News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
Yeah, I'm trying really hard to find the gotcha on this one, but it's starting to look like they might have just accidentally stumbled onto a good policy.
It will, of course, be administered badly, and probably applied in a way that doesn't stand up in court, but the idea itself seems sound. If you're really so desperate for talent to fill that role that you have to bring in someone from overseas, the extra cost is just part of doing business. But if you're just searching overseas for cheaper labour, this kills that option outright.
As the article notes, it could still have negative side effects, like seeing companies move jobs overseas, but I don't find that argument entirely convincing. If it was that easy wouldn't they have already have moved those jobs instead of dealing with a visa lottery?
Unfortunately I suspect the way this plays out is that in about a week they quietly drop it and then FAANG donate a giant pile of money to Trump's "charities" or whatever grift he's up on now. There's no way he actually messes with his financial backers like this. Most likely the whole thing is just a shake-down.
I mean, I'm not saying that it's a good policy. My kneejerk take is that it's probably not a good policy. I'm just saying that I don't think that there necessarily has to be a more-elaborate motive than trying to pull in more tax from alternate sources.
EDIT: Also, a lot of these are multinationals. So in terms of the companies involved, they can probably shift workers for whom the tax would be fatal for visa prospects to foreign offices somewhere, as long as the workers are still willing to work for the companies on those terms. That could keep them working for the company. That will kill the path to US citizenship for the workers, though, which an H1-B permits for. In general, I'm skeptical that discouraging highly-skilled workers from becoming US citizens is a great idea for the US.
EDIT2: I'd add that Trump's been on record as making statements about his H1-B policy that are extremely inconsistent. Back when campaigning for his first term, IIRC he claimed that he would expand them, slash them, and leave them alone, partly depending upon who he was talking to. Just last year, he was talking about how they were just fine:
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/elon-musk-vows-war-over-h-1b-visa-program-amid-rift-with-some-trump-supporters-2024-12-28/
So it might also be wise to take pronouncements from Trump on the matter with a grain of salt. I don't know how serious this is from the article.
And, as those people who keep posting the rainbow colored "Lets talk about the Epstein files" memes keep pointing out, Trump has had a pretty long history of doing outrageous things to try to direct public attention away from other things that he doesn't want discussed.
All this policy will do is encourage keeping employees offshore.