← Back to context

Comment by throwaway85825

6 hours ago

Flat 20 year ban would be simpler to implement.

> Flat 20 year ban would be simpler to implement

And structurally advantageous to incumbent firms with access to easy capital with which to ride downturns.

  • Why wouldn't they just layoff their visa workers in a downturn.

    • > Why wouldn't they just layoff their visa workers in a downturn

      Which they?

      Hell, if this law passed I’d bet there would be opportunity for PE to buy the assets off a company that has done a layoff, fold the original company, and reboot it. Being locked out of 95% of the world population for twenty years is a real competitive disadvantage.

What if there's a few year downturn, so they lay off and want to hire back when it passes? Force them to hire offshore instead?

  • Are they incapable of hiring Americans? Like it's treated as a given no company would ever hire an American, it's absurd.