Hypothesis: Trump chose to act now on immigration not because it's an important issue to him, but to distract voters from his bungled handling of the coronavirus epidemic. So if we take the bait, he wins.
Show this thread
-
Or maybe more than a few voters think that capitalists having to pay higher salaries to American workers would be, on the whole, a good thing?
In Silicon Valley at least, it's not to decrease costs that companies hire immigrants. It's because the immigrants are better. http://paulgraham.com/95.html
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
No, he’s saying specifically for sv tech startups they will pay more and hire legal teams just to get more workers and they’re paid the same or more than native workers. This is a fact ask anyone there. H1b also includes lower wage people but that’s not the case for SV
- Show replies
-
-
-
I've read repeatedly that the top ones are really good, but the average coder types are not.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Not least because high-IQ Americans can go into much more lucrative legal and FIRE economy fields, where raw immigrants are not competitive even if equally smart. It's doubtful whether employment in these fields is a net positive for society at this point, but who cares? $$$!
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
In the larger IT (Dilbert, Initech etc.) That's not true.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what more can you do for the Forbes 400.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Very persuasive article, still true? If so, if only the regs could be used only for those extra special people, and not the cost-reducing ones, the competitors to the mediocre Americans, it would be different.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Did I skim wrongly or does that link go to a post laying out an argument not that ‘the immigrants’ (all of them) are better, but just saying that if SV can fish from a larger pool they’ll end up finding more superstars? Also, fundamentally that’s still a cost argument
-
How about a compromise, allow H-1B’s but place a $100k/yearly headcount tax on each such hire. Per your claims, companies should be ok with this, after all, their main interest is finding those superstar high-performer programmers who are orders of magnitude better. What’s $100k?
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.