Farhad Manjoo is a liar. He knows there is no shortage of qualified tech people in the USA that in fact the exact opposite is true- millions of qualified Americans are out of work.

The h1-B program should be terminated immediately- but it isn't because of the desire of the super-rich, like Bill Gates, and their congressional puppets in Congress, like Chuck Schumer to have cheaper more compliant labor.

So now whenever some makes a series of reasoned arguments and someone else disagrees with one of the many points, the first person is to be branded a liar? Please. Let's try to at least have a basic level of discourse.

Let me reply to your post in reverse order of your comments.

1) Are you actually going to blame the Chuck Schumer and the Democratic party for shipping jobs overseas?* Really? Please, if you want to tell me the GOP is NOT responsible for encouraging businesses to move jobs overseas, you'll need to show me some facts.**

* Okay, you didn't blame the entire Democratic Party, just Chuck Schumer, so maybe you think it is Chuck Schumer and the GOP who are responsible for shipping jobs overseas.

** I'm not arguing that sending some jobs overseas is a bad thing. But you clearly think it is, and then blame Chuck Schumer for it, and yet have no reason to do so.

2) Are you really going to blame Bill Gates for not doing enough to create more jobs in America? Bill Gates? Really? Would you prefer him to have created ZERO jobs in America rather than tens of thousands of jobs, some of which go to non US citizens? You are misdirecting your anger, sir. If you'd like to blame someone who took over the reigns as CEO at a 100 year-old American company and then shipped all the jobs overseas, at least you would have some merit. But Bill Gates (love him or hate him) is responsible for brining billions of dollars into the US economy and hiring tens of thousands of Americans. Not the correct target here.

3) You talk about qualified tech people, but you don't really explain what qualified means. Should a company hire an American who was the bottom 10% of their engineering class in the US over somebody who was the top 10% in China? That would weaken American companies. Is that what you want? I do think that, all things being equal, a company SHOULD be required to hire American citizens first, especially since many of the countries where we ship jobs have similar policies. But things are rarely equal. Right now there is a global economic crisis, which means people are having difficulty finding work everywhere. That means more Americans are looking for jobs, but it also means more non-Americans are looking for jobs. One option to fix the problem is to help Americans get jobs by pressuring American companies to only hire Americans. A second option to fix the problem is to help American companies grow by letting them get the best (or cheaper) people, so that they will bring more money to the American economy.

Please be clear--I am NOT arguing that one (or even either) of the above options is the way to fix the economy. What I am arguing is that this is a nuanced issue, and calling someone a liar because you disagree with them on a point is an irrational response.

P.S. Option two tends to be the Republic point-of-view, so please don't blame it on Chuck Schumer.

1) Are you actually going to blame the Chuck Schumer and the Democratic party for shipping jobs overseas?* Really? Please, if you want to tell me the GOP is NOT responsible for encouraging businesses to move jobs overseas, you'll need to show me some facts.**

<link>

** I'm not arguing that sending some jobs overseas is a bad thing. But you clearly think it is, and then blame Chuck Schumer for it, and yet have no reason to do so.

Actually, I mentioned H1-B's, which is not outsourcing- it is the reverse.

You are quite wrong about Gates. Gates has been very aggressive in outsourcing jobs to India, but more importantly in using his influence over the government to increase the H1-B program. This affects not only H1-Bs at Microsoft, obviously, but the whole country. Google is your friend here.

Farhad Manjoo is a liar. He knows that his comment about the " qualified tech worker shortage" is a lie.

You have not investigated this issue. You are a newbie. I have been educated on this topic for many years. Go look through the archives on some bulletin boards for tech workers and learn about it.

How can you know what I know? You state it so confidently so I needed to check. Are you keylogging my machine?

---

As to the substance of your claim: Provide some of the data on which you've been "educated" so that we can all understand what you're talking about. Thanks.

MisterPerson, in your reply I think you make some valid points and some invalid points.

As for Chuck Schumer, you provide a valid link to information about his support for H1-Bs, and so I agree that if you want to prevent H1-Bs then Schumer is not on your side. Since I don't know your political affiliation, this may be irrelevant, but I'd like to know whether you think support for foreign labor in American companies is typically a Republican or Democratic position. (And I don't mean voters--I mean politicians.)

As for Bill Gates, I think it's still debatable. Remember, I did not say that I don't think Bill Gates has hired (and fought for the right to hire) many H1-B employees. What I said is that I think his contributions to the American economy and labor force still outweigh anything an anti-H1-B activist would dislike. However, I accept that you may think his support for H1-Bs has helped other American companies hire H1-B employees, therefore resulting in a net-loss for American jobs. If you can come up with some research to verify such a thing, I'll be impressed, but until then I think you can't possibly "know" that Bill Gates has caused more harm to the American economy than good. Regardless of how many H1-Bs Microsoft hires, I still think you are barking up the wrong tree when you look there for a scapegoat of a company that has harmed the American economy.

As for me being a "newbie" to this issue, you HAVE NO IDEA WHO I AM OR WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. The number of comments I have posted to a Slate message board has ZERO connection to my knowledge on a subject. I have extensive experience managing technology teams and hiring tens (if not hundreds) of technical positions at several Fortune 500 companies, I have started (moderately successful) technology companies, and before all that I worked my way up through the ranks as a undergraduate-educated engineer just like all the people I subsequently hired, and I later returned (while working part time) to get a graduate degree.

I will not assume to know how you have been "educated on the topic". But I have been educated on the topic both in undergraduate and graduate degree settings, through decades of professional experience, through personal research, and--as they say--in trial by fire.

You score a point for me allowing you to goad me into defending my credentials even though such a defense was unnecessary. This is an anonymous comment board. From now on, if you want to argue with me, argue my points, not my right to make such points.

And, for the last time, there are clearly many intelligent, rational, NON-LYING people who believe that there is a qualified tech worker shortage across the globe. Stop claiming it's a lie (a non-argument that makes you look like an irrational fool) and instead use facts and reason to convince people it is otherwise. You will never win a convert by calling them a liar. You may win one by proving them wrong.

Farhad Manjoo:

How can you know what I know? You state it so confidently so I needed to check. Are you keylogging my machine? --- As to the substance of your claim: Provide some of the data on which you've been "educated" so that we can all understand what you're talking about. Thanks.

Here is your lie:

Why do American tech firms need so many immigrant employees? Because there aren't enough native workers to fill the jobs tech companies need.

This is so outrageous, it boggles the mind. Are you living under a rock? I don't think you are- therefore the only logical explanation for a statement like this is that you have some reason to lie.

Every tech job advertised gets from dozens to hundreds of replies from qualified American applicants. Anyone who wants to verify this can check the bulletin boards that American tech workers post to- for example, checking out the archives at Dice.com. There are many, many US tech workers to corroborate what I am saying. Even the "polite" posting selected as the best one in response to your article DIRECTLY contradicts your statement.

Did you bother to read it? Just who are you trying to kid?

Since I don't know your political affiliation, this may be irrelevant, but I'd like to know whether you think support for foreign labor in American companies is typically a Republican or Democratic position. (And I don't mean voters--I mean politicians.)

No, I think there are an equal number of corrupt politicians in both parties. Schumer happens to be in Wall Street's pocket, obviously, since Wall Street is in New York.

The fact that you have identified yourself with Fortune 500 management would provide a good explanation for why you would want to defend the H1-B program- you want to put short-term corporate profits above the long-term national interest.

You are a laugh riot, MisterPersons.

So is it your claim that anyone who is or has ever been in middle management at a Fortune 500 company is anti-American? Please explain. Or is it just anyone who doesn't agree with you 100%?

Also, do you believe that America would be better without the existense of those 500 Fortune 500 companies?

And, just to be clear, I have not once said I support the current H1-B program. Just because I believe there are rational arguments to be made to defend it, does not mean I agree with all of those arguments. Read some of my other posts on this article where I discuss the importance of improving our university system so that America can remain competitive. I think there are many different ways to approach this. My end goal is not to push other countries down, but, rather, to allow America to remain at the top (or rise back to the top, since you seem to think it has fallen so far). This is a much more nuanced issue than you make it out to be, and if you think yourself a nuanced person I would hope you'd realize that.

Your many tech workers to corroborate something does not make for research; it makes for anecdotes. Lots of job postings get responses--that doesn't indicate anything other than that people are interested in the jobs. I hope you understand that evidence of interest doesn't equal evidence of qualification.

I pointed out simple numbers in my piece--the majority of students graduating from elite tech programs *in the US* are foreigners. Is your only response to that to tell me I'm living under a rock? Not good enough. Show me some numbers indicating that there loads of well-qualified Americans who are out of work because their jobs were taken by less-qualified foreigners. Then you'll at least begin to have the outlines of an argument.

This is the most anti-capitalist thing I've ever heard: You want businesses to put "national interest" above profits? They don't even do that in Communist China.

I would only point to the fact that two years ago, several large corporations were caught employing companies whose business was telling you how to write a job requirement so it would legally disqualify american candidates.

The fact that such companies exist is evidence that corporations prefer to hire cheap labor.

---

I'm sure we welcome entrepeneurs. We don't welcome bachelor and masters degree competitors for our jobs who are making $33 to $66 an hour and working 60 hours a week. Of course companies want to hire people like that. Left unchecked, companies also hired 12 year olds and worked them 14 hours a day in locked factories. (And actually- still do out side of america).

Farhad Manjoo:

This is the most anti-capitalist thing I've ever heard: You want businesses to put "national interest" above profits? They don't even do that in Communist China.

You are either not a very careful reader, or you choose to distort the arguments of those who disagree with you. I would never bother to ask businesses to put the national interest over profits. They never have and never will.

I asked American citizens and the American government to put the national interest over SHORT-TERM profits. If the government were not dominated by those business interests who pursue short-term profits only, it could look after the interests of its own workers.

You are apparently too short-sighted to understand that if generations of Americans see their government and corporate leaders screwing the workers, eventually they will revolt against this system.

You obviously have thrown your lot in with the oppressors- but if the American system gets hollowed out from the inside, it will collapse.

Is your only response to that to tell me I'm living under a rock?

Yet ANOTHER example that shows you are not a careful reader. I specifically said you were NOT living under a rock. You KNOW the deal and yet you deliberately misrepresent the situation.

Not good enough. Show me some numbers indicating that there loads of well-qualified Americans who are out of work because their jobs were taken by less-qualified foreigners.

You have some real nerve. YOU are the one who stated that there was a shortage of qualified high-tech workers in America, yet provided no figures to back it up. YOU are the one who wrote the article, right? That put's the onus on you, not me, right?

OK - fine you do not have the stats. Well I do. here they are from this blog:

<link>

Guestworker over-subscription in Computer-related occupations.
From 2000-2006, employment growth (BLS-OES) in the (SOC) 15-1000 Computer Specialists, was 326,600. [2]

The National Science Foundation reports that 310,749 B.S. Computer Science degrees were granted to Americans from 2000 - 2006, with an additional 26,533 BS-CS awarded to temporary residents. [3] Domestic BS-CS degree production of 337,282 awards, exceeded "(SOC) 15-1000 Computer Specialist" employment growth of 326,600.

During a shorter period, 2001-2006, reflecting the six year H-1B duration, 328,968 H-1B visas were granted to "initial employment approvals" for Computer related occupations.[1][4] Computer-related occupations, H-1B initial employment approvals, also exceeded employment growth.

Factoid: 2000 to 2005 [1]
Computer related H-1B "Initial employment approvals = 348,691
Computer related H-1B "Continuing employment approvals = 390,506

Narrowing the scope to the 2000-02 recession, [2] the BLS-OES occupational statistics show an employment decline of 134,960 in Computer-related occupations, during 2001 (110,712) and 2002 (25,637) H-1B awards were added to the occupational group. Employment for H-1B is reserved as a condition of entry, therefore, the decline in the occupation and new H-1B are additive, bringing the job losses to 271,309.

The H-1B is only one of the high-skill non-immigrant visa program that has "...adversely affect the wages and working conditions of workers in the United States similarly employed." There are many high-skill nonimmigrant visa categories, the "O", "H-1", "L-1" and "TN" visas are all employment based temporary visas.[5] that can include Computer-related occupations.

High-skill temporary visas (H-1B, L-1,H-3, O-1, O-2, TN) [5]
1998 = 136,000
1999 = 165,930
2000 = 197,520
2001 = 230,400
2002 = 184,770
2003 = 165,430
2004 = 213,020
2005 = 203,320
2006= 224,060

Again, 271,309 workers were permanently displaced by the glut in computer-related H-1B awards, another 310,749 American BS-CS graduates entered the workforce. As a condition of employment, H-1B must have an employment offer, so 582,058 high skill workers were shut out of the Computer-related occupations. Additionally, 430,084 L-1 Intracompany visas were issued during the 2000-2006 period.[6] There are no statistics available to prove the L-1 subscription levels for Computer-related, but the OIG made the following statement:

"From 1999 to 2004, nine of the ten firms that petitioned for the most L-1 workers were computer and IT related outsourcing service firms that specialize in labor from India." [7]

Fraud estimate in Computer-related immigration:
The USCIS recently found a 31% violation/fraud rate in H-1Bs with Bachelor's degrees as the highest level of education.[8] Bachelor's degreed H-1B recipients are higly concentrated in Computer-related occupations. The NSF reports that roughly 47,300 of all new H-1Bs in 2006 did not have advanced degrees, in Computer-related occupations, 35,904 did not have advanced degrees (postgrad). 75.9% of all H-1Bs withless than a postgraduate degree were granted to Computer-related occupations in 2006.[9]

The most popular H-1B occupation also experienced the fourth highest rate of fraudulent conduct - computer-related occupations accounted for 42% (104 cases) of the sample. Among this sample, 27% (28 cases) were associated with some type of fraud or technical violation(s).[8]

Additionally, due to the AC21, H-1B and L-1 portability provisions,[10] it is reasonable to assume that similar violation/fraud rates exist in the Employment based green card PERM system, which is currently experiencing a backlog 500,000 applicants.

Overall, we estimate that the number of employment based principals (in the three main employment visa categories—EB1, EB2, and EB3) waiting for legalpermanent residence in the United States in 2006 was 500,040.
<link>

America's high skill immigration policy has been completely insensitive to changing market conditions, even when employment creation has gone negative, America continues to import skilled workers without regard to available data. Other countries, such as Australia adjust their immigration intake by occupation.

"The economic circumstances in Australia have changed as a result of the global financial crisis," Senator Evans said. "It is prudent to reduce this year's migration intake accordingly."

The cuts will be coupled with deletions to the critical skills list,which specifies which jobs are open to migrants.

Senator Evans said Australia needs a more targeted list "so that migrant workers are meeting skills shortages and not competing with locals for jobs".
Government to cut immigration intake, 16 March 2009

Fortunately, Elaine Chao is no longer the Secretary of Labor, Hilda Solis has been sworn in, she has publicly stated that she is interested in reviewing the H-1B and other non-immigrant employment programs. <link>

I suggest that we call the DOL (Telephone: 1-866-4-USA-DOL (1-866-487-2365)) or email ExecutiveSecretariat@dol.gov and ask that Ms. Solis decertify "Computer-related Occupations" from the H-1B, L-1 OPT and EB-3 employment based visa programs.

The definition of Computer-related Occupations would include:
(DOT) "Computer Related Occupations"
(SOC) "15-1000 Computer Specialists"
(NCES - CIP) COMPUTER AND INFORMATION SCIENCES AND SUPPORT SERVICES

And the occupations listed under the following NAICS Industries:
54151 Computer Systems Design and Related Services
541511 Custom Computer Programming Services
541512 Computer Systems Design Services
541513 Computer Facilities Management Services
541519 Other Computer Related Services

References:
[1] Source: USCIS
Report on Characteristics of Specialty Occupation Workers (H-1B): Fiscal Year 2000
Report on Characteristics of Specialty Occupation Workers (H-1B): Fiscal Year 2001
Characteristics of Specialty Occupation Workers (H-1B): Fiscal Year 2002
Characteristics of Specialty Occupation Workers (H-1B): Fiscal Year 2003
Characteristics of Specialty Occupation Workers (H-1B): Fiscal Year 2004
Characteristics of Specialty Occupation Workers (H-1B): Fiscal Year 2005

[2] Source: Occupational Employment Statistics
15-1000 Computer Specialists Employment May 2000 = 2,642,910
15-1000 Computer Specialists Employment May 2006 = 2,969,510
Employment growth = 326,600

[3] Source: National Science Foundation
Division of Science Resources Statistics, special tabulations of U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System, Completions Survey, 1997–2006.

[4] Source: National Science Foundation
"Chapter 3. Science and Engineering Labor Force"

These are actually quite fascinating and upsetting statistics on the subject, and most of it appears to match up against the original sources (I checked). I'm not sure I grok exactly how the count of computer science H-1B visas was calculated from the tables presented, but, nevertheless, this is compelling data.

Ignoring the section on fraud (I don't think anyone here is arguing that fraud should not be prevented) the main thrust of this article appears to be:

1) The number of (American) computer science jobs grew by 326,600 between 2000 and 2006.

2) The number of (American) computer science graduates totalled 337,282 between 2000 and 2006.

3) The number of computer science H-1Bs awarded was 328,968 between 2000 and 2006.

Assuming point 3 is correct, the net result is that 582,058 Americans were displaced (or could never find jobs) due to the H-1Bs awarded.

This is very damning information indeed, and I will definitely research this further.

I do think there are some incorrect assumptions being made in the conclusions. Not every American who has a computer science job in 2000 still expects or wants to have a computer science job in 2006. For example, many of these people have moved into management positions. (In fact, one of the arguments in favor of this sort of thing is it allows Americans to move from routine "programmer" jobs to higher-value and more abstract creation/management roles.) However, the number of people who have been promoted or voluntarily moved from their jobs is not enough to account for the loss.

It also assumes that every single person graduating with a computer science degree is qualified for the new jobs available, and that every single person who already had a computer science job was qualified for whatever changes occurred in the marketplace.

One example to disprove those assumptions: While I don't have statistics for it, I know many companies have moved from COBOL to Java in the time between 2000 and 2006. Many COBOL developers lost their jobs to either Java developers just out of college or Java developers from overseas. Indian firms are actually quite poor at providing COBOL talent, so this was not a case of people losing their jobs due to cheaper options, but simply because the industry changed beneath them. Once again, while this should account for some of the numbers above, I don't believe it is enough to cover all of it.

Now, of course, I have not stated I support the H-1B program as it is. I have been primarily arguing two things:

1) Giving H-1B's to people who will found new companies and create more American jobs (assuming this can be done without fraud--a big assumption) makes sense.

2) Calling someone a liar because they have not researched the same set of complex job statistics that you have researched is an immature and innacurate way to respond to someone you disagree with. Calling the report you just forwarded obvious is ridiculous and stating that anyone who hasn't read it (or even has read it and doesn't fully believe in its accuracy) is a liar is plain wrong.

Instead of starting by calling someone a liar and only after much name calling and anger providing some data to back up your statements, why don't you start with the data?

And the last thing I'll state:

I like how with each response you choose to respond with data (possibly intentionally overwhelming) to the questions/comments for which you have facts (but were not necessarily asked to respond to), but choose NOT to respond to the questions/comments which would make your prior positions look weaker. It's an old debater's trick, but, rest assured, I do notice every time you wave your magic hands and change the subject.