Forum Index
»
Political Discussion
$100k fee for h1-b visas coming
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
+1 If visas are necessary for these jobs, then the authorized visa holders should not be beholden to a particular company. They can go wherever they want for the given authorized time period. Companies can pay a labor pool fee. |
Anonymous
|
Companies work covertly with the government to keeping their interviews secret while setting wage and labor categories? Categories almost like Unions except we have no representation in the matter. PERMs and LCAs if the reader needs to chatGPT it.
It's almost as if they are being hostile towards us. Is there anything they can say that will end well for them at this point? Oh and by the way, when were our immigrant coworkers going to tell us they were doing that? And you want assurance capitalist profits will continue. Not a chance, we want a pound of flesh. Eh what do you have to say for yourselves? Anything you have in mind you would like to say as you leave the country, maybe like a "oops sorry" or something. |
Anonymous
Not a good idea. There's a reason why the I-20 is tied to a particular school and student attendance is required. Imagine all the ghost jobs that would suddenly exist. |
Anonymous
It's almost like you phased into Donald Chump's brain while you wrote this. Are these explanations, questions you want answered, or rhetorical? |
Anonymous
You could easily require people to verify employment through payroll taxes or something like that. If they go the certification route, it could maybe force the tech industry to create a more standardized way of measuring talent/skills. There's no reason this visa should exist for entry-level work. |
Anonymous
If work is “off-shored” there will still be some sort of resulting product that would presumably then be imported back into the US for use. Perhaps as a simple example it would be a developer’s code. Wouldn’t this exist in some sort of file or in some sort of cloud storage? Why isn’t this sort of product being imported any different than a shoe, sofa, medication, etc. therefore subject to tariff? |
Anonymous
| H1-b visas have been abused for years. My friends and I were talking about this in the early 90s. I hate Trump but fully support this policy. |
Anonymous
Corporate executive, "These Americans are too socialist, I'm going to offshore to India or China." Here is a summary of how Communists do it: How China regulates its tech industry China has a “state-capitalist” model. Private tech firms can be very large and innovative, but the Party keeps them under political discipline and economic control. Main tools: Licensing and approvals: All major internet platforms must get government permits, operate under censorship rules, and share data with state agencies on request. Anti-monopoly enforcement: Since late 2020 the State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR) has used antitrust rules to break up or fine big platforms (Alibaba, Meituan, Tencent). Data and cybersecurity laws: The Cybersecurity Law (2017), Data Security Law (2021) and Personal Information Protection Law (2021) give the state broad powers over how data is stored, transferred, and audited—especially for companies listing abroad. Party committees inside firms: Large private companies are expected to host a Communist Party cell; in practice that gives regulators a line of sight into strategy. Capital markets controls: IPOs and foreign listings can be halted or delayed if regulators think they threaten “national security” (as with Didi Chuxing’s NYSE listing). So the tech sector is profitable, but it can’t operate as a purely private, independent sphere the way Silicon Valley companies do. 2️⃣ Executives who’ve been punished or disappeared Since Xi Jinping came to power, a number of high-profile business figures have been investigated, detained or gone “missing” for weeks or months: Jack Ma (Alibaba / Ant Group): After his October 2020 speech criticizing China’s financial regulators, the $37 billion Ant IPO was halted. Ma disappeared from public view for about 3 months, then reappeared in early 2021 but has kept a much lower profile. He wasn’t charged, but regulators forced Ant to restructure as a financial holding company and imposed record antitrust fines on Alibaba. Colin Huang (Pinduoduo): Stepped down as chairman in 2021 amid the regulatory storm, though without public disciplinary action. Sun Dawu (agriculture entrepreneur): Jailed for 18 years in 2021 for “picking quarrels” and illegal fundraising. Bao Fan (China Renaissance investment banker): Disappeared for months in 2023, later confirmed to be assisting an investigation. The pattern: if a business leader becomes too politically outspoken or a company’s activities threaten financial stability or Party priorities, regulators act quickly—sometimes with fines, sometimes with detentions. 3️⃣ Jack Ma and “running afoul” of the Party Ma’s case is widely seen as a warning shot. He didn’t “oppose communism” directly; he criticized over-cautious regulators and praised risk-taking, which embarrassed the Party just before Ant’s IPO. The swift regulatory clampdown showed that: No private entrepreneur, however famous, is beyond Party discipline. Financial technology—because it can create systemic risk—will be treated like a quasi-banking sector under state control. Since then, Ma has divested some holdings and stayed mostly abroad, but he remains free and retains some wealth. |
Anonymous
|
If the big companies can comply with Communist China's policies to make a profit, why can't they comply with our?
Why big U.S. firms stay in China Huge market: China is the world’s second-largest economy and has hundreds of millions of middle-class consumers. Apple sells more iPhones in China than almost anywhere else. Critical supply chains: Apple’s iPhones, Macs and AirPods are still largely assembled in China; Amazon’s supply chain and vendor base are heavily Chinese. Managed partnerships: Foreign firms typically enter joint ventures with Chinese companies or create local subsidiaries so they can comply with licensing rules. How they comply Apple: Hosts Chinese users’ iCloud data on servers run by a state-owned partner (Guizhou-Cloud Big Data), removes apps when Beijing orders it, and follows Chinese content rules. Amazon: Closed its domestic retail marketplace in 2019 but still runs AWS cloud services through a local partner, sells Kindle books, and sources huge volumes of goods from Chinese sellers for Amazon.com abroad. Tesla: Built a wholly owned factory in Shanghai but had to negotiate local subsidies and data-storage rules. Microsoft: Runs a censored version of LinkedIn (recently shut down) and has a joint venture for Azure in China. The trade-off They get access to China’s market and manufacturing base. They accept restrictions on data, censorship, and sometimes intellectual-property transfer. They have no political leverage if the government decides to change the rules; they either comply or risk losing access. |
Anonymous
Anonymous
what you are listing is the end of the bell curve. the reality is the vast majority of H1Bs are low skilled entry level and are hired because they are cheaper. Newly released gov't records show the vast majority of H-1Bs approvals are for entry & junior level jobs 83% at Wage Levels I & II -> Way below market salaries These jobs can and should be filled by unemployed & underemployed American graduates. But the investor class demands cheap disposable labor. https://public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2025-18473.pdf |
Anonymous
Level I wage rates are assigned to job offers for beginning level employees who have a basic understanding of the occupation. These employees perform routine tasks that require limited, if any, exercise of judgment. The tasks provide experience and familiarization with the employer's methods, practices, and programs. The employees may perform higher level work for training and developmental purposes. These employees work under close supervision and receive specific instructions on required tasks and results expected. Their work is closely monitored and reviewed for accuracy. Level II wage rates are assigned to job offers for employees who have attained, through education or experience, a good understanding of the occupation. These employees perform moderately complex tasks that require limited judgment. An indicator that the job request warrants a wage determination at Level II would be a requirement for years of education and/or experience that are generally required as described in the O*NET Job Zones. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/20/655.1308 |
Anonymous
|
Newly released gov't records show the vast majority of H-1Bs approvals are for entry & junior level jobs
83% at Wage Levels I & II Way below market salaries These jobs can and should be filled by unemployed & underemployed American graduates. https://public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2025-18473.pdf comment here on proposed H1B changes -> https://www.regulations.gov/document/USCIS-2025-0040-0001  |
Anonymous
|
I’m an Independent leaning Democrat and have been saying since the 90’s that immigration, both undocumented and documented H1B, were overwhelmingly against the American people. And yes, some of my more liberal friends would say, if I didn’t know you, I would think you’re a republican. Republicans have so many horrible policies and isms ingrained in them as a political party that even if you agree with them on some things, you can’t vote for them. The hate in the Republican Party is strong. |
Anonymous
I'm disappointed by it not being stratified only by wage. I don't trust the "LCA" process at all. I understand that the Trump admin is likely highly constrained by laws that Obama passed. Which is considered some of the best legislation money can buy. So, the 100K fee on h1-b entry is totally welcome. So, here are the two areas I don't like. About the randomization process. A) It still relies on the LCA process which is highly gamed by employers. B) The employer isn't constrained in the numbers of job applicants they can submit. In the past they easily put forth multiple job positions for the same applicant. I believe they could just as easily find as many applicants say they want the same chance as a level IV applicant, they would just go out and find four applicants create four bona-fide jobs and submit. If they get one, next year they'll use the same three add another one. I mean it might relieve some of the pressure to depress wages for the LCA, but I highly doubt employers will bump an employee up to a level IV when they can just submit applications for four level I. It may even make the application stuffing problem worse. IMO they actually have to cap the number of level I petitions for this to make sense. Again, this is probably a no go from the Obama laws. |