You call it whatever you want to call it. “You work at this specific company or we kick you out of the country” is as exploitive and ultra-capitalistic as you can get.
It can be, but isn’t a guarantee. All countries do this to an extent, some do it better than others. You calling it the wrong thing trying to drive a point home with hyperbole isn’t helpful to anyone.
All countries have some sort of work for visa program, which by itself is not indentured servitude. And given there are non ultra-capitalistic countries that also have it, the practice is also not “as far as one can get”.
Hell, to group the US 's visa program in with the ones that literally end with slavery (and are actually like what you described) is just poor form.
Again, we are specifically talking about one country’s visa program and you are downplaying the draconian nature of it with a lot of dodging and whataboutism.
I’m not doing either of those things. You made a claim by misunderstanding terms for hyperbole. I said that your claim isn’t true. You backed up your claim with more hyperbole. I rebutted that with how it’s standard practice globally and even in within a larger scope is a more reasonable standard.
QED, the US visa program is not indentured servitude, by colloquial or exact definitions, and not ultra-capitalistic by any stretch. These are not whataboutism or dodging. They directly address your statements.
If you want to simplify it, then it’d be
If you want to live and work in a country, you have to be sponsored by a company. If you’re laid off, you have 60 days to find another sponsor
Tying a visa to an employer is not indentured servitude.
You call it whatever you want to call it. “You work at this specific company or we kick you out of the country” is as exploitive and ultra-capitalistic as you can get.
It can be, but isn’t a guarantee. All countries do this to an extent, some do it better than others. You calling it the wrong thing trying to drive a point home with hyperbole isn’t helpful to anyone.
“All countries” do not have the U.S. H1-B visa program, which is what we are discussing.
All countries have some sort of work for visa program, which by itself is not indentured servitude. And given there are non ultra-capitalistic countries that also have it, the practice is also not “as far as one can get”.
Hell, to group the US 's visa program in with the ones that literally end with slavery (and are actually like what you described) is just poor form.
Again, we are specifically talking about one country’s visa program and you are downplaying the draconian nature of it with a lot of dodging and whataboutism.
I’m not doing either of those things. You made a claim by misunderstanding terms for hyperbole. I said that your claim isn’t true. You backed up your claim with more hyperbole. I rebutted that with how it’s standard practice globally and even in within a larger scope is a more reasonable standard.
QED, the US visa program is not indentured servitude, by colloquial or exact definitions, and not ultra-capitalistic by any stretch. These are not whataboutism or dodging. They directly address your statements.
Sorry, no. “Work at this specific company or you’re deported” is very much an ultra-capitalist position. I have no idea why you think otherwise.
That isn’t the rule for h1b visas.
If you want to simplify it, then it’d be If you want to live and work in a country, you have to be sponsored by a company. If you’re laid off, you have 60 days to find another sponsor