The New York Times says that low-skill migrants generate homelessness for the native-born

by philg

Without noting that this contradicts everything that they’ve been telling Americans for 20 years, the New York Times suddenly says that bringing in welfare-dependent low-skill migrants exacerbates homelessness among native-born Americans (full article):

What will happen next in this New Age of Wonders? Will the NYT tell us that buying an electric car won’t reduce CO2 emissions from India and China? That Kamala Harris’s laughter/joy in situations that appeared to call for neither was not a sign of hypercompetence and fitness for high office but instead a sign of dementia, consistent with “Observing conversational laughter in frontotemporal dementia” (J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry; 2017)?

Speaking of immigration and Indians, here’s a highly Deplorable tweet on the subject of reducing H-1B “nonimmigrant” visas (that somehow produce a huge number of permanent immigrants to the U.S.):

also

Elon Musk now says that he wants only the top 0.1% of engineering talent as H-1B-style migrants (tweet). But how could this be implemented with the bureaucrats that we have? What stops 100 percent of potential migrants from writing down on their applications that they scored in the top 0.1% of an exam that Americans have no way to verify?

Related:

  • “PhD dropout to OnlyFans model” (YouTube video from Zara Dar, holder of a Master’s in Computer Science from University of Texas-Austin; she’ll need to be replaced in the tech workforce)

12 thoughts on “The New York Times says that low-skill migrants generate homelessness for the native-born”

  1. The O-1 visa is a good fit for the top 0.1%. And the H-1B visa can be eliminated.

    Or perhaps the H-1B visa could be retained with the following changes:
    1. Reverse Obama’s executive action to extend OPT to automatic 3 years
    2. Eliminate exemptions to the so-called “cap,” making the cap a real cap.
    3. Reduce the total cap by 70%-75% to around 22,000 and index this to the number of high school graduates.
    4. Introduce per-country caps of no greater than 7%, and possibly 5%. If a country splits in the future, prorate the cap among its successor states.

    Regarding #3, as the US population stops reproducing, in large part due to economic instability, the number of work visas needs to DECREASE in order to keep a the work visas to a reasonable proportion of new Americans entering the economy. In other worse, this should not be a “Population Replacement Visa.”

    Regarding #3 and #4, the Green Card already has the “7% from any one country rule,” and, according to one easily searchable source[1] 72% were awarded to Indian nationals and 13% to Chinese nationals. The total “cap” is officially 85,000 (65,000 bachelor’s and 20,000 advanced degrees). Thus 71% of current approvals would exceed the per-country cap, so cutting the total quota to 20,000-25,000 would leave leave the number of non-Indian and non-Chinese approvals relatively constant.

    We could at least start here and consider further reductions in the future.

    [1] https://cis.org/North/New-Data-Chinese-and-Indian-H1Bs-Educational-Backgrounds

    • @Faucian Bargain @PhilG we only hire US citizens for our IT positions and ask to come to office 2 to 3 days a week. Typically we would look for 4 to 5 years experience in full stack programing with some experience with databases. But we never get any applications with this experience, most of the applicants do not have any IT/programing experience instead they are sales/admins applying as they do not have a job currently. Couple of people who has this experience and apply ask for at least $175K + bonus + all of them want 100% remote work. This position is in a small city in FL. Basically it is so hard to hire US citizens for these positions. How do you explain this.

    • @Anonymous please see my reply to your other points above.

      “Basically it is so hard to hire US citizens for these positions.”

      This is because you have a “one-way open marriage” with the US economy and capitalism! In a traditional marriage, monogamous fidelity is expected of both partners. In an “open marriage,” both partners have sex with other people. In a “one-way open relationship,” ONE partner is allowed to commit adultery at will but the other expected to be monogamous.

      When a family’s house falls into foreclosure and is purchased by BlackRock, or, more commonly, when a young man is unable to afford to leave his parents’ home and get an apartment (let alone buy real estate) and therefore is unable to consider getting married and forming a family despite being reasonably talented and taking reasonable efforts to build a career, people like you say “that’s capitalism: what do you want, communism?” When Barack Obama told coal miners “those jobs aren’t coming back,” his media organs suggested that they “learn to code.” When Americans DO “learn to code,” you immediately pivot to “HOW DARE THESE ENTITLED AMERICANS EXPECT A LIVING WAGE! WHY CAN’T WE JUST GET INDENTURED SERVANTS WHO ARE LEGALLY NOT PERMITTED TO CHANGE TO A HIGHER PAYING JOB, WHO WILL COMPLY WITH ANY OF OUR DEMANDS UNDER THREAT OF DEPORTATION WITHIN 60 DAYS, AND FOR WHOM THE PRIVILEGE OF ESCAPING THE CORRUPTION, NOISE, POLLUTION, AND SQUALOR OF INDIA CONSTITUTES THE MAJORITY OF THEIR COMPENSATION?! WHY CAN’T THESE AMERICAN ‘SKILLED WORKERS’ BE CONTENT TO SHARE A ONE-BEDROOM APARTMENT WITH 5 OTHER ‘SKILLED WORKERS’ LIKE OUR INDIANS DO?”

      (What if YOU had to live on an Indian “skilled manager’s” salary? Would you like that?)

      This paragraph, from an article about a a citizen with no degree, zero years of professional experience, who is black, and who JUST TURNED SEVENTEEN (17)[1,2], is the key.
      “The website On3 initially reported a figure for Underwood may near $5 million, but multiple conversations CBS Sports and 247Sports have had with sources across the industry paint the real number to be something closer to double that (over the course of several seasons). There should be no surprise at the high cost of doing business in the NIL era with a highly-touted prospect.”

      You, too, can compete in the market if you pay the market rate for your “recruit” AND either allow remote or pay a steep premium that will compensate your “recruit” for uprooting his family and moving to an area which is charming but a CAREER BLACK HOLE.

      [1] https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/if-michigan-can-pull-off-pricey-flip-of-no-1-recruit-bryce-underwood-trajectory-of-sherrone-moore-era-shifts/
      [2] An equally talented foreign 17 year-old could probably enter with an O-1 visa

    • @Anonymous
      In case it’s buried in my long responses, please link the req here. You’re Anonymous so it won’t hurt anything.

    • @Anonymous: If you ask employees to come in to the office at all, then you need someone who lives close to the office. Most qualified people would need to move.

      Most full stack developers have some post-high-school education, so a person with 5 years experience will be mid to late 20s.

      A sharp 20-something developer who can work in the usa and is willing to move can definitely get an L4 roll at google or facebook, and earn 300k. Someone who is above average could get to L5, and make 500k. Source: http://levels.fyi

      If I were in your position, I would make sure people looking for a job can find your careers page, and know how much lower Florida’s cost of living/taxes are vs. the bay area.

    • @Faucian Bargain I do not have any positions open now. This has been my experience for last 15 years.

  2. I think this 0.01% is a meaningless number.

    There must some theorem in statistics or probability likely, which I might be approximating:

    Given a system which ranks sufficiently large number of candidates, the certainty of the percentile varies inversely with the percentile.
    Take IIT-JEE in early 2000s which was taken by sufficiently large number of people (~200k). Now, the certainty that the top 100 would be the same across two iterations of IIT would be much more than the certainty that the top 10 would be the same across different iterations. So, given a model, there must be a percentile which we can be 90% certain about. That’s the percentile which is meaningful. Otherwise we might be adding too much randomness. Also, note that we should be careful about the system itself, and make sure that the system has enough randomness to make sure that it’s not getting hacked. That is, if we create an IIT-JEE in which in every iteration top 10 and top 100 are the same, then perhaps the system has been hacked.

    • I know. It is very disappointing that he said that. I don’t think that the fight is over, because a lot of Americans have invested a lot of time and money in their careers.

      Daniel Horowitz recently wrote a very good article on Blaze Media that is suddenly getting traction:
      https://archive.is/rQnH1

      Something to ask your friends and family: “When do the ‘temporary workers’ leave?”

Comments are closed.