'Makes no sense': JD Vance gives H-1B warning to Microsoft, Indians say he's not revealing that....
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
Speaking at a bipartisan event co-hosted by the Hill and Valley Forum, Vance questioned the ethics and economic logic behind mass layoffs by companies like Microsoft which is followed by an increase in H-1B applications.
This suggests that these companies are laying off Americans and then applying to hire people from overseas.
"You see some big tech companies where they'll lay off 9,000 workers, and then they'll apply for a bunch of overseas visas.
And I sort of wonder; that doesn't totally make sense to me," Vance said.
"That displacement and that math worries me a bit. And what the president has said, he said very clearly: We want the very best and the brightest to make America their home. We want them to build great companies and so forth. But I don't want companies to fire 9,000 American workers and then to go and say, 'We can't find workers here in America.' That's a bulls**t story."
Microsoft recently laid off 9,000 employees globally and came under scrutiny for its use of the H-1B visa program. According to several social media claims. Microsoft submitted applications for more than 6,000 H-1B visas since October while they are also laying off so many employees.
'JD Vance is misleading people'
An Indian-American tech investor reacted to JD Vance's suggestion and said the vice president would not mention that many of the 9,000 laid off employees were H-1Bs too and they got no severance, no safety net and just a 60-day countdown to leave the country.
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
"Microsoft didn't bring in new foreign workers after laying people off , they renewed visas for long-time employees who've been in the U.S. legally for many many years, stuck in green card backlogs. Saying that's 'replacing Americans' is like saying letting a loyal employee stay and renew his visa in the building is the same as hiring someone new off the street. It's not. It's just letting them stay in the job they already earned," the tech investor wrote.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
18 minutes ago
- First Post
Trump new tariff rates ‘pretty much set,' says US trade representative
Speaking on Sunday, US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said the rates, set to take effect on August 7, are 'pretty much set,' defending the president's strategy as both economic and geopolitical. read more US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer gives a live TV interview about tariffs at the White House in Washington, DC, US. Reuters New US tariff rates are 'pretty much set' with no immediate possibility for discussion, Donald Trump's trade advisor said in remarks broadcast Sunday, justifying the president's politically motivated charges against Brazil. Trump, who has used tariffs as an instrument of American economic supremacy, has set tariff rates for dozens of economies, including the European Union, at 10 to 41 percent starting from August 7, his new hard deadline for the tariffs. In a pre-recorded interview broadcast Sunday on CBS's 'Face the Nation,' US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said that tariff rates are unlikely to see changes in 'the coming days'. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'A lot of these are set rates pursuant to deals. Some of these deals are announced, some are not, others depend on the level of the trade deficit or surplus we may have with the country,' Greer said. 'These tariff rates are pretty much set.' Undoubtedly some trade ministers 'want to talk more and see how they can work in a different way with the United States,' he added. But 'we're seeing truly the contours of the president's tariff plan right now with these rates.' Last Thursday, the former real estate developer announced hiked tariff rates on dozens of US trade partners. They will kick in on August 7 instead of August 1, which had previously been touted as a hard deadline. Among the countries facing steep new levies is Brazil. South America's largest economy is being hit with 50 percent tariffs on exports to the United States – albeit with significant exemptions for key products such as aircraft and orange juice. Trump has openly admitted he is punishing Brazil for prosecuting his political ally Jair Bolsonaro, the ex-president accused of plotting a coup in a bid to cling to power. The US president has described the case as a 'witch hunt.' Greer said it was not unusual for Trump to use tariff tools for geopolitical purposes. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'The president has seen in Brazil, like he's seen in other countries, a misuse of law, a misuse of democracy,' Greer told CBS. 'It is normal to use these tools for geopolitical issues.' Trump was 'elected to assess the foreign affairs situation… and take appropriate action,' he added. Meanwhile White House economic advisor Kevin Hassett said that while talks are expected to continue over the next week with some US trade partners, he concurred with Greer's tariffs assessment in that the bulk of the rates 'are more or less locked in.' Asked by the host of NBC's Sunday talk show 'Meet the Press with Kristen Welker' if Trump could change tariff rates should financial markets react negatively, Hassett said: 'I would rule it out, because these are the final deals.' Legal challenges have been filed against some of Trump's tariffs arguing he overstepped his authority. An appeals court panel on Thursday appeared skeptical of the government's arguments, though the case may be ultimately decided at the Supreme Court. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
India.com
18 minutes ago
- India.com
PM Modi, HM Shah Meet President Murmu At Rashtrapati Bhavan
Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah on Sunday separately called on President Droupadi Murmu at the Rashtrapati Bhavan here. The meetings came just a day before the ongoing Monsoon Session of the Parliament resumes on Monday. Taking to X, the Rashtrapati Bhavan posted: "Prime Minister Shri @narendramodi called on President Droupadi Murmu at Rashtrapati Bhavan." It shared pictures of PM Modi and President Murmu. Another post read: "Union Minister for Home Affairs and Cooperation, Shri Amit Shah called on President Droupadi Murmu at Rashtrapati Bhavan." Details related to either of the meetings were not immediately available. The meetings came against the backdrop of heated exchanges witnessed in the Parliament over the Special Intensive Revision process in Bihar ahead of the Assembly elections in the eastern state. PM Modi met President Murmu just a day after he said that the welfare of farmers, small industries, and youth remains the government's 'top priority' as the country stays on track to become the world's third-largest economy, even as US President Donald Trump announced that 25 per cent tariffs would be imposed on India from August 7. PM Modi reaffirmed the resilience of the Indian economy amid turbulence triggered by US tariff hikes, saying that the country must remain vigilant about its economic interests and adopt 'swadeshi' products. 'There is an atmosphere of global instability. All countries are focusing on their individual interests. India is going to become the third biggest economy in the world, and this is why India will have to stay alert as far as its economic interests are concerned,' the Prime Minister said during a rally in Varanasi on Saturday. Earlier this week, Trump announced 25 per cent reciprocal tariffs on Indian goods. He said India would also face an additional tariff penalty for buying Russian oil. The Parliament has seen little business since the Monsoon Session commenced on July 21.
Hindustan Times
18 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Misunderstanding India's advocacy for multipolarity
A growing number of liberal American geopolitical analysts and Donald Trump, whom they despise, have a few things in common — they are opposed to India's relationship with Russia, its association with Brics, and advocacy for multipolarity. Trump's criticism of India is sharp and direct, of course. The Trump presidency will end in another three-and-a-half years, but this rare consensus in Washington DC, on India's search for multipolarity will remain. This is something, therefore, Indian strategic thinkers must reflect on. Put differently, with or without Trump around, India's advocacy for multipolarity will continue to haunt New Delhi, particularly given the structural transformations underway in the international system today. India's foreign policy is not about indecision. It is a constant search for autonomy, balance and agency. (AFP) Let's begin by unpacking some important aspects of multipolarity, given its many layers of complexity and ambiguity. First, notwithstanding the general perception about the virtues of multipolarity, it is becoming somewhat clear that a multipolar world is not as pretty as we had imagined it to be. Even the imperfect multipolarity that we have today — with poles of various sizes and influence competing for power — seems messy, incoherent, confusing and hard to navigate. If this is what a system that is not even really multipolar looks like, what will a true multipolar system look like? Second, notwithstanding the messy nature of the quasi-multipolar order today, New Delhi remains committed to a multipolar world. The desire for multipolarity is deeply entrenched in India's tradition of non-alignment, which is one of the first principles of Indian foreign policy. When faced with a difficult choice, the first strategic instinct of political New Delhi is to be non-aligned, neutral, and multi-aligned. Mostly in that order. I would not view that as strategic escapism. It is very much part of the DNA of Indian foreign policy. It would also be wrong to mistake non-alignment (or a variation thereof) as not valuing friendships, loyalty or solidarity: In fact, India's foreign policy history is rich with examples of friendships, loyalty and solidarity. In that sense, India's foreign policy is not about indecision; it's a constant search for autonomy, balance and agency. This is where the country's fascination with a multipolar world becomes crucial, for there is no genuine autonomy, balance and agency in world affairs without true multipolarity. Third, India's complaints about American unipolarity are on a steady decline, even as the rhetoric remains. It would be a mistake, however, to view New Delhi's rhetoric against unipolarity as merely, or primarily, directed against the US because today, New Delhi is less anxious about America's global unipolarity than a potential Chinese unipolarity in Asia. While America's declining global unipolarity is mostly a theoretical concern for New Delhi, the prospect of a China-led unipolar Asia is the true source of anxiety. In that sense, New Delhi's desire for multipolarity is also an attempt at ensuring the absence of a unipolar (China-dominated) Asia. Therefore, even if New Delhi is more focused on countering Chinese unipolarity in Asia rather than US unipolarity globally, opposing regional unipolarity without opposing global unipolarity will ring hollow. There are two reasons why New Delhi would be concerned about China's unipolarity in Asia. One, this could mean that China might set the rules of geopolitical engagement in Asia. Once much of Asia falls under China's influence, it will be harder for New Delhi to push back Chinese hegemony. Two, a rise of Chinese unipolarity in Asia might prompt the US to think of accommodating China in a G2 format, especially if the American nativist and isolationist tendencies persist. In an ideal world, New Delhi's articulations must make a clear distinction between American unipolarity and Chinese attempts at unipolarity in Asia, but doing so is not easy for a variety of reasons, including that New Delhi continues to resist aspects of American unipolarity and is not yet willing to acknowledge the possibility of Chinese unipolarity in Asia. But New Delhi's rhetoric against American unipolarity and hegemony, without openly resisting the growing Chinese regional hegemony or a potentially unipolar Asia, could have unintended consequences. Some US administrations, especially the current one, might interpret India's rhetoric against American unipolarity as personal rather than an academic exercise, for the most part. This could prompt an unhappy Washington to undercut India's geopolitical standing in the region, thereby indirectly aiding China's attempts at regional hegemony. This creates a paradox: India aims to counter Chinese unipolarity in Asia by promoting global multipolarity, which annoys the US, prompting it to marginalise India in the region, thereby ultimately aiding Beijing's efforts to establish hegemony in Asia. New Delhi's rhetoric against American unipolarity and hegemony could also prompt the US, which is losing influence in various parts of the world, to seek ways of strengthening its influence in spaces where it can — this could lead to accepting Chinese unipolarity in Asia. More so, if the US reacts negatively towards India, as it is doing now, it could create a fertile ground for China and Russia to fan the Indian rhetoric against the US, encourage India to proactively participate in forums and arrangements aimed at undermining US unipolarity, and generate confusion within India's strategic community about the true motives behind India's multipolarity rhetoric. All of this will further drive the geopolitical wedge between New Delhi and Washington DC. There is no easy way out. New Delhi will need to have a lot more conversations and build trust with the US. That is not easy when a president like Trump occupies the White House. Happymon Jacob is the founder and director of the Council for Strategic and Defense Research and the editor of INDIA'S WORLD magazine. The views expressed are personal.
