The Effect of H-1b Quota on Employment and Selection of Foreign-Born Labor (2018)
Posted3 months agoActive3 months ago
doi.orgOtherstory
heatedmixed
Debate
80/100
H-1b VisaImmigration PolicyLabor Market
Key topics
H-1b Visa
Immigration Policy
Labor Market
A 2018 study on the effect of H-1B quota on employment and selection of foreign-born labor sparked a heated discussion on the impact of immigration policies on the US labor market and the tech industry.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Very active discussionFirst comment
1h
Peak period
24
0-3h
Avg / period
7.3
Comment distribution29 data points
Loading chart...
Based on 29 loaded comments
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Sep 26, 2025 at 12:33 AM EDT
3 months ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Sep 26, 2025 at 1:48 AM EDT
1h after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
24 comments in 0-3h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Sep 27, 2025 at 11:00 AM EDT
3 months ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
ID: 45382668Type: storyLast synced: 11/20/2025, 1:23:53 PM
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
Classic unintended consequence -- the policy achieved neither goal. Opponents didn't get more jobs for Americans, supporters lost the highest-impact innovators who drive patents and startups.
I did not end up using it, but I have personally "lost" the H1B lottery 3 times. I was also subject to the option above at some point.
That's why i dislike gov't intervention - in most cases, these policies are drafted by vested interests, to the exclusion of some other group (who often then bear the brunt of the externalized cost of such a policy).
(Half-joking, half-serious.)
Not to mention, if companies can’t hire the talent they need in the US, they won’t just “make do” with whoever’s available... they’ll move operations elsewhere, which means fewer opportunities for the very people immigration restrictions are supposed to help.
I don't 100% agree. H-1B visa holders, if laid off, have 60 days to find another job or leave the country.
This means they have much much lower negotiation power and will likely try and avoid at all cost being laid off, and will accept worse condition to stay in the US.
This is a detriment to the whole working class, because:
- US workers are now competing with other workers that will accept worse condition
- US companies can leverage H-1B workers as leverage against the negotiation power of US workers
I've seen this with my own eyes. When my previous employer announced forced RTO, all holders of the equivalent of H-1B visas just accepted it automatically, because rejecting would have meant (most likely) getting out of the country.
And the company was able to easily let go (or accept the resignation of) workers with stronger rights.
An over-supply of workers just weakens labor power, it's basic supply&demand reasoning: it's crazy that people don't realize that open borders and unchecked immigration is the most anti-worker thing one could do.
Labor market is complicated because jobs are not a finite pool that people compete over. New workers are also new consumers, who create new jobs as well. If more workers are always bad for other workers, declining birth rate (ie fewer future workers) would be a good thing.
Classic example of "appeal to authority" fallacy - https://helpfulprofessor.com/appeal-to-authority-fallacy-exa...
> New workers are also new consumers, who create new jobs as well.
New workers with much lower purchasing power will not be consuming as much/as well. Heck, a lot of companies are known to hand out directions on how to get food stamps upon hiring (i think Walmart was one of the notable cases).
Without proper rights may get new consumers but you may also get more pressure on the welfare system (which is already weak in the US).
> If more workers are always bad for other workers, declining birth rate (ie fewer future workers) would be a good thing.
You skip the part where declining birth rate is a very strong in developed countries but not as strong (in some cases, not strong at all) in not-equally developed countries.
> This sounds like a great natural experiment (the quota dropped by 3x!) until you realize that they weren't even coming close to hitting the old quota, and the number of approved h1bs actually rose in the two years after the quota was dropped.
> https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/data/h1b0...