You’re talking about H1B abuse that primarily affects non-US citizens. I can sympathize (and I’m not a US citizen), but you can hardly expect the US press or hacker news to have that perspective or use that terminology... right?

I would expect people working alongside these visa recipients, and even the public at large, to have some idea of the system and the problems they face. (Although, for the general public, farm labor should probably figure larger).

And, yes, I do usually expect people to have the capacity to sympathise with others. I would even assert that everyone will instinctively want to help when they see others suffering. It's called empathy and is among the basic human emotions.

There is an ideological stream in the US that has seen the success of the market mechanisms based on competition and selfishness and is now misinterpreting it to mean than any form of altruism is bad.

Closely related is the glorification of competition to a degree where people are entire oblivious to the fact that a market economy is first and foremost a mechanism of cooperation. This has gone so far as to make even the notionally educated and self-styled rational tech community grasp around for speculative theories trying to frame this issue in terms of zero-sum competition. They somehow prefer to believe this against all evidence, i. e. the number of high-profile startups founded by first- or second-gen immigrants. And thereby give themselves license to do what it is they either actually want all by itself, or what they consider a proxy for good things happening to them: hurting others.

Additional competition on the job market might be great for companies and maybe even a country in general, but it's bad for job seekers by definition - they have to compete with more people for jobs.

This has nothing to do with the US, it applies just as well to e.g. Europe.

It's kinda fascinating and scary how easy it sometimes is in this country to grab a certain liberal group by the...whatever and even make them preachers of your political agenda.

Especially when there are just two sides.

Having an ability to feel superior - is a drug.

Ability to control other people's lives - is a drug.

And as usual the decades of "Americans jobs" crap. There are no American Jobs, as much as there are no NYC jobs or LA jobs. The employer doesn't own the job, only the power to be an intermediary.

Jobs are a function of market demand for products and services.

If tomorrow all of US territory became miraculously healthy and had no need for drugs - pharmacists' jobs would just disappear. No market - no jobs.

More importantly, the US administration is not trying to solve H1B abuse from the perspective of non-US citizens.

Correct. It should prevent abuse both ways (for both US citizens and non US citizens). By making the system fairer, both US citizens and the world ends up benefiting, in addition to likely further helping the US economy.

Well... It still could, if “fair and honest dealings” is a political ideal you want to promote in the world. But sure, it’s not an administrations top priority, for understandable reasons.

Goal of my comment wasn't sympathy; but to get the facts out there that the current changes do nothing but to worsen the situation.(...not solving the H1B crisis)

Well raising the salary requirement should (long term) have a positive effect on all kinds of abuse, don’t you think?

can you state how the new changes would make it worse, and for whom?

Surely it put downward pressure on everyone's wages.

>The Pay structure that the article mentions is NOT true anymore. Take a look at the links[1], it's withdrawn and the rule is not valid.

Is there any other independent confirmation that it was withdrawn? I can't find any. The PDF is still up.

https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ETA/oflc/pdfs/DOL-Int...

I posted the link to rule: https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eoDetails?rrid=131148

You can correlate the RIN between the Rule and the PDF: RIN 1205-AC00

From what I understand withdrawing it was a procedural trick, see here: https://twitter.com/wstock215/status/1311824945752801281?ref... via https://redbus2us.com/h1b-perm-wage-levels-rule/

Also the rule does mention the new wage levels (eg. pages 147 and 148).

There were companies hiring people under H1B then finding them contract work. Something they are specifically limiting now because they were abusing the system by under paying them as well as hiring them after they get the visa instead of before.

No. It just means that the contractor should establish themselves with employer-employee relationship before finding work, from the rule PDF:

> First, striking “contractor” will avoid potential confusion as the term “contractor” in the definition is misleading. The inclusion of “contractors” in the regulatory language could be read to suggest that contractors should generally qualify under the definition of a “United States employer.” While a contractor is certainly not excluded from qualifying as a “United States employer” for purposes of an H-1B petition, the contractor, like any petitioner, must establish the requisite “employer-employee relationship” with the H-1B beneficiary.

> There is no evidence that folks on H1B visa compete with a US Citizen's job.

If an IT department puts out a req and fills it with an H1-B worker, a US worker is out of a job. It's really that simple. People like to respond to this and cite sources funded by H1-B consultancies about how H1-B create more economic opportunities which translates into more jobs for all but this doesn't make sense because companies will A) pocket the savings and B) continue to hire H1-Bs to keep on saving per headcount. The reality is that jobs are a zero-sum game. I welcome your response if you have a counter-point.