No, they’re saying the talented ones, the ones with the most optionality, will be the first to select alternative destinations.

Typical adverse selection problem.

If companies were looking for talent, 80% of H1B’s wouldn’t be from India, but from a much more diverse set of countries. The fact is that India culture is much more so subservient, willing to work more for less pay, won’t unionize, don’t follow major US/Euro holidays, don’t care about work/life balance..etc. Like it or not, it’s nothing more than exploitation as cattle to increase bottom line and sold as increased output.

India is also very nepotistic and it might well be Indian managers already present in the US pushing for entry of their relatives, schoolmates and friends.

Not sure how that’s relevant to my comment.

You’re just saying there’s variance in quality and asserting your opinion about where quality exists/doesn’t exist.

Fine.

The fact there is any variance at all means the highest quality people will be deterred first. Adverse selection.

Highly relevant as it makes your point mute.

The highest quality of talent is already not being brought in. A very specific pool of people are, and not for reasons of talent.

No no, your observation is that a large amount of (per your assessment) low-quality people are already being brought in.

This is completely unrelated to the question of whether the highest quality people are being brought in.

By analogy: "New York City doesn't have a lot of the greatest restaurants in the country because 90% of the restaurants in New York City are not that great."

It's just logically invalid.

And divorced from reality. There's a reason the top students in the world overwhelmingly come to study in the US (at least up until recently). The US's dominance on this and its downstream effects is absolutely unambiguous and it's frankly silly to suggest otherwise.

"We also have a lot of underqualified Indian H1Bs" is completely irrelevant.

P.S. It's "moot" not "mute"