In 2003 or 2004 I was discussing a similar theme on a different forum, and either came across or was referred to the O’Brien article published at first of the Month Club. I did not recall its opening paragraphs (that did not then and still do not sing to me), and when in seeking out another reference when we were discussing the similar argument (to quote O’Brien “Wasn’t this where we came in? Or have we been here at all?”) skipped past (the now obvious) it. It being the Salon Article of 2000 entitled “The latest civil rights disaster” in which Horowitz detailed his ten points.

http://archive.salon.com/news/col/horo/2000/05/30/reparations/index.html

Pot-kettle, kettle-pot. Damn,

Come to think of it, I recall similar difficulty finding the stupid Horowitz piece in 2003/4 because folks on that forum kept referring to it as an advertisement lifting the reference directly from O’Brien’s 2001 article.

Man this is de javu, all over again.

My point is still the same, I believe Horowitz is still an idiot for treating Mr. Robinson’s book in the manner he did.

I owe you an apology, and the other fellow as well. I believe, not surprisingly, that is also how my first discussion ended.

Buddy and I “solved” my Wretch problem – I thought (for a hot second back in the day) W. was an indenpendent thinker – and lines like the one I quoted show how he’s still a tease on that front. I’ll keep tabs on him because I got into the habit of marking him when he talked an enormous amount of scurilous nonsense during the campaign. Nothing obsessive – I read fast! – and I get grist – a couple peices so far! But the main reason I pay attention to Wretch now is because I know folks like you do. And you deserve a LOT more…As a great man once said – How do I know what I want until I know what there is?

The lords and common took vows to create and live under our Constitution and the fundamental individual rights from on high. It was well established that USA was to be a nation of _laws_ not of men, like no place in history.

One side vacates those vows and redefines them on a daily basis. These vows are merely sandbags keeping them from eating pie in the sky.

We all agree human life is far from perfect. Sky pilots imagine that forcing US to abandon solid ground will transform clouds into pie. Land lovers understand, motives which corrupt shall _never_ die, but by Adonai.

Allowing millions of law breaking foreigners to become citizen is like allowing criminals to do as they please. Currently, only the righteous are held to the law, no matter how alien they become.

HD,
Totally agree there is one party, the DC_dudes staffed with _harvard_boys_. All funded by China and OPEC.

I worked Silicon Valley for four years before moving to my current job (startup went under). So don’t presume I’m talking from the outside and that “plainly” I have never met such H1-B workers simply because I have had different experiences than you.

Just as you are, I’m merely reporting what I’ve seen at work in Alameda, whether or not it coincides with what you’ve seen. Another valid piece of the data pie.

And what I’ve seen is a distribution of various different types, not a blanket picture. For the record, I am no more pious than anybody else.

I actually agree with you on two points.
1) As you mentioned, you do get occasional top performers, as well as need to screen out many worthless performers when hiring.

2) If employers perceive more downside to shifting to India, they’ll stop doing it.

If employers don’t like incompetent employees with princely attitudes, arrogance, and laziness, simply don’t hire them; they’re obviously a bad deal. This is logic, not bigotry.

My point, I reiterate, is that employers should not assume an attitude problem in a particular job seeker solely on the basis of last name, race, or skin color.

If IBM and others have ridiculous hiring policies destined for disaster, or they exercise very poor judgment in hiring because they either have stereotyped Indians an unadulterated good or an unadulterated evil, that is a problem they need to address before it brings the business down.

Sounds like you’re talking theory and faith from the outside.

I’m speaking from my own lying eyes and ears.

BTW, H1-Bs are not normally issued to resident aliens sitting in American classrooms with English their second language. Instead, Microsoft, et. al. send recruiters overseas to free-ride on the best and the brightest of India and China. Because of the Indian caste system many of their best and brightest are at the top purely by nature of birth status. They live the life of little princes and in every way believe that they are better than anybody else. Plainly you have never met such H1-B ‘workers.’ They are not rare.

AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, we do get some really top performers. However, to a striking degree they quickly step out and start up their own outfit. This is not quite what their employers have in mind! So the motivation of the EMPLOYER is to cram down the wages of the intellectual elite.

It is of note that IBM is laying off 5,000 ish in the US while is hiring 5,000 ish in India. That’s our TARP money put to good use!

At the end of the day, many an employer regrets the shift to India as the performance downside finally kicks them in the head. I rather suspect that some similar stimulus would be required for you to climb down from your perch of piety and realize that you are reading ground truth — not bigotry.

Regards.

“Anyone who Enters Without Inspection (EWI) should be banned from ever gaining citizenship. No child of an EWI should be granted citizenship. ”

Here! Here! but add “and should be denied all welfare payments” .

The real driving force in this immigration debate is that the Democrats think through the granting of amnesty and citizenship to illegals they can change the demographics of the voting population so it will be permanently overwhelmingly Democrat. Without the allure of getting millions of new ignorant and willfully left victims/voters, the desire for immigration reform for the Democrats would surely die quickly.

“H1-B visas seem ever destined for India. And so we import their privileged ‘princes’ who typically are so arrogant and lazy…”

#36 “Electronics and computer engineers from Shanghai fill a similar roll in those fields”

Oh I get it. Indian and Chinese immigrant job seekers are actually a management conspiracy to “cripple the negotiating power” of natives, “period.” And these newcomers are typically “arrogant and lazy princes,” and therefore noncompetitive when compared to the skills of real job seekers, so it all must be a corporate negotiating ploy to undermine native employee power.

Maybe. But here’s an alternative explanation for the presence of immigrant competition for software jobs:

What percentage of your software programming classes in college were ESL speakers? That same percentage probably stuck around after college to try and find a job.

That seems simpler.

Any person who feels threatened might point to the absolute worst examples of a population and paint the entire race (read Indians and Chinese) with the same brush. They could tar all immigrants with the “lazy and arrogant” brush or blanketly portray all multilinguals as “unable to communicate” adequately in English and therefore uncompetitive as job seekers.

But in reality there are skill distributions. And within the curves there is overlap. Just as some natives and multilinguals could be poor or reluctant communicators, there are also some percentage of communicative and talented multilinguals within the bell curve– those who thrived in an English-immersion roommate environment and would make decent and hardworking new hires if they stuck around after college.

The small community of first tier native speaking job seekers is quickly snapped up by the higher paying employers. Within the second tier there is overlap between talented multilinguals and native speakers. Within the third tier are many companies with tight budgets who are tempted hire cheap or outsource.

That’s how I view the job situation. But some would rather believe that no percentage of immigrants could possibly be competent; therefore, it’s all a management conspiracy to hire incompetents to “cripple the negotiating power of natives, period.” Well, it’s a free country; they’re entitled to their opinions.

Or better yet, stick to your own website and fever swamps. If you’re going to make a case, write a piece for Pajamas, provide cites, build something, see if they’ll take it. Otherwise you’re just another troll.

As Gerson wasn’t raised as a link for the article here, I have problems with your use of it to attack the thinking of the thread lead. Did you read the SF Gate article. No? Am I Surprised? Yes. Finding those Converse chewy? I suggest boiling good old cow leather next time you seek to insert your foot.

I see the main threat to any talk about immigration reform is not the “Bush” suggestion of a path to citizenship but in the fact that the promises made in the Last Comprehensive Reform Bills titles, sub titles and supposed intent, was nothing at all like the actual legislation contained there in. The effort and folly in attempting to bamboozle the American voting public has made any effort at bipartisanship to be suspect at best. The smell wafting from the legislative process of late is not pleasant to say the least. The continued farce of passing legislation that works against the best interest of the majority while selling it as a valuable gotta do just doesn’t hold up when folks get the opportunity to read the bill, the executive order, the campaign promise compromised. It also does not bode well when all that is there for weeks on end is the promise of a plan.

The polarization shows a lack of leadership, an inability to defend against slander and the unwillingness to go on the offensive against lies and distortion. Just what is it on which folks agree with the President?

Oh yeah, it was Bush’s fault?