Sentences to ponder

by on May 20, 2013 at 2:51 pm in Law | Permalink

Fashion models are almost twice as likely to get their visas as computer programmers, by one rough measure.

Here is more, and for the pointer I thank Andrew Rowe.

1 Yancey Ward May 20, 2013 at 2:56 pm

Well, were I involved in the approval process, I suppose I would approve them selectively, too.

2 Peter Schaeffer May 20, 2013 at 7:17 pm

Makes sense to me too. Fashion models are scarce. Programmers? Not so much.

3 Skeptic May 20, 2013 at 10:06 pm

You kidding me? Anyone who learns a little Python can get snatched up by some start-up or gig, as demand for talent is ferocious.

4 Peter Schaeffer May 21, 2013 at 12:14 am

Software developer wages fall 2% as workforce expands

Less costly young, and long unemployed older developers may be expanding the workforce at less cost to employers

By Patrick Thibodeau

Computerworld – WASHINGTON — The U.S. tech industry added nearly 64,000 software related jobs last year, but as the workforce expanded, the average size of workers’ pay checks declined by nearly 2%.

There are multiple theories for the decline in pay, but a common one cited by analysts is simply that the new people being hired are paid less than those already on the job.

The average annual wage of all workers in the software services sector was $99,000 in 2012, about $2,000 less than the prior year, reported TechAmerica Foundation in its annual Cyberstates report.

5 RPLong May 20, 2013 at 3:05 pm

I knew I was into the wrong kind of modelling…

6 Andrew' May 20, 2013 at 3:14 pm

Clearly a dislocation since programmers must, by necessity, do it with models.

7 efp May 20, 2013 at 3:07 pm

Only twice? Ali G for prez.

8 Andrew' May 20, 2013 at 3:13 pm

Finally some good news.

9 Highgamma May 20, 2013 at 3:16 pm

Fashion models have a special criterion just for them. It’s called “of distinguished merit and ability,” No specialized knowledge necessary.

10 celestus May 20, 2013 at 3:32 pm

Do foreign fashion models displace American labor? Does allowing a foreign fashion model access to the American labor market result in more or less wealth creation than a foreign programmer?

11 Doug May 20, 2013 at 6:10 pm

Raising the quality and attractiveness of women on the top-level of the scale provides enormous incentive to produce wealth in other fields. Consider a very intelligent, bright, promising young CS grad student deciding between joining a risky startup or a comparative life of leisure in academia.

In terms of material life style difference there’s not much difference between a Silicon Valley billionaire and a tenured professor at a top-tier research university. The two most salient ones off the top of my head is private jet travel and dating super-models. Ergo importing very attractive foreign models should strongly shift the preference of the cognitive elite from leisure to labor.

12 Mike H May 20, 2013 at 10:16 pm

Apparently the way that Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg conduct their private lives contradict everything you say about their “inner motivation”. Your theory also fail to explain John D. Rockefeller.

Can’t we just accept the fact that there are some ultra-creative individuals that see wealth creation not as a means to an end but as an end in itself?

13 Doug May 20, 2013 at 11:05 pm

Saying that something has a marginal effect doesn’t mean that it affects everyone.

If I told you that adding a corporate gym would improve the firm’s recruiting effort, would you try to rebut me by finding two random current employees who don’t exercise?

Many men create wealth because they’re internally driven to build great things. But many others are just in it for the chicks.

14 middle aged vet May 20, 2013 at 11:59 pm

Motivations of “great men”:
Beautiful women. Doubt it, why go through the hassle of becoming “great” when that has never been a requirement for access to fleeting sexual pleasure?
Internally driven to build great things. Look at the world about you, if there were multiple “great men” driven to build “great things” why do mosquitoes and their ilk, bad architecture and bad city planning, bad cooking, and stupid and ridiculously non-empathetic political systems blight the lives of millions upon millions year after year?
I don’t know any “great men” but the people I have known who might have had that option were pretty much a random set of people. Too bad for the non-great, I guess …
If you are reading this, Bill, Warren, Mark, George, Slimster, Rupert, Tony, Ed, Terry, etc., STEP UP YOUR GAME … There is more to life than supermodel-land can promise…

15 Peter Schaeffer May 21, 2013 at 12:22 am

Mike H,

Perhaps you have heard of Larry Ellison and SQL*____ (not appropriate for a family blog). Ellison not withstanding, I actually agree with you more than I disagree. A counterargument is that the wives of the top people in Tech (notably Jobs and Gates) were/are rather nice.

In general, the people who rise to the top in Tech tend to be brilliant, introverted nerds. Not exactly playboy material. Wealth accumulation may change their bank accounts, but not who they are.

16 The Original D May 21, 2013 at 11:00 pm

For every billionaire tech nerd there are dozens, perhaps hundreds, of millionaire alpha male finance guys. Once you can afford a sweet pad in Manhattan a few extra million doesn’t make much of a difference.

That said, I don’t buy the premise that great producers do it for the tail.

17 mike May 21, 2013 at 3:04 pm

“Can’t we just accept the fact that there are some ultra-creative individuals that see wealth creation not as a means to an end but as an end in itself?”

Yes, that’s the standard communist view. People create wealth as an end in itself, so you can take that wealth away and give it to other people and nothing bad will happen.

18 Mike H May 21, 2013 at 9:40 pm

Wrong. The standard communist view is that people create wealth only to survive and to satisfy their animalistic needs. It is therefore the job of the “community” to make sure that those who produced beyond their needs contribute to the survival and the satisfaction of others.

19 dickburger May 20, 2013 at 3:35 pm

Thanks Obama. (frown face)

20 Mike H May 20, 2013 at 10:29 pm

Yeah. If Harvard’s admission office back in the 1960s had selected foreign students based on the popular preferences demonstrated in this thread, his father would never have came here. How ironic.

21 Peter Schaeffer May 21, 2013 at 12:25 am

Male commenters have a preference for pretty girls? I am shocked, shocked…

22 Mike H May 21, 2013 at 12:58 am

Another proof why we need a point-based immigration system that is less influenced by the the arbitrary whims of USCIS officials.

23 mike May 21, 2013 at 3:07 pm

Obama’s father was an abusive alcoholic bigamist who abandoned his various children around the globe who crippled and eventually killed himself (and probably others) in a series of drunk driving accidents. In hindsight, absolutely the kind of person you would want to keep out of your country.

24 Peter Schaeffer May 21, 2013 at 4:18 pm

“Obama’s father was an abusive alcoholic bigamist who abandoned his various children around the globe who crippled and eventually killed himself (and probably others) in a series of drunk driving accidents. In hindsight, absolutely the kind of person you would want to keep out of your country”

Drop the “probably” word. Obama senior did kill at least one other person behind the wheel.

25 celestus May 20, 2013 at 3:35 pm

Oh and also…what happens if you control for country of origin? Bet it’s not 2x then.

26 TJ May 20, 2013 at 3:39 pm

unsurprising, model agencies pull over already established fashion models from europe / rest of world, of which there is a limited amount and whose work & worth is very tangible, the uniqueness of a piece of code written by someone, or their specialty in a specific programming language or whatever, less so.

27 Chris S May 20, 2013 at 4:21 pm

…and there is less need for the programmer to physically travel to the US, given the state of telecommunications. Could their telepresence robot get a visa?

28 Noah Yetter May 20, 2013 at 5:12 pm

Assuming you’ve never worked with programmers you could be forgiven for thinking that. Nevertheless: it is not so.

29 DPG May 20, 2013 at 4:28 pm

There were 250 visas for models, but over 90,000 for programmers.

It’s a lot easier for an industry to pull strings a couple dozen times than to do it tens of thousands of times.

30 Charlie May 20, 2013 at 5:33 pm

Initially I read this sentence, as if fashion models were much more likely to enter the US under visas designed for computer programmers as visas set aside for models. As if they were putting on glasses and a pocket protector and secretly entering the country sponsored by Microsoft.

31 KLO May 20, 2013 at 8:36 pm

Based on the article, visa approval is, at least in part, a matter of God’s will. God apparently shares my preference for foreign models over foreign computer programmers.

32 Mike H May 20, 2013 at 10:24 pm

Your ancestors must have came here as foreign models then.

33 Mike H May 20, 2013 at 11:02 pm

He was, you know, one of those sneaky foreign engineer who came to America to take away precious jobs from the natives by working on minimum wage. I mean, why should big businessmen like Edison be allowed to hire a job-grabing foreign man like him when there were thousands of others Americans unemployed?

34 Axa May 21, 2013 at 7:19 am

Is this how lobbyists work? Anyone made the 274/90,800 ratio? 0.00302

Bloomberg article is too emotional, it’s a story of fashion models VS software engineers. If you read US CItizenship and Immigration Services webpage you see H-1B visas are under a bigger category called “temporary workers”.

I wonder why they worry about temporary visas and not about Permanent visas for Employment Based Immigration EB-2 and EB-3 that seem to be more appropiate for really skilled and productive workers.

35 babar May 21, 2013 at 8:01 am

maybe the quota is by weight, not # of people?

36 Dsgntd_Plyr May 21, 2013 at 6:32 pm

“’It’s the one exception that we all scratch our heads about,’ Neil Ruiz, an analyst at the Brookings Institution’s Metropolitan Policy Program, said of the addition of models as the only H-1B category that requires no bachelor’s degree.”

Why would a fashion model need a bachelor’s degree? Is this like the whole “athletes should go to college,” thing? That’s a waste of a spot in a class.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: