All countries have some sort of work for visa program, which by itself is not indentured servitude. And given there are non ultra-capitalistic countries that also have it, the practice is also not “as far as one can get”.
Hell, to group the US 's visa program in with the ones that literally end with slavery (and are actually like what you described) is just poor form.
Again, we are specifically talking about one country’s visa program and you are downplaying the draconian nature of it with a lot of dodging and whataboutism.
I’m not doing either of those things. You made a claim by misunderstanding terms for hyperbole. I said that your claim isn’t true. You backed up your claim with more hyperbole. I rebutted that with how it’s standard practice globally and even in within a larger scope is a more reasonable standard.
QED, the US visa program is not indentured servitude, by colloquial or exact definitions, and not ultra-capitalistic by any stretch. These are not whataboutism or dodging. They directly address your statements.
If you want to simplify it, then it’d be
If you want to live and work in a country, you have to be sponsored by a company. If you’re laid off, you have 60 days to find another sponsor
One of the largest downsides to an H-1B visa is that your immigration status is dependent on fulfilling the terms of your employment. If your employment ends for one reason or another, you will likely lose your lawful status. If you remain in the country without lawful status, you will start to build unlawful presence––too much unlawful presence will bar you from legally entering the U.S.
That happens if you get laid off or fired, and if you just up and quit because the conditions are too horrible:
Some of the most drastic consequences of losing your job may come if you are the person who terminates your employment. If you voluntarily quit your job, the employer will no longer be required to pay for the cost of your transportation back to your previous country of residence.
When you quit, your sponsored status will end immediately and you will begin accruing days of unlawful presence.
That doesn’t contradict what I said? It matches everything I’ve said as well. And there’s a 60 day grace period generally speaking. Can you define and name any similar with indentured servitude?
Me: Sorry, no. “Work at this specific company or you’re deported” is very much an ultra-capitalist position. I have no idea why you think otherwise.
You: That isn’t the rule for h1b visas.
Link: “If your employment ends for one reason or another, you will likely lose your lawful status. If you remain in the country without lawful status, you will start to build unlawful presence––too much unlawful presence will bar you from legally entering the U.S.” and also “When you quit, your sponsored status will end immediately and you will begin accruing days of unlawful presence.”
You: That doesn’t contradict what I said?
It literally contradicts what you said because it literally says you have to work at a specific company or you’re deported.
Which one of us is blind here? Because I don’t think it’s me.
In reality we have examples of abuse in the US. When Twitter did all of that strange s*** when Musk took over, it was widely reported that foreign hires couldn’t quit because they didn’t have other jobs lined up. That’s one example but we can find countless other examples of similar situations. So the reality is that the program is abusive in the US. And in I think all other countries that have similar programs, because of course it is. It’s very difficult to find a new job in 2 months, and there’s no guarantee that the new job would be better than the old job, which means your bosses have the ability to f*** with you, and they know it, and you know it, and many of them have and will.
What could be done instead is to change the program. Even if you require people to come over with a sponsored application, don’t make them find a new job within 2 months. Simply allow them to reside in the country until the visa expires, regardless of employment status. Or, to make it even better, issue the visa based on qualifications and don’t even require a sponsor in order to get a visa. In the latter case, all of the visa holders would no longer be getting s*** pay. They would be on the same pay scale as American citizen employees. Or give them citizenship after two years. It’s laughably easy to brainstorm fixes to the broken system, but you won’t even recognize that the system is broken.
All countries have some sort of work for visa program, which by itself is not indentured servitude. And given there are non ultra-capitalistic countries that also have it, the practice is also not “as far as one can get”.
Hell, to group the US 's visa program in with the ones that literally end with slavery (and are actually like what you described) is just poor form.
Again, we are specifically talking about one country’s visa program and you are downplaying the draconian nature of it with a lot of dodging and whataboutism.
I’m not doing either of those things. You made a claim by misunderstanding terms for hyperbole. I said that your claim isn’t true. You backed up your claim with more hyperbole. I rebutted that with how it’s standard practice globally and even in within a larger scope is a more reasonable standard.
QED, the US visa program is not indentured servitude, by colloquial or exact definitions, and not ultra-capitalistic by any stretch. These are not whataboutism or dodging. They directly address your statements.
Sorry, no. “Work at this specific company or you’re deported” is very much an ultra-capitalist position. I have no idea why you think otherwise.
That isn’t the rule for h1b visas.
If you want to simplify it, then it’d be If you want to live and work in a country, you have to be sponsored by a company. If you’re laid off, you have 60 days to find another sponsor
It absolutely is.
That happens if you get laid off or fired, and if you just up and quit because the conditions are too horrible:
https://www.lawfirm1.com/non-immigrant-visas/h-1b-visas-employee-quits/
Is it that you didn’t look this up yourself or did you think I wouldn’t bring receipts?
Also, down votes aren’t supposed to be for people who are correcting you (or people you disagree with 😘)
You’re getting downvoted because you’re wrong
That doesn’t contradict what I said? It matches everything I’ve said as well. And there’s a 60 day grace period generally speaking. Can you define and name any similar with indentured servitude?
…
Me: Sorry, no. “Work at this specific company or you’re deported” is very much an ultra-capitalist position. I have no idea why you think otherwise.
You: That isn’t the rule for h1b visas.
Link: “If your employment ends for one reason or another, you will likely lose your lawful status. If you remain in the country without lawful status, you will start to build unlawful presence––too much unlawful presence will bar you from legally entering the U.S.” and also “When you quit, your sponsored status will end immediately and you will begin accruing days of unlawful presence.”
You: That doesn’t contradict what I said?
It literally contradicts what you said because it literally says you have to work at a specific company or you’re deported.
Which one of us is blind here? Because I don’t think it’s me.
In reality we have examples of abuse in the US. When Twitter did all of that strange s*** when Musk took over, it was widely reported that foreign hires couldn’t quit because they didn’t have other jobs lined up. That’s one example but we can find countless other examples of similar situations. So the reality is that the program is abusive in the US. And in I think all other countries that have similar programs, because of course it is. It’s very difficult to find a new job in 2 months, and there’s no guarantee that the new job would be better than the old job, which means your bosses have the ability to f*** with you, and they know it, and you know it, and many of them have and will.
What could be done instead is to change the program. Even if you require people to come over with a sponsored application, don’t make them find a new job within 2 months. Simply allow them to reside in the country until the visa expires, regardless of employment status. Or, to make it even better, issue the visa based on qualifications and don’t even require a sponsor in order to get a visa. In the latter case, all of the visa holders would no longer be getting s*** pay. They would be on the same pay scale as American citizen employees. Or give them citizenship after two years. It’s laughably easy to brainstorm fixes to the broken system, but you won’t even recognize that the system is broken.
Dude, I just said it’s not indentured servitude.
I never said the system wasn’t broken, in fact I’m on one of those horrible visas now.