While something like that would help mitigate the abuse vector (although the number would have to be higher - $150k is not much in Bay area tech), it introduces its own set of problems in the other direction, because now only the most profitable companies will be able to hire foreign labor. I know that's the point, but as long as the market fails to account for positive externalities, positions like nurses and teachers will be systematically undervalued, even though it's much more valuable to the country in the long run for expert labor to land there.
If a company values the skillset and knowledge of a potential immigrant at less than $150k yearly (~3 "highly specialized knowledge" employees at worst), they should utilize immigration channels not designed exclusively for poaching the top 0.1% from other countries TO FULFILL ROLES WHICH CANNOT BE FULFILLED BY US WORKERS DUE TO LACK OF SKILLED PERSON(s).
And I agree that $150k is probably on the low end for tech, but I wanted to name a conservative amount which takes into consideration pay across all industries. Whatever we do, we should __Start__ with that, and then further modify requirements/restrictions as deemed necessary.
AFAIK, the number considered is salary, so the number is decently high, even for bay area. There are some exceptions like Netflix, but a lot of companies pay majority in equity, especially at higher salary levels.
I don't know how easy/difficult would it be for companies to move from equity based compensation to normal salary though, if something like that is implemented.
