I am not ignoring scientific evidence. I read the paper, it is not convincing. This is not a double blind experiment, it simply looks at data and asserts causes. Take this paragraph:
"An increase in the share of workers with an H-1B visa within an occupation, on average, reduces the
unemployment rate in that occupation. The results indicate that a 1 percentage point increase in the share
of workers with an H-1B visa in an occupation reduces the unemployment rate by about 0.2 percentage
points. The findings suggest the presence of H-1B visa holders boosts employment among other workers
in an occupation. The results provide no evidence that the H-1B program has an adverse impact on labor
market opportunities for U.S. workers"
There is nothing scientific about this. No experiment was performed. They simply looked at the data, saw there was lower unemployment in occupations with higher percentage of h1b, and then asserted that means there is no evidence that the program has an adverse impact on us workers. They are reversing cause and effect.
"An increase in the share of workers with an H-1B visa within an occupation, on average, reduces the unemployment rate in that occupation. The results indicate that a 1 percentage point increase in the share of workers with an H-1B visa in an occupation reduces the unemployment rate by about 0.2 percentage points. The findings suggest the presence of H-1B visa holders boosts employment among other workers in an occupation. The results provide no evidence that the H-1B program has an adverse impact on labor market opportunities for U.S. workers"
There is nothing scientific about this. No experiment was performed. They simply looked at the data, saw there was lower unemployment in occupations with higher percentage of h1b, and then asserted that means there is no evidence that the program has an adverse impact on us workers. They are reversing cause and effect.