My thoughts on the Startup Visa bill

http://vinthanedar.com/2010/02/26/my-thoughts-on-the-startup-visa-bill-fail/

by blizkreeg • 16 years ago

25 21 16 years ago

blizkreeg6• 16 years ago

I'm interested in listening to what others think about the startup visa - not swept away by the hype surrounding it, but an intelligent discussion on it's true merits and shortcomings.

There is no question that there is a need to foster and grease the wheels of entrepreneurship.

pchristensen2• 16 years ago

Here's a shot.

Economic growth is mostly based on big factors but those are often controlled or influenced by a strikingly small number of people (like Henry Ford, William Shockley, Fred Terman, Carnegie, Sears, Rockefeller, Mittal, Napoleon, Franklin, Eli Lilly, etc). When it's winner-take-all (or -most), the country/city/state that hosts the winner benefits greatly. So stacking your odds to grow or attract these pivotal individuals is a valid economic strategy.

Even if you presume that low skilled immigrants are a drain on the economy (I think that's up for debate), how many would you trade to make sure that Elon Musk lived in your country? How about the Brin Family? etc, etc, etc. Smart, driven people around the world want to come to America to live, work, and build companies because it's where they think they have the best chance of success. Losing even a handful of them could cause America to lose the fight for the next great industry, especially since China, India, and the EU are much more prosperous than they were for much of America's 20th century boom.

I don't think the Startup Visa is enough, but I think it's a concrete, feasible place to start.

blizkreeg6• 16 years ago

Did you read the blog post?

amirnathoo2• 16 years ago

The startup visa bill smells like progress and I don't buy the idea that a small step in the right direction hinders efforts at more radical reform.

However, I would like to see a more entrepreneur-centric approach that makes the O1 and EB1 processes easier, rather than using the EB5 as a starting point. That would benefit a wider group of entrepreneurs, though not necessarily investors and it's the investors who seem to have the lobbying power to make change happen.

pchristensen2• 16 years ago

I just think the investors have more to gain. An individual foreign entrepreneur doesn't have the means to lobby the US gov't, and domestic entrepreneurs don't have this problem. Investors might benefit dozens or hundreds of times from this effort.

amirnathoo2• 16 years ago

Whether or not investors gain more this is still also a win for a certain group of entrepreneurs and I can't see how it is harmful for others outside that group. Since investors are the ones doing the legwork to lobby for this it's natural that they're working for themselves too.

For the rest... one thing that surprised me was how much easier it seems for Australians to setup here than Brits like myself. I speculate that our own government could do a lot more to lobby on our behalf themselves but are more concerned by the (short termist) fear of a serious brain drain.

jboydyhacker• 16 years ago

Immigration is such a tough issue, especially in a recession. But I love the idea of the US being a magnet for the best and the brightest that start companies. Many countries use qualifying criteria such as education level or willingness to start a business as a way to gain permanent entry. We could do worse than to adopt such policies here.

blizkreeg6• 16 years ago

The criteria here is raising money. How is that better?

yumraj• 16 years ago

It's better because it moves the validation of the startup from USCIS, which is definitely not capable of this, to someone like an angel or VC.

What it seems to be saying is, if someone is willing to put a specified amount of money in the venture of an alien and hence prove to USCIS that there is some value in having these founders come to US, then US will give them Visa/permanent residency.

I do think that is a good idea.

Are there issues, sure, everything has issue. Name one perfect thing in the world. But this is definitely a step in the right direction.

rmk• 16 years ago

I think the writer is spot-on with his criticisms.

Being involved with a startup is risky business. And the risk-return premium (since when did a visa become a reward?) in the case of the startup visa is pathetic.

Overall, this startup visa is a pedestrian, half-hearted effort, at best.

A green card is a much better way to incentivise.

tptacek• 16 years ago

If you're a Chinese engineer that can create 4 jobs and generate $600,000 in revenue at a company you create in the US, you should be allowed to immigate regardless of whether a "qualified super angel investor" "sponsors" you. You should be able to immigrate regardless of whether you can purchase a postage stamp to request the visa. You should be able to immigrate regardless of whether you're willing to wear pants.

Immigration carve-outs, like this one which clearly targets VC-based companies, come with a raft of unintended consequences. Look at the massive abuses generated by the H1-B visa program, where employers use their untenably lopsided negotiating position to lower working conditions for everyone by cheating immigrants. Here, we've substituted VCs for employers, and given immigrants 2 arbitrary escape hatches (generate 5 jobs, generate $1MM in revenue).

This is the wrong path for immigration reform.

Anything you do to make it more fair makes it more gameable. Graham likes to point out that people like Ron Conway are excellent people indeed, who would never game the startup visa. Who cares? You've never heard of the people who you really have to worry about with this bill.

Anything you do to make it less gameable makes it less fair. VCs are compensated for their investments by investment returns when their companies are acquired or go public. We don't need to create a new form of compensation for them by giving them a feed of entrepreneurs who are beholden to them for their family's residency in the US.

Immigration reform is a hard problem. Immigration is broken. This problem is urgent. We should address it. But I think this bill is a terrible way to do it, and that it creates more harm than it ameliorates.

geebee2• 16 years ago

I agree, completely. What I'd say to the US government: take in talented people (without worrying too much about exactly how they are talented, such as preferring engineers or scientists), give them the same autonomy and freedom you'd give a US citizen, and let them choose their own path in life. Quit thinking you know what they should do, they know better than you do. They'll impress you in ways you didn't expect, and it'll be better than you expected.

Get rid of this H1B, startup visa crap.

I've had huge disagreements with other people on HN about immigration, mainly because I do believe in limits (I oppose unlimited immigration), and I think that emphasizing engineering instead of general diversity of talent is harmful. But almost everyone seems to agree that freedom and autonomy are preferable to a government mandated purpose and skill set.

blizkreeg6• 16 years ago

Precisely. That's my entire argument. You summed it up well.

Agree on the _not unlimited immigration_ part, but when you let someone in by qualifying them, give them the freedom to pursue what they choose to, how they choose to.

SilianRail2• 16 years ago

I've had this discussion hundreds of times with talented foreigners (India, German, Polish, and Chinese just to name a few). They all have had the same generic complain "why can't I just live in this country... I'm talented enough".

I fully agree...but unfortunately for these people they are tied to larg-corp H1B visas which restrict their freedom to leave the company and create jobs elsewhere.

Here is the key issue...how do you decided who is talented and who is not? This would become a highly bureaucratic issue.

bjoernw2• 16 years ago

It might be worth looking at all the foreign students that the U.S. attracts. I was born in Germany, did 2 years of high school in the U.S. and am about to finish college here, too.

I got a big scholarship ($20k per year), which is subsidized by American students. The U.S. educated me, gave me $80,000 and now there is no easy way for me to stay and contribute to society (taxes?)?

I agree with the author but I hope this bill will at least get people thinking about the screwed up immigration policy in this country.

SilianRail2• 16 years ago

I'm confused... what's screwed up with our country's policy? Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't Germany have the same policies??? I've lived in Germany for a year of my life on a work visa from a large German corporation. They paid for me to live, work and contribute to the companies success in Germany (and throughout EMEA for the record). How would it be my right to just quit my job at this corporation and go start up another company just because my original corporation gave me the opportunity to live there.

Your contribution is to society is taxes?? Not sure I really follow you there.

JoeAltmaier• 16 years ago

Perhaps he means to pay back America by earning money and paying his way via taxes. Instead of taking all that education investment back home.

bjoernw2• 16 years ago

I don't understand your point. My point is that American students subsidized my education and there is no easy way for me to stay and repay society. Either through taxes, donations to charities in my local community, or job creation.

Germany might have similar policies but I think that's besides the point I'm trying to make about policy in America.

My thoughts on the Startup Visa bill

Related Stories