Are you suggesting that companies should not be able to hire the most qualified individuals who went through the same system as everybody else?
[EDIT (rephrasing): There is no particular training provided. The international students received the same education as US students at US institutions.]
International students generally have to pay for everything out of pocket (they are not eligible for any public/tax-payer based assistance, not even subsidized loans). This in effect often subsidizes the cost of tuition for the domestic students.
[EDIT: This is the case in the University of California system where the percentage of out of state and international students admissions increases to deal with budget problems.]
The companies in question here expect individuals to have worked on significant projects, demonstrated ambition and passion outside of their regular coursework. Those who can generally have no problem being hired.
Yes, I am in favor of companies that are based in the US and take advantage of US infrastructure and tax-payer funding (indirectly and directly) should be hiring US citizens as workers. Anyway you didn't address the point - it is completely wrong to say that these foreign workers are not competing with US workers for the jobs they take. This is just basic supply and demand. Foreign workers are usually willing to take lower salaries and work longer hours than US citizens, which is why companies love to hire them.
I'm only talking about the subclass of foreign workers who are educated in the US and already in the country.
They surely would not accept longer working hours or less pay.
I didn't say these graduates aren't competing, merely that in the case above nobody is being replaced (in a literal sense) as these were new positions to be filled. Also, they were not filled under the H-1B program, but the F-1 OPT program.
F-1 OPT (post graduation training) hiring is virtually unrestricted (except for its duration).
Of course workers who reside abroad and are brought to the US on H-1B directly are an entirely different class of foreign workers. I cannot speak to this group.
Are you seriously saying that foreign students subsidize the education of US citizens? That is one of the most absurd statements I've ever read on HN. US student's educations are paid for by student loans, they fund their own tuitions I can assure you.
Attending university in the US is a privilege and that does not mean you should be guaranteed a job in the United States upon graduation. You seem to have a real sense of entitlement that because you went to school in the US the US owes you a job. Wow.
This idea that the most talented people can only be found from outside the US needs to just die. If the US were so bereft of talent none of these companies that these H1B visa folks want to work for would exist. Ditto for the US universities they attend.
This idea of relocating people to London for year is just gaming the system.
> Are you seriously saying that foreign students subsidize the education of US citizens?
They absolutely do. Consider that at many schools (particularly UCs) in-state tuition is not enough to cover costs. International students paying high tuition are absolutely helping to subsidize such situations.
Even at top private universities, international students can be a major subsidy. Domestic students typically have their full financial need met, but international students don't. International students thus subsidize the aid for domestic students.
You are just making stuff up! Please show me a citation that supports the claim that US students get their education on the backs of foreigners.
That UC is public university of the state of California, that differential of which you speak is funded by tax payers in California that is why it is cheaper for Californians to attend. Get it right. Here is an abridged history.
It saddens me that instead of trying to understand and debate the truth you instead refuse to accept facts which contradict your worldview.
I never made a political argument. None of my statements were normative. I certainly never said they "get their education on the backs of foreigners."
You can't just deny the objective fact that international students pay more than local students and hence their attendance helps to subsidize local tuition.
Whether this is proper and fair is a completely separate discussion from whether it is true. You can't deny the fact that financial aid for US students is substantially more generous.
As for references, you can find literally hundreds of stories about this very phenomenon:
Article referenced by parent only has data for state funds making up 16 percent of the total budget in 2004/2005.
Using that source no conclusions can be made for the following years. Only percentage of tuition (across all students) as a percentage of total budget is presented.
The phenomenon of out-of-state students significantly supplementing budget deficiencies that ordinarily would result in a necessary increase of tuition for in-state students only began around 2009/2010.
Quoting a newer article (~1 year ago) from the same source [1]:
>Out-of-state students currently pay about $23,000 more in tuition than California residents do, according to Stephen Handel, UC associate vice president of undergraduate admissions. After the UC Board of Regents’ approval of an 8 percent nonresident tuition increase in May, however, that number will jump to about $24,700 for the upcoming academic year.
>Revenue from nonresident students “helps to make up for the cutbacks in state support received over the years,” Handel said.
And another article (from early 2016) with a helpful graphic [2]:
>In the fall, nonresident students made up 15.54 percent of all undergraduates in the university and 24.52 percent of UC Berkeley undergraduates. According to an email from UC spokesperson Claire Doan, the university’s enrollment of non-Californians, who pay higher tuition, helps make up for a lack of state funding.
>“The increase in out-of-state enrollment coincided with budget cuts that related to the Great Recession,” said Hans Johnson, a senior fellow at the Public Policy Institute of California. “Those out-of-state students help to provide funding for in-state students.”
And finally the UC system 2015-2016 budget document. See on page 40 the section for non-resident supplemental tuition:
>All general campuses (except Merced) have sought to increase their numbers of
national and international students without replacing funded California residents. UC’s priority continues to be access for
eligible California residents for whom the State has provided funding. Nevertheless, nonresident students help prepare all
students to effectively live and work in an increasingly global marketplace. Moreover, the total charges they pay significantly
exceed the cost of education, providing extra revenue that improves education for all students and enables campuses to
maintain and increase enrollment for California resident students. Systemwide nonresident undergraduate enrollment
represents a little over 13% of the undergraduate population in 2014-15, whereas more than 30% and 40% of
undergraduates are nonresidents at the University of Virginia and the University of Michigan respectively. For 2015-16, the
University is estimating campuses will enroll an additional 2,000 nonresident students
>Are you seriously saying that foreign students subsidize the education of US citizens? That is one of the most absurd statements I've ever read on HN. US student's educations are paid for by student loans, they fund their own tuitions I can assure you.
The GP is correct, domestic students rarely, if ever, pay the true cost of attendance at colleges and universities (hereafter, called 'schools') [1]. The are taxpayer subsidies such as tax breaks (both the publics and privates benefit) to the schools from local and state governments, as well as annual appropriations for operating costs of public schools. This is especially evident in areas where the cost of attendance is so low to in-state residents, such as the California State school system.
Private schools also subsidise students through merit scholarships, which lower the cost of attendance for foreign and domestic alike, to the tune of anywhere between a few hundred dollars and a free ride.
What tax payer subsidies? Please explain because I am not aware of any.
If you are talking about the 501c3 status that some Universities have that has not reduced tuition costs for anybody in state or otherwise. Additionally the state contributes very little these days to a state university, case in point the UC system.
As far your link that only concerns Pell Grants. Pell Grants are only available to "people of need", most middle class families don't qualify and the average for award if you do is just $3800.
In an article from The Atlantic[1], you can clearly see that total direct federal and state subsidies to higher education in 2014 are about $140 billion with another $20 billion in indirect subsidies. Yes, some of this goes to help offset the cost of attendance through Pell grants and tax credits to the family and shouldn't affect the tuition cost directly.
From the article I linked in the previous message, it does not only address Pell grants:
>>Total federal support to higher education of "nearly $76 billion" with Pell grants being $36 billion and "nearly $25 billion in research funding obligations."
This essentially ignores the condition of the US (and in particular the Bay area) as the tech capital of the world. The US is not bereft of talent, but the US alone does not produce enough tech talent to sustain its position in the world. In some cases, these American companies "that the H1B folks want to work" were founded by non-Americans or even better, were founded out of the US but moved there as a condition in an investment round.
You can be the tech center of the world. You can be an isolationist. You can't be both.
Please show my proof or a citation that the "us does not produce enough tech talent to sustain its position in the world" It seems to me that every year for the last 15 years the US produces new and innovative tech tech companies many very successful. How is this possible then if its not sustainable?
That's a straw man that not buying into the nonsense that without H1B visas the tech economy will grind to a halt means isolationism. The U.S. is a nation of immigrants, diversity is not an issue.
<Are you seriously saying that foreign students subsidize the education of US citizens?>
It may be a reference to the fact that many public colleges have tuition breaks for residents.
The other side of that coin is availability. That practice gives those schools a financial incentive to grant full-retail foreign students admission priority over residents. That's certainly the case in California.
The University of California system is exactly what I was referring to.
They increasingly admit more out of state and international students to deal with their increasing budget problems and to counteract otherwise necessary larger tuition increases.
I'm not saying this is good or bad. Just stating that this is happening.
I don't think his statement implies any of the things you are referring to. If you reread the comment again, he is making the argument that the students who went to school in US and are good at what they do should not be discriminated in hiring because they are not US citizens.
> This idea that the most talented people can only be found from outside the US needs to just die. If the US were so bereft of talent none of these companies that these H1B visa folks want to work for would exist. Ditto for the US universities they attend.
There is definitely a dearth in the STEM students who are US citizens and have an under-grad/grad degree from top schools. All the ones who are already places. My company hires from the top 30 schools in US and when my team went for Intern hiring, they couldn't find enough US citizens with masters degree. It's a supply demand problem.
>> Are you seriously saying that foreign students subsidize the education of US citizens? That is one of the most absurd statements I've ever read on HN. US student's educations are paid for by student loans, they fund their own tuitions I can assure you.
Absurd? Perhaps. However, it is reality and happening in the University of California system. [1] The tuition for CA residents (regardless how they choose to finance this -- which is what you are referring to) is currently only maintained by the large number of out of state (and international) admissions.
The problem has gotten so bad that a bill was passed in the state legislature to limit the out of state student enrollment. [2]
>> Attending university in the US is a privilege and that does not mean you should be guaranteed a job in the United States upon graduation.
A privilege that is only accessible to the most privileged foreigners (because they are wealthy in their home countries) or most talented (who receive financial assistance from private organizations, or in some cases their home country).
>> You seem to have a real sense of entitlement that because you went to school in the US the US owes you a job. Wow.
I certainly did not make the case that any graduate of a US university is entitled to any job. I agree with you.
Taking the perspective of a business, how would you incentive your business not to hire the best available candidates who are already in the country (regardless of whether or not they are foreign-born)?
>> This idea that the most talented people can only be found from outside the US needs to just die. If the US were so bereft of talent none of these companies that these H1B visa folks want to work for would exist. Ditto for the US universities they attend.
This is not what I said. I was referring to US-born and foreign-born students attending the same universities for the same duration. I did not advocate for bringing people into the country.
Note that those international students having attended US institutions of higher education can already start working for any employer under the post graduation Optional Practical Training (OPT) for a few years.
>> This idea of relocating people to London for year is just gaming the system.
Agreed. I am not advocating for this. Just describing that this is happening.
[EDIT (rephrasing): There is no particular training provided. The international students received the same education as US students at US institutions.]
International students generally have to pay for everything out of pocket (they are not eligible for any public/tax-payer based assistance, not even subsidized loans). This in effect often subsidizes the cost of tuition for the domestic students. [EDIT: This is the case in the University of California system where the percentage of out of state and international students admissions increases to deal with budget problems.]
The companies in question here expect individuals to have worked on significant projects, demonstrated ambition and passion outside of their regular coursework. Those who can generally have no problem being hired.