You call it whatever you want to call it. “You work at this specific company or we kick you out of the country” is as exploitive and ultra-capitalistic as you can get.
It can be, but isn’t a guarantee. All countries do this to an extent, some do it better than others. You calling it the wrong thing trying to drive a point home with hyperbole isn’t helpful to anyone.
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.
I work with h1b my entire life in tech. I dropped out of university at age 20 and I’m 31 now. I am a staff engineer.
There are small places that utilize the program correctly. One amazing friend I have is a man named Ravi. Beautiful human being and he lives in Texas now with a beautiful boy.
I now contract with a major corporation now who dropped an H1B woman named Chaitanya who loved her daughter with a 2 day notice. She has to since scrambled to find a new job or risk deportation. Not indentured servitude, though.
You call it whatever you want to call it. “You work at this specific company or we kick you out of the country” is as exploitive and ultra-capitalistic as you can get.
It can be, but isn’t a guarantee. All countries do this to an extent, some do it better than others. You calling it the wrong thing trying to drive a point home with hyperbole isn’t helpful to anyone.
“All countries” do not have the U.S. H1-B visa program, which is what we are discussing.
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?
deleted by creator
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.
I work with h1b my entire life in tech. I dropped out of university at age 20 and I’m 31 now. I am a staff engineer.
There are small places that utilize the program correctly. One amazing friend I have is a man named Ravi. Beautiful human being and he lives in Texas now with a beautiful boy.
I now contract with a major corporation now who dropped an H1B woman named Chaitanya who loved her daughter with a 2 day notice. She has to since scrambled to find a new job or risk deportation. Not indentured servitude, though.