[linux-elitists] Re: H1-B

Bulent Murtezaoglu bm@acm.org
Tue Feb 18 01:08:11 PST 2003


>>>>> "KMS" == Karsten M Self <kmself@ix.netcom.com> writes:
[...]
    KMS> Whether it surprises you or not, that's actually pretty close
    KMS> to my argument.  Compete.  But on equal terms.  

How will this be possible? I'm asking mostly out of ignorance.
Especially the 'equal terms' bit.  International competition usually
has a large element of inequality even for pure labor.  Legal/tax
overhead is different, standards of living are different etc. etc.
This is different from the differences in educational systems,
culture / work ethic etc. but might actually be almost as significant
a factor (try tracking debian in a country where even 24h dial up access
costs $100-200 a month for example).

    KMS> And clean up
    KMS> after the mess if you're stuck with a bunch of bodies, don't
    KMS> just ship 'em back where they came from.

I think the "open up the borders, let 'em compete" approach might have
been at least tenable had the US had a more liberitarian sort of
employment/taxation/SS system.  Barring that, the moment someone steps
on a payroll, several issues arise that necessitate breaking the
equality aim.  Taking responsibility for people who come over and
find themselves in non-viable conditions creates more issues.  They
migh not be insurmountable, but I just don't see how one would deal
with them even in the abstract and I certainly don't see how these
solutions could be implemented through a democracy.  Again, this is my
ignorance rather than convictions.  

If A1='open up the borders', B1='they knew the rules
when they came over', A2=we'll regulate who comes in and why"
B2="we'll take care of them when the economy goes south."  the 
combination that seems toughest to arrange is A1B2.  (A2B1 is closest
to the present system).   Am I missing anything major here?

cheers,

BM




More information about the linux-elitists mailing list