Steve Forbes Demands Unlimited H-1Bs
Steve Forbes Demands Unlimited H-1Bs
Date: Wednesday, July 06, 2005 1:27 PM
JOB DESTRUCTION NEWSLETTER
by Rob Sanchez
July 06, 2005 No. 1285
Steve Forbes is an unabashed champion of the corporate greedsters. In the column below he managed to pull together some of the worst elements of the Cato Institute and the Heritage Foundation into a libertarian rampage against sane immigration policies. His shilling for Donald Trump to rebuild the Twin Towers at the World Trade Center site conclude a long diatribe for the egocentric billionaire good ol' boys that are running this country into the ground.
Forbes called for less regulations so that labor standards can be reduced, an elimination of the $100 fee that foreign visitors have to pay to get a visa, an end to biometric scanning of foreign visitors, less restrictive policies on allowing foreign students to come and go wherever they want, and of course he wants an elimination of any limits on the number of H-1B visas that can be issued. Forbes says that H-1Bs are "people who can help them [corporations] compete and grow", which translated from corporatese means "people who will work like slaves for less".
Forbes uses the argument that restrictive immigration policies make us less competitive than South Korea, India, and China. His argument falls flat on its face because all the countries he mentioned are very restrictive on immigration and all of them have protectionist trade policies. Forbes is either clueless about how other countries manage their trade and immigration or he assumes that everyone else is clueless so he can write mistruths and not be caught.
We are gratuitously hurting ourselves--competitively and
diplomatically--at a time when South Korea, India, China
and others are rapidly ramping up their high-tech efforts
to surpass the U.S.
Forbes isn't all wrong though. He understands how much of an ordeal flying into Washington D.C. can be for those with a full bladder because the feds require passengers to stay in their seats 30 minutes before landing. Forbes wants that time reduced to 15 minutes. His support for more liberal restroom breaks must have come about from his dire experiences while waiting to land at Reagan International because you can bet that if he owned "Depends" diaper stock he would be shilling for an increase to 45 minutes.
Forbes would probably have more empathy for the American workers he wants to put out of work with his libertarian immigration proposals if he ever had to suffer the pain of unemployment, but of course the only problem he has ever worried about is the size of his golden parachute.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
http://www.forbes.com/home/opinions/free_forbes/2005/0704/031.html
Fact and Comment
Steve Forbes, 07.04.05
Asinine Way to Treat Ultimate Asset: People
The Bush administration is doing the economy long term harm by not reforming our post-9/11 immigration and visa policies. Since the terrorist attacks, foreigners have had to go through considerably more hassle to enter this country. No one is arguing about the mortal necessity of tightening our screening procedures. But it defies belief that this, the most technologically advanced of nations, can't come up with software and hardware to expeditiously assist in determining who should and should not gain entrie.
Despite the weak dollar, the number of visitors from overseas during the past three years is down 23%. International conventions and seminars are not taking place in the U.S. because organizers can't be sure their delegates will be allowed into the country.
More alarmingly, foreign students are increasingly turning to non-U.S. universities. Australia, Canada and other nations have been effectively luring these students by assuring them that if they qualify, they won't have to undergo repeated, humiliating hassles at their borders. By contrast, foreign students now in the U.S. know that when they go home for summer vacation or holidays, their probability of returning to school is no sure thing.
Unless wannabe visitors to the U.S. are from one of 27 visa-free countries, they are required to pay a $100 application fee for a visa. This fee is not refunded if an application is denied. To add insult to injury, the "30-day" processing time for a visa can turn into months.
Our high-tech companies are vitally dependent on immigrant brainpower. Our schools are not turning out the numbers of American scientists and technologists that we so badly need.
In years past most foreign-born graduate students remained in the U.S. after completing their studies. Now they are in a minority--a declining one at that. Technology guru George Gilder has not-so-facetiously suggested that when overseas graduate students complete their studies here, green cards should be embossed on their diplomas.
Thankfully we may avoid making the situation infinitely worse. The U.S. appears poised to back down from its demand that by. Oct. 26 any new passports issued by the nations that make up the Visa-Waiver Program be biometric in order for their citizens to enter this country. Congressional leaders had indicated that this deadline--already pushed back once--would not be extended again. The affected countries have been making good-faith efforts to comply, but only about half of them would be able to meet this deadline. Not surprisingly, the European Union has been threatening to give U.S. visitors a rougher time if we don't ease the time limit again: It looks as though the U.S. may be willing to accept digitally scanned photographs instead of biometric chips. This could still adversely affect many potential visitors from Italy and France, which use laminated photos that don't meet digital standards.
A more immediate problem concerns H-1B visas, which allow companies here to hire immigrants with critical high-tech skills. These folks can work in the U.S. for a maximum of six years. Last year the quota for these special visas was filled in six months. High-tech outfits are continually frustrated by their inability to bring in people who can help them compete and grow. So why not raise the quota--or better yet--scrap it altogether?
We are gratuitously hurting ourselves--competitively and diplomatically--at a time when South Korea, India, China and others are rapidly ramping up their high-tech efforts to surpass the U.S.
Bury This Cartel
Nations aren't the only ones to engage in protectionism. In the U.S., cities and states routinely practice a variation of it through unnecessary regulations designed solely to protect certain professions from competition. This is what economists call "erecting barriers to entry." One blatant example is New York City, where you have to get a costly medallion in order to drive a yellow cab. Washington, D.C., by contrast, allows almost any able-bodied person with a valid driver's license and clean police record to enter the fleet.
The Supreme Court earlier this year ducked hearing a notorious case from Oklahoma that involves the selling of caskets. Oklahoma law forbids anyone other than a fully licensed funeral director to sell caskets within the state. But peddling caskets has nothing to do with handling dead bodies or with any other aspect of funeral services. This is protectionism, pure and simple. No surprise, overpriced caskets are the most profitable part of a funeral home's ..services: Markups can go as high as 600%. Naturally, entrepreneurial retailers see a ripe market. But state law prevents them from exploiting it. A licensed funeral director must have completed at least two years of full-time college course work and a one-year apprenticeship, during which the individual must have embalmed at least 25 bodies, as well as passed two exams. What all this has to do with selling coffins is left unsaid.
The Institute for Justice--a pro-entrepreneur public-interest law firm--originally filed the suit against Oklahoma's anticompetitive coffin regulation that the high court punted on. However, suits challenging similar laws in other states guarantee that the justices can't keep ignoring this issue.
After all, two federal appellate courts have rendered opposite judgments on the constitutionality of such state-sanctioned casket cartels. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, in a Tennessee case, sided with entrepreneurs, finding that one needn't be a licensed funeral director in order to sell "what is essentially a box." But the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, in the Oklahoma case, reached the opposite conclusion, declaring that "while baseball may be the national pastime of the citizenry, dishing out special economic benefits to certain in-state industries remains the favored pastime of state and local governments." Incredibly, instead of overturning such abuses, the court went on to say that such arbitrary protectionism is legitimate.
The Supremes should permanently embalm Oklahoma-style protectionism.
When Flying, Silence Is Golden
The House of Representatices exhibited a rare bout of common sense recently by passing a bill that would change a couple of rules concerning Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport. Previously passengers had to stay glued in their seats for ...the 30 minutes before flying into and after taking off from that airport. From New York and other short distances, that meant the entire flight. Those with less-than-ironclad bladders had to pray there were no delays. The bill, thankfully, would reduce that time limit to 15 minutes.
Another good change: As things stand, if a passenger leaves his seat during that 30-minute period, the plane has to be diverted to another airport. Under the new bill the captain would determine whether or not the offending individual posed a real threat.
One change Washington should not make: lifting the ban on in-flight cell phone use. I once supported such a move: The prohibition was based on the now-discredited belief that cell phones could fatally interfere with the aircraft pilots' communications; in-craft phones are also legalized thievery--you pay outrageous fees to use 'em. But experience is an ear-busting teacher. Too many people don't know how to modulate their voices when using these wireless devices. Unlike an airport or most any other place, you lack mobility in airplanes. There's no way you can walk away from a loudmouthed cell-phoner. A sensible solution: Keep intact the cell phone ban in aircraft, but permit passengers to communicate with the world via their PCs and BlackBerrys.
Let the Man Make It Happen
Time to put Donald Trump in charge of rebuilding the Twin Towers at the World Trade Center site in lower Manhattan. That New York has done virtually nothing there since 9/11 is outrageous testimony to its political incompetence. After all, the Pentagon--also a victim of 9/11--was quickly rebuilt. Never have New York's bureaucratic tendencies and inability to make decisions reached such sad, headshaking proportions as they have at Ground Zero.
The Donald knows how to get things done. In the mid-1980s he shamed the Big Apple by swiftly rebuilding the Wollman Rink in Central Park at a fraction of what the city would have spent, assuming it could ever have done the job. The rink had been in bureaucratic limbo for a dog's age. Trump recently unveiled an impressive model for the new Twin Towers at Ground Zero, including an appropriate memorial. Many risk-taking, want-to-get-ahead businesses and people are willing to move to and work in the new buildings. These structures would be a fitting memorial for those who lost their lives on 9/11 and a fantastic rebuke to the terrorists who destroyed the originals.
Trump has the tenacity to see this project through. He's instigated and managed the construction of numerous buildings. He has the iron-fisted stick-to-itiveness to surmount seemingly insurmountable political and economic difficulties. Let him loose on this task and there will be no stopping him--or it.
www.ZaZona.com
Support this Newsletter and ZaZona.com by donating:
www.zazona.com/Donations.htm
To Subscribe, Unsubscribe or to view the Archive go to:
http://www.zazona.com/shameh1b/JobDestructionNews.htm
Back to archives