Yes. I am non-ironically suggesting exactly that. Indentured servitude emerged as a solution to a socio-economic need in a bygone era, like the H1B does now. Neither is a perfect system, and all stakeholders concerned - the company, the employee, competing employees, society - get some benefits, some pain. But overall, American society is the net beneficiary of the education, skills, and entrepreneurial drive that immigrants bring with them (circling back to the original topic). Want proof? Look at the America today that was built by the ex-indentured servants and their descendants.
People who criticize H1B are not generally criticizing skilled immigration in general. They're pointing out that the way H1B is set up, it's a very poor implementation of skilled immigration, especially when you compare it to other countries (like, say, Canada). The ongoing discussion about switching to a points-based system for workers, for example, necessarily implies that skilled immigration track remains.
> They're pointing out that the way H1B is set up, it's a very poor implementation of skilled immigration
H-1B is primarily a guest worker program, not a skilled immigration program. That is why despite allowing dual intent, the H-1B is a non-immigrant visa. There are skill-based immigrant visas in the US system, the H-1B just isn't one of them.
H-1B is de facto a skilled immigration program. The fact that it's dual intent, and that you can get a green card through employer sponsorship, seems to indicate that it is at least partially by design.
Those other programs that you reference are for "extraordinary talent" and such, and the bar there is much higher than for ordinary skilled immigration.
