H1B Visa scam in disgusting detail.

He said we never had a problem producing engineering and science talent. Then he goes on to agree with me that less people are going that route now than used to. The lower wages are perhaps the cause, but the point remains that we are not producing talent in those areas, regardless of WHY that is. I wasn't confusing anything. I wasn't questioning the why of it. He created that argument to try and flip it around on me, even though that was not my contention. I'm not concerned with why we aren't producing them. Originally Posted by WombRaider

No, the POINT is that the H1B visa program is causing the low wages. The low STEM enrollments is the secondary effect.

Take away the H1B visas and STEM salaries rise. And STEM enrollments rise also. See how that works?

You are pointing to a problem (low STEM enrollment) that the H1B visa program caused and using it as a justification for maintaining the H1B visa program.

Do you not see the illogic in that?

So you favor more government intervention? Originally Posted by WombRaider

Setting immigration levels isn't government interference numbnuts. It is a basic function of government - like maintaining a military.

Government "interferes" no matter what it does when it sets the level of immigration. Open borders floods the labor market. Closed borders restricts the labor supply. And everything in between also affects the labor market.

So, why set it to depress wages?

You know as well as I do that Capitalism is about the bottom line. If they can get it cheaper, they will. It's like you're complaining about getting in a cage with a wild tiger and then acting surprised when he tries to kill you. What did you THINK was going to happen? Originally Posted by WombRaider

That "example" makes no fucking sense. So I won't even address it.

I didn't bring up cause and effect earlier, because I didn't really care, but what do you think is going to happen to a field where the people are underpaid? That it won't flourish only makes sense. It was so basic, it didn't require explanation. Originally Posted by WombRaider

I have no idea what you are trying to say here, either.

You're earlier post about there not being enough American STEM students clearly shows you are confused about cause and effect - whether you mentioned it or not. You have yet to rebut that point.

No, the POINT is that the H1B visa program is causing the low wages. The low STEM enrollments is the secondary effect.

Take away the H1B visas and STEM salaries rise. And STEM enrollments rise also. See how that works?

You are pointing to a problem (low STEM enrollment) that the H1B visa program caused and using it as a justification for maintaining the H1B visa program.

Do you not see the illogic in that? Originally Posted by ExNYer

Where did I ever say I wanted to keep the program?

Setting immigration levels isn't government interference numbnuts. It is a basic function of government - like maintaining a military.

Government "interferes" no matter what it does when it sets the level of immigration. Open borders floods the labor market. Closed borders restricts the labor supply. And everything in between also affects the labor market.

So, why set it to depress wages?


That "example" makes no fucking sense. So I won't even address it.


I have no idea what you are trying to say here, either.

You're earlier post about there not being enough American STEM students clearly shows you are confused about cause and effect - whether you mentioned it or not. You have yet to rebut that point. Originally Posted by ExNYer

I'm not confused, is the problem. The program is not entirely responsible for the problems you outlined, is my point. You keep coming back to cause and effect, as if I don't understand that. I get it, but you can't blame the entire problem on the visa program.

Regulated capitalism is what we have in effect, as I'm sure you know. It has rules, and our government should have a certain predilection for the workers as well as the owners of the means of production. It should enforce the rules that benefit American citizens, not foreign interlopers. Originally Posted by DSK

We do not have "regulated" capitalism. We have "crony" capitalism, aka fascism. The government does what's best for the corporations, because the government is OWNED by the corporations and banks. It's not going to change without massive civil disobedience demanding the removal of all Democrats and Republicans, and replacing them with people who will enforce the Constitution and restore Liberty.


The Presidential race is fun to watch, but it's meaningless. The same people own both sides. That's why we always get lots of talk, but nothing changes. If you think removing Obama from office will improve things, you're under a delusion.

We do not have "regulated" capitalism. We have "crony" capitalism, aka fascism. The government does what's best for the corporations, because the government is OWNED by the corporations and banks. It's not going to change without massive civil disobedience demanding the removal of all Democrats and Republicans, and replacing them with people who will enforce the Constitution and restore Liberty.


The Presidential race is fun to watch, but it's meaningless. The same people own both sides. That's why we always get lots of talk, but nothing changes. If you think removing Obama from office will improve things, you're under a delusion. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Yes, I agree - it is more crony capitalism than anything else. However, it isn't what WormRaider says it is.

We do not have "regulated" capitalism. We have "crony" capitalism, aka fascism. The government does what's best for the corporations, because the government is OWNED by the corporations and banks. It's not going to change without massive civil disobedience demanding the removal of all Democrats and Republicans, and replacing them with people who will enforce the Constitution and restore Liberty.


The Presidential race is fun to watch, but it's meaningless. The same people own both sides. That's why we always get lots of talk, but nothing changes. If you think removing Obama from office will improve things, you're under a delusion. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

there is a lot of truth to what ur saying but its really not equal when evaluating Dems and Repubs. . . Dems at least make an effort to put some checks and balances on big corporations. Its Repubs that fight tooth and nail to block any legislation that puts limits on corporate power. Im not arguing that dems are perfect on this issue but they are way more reasonable that repubs, and unfortunately - right now these are the only two viable options

there is a lot of truth to what ur saying but its really not equal when evaluating Dems and Repubs. . . Dems at least make an effort to put some checks and balances on big corporations. Its Repubs that fight tooth and nail to block any legislation that puts limits on corporate power. Im not arguing that dems are perfect on this issue but they are way more reasonable that repubs, and unfortunately - right now these are the only two viable options Originally Posted by southtown4488

Democrats do no such thing. They are bought and sold by the corporations as much as Republicans. Take a close look at those "checks" . There is always a way to get around them. It's a show.

there is a lot of truth to what ur saying but its really not equal when evaluating Dems and Repubs. . . Dems at least make an effort to put some checks and balances on big corporations. Its Repubs that fight tooth and nail to block any legislation that puts limits on corporate power. Im not arguing that dems are perfect on this issue but they are way more reasonable that repubs, and unfortunately - right now these are the only two viable options Originally Posted by southtown4488

When the housing bubble burst, the only voices in Congress that did NOT want to bail out the banks was a minority of Republicans.

Very few - if any - Democrats wanted to let economic Darwinism do its job and let any corporations go under - not banks, not insurance companies, not auto companies, and certainly not Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac.

And they continue to bail out solar energy companies that can't cut it.

So, no, the Democrats are not better than the Republicans. They both suck.

No, the POINT is that the H1B visa program is causing the low wages. The low STEM enrollments is the secondary effect.

Take away the H1B visas and STEM salaries rise. And STEM enrollments rise also. See how that works?

You are pointing to a problem (low STEM enrollment) that the H1B visa program caused and using it as a justification for maintaining the H1B visa program.

Do you not see the illogic in that? Originally Posted by ExNYer

Supposedly the H1B visas are for jobs that companies can't fill with qualified Americans at a given wage. However, companies have been getting around that for years. I've even seen youtube videos of US consultants bragging on how to get around it.

Another issue with STEM enrollments being so low is the US will never get a proportional amount of female students successfully involved. Except for some medical sciences, there are extraordinarily low enrollment numbers of nonAsian females.

Supposedly the H1B visas are for jobs that companies can't fill with qualified Americans at a given wage. However, companies have been getting around that for years. I've even seen youtube videos of US consultants bragging on how to get around it.

Another issue with STEM enrollments being so low is the US will never get a proportional amount of female students successfully involved. Except for some medical sciences, there are extraordinarily low enrollment numbers of nonAsian females. Originally Posted by gnadfly

My engineering classes in the 1980s looked like frat houses.

I understand things are marginally better now.

But what can anyone do about that? Is the government going to force women to take electrical and chemical engineering majors?

It's not like they are barred from enrolling. They just don't appear to be as interested.

My engineering classes in the 1980s looked like frat houses.

I understand things are marginally better now.

But what can anyone do about that? Is the government going to force women to take electrical and chemical engineering majors?

It's not like they are barred from enrolling. They just don't appear to be as interested. Originally Posted by ExNYer

Why the hell would some broad want to be an engineer anyway? Too much math for women, and too much practical field work.

Women prefer air conditioned offices, and they hate math. ijs

Why the hell would some broad want to be an engineer anyway? Too much math for women, and too much practical field work.

Women prefer air conditioned offices, and they hate math. ijs Originally Posted by DSK

And one wonders why you have to pay for pussy...

And one wonders why you have to pay for pussy... Originally Posted by WombRaider

No one wonders why you pay for dick - they know you are a faggot.

No one wonders why you pay for dick - they know you are a faggot. Originally Posted by DSK

According to Reytardo the midget bitch boy, I get paid for my services, so suck on that, big dolores.