> Does allowing a company from California hire someone from New York 'drive down wages hurt everyone except the top 1%"?

Fundamental difference: I, as a U.S. citizen, have the legal right to move to California (or New York, or any of the other 48 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, and so on) and work there. I do not have that legal right in relation to India. Until we have achieved "free trade" for the movement of people participating in an economy--like the European Union does internally--I do not have any objection to my country of citizenship trying to see that I am employed over non-citizens.

> To me, H1 visas appear to be a sophomoric tantrum of the US transitioning to a global economy.

Absolutely; I won't dispute that. On the other hand, why doesn't India have a program for U.S. nationals to easily move to India and take up employment? Or China? Or Brazil? It's easier to go to the United Kingdom for work than so-called "developing markets."

> Doesn't buying foreign manufactured goods 'drive down wages'?

It can and sometimes does.

> Do you not buy foreign mfg goods?

Where possible, I do not. Most of my clothes are made in the United States as is my television and my computer. My mobile phone was made in the U.S. (Motorola-manufactured in Fort Worth, Texas) but now that's not an option because Motorola shuttered that plant.

> Why not force all companies selling goods in the US to have those products exclusively made in the USA?

I realize this is a rhetorical question but I'll answer it straight anyway: I wouldn't object but that does rather bring about more centralized planning of the economy which is something to which a lot of people would object.

>Artificial barrier: Something arbitrary synthesized by a party not involved in an A<->B transaction.

Yes, other than:

* Being responsible for the welfare of A and B.

* Being responsible for mediating any disputes between A and B regarding their transaction.

* Being responsible for cracking down on potential fraudulent activity between A and B.

* Providing the medium whereby A and B can discharge their debts.

The government has nothing to do with the transactions. Absolutely nothing.

>Does allowing a company from California hire someone from New York 'drive down wages hurt everyone except the top 1%"? If not why does it suddenly 'drive down wages hurt everyone except the top 1%" when you change New York to India?

Because they're capitalizing on India's relative poverty.