Should Holders of Degree from Premier US Schools Have a Higher GC Preference

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gcq

H1B is the only path for skilled immigrants to enter this country. Choking H1B program will force out all skilled immigration, lead to more outsourcing and make the country less competitive.

If grassley was so concerned about fraud, why doesn't he readily agree to stop all corn subsidies ? He won't because corn farmers are his vote bank. He doesn't care about H1B because it is not a prime interest for his farm state. He himself took advantage of the corn subsidy despite being a millionaire. Grassley's intentions -- always a suspect. He works in close collaboration with anti-immigrant groups like NUSA. In fact he bases his actions on inputs from these groups. If you want a real glimpse of what this man is, watch the youtube video where he explains why he prefers senate over house. He is an attention seeking lawmaker who want everyone to be begging to please him.

Did anyone wonder why illegal immigrants have such a clout in this country despite being illegal ? Because their fellow countrymen who are citizens support them. Look at us, we are speaking the language of anti-immigrants. For that reason we will never be a strong political force in this country. Irish had the guts to ask visas specifically for their illegals. Us ? good at bashing our own countrymen's prospects !

If we are really righteous and care about our dignity, we all should be in our home country make it stronger, fighting against corruption and make it one of the leading countries of the world, not sitting in US and bragging about how great we are.

---

Don't disagree that Grassley is an opportunistic fool, though I think some of the protections that he wants makes sense. We ALL know that there is wage suppression happening due to H1Bs, OPT, L1s, etc. This is bad not just for USCs but also for future citizens! Look at how the middle class has been completely eviscerated over the past 30 years in this country because of the emphasis on corporate profits at all costs - wage suppression, cutting benefits and pensions, outsourcing, etc.

The reason illegal immigrants have more clout than skilled immigrants is that they're an immediate vote bank of 11m people (or however many illegals there are in the US right now) for whoever legalizes them. It's partly also because the Latinos and Hispanics support some form of amnesty but mostly because they are a huge vote bank if legalized. And I love the Irish, but I think the Irish asking for amnesty is actually a sign of moral flexibility as opposed to a strength as you make it out to be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jonty Rhodes

Agree with your post. This immigration system is really messed up and I hope some sane voices prevail in future. I personally feel that Sen. Grassley is not really against the HR3012 itself but is more concerned about the H1B/L1 abuse. Some of his concerns are not misplaced either because fraud in these categories is not a new thing. Now add 29 month OPT program on that. I feel that his main motive is to add those stringent measures on this bill. Now, its a different thing that those changes will probably not be accepted by technology companies and the unfortunate part is whenever H1B/L1 abuse is talked about, the discussion will almost always gets directed at IT Companies and they get truly or untruly blamed for taking unfair advantage of the system. I understand that IT and technology companies end up using most number of H1B/L1 but there are other people like me who are also on H1B and are not in technology field (physician) who are bearing the brunt of this alleged fraud/abuse of H1B/L1 and tug of war between technology companies demanding less restrictions and politicians wanting more restrictions.

I am a firm believer in Q's theory that immigration should not be tied to an employer like what we have in EB categoeries right now. I also agree with you that the immigration policy should be efficient enough to be able to pick talented people from the labor pool based on objective criteria and give them GCs instead of making talented people wait endlessly with uncertainty putting their career advancements on hold.

---

I agree with your assessment that some of Grassley's amendments will be better for immigrants like you and me, but I don't really think that's his objective - he really does want to kill immigration and I won't be surprised if he is a closet racist. Some of his points are fair, like his response to Microsoft where he told them that even if they raise the H1B quota, it won't help MS all that much as most H1Bs are used by foreign companies, i.e. Indian IT companies! And I also support him in going after the Infosyses, the Whiz ITs, etc. that blatantly violate the immigration policies.

The other reason I think Grassley is actually an idiot is because by not passing HR3012 and delaying GCs for IC, he is directly contributing to wage suppression. The longer these cheap IT guys are on H1Bs, EADs, etc. the longer their wages will be suppressed by their employers. I realize ROWers will face a longer wait if HR3012 passes, but I suspect they face less wage suppression as a) they are probably better qualified b) since they face better conditions at home than Indians/Chinese they will be less willing to put up with wage suppression.

The only way to reduce loopholes while still providing a relatively clean path for truly high skilled immigrants is to move to a points based system. I know that Canada and the UK had a huge number of applicants with this, but that just means that there should be a higher bar in terms of education, salary, experience, language proficiency, ties to the US. For one, tie the PR status it to an initial job offer but let the applicant change jobs once they get the green card. This will reduce all the "rocket scientists working as cab drivers because they couldn't find a job after getting PR" cases that Canada saw with their system.

Good luck getting such a system to fly with the Democrats. You have idiots like Robert Menendez who say such a system is bad because it won't let his parents into the country because his mother was a seamstress and his dad was a carpenter. Yeah, because that's what the US needs to preserve global competitiveness - more carpenters and seamstresses.

Right now, the whole system is perverted and is based on violating the spirit of the law at every step. First you have to prove your educational credentials, so people pay for "educational evaluations", which inherently have a huge conflict of interest. Then you file a prevailing wage application in such a way that you get the wage you want by using alternative wage surveys or other kludges. Then you pretend to look for a US worker while you absolutely don't want to find one so you can file a PERM. Instead, it is better to realize that there are some people who deserve to be let into the country because they will be a net gain to society and the economy and then figure out how to select for such people.

Well expressed

Exactly my line of thinking. In my opinion, there should be only 2 catogories for Skilled workers for PR without this meaning less PERM

Employement based and US degree based.
Employement based: Job offer coupled with idenitified skills area, use education/experience. But do not need PERM or wage certification. Update skill area every year.

Likewise US degree should have a special category, provided they get employed in their educational degree acquired in USA.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abcx13

I agree with your assessment that some of Grassley's amendments will be better for immigrants like you and me, but I don't really think that's his objective - he really does want to kill immigration and I won't be surprised if he is a closet racist. Some of his points are fair, like his response to Microsoft where he told them that even if they raise the H1B quota, it won't help MS all that much as most H1Bs are used by foreign companies, i.e. Indian IT companies! And I also support him in going after the Infosyses, the Whiz ITs, etc. that blatantly violate the immigration policies.

The other reason I think Grassley is actually an idiot is because by not passing HR3012 and delaying GCs for IC, he is directly contributing to wage suppression. The longer these cheap IT guys are on H1Bs, EADs, etc. the longer their wages will be suppressed by their employers. I realize ROWers will face a longer wait if HR3012 passes, but I suspect they face less wage suppression as a) they are probably better qualified b) since they face better conditions at home than Indians/Chinese they will be less willing to put up with wage suppression.

The only way to reduce loopholes while still providing a relatively clean path for truly high skilled immigrants is to move to a points based system. I know that Canada and the UK had a huge number of applicants with this, but that just means that there should be a higher bar in terms of education, salary, experience, language proficiency, ties to the US. For one, tie the PR status it to an initial job offer but let the applicant change jobs once they get the green card. This will reduce all the "rocket scientists working as cab drivers because they couldn't find a job after getting PR" cases that Canada saw with their system.

Good luck getting such a system to fly with the Democrats. You have idiots like Robert Menendez who say such a system is bad because it won't let his parents into the country because his mother was a seamstress and his dad was a carpenter. Yeah, because that's what the US needs to preserve global competitiveness - more carpenters and seamstresses.

Right now, the whole system is perverted and is based on violating the spirit of the law at every step. First you have to prove your educational credentials, so people pay for "educational evaluations", which inherently have a huge conflict of interest. Then you file a prevailing wage application in such a way that you get the wage you want by using alternative wage surveys or other kludges. Then you pretend to look for a US worker while you absolutely don't want to find one so you can file a PERM. Instead, it is better to realize that there are some people who deserve to be let into the country because they will be a net gain to society and the economy and then figure out how to select for such people.

---

From Slashdot today:
http://www.computerworld.com/s/artic...eign_students_
http://www.computerworld.com/s/artic...0&pageNumber=1

"High skilled" immigrants apparently go to Stratford University and University of Bridgeport these days. Needless to say, most of these guys are from India and end up working for crappy IT consulting companies. This is why an indiscriminate STEM bill will let in a huge number of crappy Indian IT graduates. It needs to be restricted to people from the top 100 or 200 Universities and stupid non-STEM disciplines like Urban Forestry should be removed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abcx13

From Slashdot today:
http://www.computerworld.com/s/artic...eign_students_
http://www.computerworld.com/s/artic...0&pageNumber=1

"High skilled" immigrants apparently go to Stratford University and University of Bridgeport these days. Needless to say, most of these guys are from India and end up working for crappy IT consulting companies. This is why an indiscriminate STEM bill will let in a huge number of crappy Indian IT graduates. It needs to be restricted to people from the top 100 or 200 Universities and stupid non-STEM disciplines like Urban Forestry should be removed.

---

Anti-immigrants come up with an argument to oppose every single high skilled immigrant bill. When economy is bad, they will blame the economy as a reason not to introduce any immigration bills as if they care about US citizens. If it is STEM, they would make an argument similar to this. They will always quote a reason different than their real motive ( racism ) to stop such bills.

We as smart immigrants should not fall for their tactics by staying united.

gcq,

I could not agree more... You said it...

Indian education is no way inferior to US education at any point of time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gcq

Anti-immigrants come up with an argument to oppose every single high skilled immigrant bill. When economy is bad, they will blame the economy as a reason not to introduce any immigration bills as if they care about US citizens. If it is STEM, they would make an argument similar to this. They will always quote a reason different than their real motive ( racism ) to stop such bills.

We as smart immigrants should not fall for their tactics by staying united.

---

I'm not saying that there isn't a latent racist motive when it comes to people like Grassley but come on. First, not all immigrants are smart. This article clearly proves that this is not the case and even if I'm not a USC, it's clear to me that the system is being abused by Indians - just as it is clear to many of my US Citizen friends that what Union Carbide/Dow did in Bhopal was wrong and what Walmart did in Mexico was wrong. I don't understand the us vs them mentality at all.

I'd rather that smart graduates from Stanford, MIT, etc. are given green cards over idiots from Bridgeport University. That doesn't make me anti-immigrant. Even if you are from Bridgeport and let's say you become a USC somehow, you will lose your job to these low paid wage arbitraging IT immigrants. A grad from Stanford or MIT will typically not have a problem like this because they are high-value and in high-demand because there is a genuine shortage of incredibly smart people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by immitime

gcq,

I could not agree more... You said it...

Indian education is no way inferior to US education at any point of time.

---

Really? So if you got into IIT and MIT, you'll go to IIT? This a weak argument and sidesteps my original point, which was that there are too many diploma mills (more so in India than in the US, but it seems there are enough in the US as well) that make it all too easy for people to abuse a GC system based on a US STEM degree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abcx13

I'm not saying that there isn't a latent racist motive when it comes to people like Grassley but come on. First, not all immigrants are smart. This article clearly proves that this is not the case and even if I'm not a USC, it's clear to me that the system is being abused by Indians - just as it is clear to many of my US Citizen friends that what Union Carbide/Dow did in Bhopal was wrong and what Walmart did in Mexico was wrong. I don't understand the us vs them mentality at all.

I'd rather that smart graduates from Stanford, MIT, etc. are given green cards over idiots from Bridgeport University. That doesn't make me anti-immigrant. Even if you are from Bridgeport and let's say you become a USC somehow, you will lose your job to these low paid wage arbitraging IT immigrants. A grad from Stanford or MIT will typically not have a problem like this because they are high-value and in high-demand because there is a genuine shortage of incredibly smart people.

---

Immigration is not an award for smart ones, it is about what industry needs. At least that is how US immigration system is designed. US Immigration needs all kind of people from the smartest scientist to farm workers. That is why the system has so many categories. Low pay, it will have a different response when asked to business people. Going by the your argument, smartest people would always demand higher wages as they are incredibly smart. So they shouldn't be worried about low paying jobs. Ultimately market decides the wages. Artificially inflating wages won't keep high paying jobs here, rather these high paying jobs will move to countries where these jobs can be done at a cheaper rate.

A socialist dreams of higher wages, a capitalist dreams of a competitive work force. This is a conflict of interest and in US, capitalist always wins.

abcx13,

I don't know what industry you are in, but in US, IT sector rules the immigration scene whether you like it or not. In fact many of the high skilled immigration legislations in this country is driven by IT industry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gcq

Immigration is not an award for smart ones, it is about what industry needs. At least that is how US immigration system is designed. US Immigration needs all kind of people from the smartest scientist to farm workers. That is why the system has so many categories. Low pay, it will have a different response when asked to business people. Going by the your argument, smartest people would always demand higher wages as they are incredibly smart. So they shouldn't be worried about low paying jobs. Ultimately market decides the wages. Artificially inflating wages won't keep high paying jobs here, rather these high paying jobs will move to countries where these jobs can be done at a cheaper rate.

A socialist dreams of higher wages, a capitalist dreams of a competitive work force. This is a conflict of interest and in US, capitalist always wins.

abcx13,

I don't know what industry you are in, but in US, IT sector rules the immigration scene whether you like it or not. In fact many of the high skilled immigration legislations in this country is driven by IT industry.

---

I'm obviously not in the IT industry. Though I have a CS degree which is very different from IT.

Immigration policy should not be dictated by industry needs. Nor should any other policy for that matter - except maybe industrial policy. This all-prevasive thinking of "corporate interest above all" is what's causing the current stasis in the US - forget about immigration issues, politics has broken down on far more important issues. I don't deny that the US needs temporary agricultural workers and unskilled workers like roofers, plumbers, nannies, as much as it needs smart scientists, but it is complete idiocy to subject both these categories of people to the same immigration system.

As to your argument that a clamp down on immigrant IT workers is akin to artifically inflating wages of US workers, I'm not so sure. Firstly, on a productivity adjusted basis, I suspect the wage difference between a higher paid, better educated US IT worker and an Indian IT import is in favor of the US worker. Now admittedly, this is hard to do quantitatively and it is necessarily to consider subjective opinions. I've worked in business and finance and I know how managers and Wall Street types think - one programmer is the same as any other, so if the H1B let's us cut costs, we should. But as a CS guy, I know for a fact that this often results in penny wise, pound foolish behavior. Secondly, these jobs cannot be done as effectively overseas as evidenced by the fact that the employers are choosing to bring in on-site people on H1Bs and L1s.

So "smart Americans" often get shafted by poor managers and execs and smarter and more talented immigrants get crowded out by lower value immigrants - that's what is annoying.

P.S. - Attaching labels like capitalism and socialism is meaningless and like in the Presidential debates only serves to oversimplify the issues.

I think this is quite harsh, insensitive and unwise.

"Smart Americans getting the shaft" is not immigrants' fault. And higher vs lower value - while true - only serves to divide folks. As GCQ said - united we stand. Talking against fraud is one thing - but when people play by rule - I think it's quite inappropriate and unwise to criticize other immigrant groups. Whether ROW or EB1 or EB3 or Chinese or whoever.

Just my view. Don't mean to criticize you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abcx13

So "smart Americans" often get shafted by poor managers and execs and smarter and more talented immigrants get crowded out by lower value immigrants - that's what is annoying.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by qesehmk

I think this is quite harsh, insensitive and unwise.

"Smart Americans getting the shaft" is not immigrants' fault. And higher vs lower value - while true - only serves to divide folks. As GCQ said - united we stand. Talking against fraud is one thing - but when people play by rule - I think it's quite inappropriate and unwise to criticize other immigrant groups. Whether ROW or EB1 or EB3 or Chinese or whoever.

Just my view. Don't mean to criticize you.

---

No offence taken.

I didn't mean to blame immigrants for qualified Americans being fired. All I'm trying to say is that there are often cases where this happens and they are replaced by substandard workers - clearly this is not the fault of the immigrants. It's the fault of the managers when they make such staffing decision.

I realize my attitude might strike some people as "holier than thou" but at the same time I think it's only natural to segment immigrants when you realize the system is being overloaded. You try to skim the cream off the top - this is what Indian entrance exams do, no? Heck, the system does it. Whether you like it or not, EB2 and EB3 are different categories with markedly different waits. And I suspect if they weren't, a lot of you would be making the same arguments that I am making for segmentation within EB2, only your arguments would be in terms of a Bachelors degree vs. a Masters degree. You can't claim with a straight face that a Stanford/MIT MS in CS or EE is the same as one with a PGD in Computer Applications or some other such thing.

I grant you that there may not be outright fraud in a lot of these cases, but because the system is based on violating the spirit of the law at every step as I mentioned upthread, there is truly no "playing by the rules". How do you distinguish the Intels that truly need MS graduates from the IT shops that really don't except for filing in EB2? The only way to tell these two apart is by using proxies such as pay, University ranking, etc. like I am. Yes, the Intel is also stretching the law in the sense that their lawyers are intentionally drafting recruitment material such that no USC is found. But does that mean that there is no difference? If you were to forget your own nationality and job and design an immigration system from scratch, would you truly consider these two individuals to be the same?

And BTW, I think Grassley is onto something when it comes to fraud. I think there may be a lot more fraud in the system than we realize or are willing to admit. For instance, I've read a ton of posts on online forums from IT consultants on H1Bs who, in violation of their visa status, are not being paid while being benched. Does anybody have any estimate of what the percentage really is? My impression is that it is not an insignificant percentage and I won't be surprised if the numbers are in the thousands. Clearly this 'outright fraud' is impacting everyone but in my opinion the other 'playing by the rules' fraud is more insiduous and is what is screwing up the system.

In general, it seems to me that there is a great unwillingness to admit the complicity of Indian companies and workers, particularly in the IT sector, in abusing and flooding the system. My suggestions, and Sen. Grassley's, would be non sequitur if this abuse had not been taking place.

abcx13,
I don't think anyone here is trying to design an immigration system for america's benefit. From what I see people are only looking at how one can get GC faster and higher wages at the expense of others.

American lawmakers who designed this immigration system over years are not naive that they included so many categories in immigration. Likes of Zoe Lofgren ( immigration law professor by profession) are well aware of the needs of US.

In the same tone as we judge others, MIT-ians could say that others are not qualified or talented as them, so let us set aside all 140,000 visas to MIT ians alone. They could claim that it is the right thing to do because they are more qualified.


There are only 3-4 lawmakers that oppose high skilled immigration. They are either anti-immigrants or union supporters.

Guys - I don't have more to add other than to say - thanks for an objective dialogue. Lets keep it impersonal and focused on issues. As far as I am concerned, this is my last on this topic.

If a person really analyze, MIT graduates will never work on usual IT contracting jobs. And most of them are in Kernel Development/Real software engineering in IBM or Microsoft etc.. etc. Lisp/autolisp kind of programming and not just alone in logical programming, And we can never compare a Graduate with MS in US with MIT, IIT cadre. There is not much difference between IITans and MITians except the infrastructure and opportunity. And if some one can speak English good that does not make one educated. The education is measured by how humble and how considerate one is.

Most of the IT jobs out in US is in "User Level" as per MIT or IIT standards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sportsfan33

You make some good points. I agree with part of the picture you present. It was an interesting and surprisingly a well written piece - I don't see such a good command on language often.

I am not sure how much you know of the history of America. America has always encouraged and inspired people to "exceed their natural given limitations" and "dream big". Yes, I agree that an MIT/Stanford graduate was given more upstairs than I was (I have no qualms in admitting my limitations). But does that mean that the said graduate deserves more happiness than I do? The answer in the US is "no". The spirit of American constitution - its blatant ignorance of the contemporary prevalent racism and slavery notwithstanding - is understood by the fact that the founding fathers set a goal that EVERYONE has the same right to "happiness" regardless of their abilities.

Happiness is mostly a function of opportunity. This also means that everyone has the right to the same opportunity regardless of ability. Perhaps using a statistical test, you could prove that an MIT/Stanford graduate contributes more given the same opportunity, but there are outliers in a long tail distribution and American system bends over backwards to find the outliers even if it means it must give all the "less talented" people the same means and opportunities as those gifted ones. Outliers are what make the difference, and they are everywhere. They don't go to MIT/Stanford ubiquitously. We don't understand how the human brain functions, what inspires it, and how path breaking discoveries are made. Hence, we should not judge the poor schmuck who could not go to MIT/Stanford.

In America, everyone believes he/she is special. It gets annoying sometimes, but it stems from how people perceive themselves in this country. It is in the marked contrast with your "cream to the top" approach deeply rooted in India and the Indian mentality.

Which approach is better? It's hard to tell. You would have to observe our civilization at least for a millennium - if it lasts that long at all - to pass judgment.

I hope you got the answer of why an MIT/Stanford graduate might encounter the same immigration opportunity as a 3 year degree holder+online MS graduate. I get annoyed by that too, and if I could rig the system to benefit my cause, I probably would :) However at some impartial level, I understand why it is what it is, and I trust that Americans are not really stupid.

Of course there is EB1, EB2, EB3...there is capitalism, and companies "generally" hire smarter people and pay them more. Yes, there is an over supply of labor in IT and "standard JAVA programming" may be "low value" (in your terminology) to not warrant an EB2. Disclaimer: I am not a JAVA programmer, and I have a CS Masters from UMD, which in its own right is a good school and I work on algorithms and optimization problems. Having said all of this, and having brooded over my bad luck of being stuck in EB2-I for years while awaiting my GC (the wait is still going on BTW), I have come to accept that the JAVA programmer will have the same means to happiness as I do. This is my 12th year in the US, and we have done a lot of things such as packing bags, temporarily moving back so that my wife could work, and relocating here again once my date was current. I have cursed the porters, been angry over EB1C...and in the end, I realized that it was a waste of my time. There are more serious problems in the world to solve - global warming, water supply, energy supply, finding sustainable ways of living and most importantly, I had a family. While raising our daughter and seeing how fast she was learning stuff was so amazing and awesome that we decided it was a blessing in disguise that my wife did not work!!! Take that US immigration. There is 1 EAD/GC that won't result in addition to your saturated labor market :) Moral of the story: Life is nonlinear and those who understand and accept its unpredictability eventually get happy. It might be your turn tomorrow. What if the Congress actually passes this STEM bill or visa recapture and makes everybody "current"? Will that make you happy?

Sorry for sounding like a preacher. Afternoon meals often make me do this :)

---

I somehow missed this reply because the original posts got forked into a new thread. I agree with the gist of what you say in that America was the land of opportunity. The Statue of Liberty does indeed say "Give me your tired, your poor/Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free" as Gutierrez pointed out in the debate over the STEM bill.

But there are two points I would make. First, the America of 150 years ago is a lot different than the America of today. Back then all America could get was the persecuted and the poor - those shunned and ostracized by the existing European regimes. Today America would have its pick were it not for a backlogged immigration system (and they still mostly get their pick when it comes to EB2-ROW). Second, the American dream is not what it once was. To really capitalize on the opportunities in this country, it is increasingly necessary to have a college degree or two. Just look at how the wage gap has widened between those with a degree and those without. Now I admit a degree is not the end all and be all, and it's perhaps a poor proxy which would have excluded people like Steve Jobs if they had been immigrants, but it's something. So you lose some outliers who would otherwise be very valuable immigrants but the only fix I see is a points system so if someone who is weak in one field (say education) can make up through others (in demand skills, pay, entrepreneurial record, etc.).

By the way, I think I made a comment upthread of not understanding this "us vs. them" mentality. But after seeing the selfish politics during the STEM debate in the House last week with every Rep. from a ethnic/racial minority trying to get what's best for their bloody group instead of what's best for everyone, I get it. This is what's sad about politics and why I hate it - it always brings everyone down to the lowest common denominator. Perhaps I'm a still bit naive and idealistic in thinking that occasionally politicians would behave like rational human beings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gcq

abcx13,
I don't think anyone here is trying to design an immigration system for america's benefit. From what I see people are only looking at how one can get GC faster and higher wages at the expense of others.

American lawmakers who designed this immigration system over years are not naive that they included so many categories in immigration. Likes of Zoe Lofgren ( immigration law professor by profession) are well aware of the needs of US.

In the same tone as we judge others, MIT-ians could say that others are not qualified or talented as them, so let us set aside all 140,000 visas to MIT ians alone. They could claim that it is the right thing to do because they are more qualified.


There are only 3-4 lawmakers that oppose high skilled immigration. They are either anti-immigrants or union supporters.

---

I think you give immigration lawyers and lawmakers too much credit. If they were as smart as you make them out to be, do you really think that they would let this system persist for 20 years?

I'm not saying that all the visas should be reserved for one college (or 20) or one nationality or one profession, and I doubt someone from a top 20 school would be stupid enough to make such an argument. My point is that a more nuanced (perhaps points-based) system is required than what is in place.

A tolally agree with you.
Otherwise what is the point in having degress and grading system and points system is the way to go

Merit always should be given credit. That is what made USA a famous selection country 20 years ago, when all Indian university grads made a beeline. Now every one is laughing at MS's/PHDs who struggle to get around to make a foothold even after 10 years

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abcx13

I think you give immigration lawyers and lawmakers too much credit. If they were as smart as you make them out to be, do you really think that they would let this system persist for 20 years?

I'm not saying that all the visas should be reserved for one college (or 20) or one nationality or one profession, and I doubt someone from a top 20 school would be stupid enough to make such an argument. My point is that a more nuanced (perhaps points-based) system is required than what is in place.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sportsfan33

I think we can safely say that students with GPA >= 3.x (choose your favorite number for x, my favorite is x = 5) from the Universities listed in the USNews top y (choose your favorite for y, my favorite is y = 30) should get a higher priority over everyone else in the respective categories. I will first award the GCs to PhDs and then to the Masters, and then to everyone else. Something like EB2-A, EB2-B and EB2-C categories.

This is a very simple rule to implement and in my eyes, very fair. It effectively skims the cream at the top first.

The list of the USNews top 30 changes year to year and it should be accounted for every year. This way, some schools that were part of the top 30 1 year may not be there the next year, and these are *border schools*. If you are in one of the border schools, you may not be lucky to get into the priority queue if your school is not there in the rankings when you graduate. Truly elite schools make the list every year and students from those schools will be guaranteed to be in the priority of the GC queue no matter when they graduate. That just increases the motivation to get into the truly elite schools and will perhaps get rid of the sad practice of getting degrees from schools like <pick your favorite from one of the trackitt threads>.

---

Agreed on the PhD > MS bit. Not sure if I would use a very stringent GPA filter or if I wouldn't do top 100 instead of top 30 but those are minor points. Alas, you run into the idiot Hispanic Democrats who seem to have gotten into this country on a whim and a prayer and now wish the same for everyone.

Degrees doesn't equate to smartness. I have seen many people at my different workplaces with US degrees who are not any better than people with degrees from India. In fact many of the smart employees I have seen in many companies are from Indian universities. Studying in US universities give you a false sense of entitlement. When it comes to work performance, it is not a benchmark.

IMO awarding EB2 categorization to fresh MS candidates ( 1 year experience or lesser ) is wrong, which should be corrected by some legislation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abcx13

Agreed on the PhD > MS bit. Not sure if I would use a very stringent GPA filter or if I wouldn't do top 100 instead of top 30 but those are minor points. Alas, you run into the idiot Hispanic Democrats who seem to have gotten into this country on a whim and a prayer and now wish the same for everyone.

---

What if this country needs waiters/cooks/janitors/farm workers/nurses more than people like you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PD2008AUG25

What if this country needs waiters/cooks/janitors/farm workers/nurses more than people like you?

---

Different category/different quota which can be dialed up or down depending on how many are required. Apart from nurses, I won't put any of that in skilled immigration. And with unemployment where it is, you really think this country needs more waiters, cooks and janitors? Maybe farm workers since Americans refuse to do it on account of the low wages (but that's why we have the temp agricultural program, right?)...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gcq

Degrees doesn't equate to smartness. I have seen many people at my different workplaces with US degrees who are not any better than people with degrees from India. In fact many of the smart employees I have seen in many companies are from Indian universities. Studying in US universities give you a false sense of entitlement. When it comes to work performance, it is not a benchmark.

IMO awarding EB2 categorization to fresh MS candidates ( 1 year experience or lesser ) is wrong, which should be corrected by some legislation.

---

I don't want to argue about US unis vs Indian unis because it is pointless. On almost any metric, US unis and their graduates win whether it is research output, entrepreneurial impact, rankings, reputations of professors, innovation, impact on the world, etc. I suspect that the quality curve also declines much slower (as you go down the rankings) in the US than in India. The simple fact is that if Indians were indeed so smart as we often claim, why the hell is the country still where it is today? Most social indicators have declined despite the economic growth. Hard to believe, yes, but you can look it up.

Indians come to this country with this arrogance that they are smarter and harder-working than others, and in my experience, this could not be farther from the truth (at least at the top levels of academia and industry - I don't know what the case is at bodyshops or BPOs and call centers). Country of origin has nothing to do with quality and Indians should give up this notion that they are somehow better than someone *equally qualified* (admittedly a subjective assessment) from elsewhere. I've worked alongside brilliant people from the US, from China, from Europe, from Russia, you name it...

BTW, I agree that studying in US unis gives people a false sense of entitlement - in fact, from personal experience, I would say that 90% of the undergrad classes at top 10 US schools feel more entitled than they should. But at the top 10% of the undergrad classes, it is usually merited and not over-entitlement. And at the MS/PhD level it is almost entirely deserved, which is mostly what we're talking about I think.

P.S. - In a points system, you could gain some points for experience and some points for a MS, so that would balance our disagreement over experience and education. The problem is that any real points system (like the one in Denmark - which only treats certain Indian degrees as the same as American/European degrees) would probably end up excluding a lot of the guys on trackitt and ** and in the Indian immigrant base in the US would be against such a system (in fact, the system ought to be designed to exclude a large portion of the IT contractors).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sportsfan33

I would use the GPA filter, because I have seen examples of people who did quite badly and should not have been admitted to the University in the first place. Nevertheless, they graduated.

Admission to a reputed school is the first step, but the performance to prove you belong there is the next. Most top notch schools require the Masters students to have a GPA of 3.5 to get into their PhD program (in rare cases, I have seen 3.3). Hence I chose that number. It indicates if the student was "PhD worthy".

Also, there is a very large difference between the first school and the 100th school. In the top, you have MIT, Stanford, Berkley, GTech, UIUC and a few Ivy leagues. The mid tier is schools like Purdue, Austin, Ohio State, Michigan, Wisconsin, Maryland, some more California schools (San Diego, Santa Barbara, UCLA, USC) etc. By the time you are in the 30s, the quality starts dropping. It goes down faster when you get into 50s and 60s. Just take a look at what schools from 70-100. Not very impressive.

I had done a lot of research on the engineering and computer science graduate programs in the US schools and I also advised plenty of students until very recently in choosing the correct school. I had followed up which students ended up in what schools. Based upon my many years of experience in this, I have roughly a notion that around 30 schools are the kings of the hill.

---

You seem to have done more research so I'll defer. :) I only really looked at the top quintile.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sportsfan33

30 or 100 is immaterial, hence I originally stated "pick your favorite number". 30 was my favorite. What would be the best is a STEM category *without country caps* to begin with. I have no problem if it included 100 universities or more.

---

Agreed. And it could be top 100 global unis or something like the way Denmark does it. Why leave out great unis like Cambridge or Ecole Polytechnique or Tsinghua? Sadly India still doesn't have anything in the top 100.