Trying Something New on Immigration in Colorado(feld.com)
feld.com
Trying Something New on Immigration in Colorado
http://www.feld.com/archives/2015/03/trying-something-new-immigration-colorado.html
45 comments
H1B and Immigration should be kept separate. Personally I'm pro-immigration and anti-H1B because of the potential for the H1B relationship to be abused in ways that are a detriment to both the one with the H1B and to the general employees in the same field. Personally, I have the skills to compete with an Immigrant for a fair paid position. I do not want to be competing for depressed wages against a H1B worker who has legally enforced company loyalty lest they be deported.
They aren't a detriment to the one with the H1B. That person is better off than they would be without it.
Believe it or not, that Indian or Chinese fellow is a reasonably smart and savvy developer just like you. They compared the "legally enforced loyalty test" to their other available options and determined that the HUGE pay hike (think 500-750%) made it worth their while. Further, the transferability of the "legally enforced loyalty test" only means that finding a new job and rage quitting must be done in exactly that order. Many people take a job with the first sponsoring employer with the express intention to shift jobs the minute they hit US soil.
I know you don't want to be competing with the nice Indian fellow, but don't spin your protectionism as somehow being for his benefit. You simply want to confine him to (American style) poverty to protect your paycheck.
Believe it or not, that Indian or Chinese fellow is a reasonably smart and savvy developer just like you. They compared the "legally enforced loyalty test" to their other available options and determined that the HUGE pay hike (think 500-750%) made it worth their while. Further, the transferability of the "legally enforced loyalty test" only means that finding a new job and rage quitting must be done in exactly that order. Many people take a job with the first sponsoring employer with the express intention to shift jobs the minute they hit US soil.
I know you don't want to be competing with the nice Indian fellow, but don't spin your protectionism as somehow being for his benefit. You simply want to confine him to (American style) poverty to protect your paycheck.
>I know you don't want to be competing with the nice Indian fellow, but don't spin your protectionism as somehow being for his benefit.
As I said, I am pro-immigration. I would have no problem him coming over here with a green card and I am for extending the number of green cards given out.
>You simply want to confine him to (American style) poverty to protect your paycheck.
It seems your assmptions about me are quite mistaken.
As I said, I am pro-immigration. I would have no problem him coming over here with a green card and I am for extending the number of green cards given out.
>You simply want to confine him to (American style) poverty to protect your paycheck.
It seems your assmptions about me are quite mistaken.
[deleted]
That's understandable, but perhaps also something of a "perfect is the enemy of the good" situation, since there seem to be large swathes of the US populace that do not want a more liberal worker immigration policy of any kind.
I'd prefer no policy change over an increase in H1Bs. This is more of a "nothing is better than bad" situation in my view.
I may even go so far as to suggest that significantly increasing H1Bs could hurt general immigration policy. Companies would rather have more H1Bs than immigrants with the ability to defend their rights and the general population will see the damage caused by H1Bs (and with some well place propaganda) instead blame immigration. But this is a thought I have just thought and have not yet given full thought to.
I may even go so far as to suggest that significantly increasing H1Bs could hurt general immigration policy. Companies would rather have more H1Bs than immigrants with the ability to defend their rights and the general population will see the damage caused by H1Bs (and with some well place propaganda) instead blame immigration. But this is a thought I have just thought and have not yet given full thought to.
> I'd prefer no policy change
All else being equal, sooner or later, that will cause enough problems for companies that they'll start going elsewhere, and then it will be you filling out the immigration paperwork if you would like to move there to work with the best and brightest.
All else being equal, sooner or later, that will cause enough problems for companies that they'll start going elsewhere, and then it will be you filling out the immigration paperwork if you would like to move there to work with the best and brightest.
Even that is better than opening up more H1Bs. I would rather have to completely globally in places that have worker rights than have to compete domestically against an individual who has to remain loyal to the country lest they be deported.
It is possible for H1B workers to change jobs, you know. Granted, there's extra paperwork involved compared to people who chose their parents more carefully, but it is doable.
Is it the government's job to prevent legal wage depression? How exactly is H1B wage depression? If there is a legal and ethical way of hiring someone who can do your work for less, why should that be shut out? It's a different matter if you are talking about the minimum wage, which does merit some protection.
Wage-based arguments for H1B are pure protectionism.
There are legitimate problems with H1B, e.g. spouse not being allowed to work and the irrational country quotas for transitioning H1Bs into green cards. 'Wage-depressing' and 'job-stealing' are specious critiques at best. It is debatable whether the government should be in the business of preventing wage depression.
Wage-based arguments for H1B are pure protectionism.
There are legitimate problems with H1B, e.g. spouse not being allowed to work and the irrational country quotas for transitioning H1Bs into green cards. 'Wage-depressing' and 'job-stealing' are specious critiques at best. It is debatable whether the government should be in the business of preventing wage depression.
>Is it the government's job to prevent legal wage depression? How exactly is H1B wage depression
The problem is the government intervention in the H1B. That is why immigration without the specific form of government intervention that is found in H1B is something I can support. The problem is that the government enforces company loyalty on penalty of being thrown out of the country or worse.
Let them be hired and move here, but let them be just as free to seek a new employer if they ever feel they are being taken advantage of.
The problem is the government intervention in the H1B. That is why immigration without the specific form of government intervention that is found in H1B is something I can support. The problem is that the government enforces company loyalty on penalty of being thrown out of the country or worse.
Let them be hired and move here, but let them be just as free to seek a new employer if they ever feel they are being taken advantage of.
>Personally I'm pro-immigration and anti-H1B
That statement is self contradicting, since H1B is the only way to immigrate to USA.
Edit: Unless you already have family here willing to sponsor your PR.
That statement is self contradicting, since H1B is the only way to immigrate to USA.
Edit: Unless you already have family here willing to sponsor your PR.
> >Personally I'm pro-immigration and anti-H1B
> That statement is self contradicting, since H1B is the only way to immigrate to USA.
No, its not self-contradicting. One, because H-1B isn't the only way to immigrate to the USA (there's a whole bunch of immigrant visa categories [0], H-1B is just one visa category, and technically its a non-immigrant category that allows dual intent -- that is, its a non-immigrant visa holders of which are not prohibited from also seeking permanent residency.)
And, two, because one can support immigration but think all the existing mechanisms are undesirable, and be pro-immigrant but oppose all of the status quo immigration mechanisms, preferring new mechanisms. So even if H-1B was the only existing US immigration avenue, the statement wouldn't be self-contradictory.
[0] A partial list -- Family based: IR1, IR2, IR3, IR4, IR5, CR1, CR2, F1, F2, F3, F4, F2A, F2B, IH3, IH4; Employer based: E1, E2, E3, EW3, C5, T5, R5, I5.
EDIT: to respond to edit of parent...
> Edit: Unless you already have family here willing to sponsor your PR.
And this is still wrong, because while family-based immigration is the main route in the US, there are also employer-based immigrant categories, and even additional dual-intent non-immigrant visas (what the H-1B is that allows it to be used for immigration) besides the H-1B.
> That statement is self contradicting, since H1B is the only way to immigrate to USA.
No, its not self-contradicting. One, because H-1B isn't the only way to immigrate to the USA (there's a whole bunch of immigrant visa categories [0], H-1B is just one visa category, and technically its a non-immigrant category that allows dual intent -- that is, its a non-immigrant visa holders of which are not prohibited from also seeking permanent residency.)
And, two, because one can support immigration but think all the existing mechanisms are undesirable, and be pro-immigrant but oppose all of the status quo immigration mechanisms, preferring new mechanisms. So even if H-1B was the only existing US immigration avenue, the statement wouldn't be self-contradictory.
[0] A partial list -- Family based: IR1, IR2, IR3, IR4, IR5, CR1, CR2, F1, F2, F3, F4, F2A, F2B, IH3, IH4; Employer based: E1, E2, E3, EW3, C5, T5, R5, I5.
EDIT: to respond to edit of parent...
> Edit: Unless you already have family here willing to sponsor your PR.
And this is still wrong, because while family-based immigration is the main route in the US, there are also employer-based immigrant categories, and even additional dual-intent non-immigrant visas (what the H-1B is that allows it to be used for immigration) besides the H-1B.
[deleted]
No, it isn't. To argue such is disingenuous. You can be for the idea of immigration but believe the current H1-B system is a sham setup as an indentured servitude model to a majority of its participants.
It could actually just be a result of confusion or laziness.
(You usage of "disingenuous" is almost as a synonym for "wrong". It doesn't just mean "wrong" or "incorrect", it implies that you believe that the comment is intentionally dishonest. If you aren't absolutely sure someone is trying to mislead others, it's a poor word choice. It gets used on HN a lot, a lot more than it should be.)
edit: I do see from the sibling reply that you were more or less right.
(You usage of "disingenuous" is almost as a synonym for "wrong". It doesn't just mean "wrong" or "incorrect", it implies that you believe that the comment is intentionally dishonest. If you aren't absolutely sure someone is trying to mislead others, it's a poor word choice. It gets used on HN a lot, a lot more than it should be.)
edit: I do see from the sibling reply that you were more or less right.
>No, it isn't.
Care to tell me what are the other practical avenues for people to immigrate to US if they are not a noble laureate or an olympic gold medalist ?
Care to tell me what are the other practical avenues for people to immigrate to US if they are not a noble laureate or an olympic gold medalist ?
About 2/3 of US immigration is nepotism based.
http://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/family-reunification#...
http://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/family-reunification#...
> Care to tell me what are the other practical avenues for people to immigrate to US if they are not a noble laureate or an olympic gold medalist ?
Not be from a country for which the applicable immigrant visa categories are overloaded (IIRC, China, India are the big overloaded categories for employer-based categories; and Mexico, the Phillipines, and India again for family-based categories) and be qualified for either family-based or employer-based immigration.
Or, qualify for a number of the other dual-intent non-immigrant visas besides the H-1B, such as the H-4, or the L, E non-immigrant visas.
The H-1B is just one dual-intent non-immigrant visa category, its not even the main way for people who aren't noble laureate or Olympic gold medalists (or the broader group who qualify under the O and P non-immigrant visa categories that would seem to apply to those two groups) to immigrate.
Not be from a country for which the applicable immigrant visa categories are overloaded (IIRC, China, India are the big overloaded categories for employer-based categories; and Mexico, the Phillipines, and India again for family-based categories) and be qualified for either family-based or employer-based immigration.
Or, qualify for a number of the other dual-intent non-immigrant visas besides the H-1B, such as the H-4, or the L, E non-immigrant visas.
The H-1B is just one dual-intent non-immigrant visa category, its not even the main way for people who aren't noble laureate or Olympic gold medalists (or the broader group who qualify under the O and P non-immigrant visa categories that would seem to apply to those two groups) to immigrate.
This is fantastic! I hope it soon makes moot many of the immigration restrictions on talented technologists.
We make it so hard to recruit great talent in this country and so hard for talented entrepreneurs--who often don't qualify for work or family based visas--to get a visa.
We make it so hard to recruit great talent in this country and so hard for talented entrepreneurs--who often don't qualify for work or family based visas--to get a visa.
It's great to see individuals/institutions being innovative on this front. I applaud Brad, his wife and CU for this.
For Americans afraid of immigrants (H1B or other types) stealing your jobs - research shows that you'll likely be better off in the long run.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/29/magazine/debunking-the-myt...
Entrepreneurs don't steal jobs - they create jobs.
For Americans afraid of immigrants (H1B or other types) stealing your jobs - research shows that you'll likely be better off in the long run.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/29/magazine/debunking-the-myt...
Entrepreneurs don't steal jobs - they create jobs.
This is great to hear, I know Craig has spent upwards of a year making this happen and it's awesome to see it come to fruition. Hopefully this kind of thing moves beyond Boulder into other places.
Consistent with university policy and applicable law, entrepreneurs in
the program will be free to work on their existing entrepreneurial ventures or
start a new company in one of the best entrepreneurial communities in the world.
IANAL but as long as money does not change hands they should be in the clear. There is nothing stopping someone on an H1B doing a "hobby" and then pitch that "hobby" to investors to get seed money to form a startup. The investors would then have to sponsor their new H1B.
Full-time employment is also a requirement (and I believe 20h per week is not considered full-time in the visa context) so either they've found a way around the law or the USCIS is going to bust them.
I don't think full-time employment is a strict requirement of the H1B visa. It's just that most companies wouldn't go through the hassle of H1B sponsorship (and it's a huuuuge hassle for both the employer and the employee) for a part time employee.
I stand corrected, it's not a requirement per se, it's just a part-time H1B still has to meet the prevailing wage requirement, which is established for the full-time job.
The university can't discriminate based on country of origin, which is exactly what is being proposed:
"we are particularly focused on international entrepreneurs."
It doesn't matter if you give the money to CU and then the university hires someone "international." It's still discrimination at a public institution. Personally I don't understand why they insist on having someone non-American on H1B or why they absolutely must travel to the US to start a start-up. Give someone money where they already live. Don't exclude Americans. What's so hard about that?
"we are particularly focused on international entrepreneurs."
It doesn't matter if you give the money to CU and then the university hires someone "international." It's still discrimination at a public institution. Personally I don't understand why they insist on having someone non-American on H1B or why they absolutely must travel to the US to start a start-up. Give someone money where they already live. Don't exclude Americans. What's so hard about that?
The Supreme Court has said that making employment decisions based on citizenship status doesn't qualify as discrimination under the civil rights act because citizenship status is not the same thing as "national origin" which is what the law prohibits discrimination on.
ESPINOZA v. FARAH MFG. CO., 414 U.S. 86 (1973)
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vo...
ESPINOZA v. FARAH MFG. CO., 414 U.S. 86 (1973)
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vo...
Regardless, what is the motivation to want to discriminate? The only thing I can see is that having someone in the US under H1B gives them power over that person.
completely agree on the fact that the H1B is messed up.
I think here this person is trying to act in good faith, and unfortunately this is the easiest way to get people into the country. I hope for everyone's sake that this is genuine.
H1B visas are the reason that immigration can cause lower salaries. They're anti-free market in every sense of the word
I think here this person is trying to act in good faith, and unfortunately this is the easiest way to get people into the country. I hope for everyone's sake that this is genuine.
H1B visas are the reason that immigration can cause lower salaries. They're anti-free market in every sense of the word
> I hope for everyone's sake that this is genuine.
He's paying a bundle of money out of his own pocket to help people out, I don't see how much more genuine it could be.
He's paying a bundle of money out of his own pocket to help people out, I don't see how much more genuine it could be.
He's paying a small amount of money 4x$25k to get some 'founders' in control of millions of investment under control of threat of cancelled visas.
"having someone in the US under H1B gives them power over that person."
Wow... way to not only completely misinterpret the intent but to completely reverse it. Before this program there were exactly zero legal avenues for a not-already-rich aspiring startup founder from another country to come here with the express purpose of starting a business. Now there is one.
Wow... way to not only completely misinterpret the intent but to completely reverse it. Before this program there were exactly zero legal avenues for a not-already-rich aspiring startup founder from another country to come here with the express purpose of starting a business. Now there is one.
"exactly zero legal avenues"
In this day of age you very rarely need to be permanently physically present in the US to own and run a US business, and once your business passes the threshold of actually being viable theres multiple routes to getting a Visa.
There's the whole E2 Visa system specifically designed for this. In addition after a year in business there is a L1a route too, assuming the business goes anywhere.
Admittedly theres very little room for a "starving devpreneur who is making some social app that doesn't make any money", but assuming such an app can take off then the investment they could raise would instantly get them to quality for a visa too.
In this day of age you very rarely need to be permanently physically present in the US to own and run a US business, and once your business passes the threshold of actually being viable theres multiple routes to getting a Visa.
There's the whole E2 Visa system specifically designed for this. In addition after a year in business there is a L1a route too, assuming the business goes anywhere.
Admittedly theres very little room for a "starving devpreneur who is making some social app that doesn't make any money", but assuming such an app can take off then the investment they could raise would instantly get them to quality for a visa too.
I'm not misinterpreting the intent. I know perfectly well the stated intent to 'help the helpless random immigrant founder.' I'm suggesting an alternative intent that needs to be discussed. And I'm not the one reversing it. In this case Mr. Feld is showing a clear preference for H1B's before having any specific foreign entrepreneur in mind.
This is the worst comment I have ever read on HN. There are already plenty of opportunities for Americans to get support for their startups. The US visa system makes it extremely difficult for foreign entrepreneurs to start businesses in the US, and Mr Feld's attempts to improve the situation should be applauded.
I see...You believe the cause is so noble that it's obvious drawbacks are beyond discussion. Then lets discuss something else. Why don't you tell us why you think it's so important for foreign entrepreneurs to start businesses in the US. Do you feel the same about US entrepreneurs opportunities in foreign countries?
> Why don't you tell us why you think it's so important for foreign entrepreneurs to start businesses in the US
Let's see:
* Google
* AT&T
* Goldman Sachs
* eBay
* Yahoo
* Nordstrom
* DuPont
* Kraft foods
* Pfizer
For starters. The list goes on. Immigrants are beneficial: http://journal.dedasys.com/2014/12/29/people-places-and-jobs...
> Do you feel the same about US entrepreneurs opportunities in foreign countries?
Certainly! Other countries should also make it easier to attract talented people, or for that matter, anyone who is willing to work, and not a criminal.
Let's see:
* AT&T
* Goldman Sachs
* eBay
* Yahoo
* Nordstrom
* DuPont
* Kraft foods
* Pfizer
For starters. The list goes on. Immigrants are beneficial: http://journal.dedasys.com/2014/12/29/people-places-and-jobs...
> Do you feel the same about US entrepreneurs opportunities in foreign countries?
Certainly! Other countries should also make it easier to attract talented people, or for that matter, anyone who is willing to work, and not a criminal.
"Another Goldman Sachs" is just about the best possible argument you can make for closed borders.
hear hear
> Do you feel the same about US entrepreneurs opportunities in foreign countries?
Sure thing, http://www.startupchile.org/
As an example of an organized program. But you'd be surprised how many countries are quite friendly to US entrepreneurs at least if your point of comparison is "not significantly disadvantaged compared to local entrepreneurs".
Sure thing, http://www.startupchile.org/
As an example of an organized program. But you'd be surprised how many countries are quite friendly to US entrepreneurs at least if your point of comparison is "not significantly disadvantaged compared to local entrepreneurs".
Yes I do. If someone wanted to come to Scotland (my home country) to make the next best Whiskey then I'd welcome them. Inbound entrepreneurs create jobs and spend money in the local economy. Perhaps my viewpoint is skewed because I am in a situation that this program helps. After investing hundreds of thousands of dollars and employing many Americans, I find myself having to go through the whole U.S. visa process again. Perhaps my case is unusual, but efforts like Mr Feld's, which try to make it at least a little easier for foreign entrepreneurs to get involved in a community of like-minded people, and bring talent to this country, are an important step. Even more so considering he is putting his own money into it.
You should realize that America is being deconstructed into a corporate entity. Being American really doesn't even matter any more, you are a head of cattle on Big Sky USA Ranch Inc. where the upper sliver of society is the only net beneficiary while Americans are cast aside at the drop of a dime if there are profits to be made by some other means.
Especially here, foreign fools are going to cheer this type of policy on, because they can then self-extract their talents out of their own society and come to the USA to build up our corporate masters' relative domination while their home countries and societies atrophy.
Brain drain is starting to become an ever greater issue for even advanced societies, especially the ones that pay for their citizens' education. The tax payer is footing the education and then, at the first chance, many of them, under the spell of America's formidable marketing and PR machine, dispatch to the USA with sparkles in their eyes; all along, not realizing they are just a cog in the wealthy's machine.
With every immigrant, whether skilled or unskilled, the inflation eats away at the earnings and progress of the average American like an endless treadmill that the wealthy have dangled an image of the American dream in front of.
Yes, come to America, everyone. Make me more wealthy by increasing the population, make me more wealthy through inflation, make me more wealthy by pushing down labor rates and cheapening salaries, make me ever more powerful by draining your talents and labor from your home societies, culture, and economy.
Especially here, foreign fools are going to cheer this type of policy on, because they can then self-extract their talents out of their own society and come to the USA to build up our corporate masters' relative domination while their home countries and societies atrophy.
Brain drain is starting to become an ever greater issue for even advanced societies, especially the ones that pay for their citizens' education. The tax payer is footing the education and then, at the first chance, many of them, under the spell of America's formidable marketing and PR machine, dispatch to the USA with sparkles in their eyes; all along, not realizing they are just a cog in the wealthy's machine.
With every immigrant, whether skilled or unskilled, the inflation eats away at the earnings and progress of the average American like an endless treadmill that the wealthy have dangled an image of the American dream in front of.
Yes, come to America, everyone. Make me more wealthy by increasing the population, make me more wealthy through inflation, make me more wealthy by pushing down labor rates and cheapening salaries, make me ever more powerful by draining your talents and labor from your home societies, culture, and economy.
Parse error: Rant did not include word "sheeple".