^^ what he said ^^

This is correct and yet kinda misses the point. The market exists specifically because of one of the most fundamental and basic of government functions: who is allowed to enter the country and work. Those market economics revolves around whatever the government decides to do: firstly when it created the H1B system and now when all the politicians are arguing over how to handle the abuse of the program.

I’d call it something more along the lines of “regulatory capture” than a freely operating market.

> regulatory capture

It's been like that for quite some time. A lot of political power coming from economic power is a sure way for a democracy to transition into a kleptocracy.

No, you missed the point of the GP. The companies don't want them because they are cheaper, they want them because they have less rights.

> who have no option to leave for a better opportunity or higher pay (or to unionize)

The companies don't want cheaper labor. They want slave labor.

You are missing the point: if they have fewer rights, they are cheaper in the long run.

Perhaps we're getting into semantics. Sure, fewer rights necessarily implies cheaper, but not the other way around. "Cheaper" alone fails to get to the heart of the matter.

As stated up thread, treat that as an externality that the business ends up paying to the citizens. Offer them an opportunity to fully uncap their favorite programs on the condition that a large chunk of total compensation (with minimums and locality adjustments) will be paid to citizens that essentially doubles or triples most citizen salaries.