Nick, this information makes it even more obvious
that the people whose backgrounds are easily researched
and, thus, those who can carry clearances readily, are
at a premium in certain industries. . your career in the
navy and mine in the manhattan project naturally have
resistance to imported talent. . others aren't so fortunate.

the world is a much smaller place than it was when
I was growing up, choosing between electrical and
mechanical engineering. . many of my friends didn't
choose science-based futures, and there are those
who wish they had. . but now, even that "best" choice
is threatened. . it means that personal excellence
is worth far more than it was, then. . WoW. -- j
.

The easiest way to make sure that American jobs do not get outsourced is to make the people who are doing those jobs into Americans. If they are willing to work at lower wages in order not to be cast back into the country of their origin, and they have important skills, then WooHoo: win-win.

I think that the lack of personnel for low-level jobs should be accounted for by a temp visa system (strawberries need to be picked); for people who have graduated with needed tech degrees then let's keep them here as citizens.

Jan

That pretty much sums it up.

Jan

Here's one to think about, There are more people flying than ever before, There's more aircraft about, But there is a dag lack of aircraft maintenance jobs about and the rate some pay is less than it was ten years ago, I know a lot of work is done by China and some of the Eastern European counties, I know one well known airline that has its major checks done in China then dos a lesser check at it's home base to put right the work! Some things can be outsourced but not everything and not things to do with safety

So just to be clear, you think that from an objectivist point of view that the government should use force to prevent someone from giving money to another person to allow them to buy ads because they think it is in their best interest?

What right does the government have to tell us who we can support?

This is not an economic issue, it is a moral issue. Ask yourself, "Is this the kind of thing Hank Reardon would do?" Just as a worker has a moral obligation to his employer to do the best job he can for his benefits, so does an employer have a moral obligation to be fair to loyal employees regardless of strictly monetary savings. There are, of course, caveats to this in which the employer's company is financially challenged and the choice becomes that of solvency. And also the possible lack of cooperation between employees and employer. Still in terms of moral values, what does this tell you about Disney? If we can believe the testimony, the benevolent images projected by Disney to the public is false and two-faced. And by the way, it also shows how laws are written stupidly without looking at all the ways a law can be used.

Besides what might lurk in the shadows of this; I think we can definitely point to the lack of patronage to the American worker, of which these companies would of never been successful, to the push for "Globalization" without any loyalty to any country.
However, that may have been a survival tactic because of the threatening chaos so prevalent in the past 30 plus years.

To be honest...I've no idea how Rand would have view it.

Yes, I never understood the reason we would challenge smart, well-educated people staying in the US. When I was in graduate school, Chinese students were scared to go home, and graduating PhDs often couldn't get visas. Why?

""overall, our colleges and universities graduate twice the number of STEM graduates as find a job each year."
There is not a fixed number of jobs of any sort. Jobs are just people helping one another. The more people working out creative new ways to use technology to solve human problems the better.

I think that the government should not be used to force the transfer of assets of some of its citizens to other entities. When this cronyism is implemented by one entity for his own benefit at the expense of others, it is unethical behavior.

As long as you change the laws before you incarcerate people for breaking them!

I will say that the 'looting' here is the ability to hire qualified employees who willingly accept your offer in order to come to the U.S. That doesn't actually sound unethical to me.

What I wrote was easy to misunderstand, WS.
I do not suggest that people acting in good faith under law be imprisoned, but that the laws must be changed to punish unethical behavior.
You are not talking to a liberal looter who has altruism as his banner to hide his statist goals.

Choosing not to loot is not altruism; its ethical behavior. Pursuit of self interest is no more a defense of unethical behavior than altruism is a defense for unethical behavior.
Unethical behavior in pursuit of self interest is still unethical behavior.

Because one of the major principles of law is that you should have a chance to know that what you are doing is illegal. In the example you give, you wish to incarcerate people who clearly broke no law, just did something in their own best interest which you found to be insufficiently altruistic.

Punish those who (a) use money/power/perks to corrupt government and (b)use that to loot from others.
Some CEOs of large companies have come to the conclusion they can use government to loot others without fear of any punishment other than a slap on the hand government fine (which only rewards other looters.) If these looters are not punished they will repeat the offense and others with marginal ethics will be encouraged to loot as well.
Why are you defending them, WS?

It's interesting the number of liberal media organizations which argue for a "path to citizenship" for low skilled people who entered the country illegally, but do not want high skilled people to be able to legally come to the country. I guess it just depends on whose job you are taking.

So you want to jail the CEO's of companies that made legal contributions to politicians who voted for a policy they agreed with?

You sound like my far left friends who want to incarcerate the people they disagree with.

So is it freedom for all who agree with me?

"overall, our colleges and universities graduate twice the number of STEM graduates as find a job each year."
How capable are the graduates? Does graduation equate to competence?

"a growing number of PhDs are in jobs that do not take advantage of the taxpayers’ investment in their lengthy education."
What taxpayers? Why are taxpayers investing in higher education of individuals at all?

I think the H-1B visa program is a scam to benefit companies with "pull", that is, able to buy the votes of con-gress. I would cancel all H-1B visas that were hired to replace citizens that were laid off, and I would terminate the program immediately, and deport every H-1B visa recipient except those holding positions that cannot be filled by American citizens. I would jail the CEOs of the companies who made contributions to politicians voting for the program and who head companies employing H-1B visa holders instead of competent American citizens.