This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I was looking for the part where the "
900k application approvals" somehow became900k visas, but he never got there. the 85k number seems to still be the amount we actually give out per year. I'm going to stick with the 85K number. His entire post seems to be focused on the applications, but I don't see how it's relevant to the debate. Every person in the world could apply for every role and we'd still only give out X number of visas.I'm not surprised these are popular programs. It clearly keeps the costs down and from my personal experience, many of these large firms already have considerable populations of Indian employees and a working climate that is comfortable for them and self-reinforcing.
The big question that I haven't seen discussed is what's the actual jobs situation? Who's battling and for what? I asked ChatGPt for basic STEM jobs data. it seems reasonable:
89k or 110K annual positions is a lot! Based on the other numbers, I'll grant H1-Bs something around 10% of the total STEM workforce.
Then we ask, "well what about native US STEM grads?
So we have 110k jobs annually for
800k grads +90k H1BMaybe everyone is too focused on STEM? Seems like there's a bigger issue in overproduction that dwarfs the H1-B discussion. From my perspective, the problem is that real advancement in tech requires the input of an extremely rare type of tech-genius -- let's call them huckleberries. In the real-world, most people are mid-level, mid-IQ flunkies doing make-work in Excel.
Back to the the X post:
the X post backs up my claim that these are grunt-level positions. These are low-middle class folks who, by dint of a national culture overwhelmingly focused on STEM education, are trying to lever themselves up into the (American) upper-middle class.
From my perspective in a senior role in Fin-tech/IT who has done a reasonable amount of hiring over the past decade, we can't find good people for the high-complexity, high-responsibility roles we need filled. I've never hired an H1-B applicant as they've never passed an initial interview. I can also count them on one hand. The program simply does not concern me. If they're competing for jobs, they aren't the ones I'm trying to fill.
I maintain my claim this is not a big deal in the near or long term -- not nearly as big of a deal as STEM over-production in the age of AI. I also maintain it's a diversion from the real issue which is an open US-Mexico border and millions of low-skilled, unaccountable unknowns that will never be found let alone repatriated. It is a debate over wallpaper as the house burns down. Ending it won't do much, expanding it won't do much. What the discussion does instead is prime everyone to get upset about easily controlled, legal, largely pro-social and pro-American immigrants instead of 10x randos as it's a guarantee that the campaign promises of "closing the border and sending all the migrants back" will not happen.
More options
Context Copy link