> The only effect this is going to have is accelerating the offshoring of jobs through more hiring in India, Europe and Canada, which is a net loss for the US.

I’m honestly tired of hearing the argument “if we do X then business will move to another state or out of US”.

Good riddance to the companies that flee from jurisdictions enforcing workers rights, don’t allow exploitation, etc.

The most important thing is protecting people, not fearing the cries of money-making machines.

Particularly in tech, where the network effects and first mover advantages are so strong.

California could introduce a million dollar minimum wage for software engineers, ban electricity on Thursdays, raise corporate taxes to 60% and still probably have more new unicorns founded in the subsequent year than Europe.

They'll still end up in the US as they can work a year abroad and come in using L1-B program for 5 years (3 + 2 years on renewal).

L1 has no PWD, no min wage requirements (beyond min wage law in US) and is completely uncapped.

The business must go where the talent pool is if the talent can't be brought to the money. This H1B change is intended to remove a sizable portion of the talent pool from the US, so companies will have to follow (and spend US investor money on wages abroad).

So who is going to pay taxes to fund the country? Particularly as the population ages, meaning more costs and fewer workers.