US plans to strip H1B immigrants' spouses of work permits - <AUTHOR> http://www.sfchronicle.com/business/article/Trump-administration-begins-effort-to-strip-work-13634442.php <comment><USER2> In a country where even citizen couples can need two jobs, _each_ , just to survive, it is frustrating that immigrants are still expected to just somehow pull it together. Oh, and all the immigrant-heavy jobs seem to be in very expensive areas, at least for tech.

Here's a good yardstick for citizens: for any given immigrant policy X (or heck, any policy X on any subject), _would you want to live that way_? If "no", the policy is Wrong. Period.

These policies also keep trying to restrict immigrants without paying any attention to the benefits that companies receive, and indeed that citizens receive, when there are immigrants. First, the basic one: more people = more customers to buy stuff in your local economy, broader tax base, etc. Second, sometimes the entire _presence_ of a site is based on filling a certain minimum number of jobs. A site with 1000 people that has 300 immigrants is not "300 stolen American jobs", it's +700 jobs that wouldn't have otherwise existed for citizens; or, it's a site that wouldn't be able to do as much otherwise, possibly causing the entire company to fail in some way that ends up costing U.S. jobs all over the place, even at other sites.

Policies should never be "death by 1000 cuts", either. Politicians keep finding ways to make things that they don't like unnecessarily hard, just because they haven't found a way to kill them off entirely. Well, frankly, that kind of thing is crap.

<comment><USER3> The title on the article is wrong. H1B workers aren't immigrants and using that word in this context is wrong.

H1B is a visa. They are visitors.

That being said, visitors should be able to work and so should their relations if they are allowed to visit as well. One shouldn't need the blessings of the federal government to earn a living.

<comment><USER4> H1B is classified as a dual-intent visa; as such it explicitly acknowledges that people who obtain this visa may have be allowed to immigrate into the country subject to certain conditions.

[http://www.americanlaw.com/dintent.html](http://www.americanlaw.com/dintent.html)

<comment><USER3> I am aware, but dual intent means just that. Until they file for a green card, their intent isn't known and calling them immigrants is wrong. They are not immigrating. Although they may, if they choose to.

<comment><USER5> The rule that the article talks about is only valid for folks that have already filed for green cards(thus expressing intent to immigrate) and been on work visa for 6 years+. They would be immigrants if not for the extremely long wait list.

<comment><USER6> This "wait list" is created by the law. Congress has set the number of immigrant visas ("green cards") to be issued each year. Since there are more people than visas available - some people are not getting them and, thus, do not become immigrants. It's not some kind of bureaucratic snafu with the paperwork stuck in some desk somewhere - this is by law. So they would be immigrants only if the law was different somehow.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> According to the current queue times, many of these people will die of old age before being able to legally work and their spouse getting a green card.

This rule only applied after waiting six years in the green card queue. Is 90k folks in the entire US really that high when fields like Computer Security have 0% unemployment? This might end up encouraging offshoring.

Country based discrimination at it's finest.

Born in the wrong countries(China/India) = 70 years waiting for a green card and dying before your spouse can legally work.

Born in the right countries = Green card in 7 months and being able to work instantly.

<comment><USER7> The key thing however is that the H1B is a non-immigrant, temporary worker visa. Expecting wine from water doesn't engender much sympathy. Using H1B as a pathway to a green card is not any different than expecting to convert an EU tourist visa into a work permit. The long waiting times for a green card are a symptom of expecting an immigrant outcome for a non-immigrant visa.

If people want to immigrate, then isn't the correct choice to obtain an immigrant visa?[1]

An H1B is a non immigrant visa[2]:

"Temporary worker visas are for persons who want to enter the United States for employment lasting a fixed period of time, and are not considered permanent or indefinite."

So I'm confused. How is it some kind of tragedy when the visa under which you are working doesn't provide a quick path to a green card? Isn't the visa doing exactly as advertised? Furthermore, providing the H1B spouse with a work permit -- doesn't that mean that the spouse can work in a non-shortage occupation without restriction? Doesn't that necessarily mean that the spouse is able to compete with Americans and permanent residents for jobs that are not hard-to-fill? Basically 1 work visa provides 2 jobs? That doesn't seem like the intent of the H1B program which is to provide temporary workers of high ability to fill specialized jobs for which there are verifiable shortages. It certainly isn't designed to be a recruiting tool for big tech: "Come work for us and your spouse can get a job too! The salary is lower than an equally qualified American, but since your spouse gets to work too, you'll have enough money to live in San Jose and maybe one day, you might even get a green card!" That seems to be the promise the H1B crowd is expecting.

I'm not opposed to immigration -- but H1B isn't about immigration; it's about filling otherwise unfilled jobs in specialty occupations for which there aren't enough qualified Americans. If the sole purpose is to fill shortages, then providing the spouse with a free-riding right to work in any occupation (not shortage areas) is not consistent with the purpose. If H1Bs can't afford to have a non-working spouse, then they ought not accept the jobs at the salaries offered. What's happening now is that the working spouse's job is actually a subsidy to compensate for an H1B wage that is lower than it should be. That lower H1B wage is then being used to displace American workers.[3]

[1] [https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us- visas/immigrat...](https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us- visas/immigrate/employment-based-immigrant-visas.html) [2] [https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us- visas/employme...](https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us- visas/employment/temporary-worker-visas.html) [3] [https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/04/us/last-task-after- layoff...](https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/04/us/last-task-after-layoff-at- disney-train-foreign-replacements.html)

<comment><USER5> H1B is a dual intent visa.

>So I'm confused. How is it some kind of tragedy when the visa under which you are working doesn't provide a quick path to a green card? Isn't the visa doing exactly as advertised? Furthermore, providing the H1B spouse with a work permit -- doesn't that mean that the spouse can work in a non-shortage occupation without restriction? Doesn't that necessarily mean that the spouse is able to compete with Americans and permanent residents for jobs that are not hard-to-fill? Basically 1 work visa provides 2 jobs? That doesn't seem like the intent of the H1B program which is to provide temporary workers of high ability to fill specialized jobs for which there are verifiable shortages. It certainly isn't designed to be a recruiting tool for big tech: "Come work for us and your spouse can get a job too! The salary is lower than an equally qualified American, but since your spouse gets to work too, you'll have enough money to live in San Jose and maybe one day, you might even get a green card!" That seems to be the promise the H1B crowd is expecting.

The problem is that everything you wrote currently applies to only two or three countries. For H1B from all other countries, H1B is a pathway to green card in as low as 7 months upon which their spouse gets a green card and work authorization. How is that fair?

If H1B is all what you claim it is, why are these people getting green cards and work authorization?

<comment><USER8>
      How is that fair?

In the case of those three countries, what is _their_ immigration policy toward incoming work migrants? How many foreigners (especially Americans) has each onboarded in the past decade compared to the USA?

"Fair" goes both ways.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I wish they'd just limit H1B's to a salary of say 100k or more or something so that the whole concept of "can't find enough people here" might actually apply.

That way we'd see less abuse as far as some really low level work just being imported for cheaper. At one point you could search active H1B jobs on a government site somewhere, I found what looked like basic customer service positions being filled for pretty low wages. I really doubt they couldn't find someone to do the job, just they didn't find them willing to work for cheap / tethered to the company via an H1B...

<comment><USER10> I think the H1B should be ended entirely. What incentive is there for corporations and the government to invest in its own people when they can just import workers. Not only that, it is unfair to others countries who lose workers. If these employees are so valuable then isn't almost evil to steal them from poor underdeveloped countries.

The idea that a nation of 350 million people can't supply the workers needed for the US economy is nonsense. What it really means is that corporations want to use foreign workers to cap wages. Or it could be that corporations and governments haven't done a good job developing the work force they needed. That's their problem, not the american people.

I can see a temporary workers program being useful after a catastrophic event like a world war where millions of your people are killed and you need to rebuild. But in peacetime, it's not needed.

<comment><USER11> Historically US and its economy has benefited tremendously from immigration. In the modern world it continues to be a big edge. Anti-immigration mindset is also anti-American mindset. How about we revoke the citizenship of folks with such mindset and make way for a prosperous nation? Maybe we could let them cut in front of the line to earn back their citizenship with hard work after catastrophic events. I'm of course just using a far fetched example to make a point.

<comment><USER10> Firstly, you are repeating propaganda you've heard in the media that simply isn't true. From the founders til today, the US has been highly anti- immigration. Secondly, population growth may have been great for the US economy, but it has also been terrible for average american workers and minorities ( especially blacks and native americans ). Thirdly, we benefited far more economically from war, conquest, slavery, genocide, expansion and resources than from immigration. Just because something is good for the economy doesn't mean it's good or moral. And just because something was good in the past doesn't mean it is good today.

Having said that, I'm actually for immigration. But H-1B isn't immigration, no more than human trafficking is immigration.

Immigrants, like Jerry Yang and Sergei Brin, can start and own businesses. Do you know what H-1B visa holders are forbidden to do? They can't start or own businesses. Interesting huh? I laugh whenever pro-H-1B visas try to lie about how H-1B visas is the reason why Yahoo and Google exists. When H-1B explicitly prevent you from starting businesses. Had Yang and Brin be H-1B visa holders rather than being actual immigrant americans, they would not have been able to create yahoo and google.

So the H-1B visa was created so that foreign workers can compete against american workers, but not against american business owners. Isn't that great for business owners?

If you are for immigration, workers rights and plain fairness, then you'd be against H-1B visas because it's purely exploitation by billionaires so that billionaires can profit.

Why not do away with H-1B visas and shift it to real immigration ( which I support ) so that they have actual rights and can start businesses themselves and create jobs?

How about a non-exploitive and fair immigration policy rather than a exploitive non-immigration visa like H-1B? How about we let these foreign workers compete against both the billionaire owners and the workers? Why protect billionaires from competition and subject stressed american workers with more competition?

<comment><USER11> There are big gaps in your understanding of what H1B is (it is dual intent). Most folks on that visa go on to become greencard holders and citizens. Several of them go on to create jobs (directly or indirectly).

And it is not like H1Bs are handed out like candy. There are caps, lottery, wage requirements, 6 months of advertising etc. (sure there is abuse like with anything else which should be addressed).

Also ironic that you come to a thread discussing how things like these rip apart families (and work against women) and try to take a higher moral position.

Your stand of, "I support immigration" doesn't sound sincere because you seem to imply that if we reclassify H1B to immigration-visa you will suddenly be supportive of it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I've had too many friends be forced to spend their last two weeks on the job training their H1B replacements. I'd be happy if the H1B program was done away with entirely. The idea you can't find enough employees in a country of 326 million people is a joke.

<comment><USER13> Cisco is a really good example of this. They actually ran afoul of anti- discrimination laws for explicitly rejecting American born workers.

[https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/08/21/h-1b-visa-reliant- cis...](https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/08/21/h-1b-visa-reliant-cisco- secured-visas-for-foreign-workers-instead-of-hiring-u-s-citizens-report/)

<comment><USER8> Same with IBM. And Disney. And UC.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Statements from the article such as "Rand pointed out that, only families already approved for green cards qualify for the work visa, meaning the government has already determined there are no Americans who could be working the high-skilled job" make me question the entire program. Really, " _no_ _Americans_ "?, What rocket science project are they working on? Or did they leave out "at the wages offered" part?

<comment><USER15> The employer has to post the job requirement and try multiple recruitment channels for 30 days. Only if they cant find another candidate, can they file for Perm. So that specific "Rocket Science project" didnt have any qualified american apply for it. This is a good article to explain the whole process - [https://www.usavisanow.com/perm/](https://www.usavisanow.com/perm/)

<comment><USER16> When I stop getting South-Asian recruiters bombarding me on LinkedIn asking if I want to work a 1 month contract in Pittsburgh writing PHP for $16 an hour despite living in Texas then I will agree the situation has been straightened out. There are fast-food places offering $15 an hour.

Until then the system is being abused and it's American labor that's losing out, followed by people being abused by the H1B racket. If they want to pay someone $x to do some job then hire them in their home country and outsource it. Or offer the visa to the worker. It's much more preferable for these firms to abuse the system and their "placements" until it's fixed though.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Even with the best estimates for people born in India, the Green Card wait times are at least 10+ years to 120 years. What are the spouses of such people ought to do?.

There seems to be no interest in fixing the root cause of the problem. The only partial fix for the problem is to let the spouses of approved GC petitioners work. But, this administration is bent on removing those provisions, without providing a fix for the problem in the first place.

<comment><USER18> > Even with the best estimates for people born in India, the Green Card wait > times are at least 10+ years to 120 years.

10 years is the length of the current backlog for Employment 2nd, 3rd, and "Other Workers" preference visa from India, but only two years for Employment 1st Preference,.and Employment 4th preference is current.

> What are the spouses of such people ought to do?

In principal:

(1) Come to the US but not work, or

(2) Remain in India, to which the H-1B recipient, as a nonimmigrant, will return.

> There seems to be no interest in fixing the root cause of the problem.

Do you mean the existence of the H-1B in the first place, or some other "root cause".

<comment><USER19> > 10 years is the length of the current backlog for Employment 2nd, 3rd, and > "Other Workers" preference visa from India, but only two years for > Employment 1st Preference,.and Employment 4th preference is current.

Have you looked at what's required to get a first preference greencard? 99% probably dont qualify unless you abuse it with companies like CTS or Accenture.

> (1) Come to the US but not work, or

What do spouses with advanced degrees and prior work experience do? With H1B lottery, this was a decent outlet when you have stayed here already for a few years.

> (2) Remain in India, to which the H-1B recipient, as a nonimmigrant, will > return.

You suggest stay away from your wife and family when you're just married or have young kids?

<comment><USER18> > Have you looked at what's required to get a first preference greencard?

I was clarifying the backlog statement, not recommending a method of bypassing it.

> What do spouses with advanced degrees and prior work experience do?

The same as other spouses.

> You suggest stay away from your wife

No, I suggest nothing; those are the options under the law in the absence of the H-4 EAD.

More bluntly, the entire point of the policy change is clearly to discourage H-1B applications, especially from countries like India and China, so complaining that it doesn't leave attractive options for the spouses impacted is pointing out that it is working as designed. What the spouse is really supposed to do, in the eyes of those crafting the policy, is prevail upon their partner not to seek an H-1B in the first place.

The mechanism may be a bit more subtle than closing border crossings and firing tear gas across the border to turn away people attempting to exercise their legal right to apply for asylum, but the _intent_ is the same: to make clear that the affected people _are not welcome in the US_ , at least by the present administration.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> No matter where you are on the politics of all this our immigration system is incredibly broken.

There are so many "work arounds" or "hacks", if you prefer, placed precisely because the system is so badly broken. Whether it's DACA, or this, or the many other things put in place and intended to help families these are all hacks around a fundamentally broken law system.

No one seems to have the courage to fix it and the politics are now so devisive that the state things are in is incredibly sad and frankly inhuman in many cases.

<comment><USER21> The H1-B Visa was abused, intended only for cases where there are absolutely no Americans with the qualifications that can fill that job.

A number of politicians are effectively "bribed" by large firms to attempt to increase the H1-B Visa quota (see Gang of Eight Immigration). My own state sen Schumer, has a daughter that works for Facebook and it is no secret that Facebook wants to increase the number of H1-B Visas.

Fixing immigration is comparatively easy. 1\. Get rid of H1-B Visa abuse. The reality is that there should be few H1-B Visas given out because there are in fact Americans that can do most of the jobs. H1-B Visas should only be given out at salaries 1.5 times those of Americans, to incentivize the hiring of Americans and minimizing H1-B Visa abuse.

2\. Force the implementation of eVerify with massive fines for employers that don't use it.

3\. Obama broke the law by not having Congress pass the DACA legislation. It appears that Congress doesn't want to pass it so they should return to their native countries.

Remember, in all of these programs of Visa abuse, or the hiring of illegal aliens, takes jobs (and in the case of DACA) university spots from US Citizens and those who are living here legally.

Thus, the system is not broken. Just enforce existing laws such as eVerify with massive fines for abuse, get rid of H1-B Visa abuse, get rid of H4 Visas which Congress never passed in the first place, get rid of DACA, have them apply and wait in line like everyone else that wants to live here.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> I was an H1-B for a couple of years many years ago, I don't remember spouses (H-4) having the ability to work back then. If this passes, it would be reverting to how it was for the longest time.

<comment><USER5> >If this passes, it would be reverting to how it was for the longest time.

Not really. The system wasn't created for wait times of upto 120 years, someone waiting a few years for their spouse to get a green card like in the past is different from now waiting for 70 years and actually die before being able to work. How is that reverting to what it was?

Only people from certain countries are affected by this, because the 7% visa per country cap is enforced the same for both Vatican City with half a million population[edit: 1000 population] and for China and India with more than a billion population each.

Also, the H4 work authorization only applies after the worker has been working on a H1B for more than 6 years.I am assuming you were never qualified for that when you were on a work visa since you presumably got a green card much faster.

<comment><USER18> > The system wasn't created for wait times of upto 120 years,

H-1B wasn't crested as an immigrant visa, either, though it allows immigration without exiting. It was envisioned and sold ad primarily a way to temporarily fill transitory needs.

> Only people from certain countries are affected by this, because the 7% visa > per country cap is enforced the same for both Vatican City with half a > million population[edit: 1000 population] and for China and India with more > than a billion population each.

Population is only loosely correlated with the issue, it's not about visa demand; in many cases (basically, all the family-based categories) the backlogs are worse from Mexico and/or the Philippines than India or China.

<comment><USER5> >Population is only loosely correlated with the issue, it's not about visa demand; in many cases (basically, all the family-based categories) the backlogs are worse from Mexico and/or the Philippines than India or China.

Population is definitely part of the issue, with people from smaller countries getting a green card in 7 months vs. 70 years for the biggest ones.

>in many cases (basically, all the family-based categories) the backlogs are worse from Mexico and/or the Philippines than India or China.

That's irrelevant because those people in family based backlogs are not legally present in the US fulltime, so the pain for them is much less compared to people on work visas and their spouses who are not able to work.

People in family based queues can still work because they're in their home country.

>H-1B wasn't crested as an immigrant visa, either, though it allows immigration without exiting. It was envisioned and sold ad primarily a way to temporarily fill transitory needs.

I was talking about the work green card system. Also H1B is a dual intent visa. If it was designated as a temporary transitory visa then it should not qualify for green cards.

<comment><USER6> H1B does not qualify you for green card. "Dual intent" means the _applicant_ can obtain the visa even with immigration intent. For all non-immigrant visas the immigration intent is assumed and the applicant must prove the lack of thereof in order to obtain most of them. The acceptable proofs are strong ties to the home country such as family, job, realty etc. Work visa applicants generally cannot provide such proof since their job is in the US and they take their family with them on dependant visas so the DoS just made this "dual intent" doctrine to be able to issue such visas.

Perpetuating the myth that H1B somehow qualifies you for greencard is only harming people who sign up for H1B and suffer abuse in hope they are on the way to greencard. Greencards are immigrant visas and obtaining one does not require or benefit in any way from a non-immigrant visa of any kind or even presence in the country. If you are truly an indispensable worker, likes of which could not be found in the US, you could just stay in the home country or any other country where you like and wait for the greencard.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Picking at the program by brutalizing people here and there is unconscionable. Put everyone out of their misery, stop trying to predict winners and losers and just end the program.

The normal immigration processes served the country well for generations. The new policy of catering to particular industries by creating second class citizens is never going to be fair to anyone because it was never designed to be.

</comment><comment><USER24> As a US citizen, I both agree with returning to a more explicit work-permit system yet apologize for our terrible immigration system.

<comment><USER25> unfortunately there's vested interests, corporate and political, to keep it sucky.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> This is great news for Canada. [https://www.canadim.com/h1b-riskier-canada- welcome-record-im...](https://www.canadim.com/h1b-riskier-canada-welcome- record-immigrants/)

Legal immigration is the reason silicon valley exists. Ask Mark Zuckerberg why he moved Facebook HQ to silicon valley. It is because that's where the engineers are. If legal immigration wasn't a thing Zuckerberg would have moved considerable number of jobs to places like Beijing, Bangalore and St. Petersburg, because that's where he would have found software engineers.

Canada, already a major center for AI innovation, will be the new silicon valley.

Edit: s/H-1B/immigration/g because the exact visa doesn't matter.

<comment><USER27> _Canada, already a major center for AI innovation, will be the new silicon valley._

The corollary of this is that with our punishingly high personal income and capital gains taxes and dearth of good exits for startups, the only thing we really have going for us is our sane points-based immigration system. I work at a company with a _lot_ of engineers who were trying to get entry to the US and gave up and decided to work towards PR in Canada instead.

We are essentially arbitraging America's dysfunctional immigration rules. If the Americans ever get smart and pass comprehensive immigration reform (hint - like Obama's _Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act_ of 2013 which never got a vote in the House and withered on the vine), tech in Canada is even more screwed than it is now.

<comment><USER28> > the only thing we really have going for us is our sane points-based > immigration system

I lived in Seattle and enjoyed it, but staying in America long term was never an option for me. There's so much more to living in Canada than just our immigration system.

Even with the pay cut for being in Canada, and even with the additional taxes, I still make enough money to not need to worry about money. More money would be nice, but it's not all that motivating.

Meanwhile, those taxes go to things I think are important: a strong public education system; a health care system based on need, not wealth; a safe, gun- free society; a safe haven for refugees in need.

In my office in Toronto, probably 1000+ Amazon devs could transfer to an American office and make more money. But we don't. The same goes for the even larger Vancouver office.

Our immigration rules are just one aspect of why devs live here.

<comment><USER27> _I lived in Seattle and enjoyed it, but staying in America long term was never an option for me. There 's so much more to living in Canada than just our immigration system._

You work at AMZN - I work at a US company in Canada too. Canada is a nation of branch-offices, largely because we have no VC-ecosystem, which is largely because we're a highly redistributive country with high capital gains taxes.

What makes us attractive for branch offices is that smart, hard-working, well- educated immigrants who can't make it into the US can often make it into Canada. Native born Canadians, OTOH, are leaving in droves ([https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/technology/article-...](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/technology/article- canada-facing-brain-drain-as-young-tech-talent-leaves-for-silicon/))

But we're a terrible place to start a company and exit, which is why it doesn't happen very often.

The original poster claimed that Canada could replace Silicon Valley - that's not going to happen without a better ecosystem for funding start-ups and rewarding founders.

As for those devs who choose to stay here when they could leave on a TN-1, make twice the money in the US after taxes and expenses (including health insurance and private schooling for kids), and work on more interesting problems at US companies, I encourage them to do the math. They're not doing themselves any favors living in unliveably-expensive cities earning pennies and not saving for retirement, and retirement will come a lot sooner than they think.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> High chance this will get and injunction in courts as soon as the rule is published.

<comment><AUTHOR> But serious damage to the overseas perception of US employers would result regardless.

<comment><USER30> It doesn't matter. Are the Indians and Chinese going to stop pounding on the doors because the American government makes the rules marginally more strict? No, probably not.

<comment><USER31> In the last 4 months, I've already seen more than 5 friends in my circle who've left the US for good. They do not plan on returning to the US until the pathway to a green card is sorted out. They work at companies like Microsoft, FAANG, etc. Over the next year, another 10-15% of my friend circle is moving out of the US - most of them cite the green card issue as the primary cause of returning back.

They've already worked at good tech companies here, most of which have offices around the world. Their choices directly cause the shift of their jobs from US to outside. Couple this with the fact that many of my juniors at the best universities in India (harder to get into than Stan/MIT here) now no longer consider moving to the US because of these cases, there is already an effect of really good talent not arriving here. The effect is not obvious in a year or two, but surely over time you will notice the secondary effects: a lot of engineers coming from India/China would not be the countries'best - the best do not want to put up with this, more employees leaving earlier/not settling, the expansion of India/China offices for these tech companies, or China/India companies doing better than the US counterparts (in cases where this is already happening, a lot of the HN crowd blames Chinese protectionism rather than acknowledging the talent that already exists in those countries).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> As a former H1B visa holder with a spouse, and friends in the same boat, I have experienced first-hand the effects of having a spouse that is not allowed to work.

First, they get bored out of their mind. They're young, they want to grow, but they can't. While you're off to work, networking, learning, your spouse is at home, trying their best to chase away the feeling of stagnation.

It's OK for the first few months - they go for walks, cook, read, go to the gym - anything to keep busy, but unless there's a child that takes up their entire time, they just get bored, then they get sad, and then they get depressed.

It takes a hard toll on the relationship, which, ironically, is the primary reason why spouses agree to this in the first place. Most just want to live with their husbands or wives and have a normal life. Long distance isn't a realistic option when you're talking about a 6 year H1B visa.

Being unable to work makes the relationship one-sided, because one person goes to work, provides for the family, and has various experiences which slowly add up and allows them to grow personally and professionally. In addition, if you come from a society where gender roles are heavily promoted culturally, it is especially hard when the roles get reversed when the couple is in the US. Typically, men lose confidence in their ability to provide for the family and get very depressed. Women from cultures where there's an expectation that they'll be a homemaker, have much less stigma associated with not working, especially if there's a child to take care of.

They are also competing with other couples in various areas: social status, disposable income (that lets you go on vacations) or ability to buy a house, and they'll be losing ground simply because of the income level (less so for FAANG employees, but there are plenty of places hiring on an H1B visa that pay the minimum they can to meet the H1B criteria).

There are only 2 realistic options most spouses end up taking: the spouse works illegally (clearly a risky move) or the spouse changes their legal status: divorces you and marries a citizen (risky and further damages the quality of your relationship), tries to go to school on an F1 status (which now requires even more income and puts more pressure on the H1B holder), or the relationship deteriorates to the point where the non-working spouse goes back to their home country because they are unhappy here.

Finally, I will say that yes there are many real issues with the H1B visa, but disallowing the spouse to work is not a solution to any of them. It only manages to get these young couples behind in life.

I am fortunate enough to have come out of this ordeal fairly unscathed, but others I know have not been so lucky.

<comment><USER33> Everything you've said is true. My wife is not even in tech. "the relationship deteriorates to the point where the non-working spouse goes back to their home country because they are unhappy here." \- this is what we're close to right now.

<comment><USER34> The difficulty of assimilating in a strange new country is enough to make many people want to go back, with or without employment. I don't think employment is the issue here. Culture shock is real.

You're also away from extended family. This is difficult for many people.

Native-born people, with or without both spouses working, experience relationship troubles and depression. It happens, even without the culture shock. You may have had the exact same problems had you stayed where you were born.

FWIW though, there is no need for the spouse to sit around being bored out of her mind. The solution is to participate in in-person local mommy groups. Typically the moms gather together at a local park or library, bringing their little kids. The moms chat with each other while the kids do some activity together.

<comment><USER32> > The difficulty of assimilating in a strange new country is enough to make > many people want to go back, with or without employment.

That's applicable to one group of immigrants, namely those who don't want to assimilate. However, this discussion is about those who are perfectly OK with assimilating into the US culture.

> I don't think employment is the issue here.

It's absolutely the issue here. You seem to be focused on immigrants who fail to assimilate, and you're applying their problems to all other immigrants ("What's that, your spouse can't afford to pay for tuition and you are not allowed to work? well, see, it's actually very simple. You just failed to assimilate and you will soon have to go back to your country. Ha ha, one less evil immigrant to deal with!")

> Native-born people, with or without both spouses working, experience > relationship troubles and depression.

What we're talking about here is the direct link between a government rule, and the known issues that rule has created for immigrants in the past. The argument you brought to the discussion, however, is similar to shooting an immigrant in the foot and telling them that native people also have foot pain, with or without being shot in the foot. It's non-sensical.

> FWIW though, there is no need for the spouse to sit around being bored out > of her mind

Since you said "for what it's worth", I'll just say that it's worth exactly zero. I've already given examples of what most folks attempt to do when faced with the reality of not being able to seek employment, though you, again, chose to focus on a narrow subset of the group, extract a detail about them and then apply it to everyone else in the group. Do you notice a pattern here?

> The solution is to participate in in-person local mommy groups.

Finally we got to the part of your comment where you show how little you think of spouses of immigrants. Just to drive this point home: you took a detail from a subset of the group ('mommies'), and claim it will work for everyone else in the group. Again, do you notice a pattern here?

Also, I've already mentioned in my comment above that a child will consume most of one's time, but also most of the limited income, so that solution 'solves the problem' by creating an even bigger problem. Sometimes it works out, some time it doesn't. We could increase the chance of success for such families if we allowed both spouses to seek employment.

<comment><USER34> The point of the visa is supposedly to bring in unusually high-value workers. The value of a worker is called into question if they need a second income. The same is true if a child consumes "most of the limited income". You should be able to afford a half dozen children and a house (4 bedroom, 3 bath, garage, fenced yard) and a car. Maybe you even send all of your kids to private school, or you pay full tuition at Harvard.

The visa is supposedly not for people who just want to come take a couple ordinary jobs away from ordinary Americans. You're supposed to be extra- special and wonderful, bringing amazing value to the country. The idea is to let you try out the country, with the hope that you might become an unusually productive citizen.

Anyway, if you don't like the deal, you don't have to accept the deal.

<comment><USER32> The purpose of an H1B visa is to bring in "foreign workers in specialty occupations" (engineers, architects, etc), not foreign workers that are able to command a very high salary (e.g. CEOs).

Sometimes foreign workers are able to negotiate an above average salary, sometimes they can't, because the company has a very high reputation or access to unique resources and uses that as leverage (for example, NASA, Harvard, etc).

Most likely, they'll get an average salary in exchange for being able to work at the company in a first world country, so they'll be able to afford whatever the 'local' Americans are able to afford in the area. Can your average American afford a 4 bedroom house and 6 children in 2019?

That's the real deal that's being sent in a Word document requiring your signature. Yes, you don't have to accept the deal, but the US government doesn't have to prevent spouses from seeking employment either, causing more issues for the immigrant families.

Which one of these 2 options benefits the US more?

<comment><USER34> The average engineer can afford a 4 bedroom house and 6 children in 2019. The same goes for somebody who might be called a software architect, but not for the type of architect who draws floorplans and rooflines for houses.

Maybe that doesn't work in San Francisco, but there are many other places to live in the USA. Most of the country is very affordable for somebody who can design software or hardware.

As I understand it, getting an above-average salary is nearly a legal requirement. Going below average is prohibited. (one could be exactly average I think)

To make a random example: $150,000 per year will have you living very well in Deerfield Beach, FL or in Georgetown, KY.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> Just take look into EU countries and try to apply some of the same policies. They seem to have if not zero, less issues with high skilled workers.

Otherwise you can blame H1B holders forever. They didn't wrote the policy or the law. You shouldn't punish them for what they had no influence. They should be able to plan for their living. They should be encouraged to contribute and integrate with society.

</comment><comment><USER36> Some possible impacts:

1) Drives up wages to the point where an H1B couple can contain one non- working spouse. Not bad.

2) Causes H1B applicants to skew towards younger folks without families, reducing housing pressure. Not bad.

3) Causes H1B recipients to marry citizens at slightly higher rates and more quickly assimilate, especially in the second+ generation. Call it a wash.

<comment><USER19> 1\. Might not happen in the probably the next decade. Earning 200k+ in Bay Area is common and still hard to live on a single salary. What should an engineer do to make it go to 400k? 2\. So, you want experienced, well trained experts in their respective fields to leave the country and go elsewhere after the companies spend so much on their younger selves? 3\. This would be a small minority whatever happens. After growing up in a country with a completely different culture for ~25 years, a sudden shift in a small timeframe is not expected.

<comment><USER37> Realistically how can 200k+ be hard to live on?

<comment><USER19> It's not hard to live on. But, you mostly don't save anything or you might take a long time to buy a house.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> Yet another hurtful policy that puts paid to the notion of "oh, but we're perfectly ok with _legal_ immigration".

<comment><USER39> I don't someone has to support open borders to be "ok with legal immigration".

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> To the moderators: the article title here is incorrect. The title on the linked page is actually:

      "Trump administration begins effort to strip work permits for immigrant spouses"

</comment><comment><USER33> The system is fundamentally broken and it's partly my own countrymen to blame. I've lived here for 17 years (in 4 years, if I live here, I'd have lived here longer than in my home country), earn more than $500k per year and recently got an offer for $600+k/yr. I've probably paid at least three quarters of a million in taxes. I'm still on a H1, cannot change jobs easily, cannot do anything on the side like advise companies and though I get opportunities for VP roles, cannot take them up since companies usually don't want a VP that's on a H1. This news is devastating since my wife quit her job after my kid was born and only recently has used the EAD to work with autistic children which has been her passion all her life. If HR1044 does not pass, we've decided to move back. I'll take my $1.5M, which I could have invested here, with me and invest it in my home country instead (or I'll come back on a L-1 visa like so many of my lesser-qualified friends and get a green card in a couple of years).

<comment><USER41> $500k/year? I'm supposed to feel sympathy towards you when there are H1b holders who are being horribly exploited?

$500k/year is a lot of fucking money, even in the Bay Area.

<comment><USER42> H1B-holder: _earns $80k /year_

"Cheap labor! Exploitation!"

H1B-holder: _earns $500k /year_

"You greedy bastard! You want a green card on top of that?!"

H1B-holder: _shocked Pikachu face_

Sorry for the Reddit-style comment :-). Also, I haven't downvoted you (in case someone has and you were wondering) because I don't believe you're posting in bad faith. But you do see the contradiction?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> Trump. Making Canada great again.

<comment><USER44> This isn't Trump, this lawsuit was filed during the Obama years.</comment></comment>


Right versus pragmatic - <AUTHOR> http://www.marco.org/2012/02/25/right-vs-pragmatic <comment><USER2> The quote from Andy Ihnatko repeats a common meme:

 _The single least-attractive attribute of many of the people who download content illegally is their smug sense of entitlement_

Framing it as an issue of entitlement is not very good. A lot of folks who pirate can't afford entertainment otherwise, and to tell folks who, say, are working multiple jobs and who have shitty healthcare and whatnot that they're "entitled* is just dickish.

Moreover, the truly "entitled" behavior being displayed is by the publishers: they promote user-harming DRM, they cripple technologies with things like DHCP, they push spyware onto users' machines, they waste the time of consumers with pointless ads and notices, and so on and so forth.

It's just a really bad direction to argue on. A better one is "Hey, this AAA entertainment you are consuming doesn't pay for itself...how can we get you to pay us to make things you want?". Unfortunately, instead, the argument is typically "No artists would _ever_ produce _anything_ without money and oh just ignore the fact that we publishers are fleecing the artists as much as you are".

Sigh.

On a lighter note: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtI3ghO4jZ8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtI3ghO4jZ8)</comment>


Is the United States losing its spirit of Entrepreneurship? - <AUTHOR> http://technical.ly/2015/05/20/entrepreneur-video-game-aradhya-malhotra-immigration-deportation/

<comment><USER2> I'm guessing the OP is the Aradhya mentioned in the article.

1\. Aradhya could've filed for H1-B for this year through his own company, since the deadline has passed for this, this is now irrelevant. 2\. One option is to apply for O-1A visa awarded to individuals of extraordinary ability.

The US immigration system is definitely broken, but in this specific case, the change of status is not a sudden occurrence and Aradhya would've been aware that the policy change isn't happening in time and should've been prepared for it.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for your message. At the time of deadline my company had some financial constraints that would not allow me to apply. I am currently looking into the O-1A visa option. And you are right, I have spent time preparing for all different eventualities and the purpose of this article was to share my story with other entrepreneurs who might be facing this situation soon.</comment></comment>