The "Wage Level" Mirage: H-1B proposal could help outsourcers and hurt US talent

Outsourcing vs. H‑1B Labor

• Some recall a big push for tech offshoring in the early–mid 2000s that often failed in practice (slow feedback cycles, quality issues), causing firms to pull back.
• Others counter that many large firms now run heavily offshore software operations, suggesting quality can be “good enough” for many products.
• Several argue that if H‑1B becomes too expensive, companies will simply offshore more work (e.g., to India, Eastern Europe, Philippines, Serbia), shifting tax base and know‑how away from the US.

Students, Alternative Visas, and Fairness

• One camp wants a special visa track (or priority) for foreign students educated in the US, arguing their credentials are easier to verify and aligned with US norms.
• Critics note: many US colleges are low quality, such a system favors the wealthy who can pay US tuition, and students typically have the fewest skills; work visas should target experienced, high‑skill workers.
• Existing paths (OPT/STEM OPT, graduate quotas, O‑1) are seen as insufficient or too hard to obtain, especially for PhDs.

H‑1B Abuse, Wage Suppression, and “Indentured” Dynamics

• Many describe H‑1B in tech as widely abused: used to import cheap, semi‑skilled labor, often via outsourcing “body shops,” undercutting US engineers and depressing wages.
• Tying status to a single employer creates strong power imbalances, discouraging job changes and enabling overwork and underpayment.
• Others report positive experiences with high‑caliber H‑1B colleagues and emphasize the role of immigrant talent in building major tech companies.

Trump Proposal and the $100k Fee

• Critics say a flat $100k fee per H‑1B is bad policy design:
  • Easily amortized via lower wages; risk of even more wage suppression.
  • Disadvantages hospitals and smaller employers versus big tech/consultancies.
  • Encourages gaming, more L‑1 usage, or moving jobs overseas.
• Some see a marginal benefit: once an employer pays $100k, firing becomes costly, slightly increasing worker leverage.
• Concerns about arbitrary waivers and “special exceptions” are framed as corruption and executive overreach that should instead be handled legislatively.

Broader Immigration Philosophy and Class Impact

• One side stresses the US’s long‑term advantage from attracting highly educated immigrants, calling restrictions short‑sighted.
• Others argue immigration should be slowed, prioritizing native workers, higher wages, and increased native birthrates; they link mass immigration to rising inequality and a detached elite.
• Debate emerges over whether policies should optimize for national wealth, worker welfare, or investor/consumer interests, and how much immigration helps or harms each.