Why does the U.S. restrict H-1B visas? To protect American workers.

[Bardley]

Why does the U.S. restrict H-1B visas? To protect American workers.


By Jeremy Beck, Tuesday, March 15, 2011, 7:36 PM EDT - posted on NumbersUSA

The NBC Nightly News' segment, "Can America Keep Best, Brightest Immigrants?" asks a seemingly-straightforward question: "Many foreigners come here, get educated, and want to stay, but can’t. How can the U.S. take advantage of their potential?" The report takes a look at the H-1B (non-immigrant) visa program, which was created in 1993 to allow skilled workers - particularly in the science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) fields - to enter the U.S. on a temporary basis. The "temporary" part of the visa has NBC and the featured personalities in this story concerned. Their thesis is simple: "America's visa restrictions lead to reverse brain drain," depriving the U.S. economy of the job creators it desperately needs.

more detail in this link

http://www.numbersusa.com/content/nusablog/beckj/march-15-2011/why-does-us-restrict-h-1b-visas-protect-american-workers.html

[msongs]

1. NBC's parent corporation wants workers who will earn less and be deportable if needed nt

[Hannah Bell]

13. +100. also wants us workers to be deportable. in fact, all the workers

in the world should be constantly moving around the globe as refugees & homeless to serve international capital.

[FreakinDJ]

2. H1B - Most ABUSED / FRAUDULENT Visa program

[midnight]

3. Some Americans work hard and get multiple degrees and still can't afford to live hear. Why?

It is a myth about the protection of the American worker.... I do believe in the best and the brightest myth either.. We already have the best and the brightest flipping burgers at McDonalds... It is all about wage suppression.. It is all about the profit margin...

[Johonny]

7. I agree

[pampango]

4. Ouch, a NumbersUSA link used in a positive way.

Southern Poverty Law Center: The Nativist Lobby: Three Faces of Intolerance

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/publications/the-nativist-lobby-three-faces-of-intolerance

"Three Washington, D.C.-based immigration-restriction organizations stand at the nexus of the American nativist movement: the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), and NumbersUSA. Although on the surface they appear quite different — the first, the country's best-known anti-immigrant lobbying group; the second, an "independent" think tank; and the third, a powerful grassroots organizer — they are fruits of the same poisonous tree.

FAIR, CIS and NumbersUSA are all part of a network of restrictionist organizations conceived and created by John Tanton, the "puppeteer" of the nativist movement and a man with deep racist roots. As the first article in this report shows, Tanton has for decades been at the heart of the white nationalist scene. He has met with leading white supremacists, promoted anti-Semitic ideas, and associated closely with the leaders of a eugenicist foundation once described by a leading newspaper as a "neo-Nazi organization." He has made a series of racist statements about Latinos and worried that they were outbreeding whites. At one point, he wrote candidly that to maintain American culture, "a European-American majority" is required.

Like CIS, NumbersUSA bills itself as an organization that operates on its own and rejects racism completely. In fact, NumbersUSA was for the first five years of its existence a program of U.S. Inc., a foundation run by Tanton to fund numerous nativist groups, and its leader was an employee of that foundation for a decade. He helped edit Tanton's racist journal, The Social Contract, and was personally introduced by Tanton to a leader of the Pioneer Fund. He also edited a book by Tanton and another Tanton employee that was banned by the Canadian border officials as hate literature, and on one occasion spoke to the Council of Conservative Citizens, a hate group which has called blacks "a retrograde species of humanity."

Together, FAIR, CIS and NumbersUSA form the core of the nativist lobby in America. In 2007, they were key players in derailing bipartisan, comprehensive immigration reform that had been expected by many observers to pass. Today, these organizations are frequently treated as if they were legitimate, mainstream commentators on immigration. But the truth is that they were all conceived and birthed by a man who sees America under threat by non-white immigrants. And they have never strayed far from their roots."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Canada doesn't have an H1B style visa program, but it legal immigration rate 2.5 times higher than that of the US and focuses on professionals and highly-educated immigrants. If the US doesn't want these skilled STEM workers, they can look to the north if they are interested in being permanent immigrants rather than temporary workers.

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bardley]

6. 'Canada's 2.5 times higher immigration rate'

"Canada doesn't have an H1B style visa program, but it legal immigration rate 2.5 times higher than that of the US and focuses on professionals and highly-educated immigrants. If the US doesn't want these skilled STEM workers, they can look to the north if they are interested in being permanent immigrants rather than temporary workers. "

canada has about one tenth the population of the USA even though it is physically a larger country

so it could have an immigration *rate* 2.5 times the USA, but still 1/4th the *absolute number* of immigration as the usa in actual numbers, into a country that is actually physically larger. and i dont think canada has anywhere NEAR the rate of illegal immigration that the USA has

also, 'guilt by association' tactics noted

from

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/guilt-by-association.html

Fallacy: Guilt By Association



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Also Known as: Bad Company Fallacy, Company that You Keep Fallacy

Description of Guilt By Association
Guilt by Association is a fallacy in which a person rejects a claim simply because it is pointed out that people she dislikes accept the claim. This sort of "reasoning" has the following form:


It is pointed out that people person A does not like accept claim P.
Therefore P is false
It is clear that sort of "reasoning" is fallacious. For example the following is obviously a case of poor "reasoning": "You think that 1+1=2. But, Adolf Hitler, Charles Manson, Joseph Stalin, and Ted Bundy all believed that 1+1=2. So, you shouldn't believe it."

The fallacy draws its power from the fact that people do not like to be associated with people they dislike. Hence, if it is shown that a person shares a belief with people he dislikes he might be influenced into rejecting that belief. In such cases the person will be rejecting the claim based on how he thinks or feels about the people who hold it and because he does not want to be associated with such people.

Of course, the fact that someone does not want to be associated with people she dislikes does not justify the rejection of any claim. For example, most wicked and terrible people accept that the earth revolves around the sun and that lead is heavier than helium. No sane person would reject these claims simply because this would put them in the company of people they dislike (or even hate).

Examples of Guilt By Association

Will and Kiteena are arguing over socialism. Kiteena is a pacifist and hates violence and violent people.
Kiteena: "I think that the United States should continue to adopt socialist programs. For example, I think that the government should take control of vital industries."
Will: "So, you are for state ownership of industry."
Kiteena: "Certainly. It is a great idea and will help make the world a less violent place."
Will: "Well, you know Stalin also endorsed state ownership on industry. At last count he wiped out millions of his own people. Pol Pot of Cambodia was also for state ownership of industry. He also killed millions of his own people. The leadership of China is for state owned industry. They killed their own people in that square. So, are you still for state ownership of industry?"
Kiteena: "Oh, no! I don't want to be associated with those butchers!"


Jen and Sandy are discussing the topic of welfare. Jen is fairly conservative politically but she has been an active opponent of racism. Sandy is extremely liberal politically.
Jen: "I was reading over some private studies of welfare and I think it would be better to have people work for their welfare. For example, people could pick up trash, put up signs, and maybe even do skilled labor that they are qualified for. This would probably make people feel better about themselves and it would get more out of our tax money."
Sandy: "I see. So, you want to have the poor people out on the streets picking up trash for their checks? Well, you know that is exactly the position David Count endorses."
Jen: "Who is he?"
Sandy: "I'm surprised you don't know him, seeing how alike you two are. He was a Grand Mooky Wizard for the Aryan Pure White League and is well known for his hatred of blacks and other minorities. With your views, you'd fit right in to his little racist club."
Jen: "So, I should reject my view just because I share it with some racist?"
Sandy: "Of course."

[pampango]

8. Nonetheless, Canada has chosen to be welcomes immigrants. Russia with a similar population density

does not and has a much lower percentage immigrants in its population 8.8% (Canada is 18.8%). Australia (19.9% immigrants) and New Zealand (15.5% immigrants) also welcome immigrants in a way that Russia does not. Guess which countries are the more progressive?

Also, take Germany where immigrants make up 12.3% of the population compared to our 12.8%. Germany is a much more densely populated country than the US, yet is as open to immigration are we are. Again Germany is much more progressive than the US. Being tough on immigration does not make a country more progressive. Indeed you could argue the opposite that there is a statistical correlation between how progressive a country is and how open it is to immigration.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_foreign-born_population_in_2005

It's not a matter of guilt by association. FAIR, CIS and NumbersUSA are nativist hate groups. I agree with none of their views on immigration. And their position on immigration is totally at odds with the Progressive Caucus, labor unions and Obama.

I wouldn't cite a NumbersUSA source on immigration any more than I would FOX News on politics, the KKK on race relations, the John Birch Society on international relations or the tea party on trade policy. If there is a valid progressive point to be made, one would hope that substantiation for it could be found at a more progressive or at least neutral site.

[Bardley]

9. everything you say is based on 'what group thinks this vs what group thinks that'

i think it's actually less work to think for yourself. there's nothing more authoritarian, than browbeating someone over what groups might have what opinion, while ignoring a persons's point. And as far as 'what company one is in', you might do some homework on Senator Joe McCarthy

i hope david duke never puts a current weather thing on his web site

me 'Looks like rain today'

you 'THAT EXACTLY WHAT DAVID DUKE SAYS!!!!!!'

and you still cant get around the fact that canada takes in less that 1/4th the total number of immigrants of the USA (far less than 1/4th when illegal is considered), even though their country is actually larger. hinting that i am a 'racist' and you arent doesnt change the math, hard as you might try

[pampango]

10. My point is that progressive countries tend to be more open to immigration.

Your point seems to be that countries with lower population densities tend to be more open to immigration. IMHO, both tend to be true.

Canada and Australia are both more progressive than the US and have a lower density. Both have relatively large immigrant populations. Germany and Sweden are more progressive than the US, but have a much higher population density yet have a very comparable immigrant population. Russia has a lower population density than the US, is not progressive and has a smaller immigrant population (and most of those are ethnic Russians who "immigrated" from former Soviet countries after the breakup of the USSR).

As for "hints" that you are racist, could you point out in between which lines you read that?

You have every right to post links to and agree with nativist hate groups. You have every right to disagree with the Progressive Caucus and labor unions. They are not right all the time. (No one is.) But it would be helpful if you pointed out why the Caucus and unions are wrong and why the FAIR, CIS, and NumbersUSA are right.

I commend you for thinking for yourself. I hope we all do. Any time that we find that our thoughts happen to align themselves with those of hate groups and in opposition to progressive groups, it is perhaps a time for a moment of reflection and reaffirmation on how we got to that point. Don't necessarily have to change our minds, just reaffirm that we got to this point through a liberal thought process, not a emotional "we" have to protect ourselves from "them" reaction.

[Bardley]

11. you've softened your tone somewhat , but you're still saying the same thing

you say

"As for "hints" that you are racist, could you point out in between which lines you read that? "

then your very next line is

"You have every right to post links to and agree with nativist hate groups"

was that supposed to be a joke?

I only posted a link from NumbersUSA. Not FAIR or CIS - never mentioned them - YOU DID

NumbersUSA is not listed as a 'nativist hate group' by SPLC, they just cleverly mention NumbersUSA on the same page

Believe it or not, my parents used to give generously to SPLC until they got fed up with their McCarthyism tactics (and super greedy fundraising) - they were students during the McCarthy era, and supported stuff like SPLC, ACLU because they were trying to stop people who used those kinds of tactics

NumbersUSA is about one thing - the numbers. Their entire discussion is about the effect of numbers on citizens

I've noticed in this whole thread, you dont address anything they say - only your claims on who they are

why dont you take a look at this short youtube of theirs, and critique it for me? It's their case, in a nutshell

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XyTmClBU7nA

part 2 should pop up after part one is done, the 2 together are a little over 10 minutes

[pampango]

12. NumbersUSA was established as anti-immigration organization. It is not just about numbers.

You are right that NumbersUSA was not labeled a hate group by the SPLC. My mistake. The SPLC only determined that NumbersUSA is a nativist group.

NumbersUSA, FAIR and CIS are all part of John Tanton's anti-immigration network of organizations, but it is only FAIR that the SPLC determined to be a hate group, not NumbersUSA.

I have no plans to watch nativist videos. There are plenty of groups that espouse causes I don't believe in. I choose not to spend my time watching their videos either. I believe that immigration has been and continues to be good for our country, as it is for Canada, Australia, Germany, Sweden and others. I am proud that it is liberals in these countries who promote and protect immigration and treasure what immigrants add to their country and culture, while conservatives in Europe and elsewhere fight to reduce or eliminate immigration.

BTW, you seem to equate racism and nativism. I did not "hint" that you are racist because you posted a link to a nativist organization. One could wonder about the potential nativism of someone who posts links to such organizations and seems to agree with them. My assumption is that you oppose immigration from Canada, the UK and Germany as much as you oppose that from Latin America or Africa, so you wouldn't be a racist by any means.

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2002/summer/the-puppeteer/john-tantons-network

John Tanton's Network

The organized anti-immigration "movement" is almost entirely the handiwork of one man, Michigan activist John H. Tanton.

Here is a list of 13 groups in the loose-knit Tanton network, followed by acronyms if the groups use them, founding dates, and Tanton's role in the groups.

*American Immigration Control Foundation
AICF, 1983, funded

*American Patrol/Voice of Citizens Together
1992, funded

*California Coalition for Immigration Reform
CCIR, 1994, funded

Californians for Population Stabilization
1996, funded (founded separately in 1986)

Center for Immigration Studies
CIS, 1985, founded and funded

*Federation for American Immigration Reform
FAIR, 1979, founded and funded

NumbersUSA
1996, founded and funded

Population-Environment Balance
1973, joined board in 1980

Pro English
1994, founded and funded

ProjectUSA
1999, funded

*The Social Contract Press
1990, founded and funded

U.S. English
1983, founded and funded

U.S. Inc.
1982, founded and funded

[UndertheOcean]

14. I have to say , bravo ! well said

[Bardley]

16. and SPLC was funded partly by my parents

and if their son is a 'nativist', doesnt that imply SPLC is ALSO a 'nativist' organization?

perhaps it takes one to know one? dont you see how absurd your group logic is?

your entire thread is 'guilt by association' - everything you say is so and so says that this group has some ties to that group, so "i dont have to address your point all i have to do is call you names" - that kind of logic makes me sick, it's just re-packaged McCarthyism

"You are right that NumbersUSA was not labeled a hate group by the SPLC. My mistake. "

yeah, that's actually a pretty big mistake, claiming someone is posting things from a hate group when in fact they are NOT

you throw around very damaging FALSE labels pretty casually, as a substitute for debating another person's issue - a lot easier just to smear. I suspect that you wont debte the issues because you fear you CANT, and so you duck them with names

Corproate America has the sweetest labor busting scam of all time, where anyone who questions *any aspect* massive labor of market dillution is called a 'racist', nativist', 'xenophobe' by those they used to consider allies

[lumberjack_jeff]

15. You take advantage of their potential by educating americans instead. n/t