You strongly agree with making people who were legally living their lives in the US lose access to everything they own overnight just because they happened to be outside the country on a random day?

▲

breitling 3 days ago | parent [-]

[flagged]

▲

rsynnott 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

Say you’re a multinational, with offices in the US, Europe, Asia. You need to hire more people. _Where are you going to do it_? The place where the rules change every ten minutes?

This doesn’t prioritise locals; it will almost certainly cause large companies to concentrate their high-skilled employment elsewhere.

(Honestly for some of them the _chaos_ will be almost as bad as the restrictions; how do you plan with the US’s current level of nonsense? You can’t. What if he decides to revoke green cards next week, or bans enemies of the reich from high-skills employment?)

▲

ponector 3 days ago | parent [-]

>> it will almost certainly cause large companies to concentrate their high-skilled employment elsewhere

And this is actually a good thing. More diverse workforce, more investment into other countries.

	▲	rsynnott 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		Sure. But not exactly where the people who vote for ol’ minihands were going for, presumably.

▲

dotnet00 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

You've got to be braver than that about your desires. Be upfront about it instead of dodging the question.

This isn't about prioritizing locals, locals aren't being priorizited by taking away the belongings of someone whose only crime was being a legal immigrant.

If it was solely about prioritizing locals, the rule would make a one-time exemption for H1B holders who happen to be outside the country, so they have the ability to figure things out with their employer, sort out their affairs, sell off vehicles etc, sort out their leases and pack up their belongings to bring with them.