This isn't about what makes sense. This is about finding a punchy number that sounds big and makes Trump's base happy. "$100k fee (that covers 3/6 years)" sounds more impressive than "$33k per year" or "$17k per year", so that's what they went with.

Ultimately this isn't going to do anything to reform the H-1B program; this is just trump "doing something", which he'll claim as a success (and his base will eat up), even if it does nothing or makes things worse.

▲

newfriend 3 days ago | parent [-]

It's 100k per person per year. And I am ecstatic.

▲

breadwinner 3 days ago | parent [-]

It is not, and don't be. If you were not previously qualified you won't suddenly be. The job will simply migrate overseas.

▲

newfriend 3 days ago | parent [-]

I don't have to be qualified for every job for this to have an effect on wages. A surplus of labor has allowed companies to be extremely selective during the interview process, while putting downward pressure on wages.

Moving jobs offshore is already cheaper and has been for decades. There's a reason it's seen as a dead end / ktlo.

This change is a big win for all American tech workers.

	▲	breadwinner 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		It is not a win unless you are talking about IT jobs. For silicon valley type jobs, silicon valley is silicon valley because it is where top tech people congregate. If it loses that status then talent and venture capitalists will find another place to congregate, for example Vancouver BC. It won't happen overnight, but even a slow migration is bad news. https://www.forbes.com/sites/johntamny/2024/09/16/the-micros...