The Department of Justice investigated Meta, for example, and found that the company created an entirely separate job programme to comply with the rules. Positions the firm sought to fill with H-1B holders were effectively disguised from the public — advertised in print media and applicants could only respond through physical mail-in forms — despite other routine jobs posted by the company accessible electronically.
The government found that Meta discriminated against American workers, refusing to recruit, consider, or hire qualified Americans for more than 2,600 jobs. The Department of Justice, however, ended the issue with a slap on the wrist penalty of $14.25 million, or a mere 0.016% of company revenue.
While government enforcement actions are rare and generally impotent, research strongly shows that major employers, especially those in Silicon Valley, are using the H-1B and similar visa programmes to depress wages. Amazon, Microsoft, Google, Apple, and Meta use the scheme “in order to legally pay many of their H-1B workers below the local median wage for the jobs they fill,” noted the Economic Policy Institute, a Left-leaning think tank, in a research report.
It’s more indentured labour than free market: should a foreign worker complain about wages or working conditions, an employer can rescind the visa and send them back to their home country. Meanwhile, economists from the University of Michigan and the University of California, San Diego found that tech worker wages would have been as much as 5.1% higher in the absence of H-1B visa workers in the same field.
Proponents of the visa counter that the programme leads to greater dynamism and economic expansion, a trickle-down effect that helps workers. But recent experience has called such claims into question. Last year, the top 30 H-1B visa employers laid off 84,556 people at the same time as they sought 34,414 new H1-B foreign workers. This includes firms such as Musk’s Tesla.
Such lax supervision of the H-1B programme has led to other indignities. In 2016, Disney and Southern California Edison were caught forcing laid-off American workers to train their H-1B foreign replacements. Similar stories have been reported around the country, especially in California, where such in-shoring dynamics are common.
To add insult to injury, as tech firms laid off thousands of Americans last year, they lobbied the Biden administration and Congress to lift the cap. But, of course, it is in the economic interest of any corporation to hold down labour costs, by any means.
Such obvious realities are confirmed in the litigation documents revealed by the Cognizant trial. The courtroom drama forced the disclosure of an internal presentation that warned about reforms that might limit the number of H-1B visas, which might force Cognizant to hire more native-born Americans. That option, the company warned, “may reduce [profit] margin”.
One might assume the Democrats, not the Republican Party, would mobilise more effectively to crack down on H-1B abuses. But the party has changed dramatically in recent generations. Silicon Valley and immigration lobby influence have moved the Democrats into a position far from its historic labour movement roots.
In 2010, for example, then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi organised a retreat for the leading tech titans, featuring some of the same Silicon Valley leaders now in the orbit of Trump. The demand from donors was clear. “They want H-1B visas for immigration, and we’re saying ‘help us have a comprehensive immigration reform and we can help you with that,’” Pelosi told reporters.
Similarly, the American Immigration Lawyers Association, another group with sway over Democrats, has lashed out at any attempt to raise H-1B wages. In reaction to a previous proposal, the AILA howled that hiking wages threatens the “solvency of countless American businesses” and represents efforts to “scapegoat immigrants”.
Not much has changed. President Joe Biden had promised strong reforms to the H-1B programme, such as raising the $60,000 income threshold, but ended up settling for more minor tweaks to the system. Notably, Biden signaled his seriousness on the issue with his appointment of Ur Jaddou, a former aide to former Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif, to lead USCIS, the agency overseeing the visa scheme. Lofgren long served as the representative for the district encompassing Silicon Valley and was one of the biggest boosters of H-1B.
On Saturday, Trump finally weighed in, siding with Musk and his other tech-centric advisers. “I’ve always liked the visas, I have always been in favor of the visas. That’s why we have them,” Trump told the New York Post. “I have many H-1B visas on my properties. I’ve been a believer in H-1B. I have used it many times. It’s a great program.”
But for all his enthusiasm, and for every Silicon Valley executive posting on X about the need for foreign talent and STEM expertise, hundreds of other users have flooded social media with online H-1B applications which show businesses using the programme for low-skilled jobs, such as “golf development director” and “cook”.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out. The president-elect has, after all, surrounded himself with diverse viewpoints and many who hold diametrically opposing positions. JD Vance and incoming White House advisor Stephen Miller are avowed critics of H-1B visas, so it is far from certain that Musk will have the final word.
It all highlights the uncomfortable dynamic at play in Trump’s coalition. On the one side are libertarian business leaders who seek economic growth at all costs, often at the expense of American wages and consumer protections. Ramaswamy, for instance, is tasked with the DOGE commission, which will suggest vast swaths of government spending to cut — a position that will spark new debates about austerity, the welfare state and whether Americans are simply too lazy to compete. On the other side, we have the average Trump supporter who seeks a halt to immigration and a focus on rebuilding the middle class. Given the strongly held beliefs on both sides, the H-1B fight is only the first of many that will divide the administration over class lines. How long will Trump be able to hold it together?
Main Edition
US
FR
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeOh my God, another article about the same topic. All America has to do, rather than bringing in these people, is to provide education to its own citizens. The way these companies operate under the radar is by interviewing 10 American candidates, who might even be whites and have the same qualifications as the Indian candidates. They will then claim these individuals ‘don’t fit in,’ but of course, they won’t put it that way. Instead, they frame it in a way that allows them to say, ‘This person passed all the questions we asked, and they are the perfect fit for the job.’ It’s so subjective that there’s nothing you can do about it unless you eliminate interviews altogether—no meetings, no subjective judgments, just a review of credentials. But we both know that’s not going to happen.
The only real solution is to simply acknowledge: You don’t actually need to bring in people from outside. You need to educate your own citizens.
You have plenty of people in your country who can be trained and educated for these jobs. Why not invest in them? Do you see China begging to bring in people? No. Do you see India doing it? No. But countries like Europe or America, and others find themselves in this position because corporations are exploiting the laws they created. And as long as we ignore the way these cooperations abuse the system, we’re not having a real conversation about the issue. It’s time to address the real problem at its root: a lack of accountability and investment in our own people. Even a bigger issue is what group benefits from this exactly? There is a replacement to create division like this tomorrow….who benefits that? How we initiate crisis in other countries is divide and conquer so who is orchestring this type in very interesting and strategic manner? USA don’t need these people if they train their people? Look at the root of the issue – who is planning to destabilize US in the future? You do not need high paid immigrants lolol
I partly agree with you. But the fact is that too many western workers are simply not competitive, albeit that it’s not mainly their fault. Ramaswany has a point. Endless “rights” and guaranteed pay rises (ok, more true of Europe) are not what led to the rise of the West. Education is not good enough – we have had at least a decade of woke insanity prevailing – and this can’t be changed overnight.
What guaranteed pay rises are these? Wages have been largely stagnant since the credit crunch
Most large UK companies give statutory cost of living pay rises yearly. Also, the civil service supplement this with “seniority” rises, usually also yearly. You don’t need a promotion for those. Just tick off another year in grade.
Individual rights are precisely what led to the rise of the West. This is really one of the most fundamental ideas of the enlightenment and the modern period. Major progress and stability was achieved with the creation of the well-educated middle class. After initial industrial revolution hardship the middle class was built through hard earned worker rights, political action as well as business leaders like Ford realizing the bigger picture (e.g. Fordism). Suppressing wages seems to make sense from a business perspective but what everyone is forgetting that high demand is essential for growth. Not to mention that, if anything, a stable and happy world is good for business as well. An extremely unequal world regressing back into some kind of globalized neo-feudal society becomes rife with dissatisfaction, radicalization and even worlds wars. Examples are the 19th- and first half of the 20th century.
Please look into how Ramaswany made his fortune, he should be in prison. He has NO right to lecture anyone on their pay or working conditions
It’s really very simple. It is cheaper for firms to hire migrant labour, and they will lobby Govt to facilitate this or find ways around legislation as described in the article, and Govt will save money on education. And they will all tell you how fantastic this is for everyone, and how nasty/stupid you are for not supporting it, as you work harder and get poorer.
The subsequent storm of racist vitriolic rage in response — featuring the invasion of Indian migrants and deficiencies of Indian culture. Racist rage? Insult my culture, whoever you are and see how that goes for you. This H1-B is not a fatal issue for Trump, but one he wont win within his Conservative coalition. This is going to be a loser for Ramaswamy and Musk.
More math tutoring, fewer sleepovers.
More weekend science competitions, fewer Saturday morning cartoons.
More wealth for me, less social cohesion for you.
More personal effort, less personal reward.
Increased GDP, lower GDP per capita.
More rent, less home ownership.
More profits, less money in your wage packets.
More time working, less family.
More progress, less point of existing.
Remarkable wasn’t it that Vivek posted that tirade about US culture. You can imagine him saying to himself before he pressed send – ‘that’ll tell em’. Well it certainly did. Tech Bros were always about how much money they can make.
He didn’t deserve the racial tirade he got back though, but it may have made him and others better appreciate who they laid down with.
I even suspect that the progress part isn’t even true in a post-industrial society that fundamentally runs on financial speculation.
Similar to what happened in the UK after Brexit. Brexit was about immigration more than any other topic (for precisely the same reason of undercutting the local workforce) but that aspect was ignored and immigration actually increased after Brexit.
Industry doesn’t want to pay the going rate for peoples labour. The electorate managed to close off one source of cheap labour so they lobbied the government to open up a new one
Debatable if industry doesn’t want to pay just a reflection of our unwillingness to pay? The whole debate conducted at such an immature level hardly any wonder we got into such a bind.
If you want to talk about immaturity then IMO the issue came very much from the pro-immigration / Remain side, many of whom refused to even acknowledge that immigration suppresses wages, and called those suggesting that it is an issue racist or stupid. The name calling then naturally went back the other way. I’d say the debate went downhill from there, but it never even got to the stage of being a debate.
I’m sorry if that just sounds like ‘they started it’, but they did. The failure to engage has already led to Brexit, and more recently riots. What is next? The election of Reform? And if they fail to deliver, then what? It seems very unlikely the issue will go away.
Agree with some of that DR. There were (and are) some Remainers who were quite confused, and over simplistic, (although I think the abreaction to blaming Foreigners was correct). In many regards that’s now almost ancient history and given over simplistic Leavers have now proven they didn’t understand the subject much either the hope has to be we get into a more mature national conversation in 25. (Talking about ‘legal’ migration here)
We can all hope for better debate, but I really just don’t know how the world delivers that anymore.
You’re right, they don’t. But consumers don’t want to pay the going rate either. We are complicit. Making demands that only globalisation can fulfil. Protesting the means but demanding the ends.
It’s the consumers job to find the best price for a product, likewise it’s the companies job to make that product as cheaply as possible. I don’t blame either of them for doing so.
It’s the governments job to weigh up the pros and cons and decide on the best outcome for society. Where importing cheap foreign labour is causing the domestic workforce to lose their jobs or suffer stagnant wages (which in turn means more are then reliant on taxpayer support) then the government should change the laws to prevent it happening. That after all is what we pay them for
The government can only be an extension of the will of the electorate. It’s up to individuals to understand the difference between a need and a want, and to have the self-disapline to withstand the temptation to gluttony and avarice.
Unfortunately that kind of inner strength is learned from childhood and requires social reinforcement, and out society goes out of it’s way to do the opposite, to turn us into mindless consumers with no discretion.
I am hopeful that some who have been foolishly blind to what people like Musk really want will have their eyes opened. It’s strange that those who should know better think he has the public good at heart.
Was rather amusing seeing Elon Musk get triggered by some twitter anons. And threatening to go to war over H1B1 visas. Massive woke snowflake clearly.
People say Trump has an issue with emotional control but he’s pretty level headed compared to Musk.
The free speech martyr restricting the X accounts that were critical of him was a nice touch I must say
I don’t think anyone is really a complete free speedy absolutist, no matter what they say. Everyone has a red line, a state of exception. So I don’t wholly begrudge Musk on that. But for his redline to be H1B1 visas is pretty laughable. He tolerated leftists calling for the state to jail and rob him of his businesses, yet a few right -wingers call him out over H1B1 and he has a full blown autistic meltdown
Criticism from left wingers feeds the ego and allows him to portray himself as a free speech champion, which was also handy advertising for himself. Criticism from what is nominally his own side is clearly much more difficult for him brush off as partisan attacks from political opponents
as a Silicon Valley denizen of decades, I can say with experience, that as with many policies, there is a good and a bad side. The good side is we are able to get best in class minds for various specialties. There are great minds in EU, APAC, SE Asia, etc, of course. The ugly (but maybe not bad) side is hiring mediocre seat fillers for tech support and low end software development tasks.
I know that high tech in Bay area exploited the H1B system to get cheap Indian software engineers (was always from India, never China or any other country). These H1B workers were typically not standouts in any way. And it’s a complete pile of crap to say that there were not local Bay area engineers fully qualified to take these jobs. The difference was that these H1B’s would sleep 4 to a room in the expensive Bay area, eat and live cheaply, and survive ok on that cheap pay. Whereas the American citizen with the need to pay full rent for a living space could not dip into those lower salary levels.
So if you make it possible to legally cheat an immigration system and import barely competent cheap labour, then the almost responsible thing to do is to take all tax deductions available, so to speak.
I would propose limit H1B’s to Masters and PhD’s from certain universities around the world in certain topics.
As with illegal immigration — the immigration issue that really bolstered Trump’s coalition — the correct solution to the problems presented by H1-B visas is one which accepts both sides’ points:
The program should be continued, but reformed:
(1) Legislation should create a rebuttable presumption of unfair labor practices if any employer replaces an American citizen or permanent resident with an H1-B visa holder. Unless the employer can prove in open court that the employee was, in fact, fired for cause, and that he or she could not be replaced with another American citizen or permanent resident, the employer should be obliged to either rehire the discharged worker to the same position, if the employee choses this, or pay a severance package equal to the value of two years salary and benefits to the discharge employee, and moreover be banned from hiring H1-B visa holders for two years for the first offense, five for the second, or ever for a third.
(2) Requirements for showing that no American can fill the opening should be tightened. And subject to those reforms,
(3) The total number of H1-B visas authorized should be increased.
My advice on illegal immigration is similar: Trumpian enforcement and barriers on the border, combined with streamlined asylum procedures, increased quotas for legal immigration from Latin America, a guest-worker program, and a circumscribed amnesty for the “Dreamers”, into “Red card” status — permanent residence with no right to serve as the basis for chain immigration of family members.
The problem with reforming the program with more rules is that there is no way for the rule makers (Congress and federal agencies) to change the rules fast enough to keep up with the rule-dodgers. All the economic incentives are on the side of the rule-dodgers, a bit like how high-powered tax accounting firms start working on the next round of tax shelters as soon as the more recent round of tax shelter rules are released.
How about for an employer to hire somebody on one of these visas, the employee has to be paid at least 20% above the going rate for that role?
That way if there is a genuine shortage of domestic workers who could do that job then the company would still pay it as they have no option but to do so. If on the other hand they’re simply abusing the visas for cheap labour it no longer becomes financially attractive to use these imports and they’d favour domestic workers instead.
At the very least it would prevent wages being undercut
Isn’t it much simpler than this?
Make the program work in such a way that it isn’t cheaper to hire these workers, and the employer has significant responsibilities to them. Also potentially allow them to change jobs if they get a better offer where they meet the requirements for the program.
The H-1B has been a complete disaster for the US IT force. In 1990, when Ross Perot was starting his run for POTUS, he ran a computer consulting business with entirely US workers. IT was a great career.
Then the H-1B was started, and ramped up. US workers were directly replaced by H-1Bs, and had to train their replacements. Completely terrible. If you did not train, you got no severance. And no one was hiring US workers.
Since then, an even more terrible program, OPT (optional practical training) was started by POTUS signing statement under Bush 43, increased under Obama. It started with 20,000, and is up to 250,000 in 2024. This allows companies to not pay FICA (15% of wage). It lasts 3 years, but absorbs the majority of starter level jobs.
Trump supporters will downplay this but it’s much more fundamental than they like to admit. It’s just one of the early examples of the conflicting prospectus Trump extolled to get elected that will step by step unravel.
To quote Steve Bannon over the weekend – ‘Let me just restate something, as a fact. The H1B visa program is a total and complete scam from its top to the bottom’. Laura Loomer may also be a Loon but she has significant number of MAGA supporters. (And v informative that when it suits Elon he blocks free-speech on X to neutralise her attack lines).
So the fundamental question is which way will Trump lean, and the fact all indications suggest towards his tech bros who have the money hardly a surprise. He doesn’t need MAGA now to get re-elected and who do you think is going to find a way to lend him the £500m he owes for civil lawsuit damages? It’s not Steve Bannon is it.
Kleptocracy here we come.
You’ve mastered the art of Cliche Socialism. Everything through the Lens of Victim/Oppressor. Everybody that agrees with you is “Working Class Adjacent” and everyone that disagrees with you is “Oligarch Adjacent.”
Vivek Ramaswamy’s comments about American (Western) culture…”more math tutoring, fewer sleepovers” etc…are valid even if his conclusions about visas are wrong. A nuanced strategy for the incoming Trump administration might be something like this: 1) be utterly clear that anything the Progressive Establishment thinks is a good idea is probably a bad idea. 2) be relentless in seeking to dismantle everything that the Progressive Establishment has foisted on the country these past fifty years. But then 3) be sensitive to noticing if there are any exceptions to this…..such as maybe a lot fewer HB 1 visas but still some?
The fundamental idea that the west needs immigrants (skilled or not) is the problem! Coming from a very successful immigrant! Why? Do not give me the answer it is cheaper because cheaper will become not safe and divided! Or have immigrants but do not give them same rights to vote or own property and at old age, they can go back to their country where they build a fortune already!
The fundamentals are wrong. No way to dissect without tying your own personal interest for safety and prosperity into a pretzel!
This Narrative about the average Trump voter being some kind of xenophobic Trade Unionist was never true. It’s just a comforting story Socialists tell themselves to believe they’re a popular majority even though their side lost.
The American “populist revolt” if you want to call it that was in response TOO MUCH government and the out of touch bureacracy that comes with it. Compare Oliver Anthony’s song to Billy Bragg’s response. Bragg suggests that Anthony is unenlightened for daring to speak about excessive welfare, taxes and government control. Well, just maybe American “Populists” are generally more concerned with being left alone than having the government guarantee a “right to dignity and leisure.”
The Visa numbers we’re talking about here are equal to a week or two of border crossings under the Biden administration. They’re trivial. Less people are clearly going to come in under Trump than they did under Democrats. The attempt to indict Trump for failing the Ideological Purity test is based on a false notion of how he actually thinks. He’s not an ideologue. He’s going to do what’s practical to make America successful. Market Success will help the “Middle class” far more than a Planned Economy that tells businesses how and what to build.
I don’t believe the article had tried to portray the average Trump voter has xenophobic (with the exception of a few online trolls), but there’s no denying his campaign and his grass roots support was nativist in nature. Phrases like America First become worthless if he’s going to support systems that allow tech oligarchs to import cheap labour from abroad while laying off American workers.
Hypocrisy is possibly the worst thing a politician can be accused of (look at Starmer), and Trump really needs to avoid being labelled as such before he’s even got the keys to the White House.
Agree BB. One suspects Trump thinks worrying about hypocrisy is for losers though.
More importantly perhaps is all this makes his opposition in Congress a little more ready to push back, and he’ll have a growing opposition in the Republican camp knowing he’s not their ticket to re-election again beginning to grasp it’ll be them getting the blowback.
Again, the engineers that Musk/Rawaswamy are talking about are not “Cheap Labor.” Do you complain when the Premier League takes players from all over the world? Why not demand Parliament seize control of the league and do a better job training British youth. The top .01 of anything is always going be a global competition to maximize a product.
If you say- well soccer/football is just entertainment. Is it though or does the revenue from that entertainment grow GDP and create local jobs. How many total jobs are created by the existence of a local league with global reach? Would the city of Manchester benefit economically if its teams left or would it depress the city even more?
The entire article is about how these visas have been used to suppress wages and push Americans out of jobs in favour of cheaper foreign imports you do realise?
I fail to see what relevance English football (which has a myriad of problems of its own) has to do with Americans being supplanted by cheap foreign labour
This is a debate about Supply Side Economics (Trickle Down) vs a Planned Economy (National Socialism) where the government bullies corporations into meeting its own production targets and constantly tinkering with the pay scale.
Have you ever noticed that every locale that mandates a high minimum wage also has extremely high housing costs? It turns out that when the government raises the floor it actually makes the “middle class” poorer. Then when the middle class agitates for increases the ownership class simply reduces expenses by cutting jobs. This happens across industries in every country. Yet you idealists want to ignore that its a basic fact of life. The ultra rich will stay rich no matter how much you try to weaken them. The more you weaken them the richer they will become.
Divide the total number of H1b Visas by total population. Its 0.0167 of the population. The idea that visa holders are suppressing the average citizens wealth is fallacious. Pretty much every working citizen has a retirement account heavily invested in the stock performance of multinational tech firms. Infinitely more citizens are benefitting from these corporations making more profit. The few tech engineers that are “displaced” already have more market options than just about any profession. The drain on the American citizens wealth comes from poorer migrants disproportionately utilizing public services not highly skilled tech workers.
So despite the entire point if the article being that the visas have been used to discriminate against American workers and suppress wages, despite the tech firms having been found guilty and fined for using the visas to discriminate against American workers in favour of cheaper foreign imports, you’re going to deny that any of this actually happens? That’s despite visas being used to bring in foreign workers for high skilled roles such as “cooks” and “golf development managers?”
As for your other point, house prices have nothing to do with the minimum wage. They’ve exploded because firstly not enough houses have been built to keep up with demand (ironically since the government decided to take a hands off approach to house building in the belief the market would magically fix the issue) and secondly because property has become a dumping ground for all the money printed after the credit crunch and COVID pandemic. Perhaps we should take a leaf out of that left wing paradise Singapores book when it comes to house building, where around 90% of properties were originally built by the state?
I just think you’re doing a Gish Gallop and distorting my argument. I’ve never claimed the H1b is the perfect system. I’m sure we can locate thousands of abuses. Just like we can locate countless examples of Medicare and Social Security fraud or loopholes in the system. It doesn’t answer whether a program is a net benefit or liability.
This is the only question that matters- If Trump were to increase the H1b cap from 85k to 110k but reduce border crossings by 3 million compared to the Biden administration, would you consider that an improvement or a regression? Direct answer please.
It would be good in terms of illegal immigration, but bad in terms of workers losing their jobs and seeing their wages suppressed by the legal variety.
However I’m not sure why you constantly try and change the subject by comparing the two. They’re two entirely separate problems that will require two entirely different solutions. The fact is this is the first time Trump has had to choose between what is probably the two dominant wings of his support base, the grassroots who want jobs to go to Americans and to see an improvement in wages, and his billionaire tech backers who want to see wages kept low through imported workers. Unfortunately it looks as if he’s going to side with the latter.
The reason I keep “changing the subject” as you say is because I don’t think your motivation here is simply limiting foreign Visas in America. I mean let’s just do basic psychology here. This is a niche American issue. The only reason you would care from across the pond is because you want to see Trump fail.
I think its clear the International Left has a strategy to pit Trump against Musk in order to obstruct his agenda. I don’t think you personally are in on some grand conspiracy. I just think that you like many want Trump to be perceived as failing because of the ideological chess match being played between Capitalist and Anti-Capitalists.
Then you read far too much into my motivations. I’ve no interest in what Trump does or doesn’t do in regards to American immigration. I’ve also no interest in some supposed battle between capitalists and anti capitalists, whatever they are.
I merely find it amusing watching the more cultish of his supporters tie themselves in knots trying to defend his blatant hypocrisy on the issue of him supporting big tech firms abusing the visa system to undercut American workers when he was elected on an explicitly pro nativist manifesto.
You’re exactly like my buddy. You’re like in between being a troll and a serious person.
You’re fully aware that the rapidly deteriorating Woke revolution was ridiculous… and it came from the Left…who passionately opposed Trump…but tearing down Trump is just a hobby.
Don’t fall into the trap of thinking that because I’m critical of Trump that means I blindly support the opposition, as that’s simply lazy partisanship rather than critical thinking.
If I was a yank I would have likely voted for Trump, although that’s says more about the ginormous weaknesses of Harris than it does about any strengths of Donny Boy.
On this issue though I think he is being a colossal hypocrite. He now supports a policy that leaves average Americans financially worse off simply because his wealthy backers want their supply of cheap labour to continue, despite being opposed to the scheme in the past and being elected on an America First nativist ticket
If ‘Market Success’ doesn’t require the middle class (or any other class) it won’t help them.
It is no secret that a lot of Trump voters are disappointed working- and middle class people. I suspect many of them do not care about the all the ‘isms and growth. They just want a better life and if someone tells them this can be achieved by reducing bureaucracy and deregulation this sounds appealing. But make no mistake, if ‘freedom’ means working 80 hours a week, never being able to own a home, never being able to retire and a healthcare system that ruins families. Well, then most people do not consider that freedom at all.
The last time the ‘free market’, suppressing labor rights and deregulation were supposed to help Americans, the program failed on many of its own terms like achieving more growth. What is did do is transfer 50 trillion from the bottom 90% to the 1%, which never trickled down. And while everyone was dealing with austerity and reducing benefits the nanny state was always there to bailout big capital. I am not saying this time will be the same but it would be naive to just blindly trusts the rhetoric.
I enjoy discussing things with you because your writing is rational and not emotionally charged. I also read your post above referencing individual rights and “Fordism” as you called it. Let’s attempt to Steelman instead of Strawmanning. So please correct me if I mischaracterize your points.
You appear to be saying that the typical Trump voter has “false consciousness.” They only question government bureacracy and the nanny state because some articulate plutocrat tells them it’s a problem. But once they “awaken” to the reality that the Ownership class is suppressing their wages and outsourcing their jobs in order to make excess profit than they will rebel and demand that the Federal Government ensure: 1) Workplace Democracy 2) Less hours for more pay. 3) Universal single payer health care and child care for all. 4) Wealth taxes on those making over 400k per year.
This will then produce a climate of equality where everyone has enough. The government will be tasked with constantly assuring that wealth is evenly distributed. Individual rights and free speech will proliferate in this environment because everyone will be content and work toward the common good.
Isn’t the whole point of capitalism that as we become more productive we can work fewer hours for more pay? A rising tide lifts all boats and all that?
Unfortunately since the mid 70’s productivity has increased around 80% in America, while the average hourly pay has only increased by just under 30% in real terms. I think workers demanding a larger slice of the pie is entirely reasonable
Well, that is not precisely what I am saying, I am not certain of these things and I would not claim that Trump voters have false consciousness. Perhaps everyone has it to some degree, we are not as rational as we think. However, what I can say is it would be wise for the working classes to at least consider the possibility that they are being mislead and pay close attention to what is happening. Also when it comes to solutions I am not so dogmatic. I am willing to discuss (actual) right-libertarian ideas as well as these typical typical left wing proposals you are stating. Though something like the state assuring that wealth is evenly distributed goes too far, in my opinion. We should be pragmatic. I think there is good evidence that reducing inequality and providing basic needs is possible and beneficial for everyone and, in fact, the economy itself. Eliminating inequality is probably not. Even if you have a post-scarcity society of abundance, where money no longer exists, it makes sense that humans will organize hierarchies based on merit and expertise. Conversely, I think there is good evidence that shows our current economic hierarchies deviate a lot from a meritocracy.
Outstanding comment. I can’t say I disagree with any of that. I would just say that the definition of “working class” has become very muddled and abstract as the economy has diversified away from industrialism.
So when you say the “working class” has to be cautious about being misled, I would add that we need to be a bit more precise about the definition of “working class.” We also identify that the “misleading” is coming from both the Capital side and the “Anti-Capital” side. Because it turns out Anti-Capitalist are often very fond of Capital.
So I used “working classes” plural intentionally because it is a spectrum which also includes the middle class. In my opinion, anyone who has to sell their labor to survive is working class in the end. Upper middle professionals are often considered elites but as long as you and your family cannot easily live off a big amount of capital you are in a different club.
I’m not surprised. Every President gets into office, to a greater or lesser extent, promising everything to everyone. I am interested in seeing whose promises get broken and kept. On the one hand, his base has the votes he has needed, but the tech bros have the money and success he has always craved. The fact that he is a lame duck in his second term and will not face the voters again would appear to give the edge to the tech bros.
I’d love to see Lee Fang do a follow up article on remote work, specifically in the tech industry.
I’ve worked at an American tech company for 8 years, and since the pandemic, 80% of our engineers have been laid off and replaced with foreign workers. Many of them work for peanuts, 1/5 of what Americans are willing to work for.
Most of the engineers were paid out, but nonetheless, workers are slowly losing their rights and are being replaced by cheap foreign workers.
I fully support legal immigration, but if Trump allows this program to undercut American wages, he will lose a lot of credibility. By the way, WTF is the reason to quote Laura Loomer?
Yeah, I’m 100% in support of infinity immigration, but it should be legal
Re: Loomer – 1.5m followers on X apparently, one assumes all pretty much MAGA.
Elon blocked her subscription system on X as a result. So free speech does have it’s limits when the Oligarch decides.
Yes. While Musk promises X is equal for all, his behavior indicates it’s more equal for some than others.
Everyone has their state of exception. Too bad Musk’s red line is something so lame. And that he had a brain meltdown over it
Everyone remembers Ross Perot for his opposition to NAFTA. They forget the reason he first got into politics was that he couldn’t find enough US STEM grads to hire for Electronic Data Systems. He wanted fix the broken US education system. AND THAT WAS 30 YEARS AGO!
A reckoning should be coming but that’s beside the point. More salient is how Trump went from adamant opposition to H1-Bs in 2016 to saying he has ‘always’ supported them. I wrote about this in August after Trump’s selection of a running mate and the ties that come with Vance: https://alexlekas.substack.com/p/donald-makes-a-drug-deal?utm_source=publication-search
The big Trump fu is just beginning, this cabal of billionaires is going the milk the USA dry with more tax cuts for themselves, immigration policies that suppress wages and benefits for average workers, cuts to social security and Medicare that will hurt most of the working class, trade union suppression, rising deficits and debt, trade wars that lead to nothing and cause more inflation, environmental deregulation that will cause more harm, etc etc. Wake up, Trump and his billionaire cronies don’t care about you, in 4 years you will be so milked there will be no milk left, it will all be stored in the billionaire coffers of tax shelters and off shore accounts amd tax evasion schemes including crypto. Musk and the gang will be laughing all the way to the Cayman Islands in their 200 million $ yachts.
Marxism never works anywhere. Stay in Canada, Trudeau.
We’re in the process of getting rid of him soon, good riddance. Who’s talking about Marxism? We all live in mixed economies, like it or not. No government is a fantasy, capitalism is a beast that must always be tamed, otherwise you get chaos and societal collapse
“Like much of the past few years of conservative populist rage, the issue is clouded by inflammatory rhetoric around identity and culture. But at the centre remains an economic issue that has festered for decades. Elites have gained tremendously from the H-1B programme. The record for everyone else is quite mixed..”
Implying culture and identity are fake issues, while economic issues are of the utmost importance. Spoken like a true neoliberal.
It is not mixed. Everyone that isn’t an elite or a politician they bribe has been negatively affected by H1B.
An article with a lot of data on H1B and it’s effect on Americans:
https://barsoom.substack.com/p/the-great-christmas-h1b-war-of-2024
If the US isn’t careful here, China will step in and take all the Indians, this will make China an unstoppable powerhouse, kinda like India I suppose
H-1B is good. The clueless MAGA who gifted Musk et al more billions of dollars will work at menial jobs for menial wages in the mansions of immigrants. It serves them bl**dy well right.
It’s NOT over yet pal. in fact, the fight is only just starting, step one is people waking up
Absolutely. This has now brought work visas (H-1B, OPT, B-1, L-1) into the public eye, and when people learn about the numbers (260,000 OPT visas PER YEAR), they will become completely irate.