https://www.zerohedge.com/political/populism-protect-american-workers

"Americans have clearly had enough of this porous border radicalism, including worker visa programs like H-1B which are massively abused and serve the interests of C-suite American executives and Asian foreign nationals, while undermining the pay and job stability of American citizens. These programs were intended to allow the truly exceptional outliers of the world to enter and assimilate into America. But, like so many government programs, visa programs have been hijacked and perverted by powerful corporate interests, both here and abroad."

Responding to Musk's raising of the H1B salary:

"Now, the devil is in the details, of course. So, a reasonable annual fee for each incoming worker on a visa should be at least $50,000, with half going to the state of the business and half to the federal government. The average minimum salary for these workers should be at least $250,000 per year, and should be mandated to stay above three times the median household income as determined by the Census Bureau ($80,000 in 2023).

Such high minimums would guarantee that work visas only welcome in the truly talented stars that will bring big advances to American society. Instead of a worker replacement program that undercuts Americans, this new system would bring in a very small but super-talented pool of outperformers – and it should replace the entirety of current, confusing worker visa programs.

If these foreign workers are actually essential, then U.S. firms will willingly pay the high fees and salaries!

Once these reforms are joined with strict border enforcement and vigorous deportations, then America will reclaim sovereignty, build diffused prosperity, protect our culture, and pave the way for a new “roaring ’20s” period ahead. Such a roadmap can also maintain the unity of the broadening America First coalition.

(What he describes is the O-1 Visa and I doubt Musk had in mind that kind of salary for all the H1B's he hires after laying off U.S. Citizens)

Reading Weinstein's work on how the usual suspects create "shotages" of workers:

www.ineteconomics.org/uploads/papers/Weinstein-GUI_NSF_SG_Complete_INET.pdf

Led to some digging on the NSF people behind that. Two principles seem to be Peter House and Eloch Bloch. House I haven't found much on except that House was director of the Policy Research and Analysis division. It occurs to me that it's purpose may be to find the analysis to fit the desired outcome.

Eloch Bloch was NSF and allegedly wanted to increase science education budget. Voila, a shortfall of scientists is projected for the future based on data that led to a congressional probe of the NSF prediction of Scientist shortage:

https://www.edwardtufte.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Congress-Presses-Probe-Into-NSF-Prediction-Of-Scientist-Shortage.pdf

House was proud of himself:

"The shortfall argument helped to justify President Reagan's proposal to double the NSF budget over five years," they write, referring to a 1987 pledge that President Bush has also endorsed. "The education and human resources component of NSF's budget was increased to support new math and science curricula, and the basic research budget was increased to accelerate the production of natural science and engineering Ph.D.'s."

"The two authors also engage in a certain amount of self-congratulation. "The `675,000' number became famous," they write, "and was used in countless speeches and magazine articles."

Who was the beneficiary of the alleged shortfall?

Eloch Bloch is or was IBM at the time. Worked on some stuff. When did IBM begin hiring foreign workers? All of this began around 1985 I beleive. The NSF published a book in 1990.