4 ms·

"positive rebranding of the Exceptional Talent visa scheme" pretty much sums this up - spin on a lackluster program. Revolutionary - hardly. Want to do somethi

by smackay 11y ago

"positive rebranding of the Exceptional Talent visa scheme" pretty much sums this up - spin on a lackluster program. Revolutionary - hardly. Want to do something revolutionary or at least something that might make a difference, pull in teams from under-developed countries, train them up by putting them in top tier companies specifically not as cheap labour (a mini-YCombinator for want of a better description), then let them go do their thing.

eru 11y ago
Or just auction of the visas to the highest bidders. Or let in anyone who surpasses the average native in education (or tax-paying power).
- scrollaway 11y ago
  > Or just auction of the visas to the highest bidders. Yes, let's have money decide who gets or doesn't get into the country, who can and cannot get hired from abroad. Isn't legal bribery great... > Or let in anyone who surpasses the average native in education And how do you determine that?
  - aianus 11y ago
    > Yes, let's have money decide who gets or doesn't get into the country Yes, let's have money decide who gets or doesn't get food or shelter or medical care... oh wait. Snarkiness aside, rich people can already buy citizenship in most countries, even the U.S. It's by far the fairest and most objective system to decide who gets in or doesn't get in. It also has the positive side effect of selecting those least likely to mooch off the state (a popular fear amongst those against immigration).
    - scrollaway 11y ago
      > Yes, let's have money decide who gets or doesn't get food or shelter or medical care... oh wait. You mean human rights which are covered by the government for those who can't afford it?
      - mollmerx 11y ago
        Yes, ideally those human rights would be provided for by the government. However, there is too much food poverty and lack of medical insurance, even in developed nations, for me to accept this to be the case.
  - sqrt17 11y ago
    > Yes, let's have money decide who gets or doesn't get into the country, who can and cannot get hired from abroad. Isn't legal bribery great... I'm pretty sure that people with enough money already have ways and means to get around visa restrictions by doing contortions similar to what companies do to avoid paying taxes. As an example, the US process for H1b visas is a highly technical affair that allows companies with large legal departments (e.g. IBM) to hire people significantly below market rate while other companies would have trouble employing people from abroad on an H1b visa. This leads to a double market distortion: one is positively discriminating for companies with a large legal department, narrowing the number of positions that people from outside the US can access, and the other is that the H1b holders themselves are (if you look at the facts) underpaid in comparison to the normal US job market. Having an auction would ensure that the corresponding money flows to the state (and can help alleviate any qualification shortage that makes it necessary to rely on talent from abroad), while making sure employers have fair and non-discriminatory access to international employees, prioritized by the value these companies put on the talent. Also, an auction would mean that the price is set by the market, i.e. if one particular field of employment has a shortage, then paying extra money to sponsor a visa beyond what other fields can pay makes economic sense and companies from that particular field would spend more money but also get a larger share of the available visa pool.
    - scrollaway 11y ago
      You're abolutely right, but that doesn't mean pushing this mentality further is a good thing.
      - eru 11y ago
        Why not? Transparency and efficiency are good. It's not like the current systems are reward paragons of virtues with a visa.
  - Oras 11y ago
    that's exactly what entrepreneur and investor visas are. And for investors, you don't even need to pass English test

by smackay 11y ago

eru 11y ago

Or just auction of the visas to the highest bidders. Or let in anyone who surpasses the average native in education (or tax-paying power).

scrollaway 11y ago
> Or just auction of the visas to the highest bidders. Yes, let's have money decide who gets or doesn't get into the country, who can and cannot get hired from abroad. Isn't legal bribery great... > Or let in anyone who surpasses the average native in education And how do you determine that?
- aianus 11y ago
  > Yes, let's have money decide who gets or doesn't get into the country Yes, let's have money decide who gets or doesn't get food or shelter or medical care... oh wait. Snarkiness aside, rich people can already buy citizenship in most countries, even the U.S. It's by far the fairest and most objective system to decide who gets in or doesn't get in. It also has the positive side effect of selecting those least likely to mooch off the state (a popular fear amongst those against immigration).
  - scrollaway 11y ago
    > Yes, let's have money decide who gets or doesn't get food or shelter or medical care... oh wait. You mean human rights which are covered by the government for those who can't afford it?
    - mollmerx 11y ago
      Yes, ideally those human rights would be provided for by the government. However, there is too much food poverty and lack of medical insurance, even in developed nations, for me to accept this to be the case.
- sqrt17 11y ago
  > Yes, let's have money decide who gets or doesn't get into the country, who can and cannot get hired from abroad. Isn't legal bribery great... I'm pretty sure that people with enough money already have ways and means to get around visa restrictions by doing contortions similar to what companies do to avoid paying taxes. As an example, the US process for H1b visas is a highly technical affair that allows companies with large legal departments (e.g. IBM) to hire people significantly below market rate while other companies would have trouble employing people from abroad on an H1b visa. This leads to a double market distortion: one is positively discriminating for companies with a large legal department, narrowing the number of positions that people from outside the US can access, and the other is that the H1b holders themselves are (if you look at the facts) underpaid in comparison to the normal US job market. Having an auction would ensure that the corresponding money flows to the state (and can help alleviate any qualification shortage that makes it necessary to rely on talent from abroad), while making sure employers have fair and non-discriminatory access to international employees, prioritized by the value these companies put on the talent. Also, an auction would mean that the price is set by the market, i.e. if one particular field of employment has a shortage, then paying extra money to sponsor a visa beyond what other fields can pay makes economic sense and companies from that particular field would spend more money but also get a larger share of the available visa pool.
  - scrollaway 11y ago
    You're abolutely right, but that doesn't mean pushing this mentality further is a good thing.
    - eru 11y ago
      Why not? Transparency and efficiency are good. It's not like the current systems are reward paragons of virtues with a visa.
- Oras 11y ago
  that's exactly what entrepreneur and investor visas are. And for investors, you don't even need to pass English test