4 ms·

So, in your estimation, would that be "better" or "worse" than "you cannot get a visa to come to the US and start a company at all, ever" (the status quo)

by jbooth 17y ago

tptacek 17y ago
Worse. I think it will be somewhat unfair to visa aspirants and that it will distort the market.
- jbooth 17y ago
  Do you think it will be less fair than "You can't even have an application form"?
  - tptacek 17y ago
    Yes, though not by much. There are two issues at play here: whether you can move to the US to start a business, and, regardless of where you run your business, how your business will operate. I think that the first issue is slightly less fair (it's more arbitrary and more ambiguous, but it's also more flexible). I think the second issue is much less fair.
- shawndrost 17y ago
  I'm baffled. Should this bill pass, visa aspirants will be in a strictly better position. They will have all their old options, plus one. Can you explain how that is worse?
  - briansmith 17y ago
    Unused EB-5 visa numbers spill over to EB-1, and EB-1 to EB-2, and EB-2 to EB-3. This bill would eliminate the EB-5 -> EB-1 spillover, which has the effect of reducing the number of EB-2 and EB-3 green cards available per year.
    - davemc500hats 17y ago
      please point out the information that supports your conclusion above. i'm not convinced unused EB-5s contribute to solving for other backlogs. regardless, it's also not the case that all other backlogged visas are of higher priority than new visas. if there is a zero-sum game to be played, priorities could well be reviewed for all types of visas. your argument for not approving this legislation seems to revolved solely around the backlog issue. there are other better ways to solve that problem than by simply stonewalling all other visa legislation.
      - briansmith 17y ago
        Google for "EB-5 spillover", and/or have the lawyers that wrote the proposed legislation post their professional opinion.

So, in your estimation, would that be "better" or "worse" than "you cannot get a visa to come to the US and start a company at all, ever" (the status quo)

by jbooth 17y ago

So, in your estimation, would that be "better" or "worse" than "you cannot get a visa to come to the US and start a company at all, ever" (the status quo)

tptacek 17y ago

Worse. I think it will be somewhat unfair to visa aspirants and that it will distort the market.

jbooth 17y ago
Do you think it will be less fair than "You can't even have an application form"?
- tptacek 17y ago
  Yes, though not by much. There are two issues at play here: whether you can move to the US to start a business, and, regardless of where you run your business, how your business will operate. I think that the first issue is slightly less fair (it's more arbitrary and more ambiguous, but it's also more flexible). I think the second issue is much less fair.
shawndrost 17y ago
I'm baffled. Should this bill pass, visa aspirants will be in a strictly better position. They will have all their old options, plus one. Can you explain how that is worse?
- briansmith 17y ago
  Unused EB-5 visa numbers spill over to EB-1, and EB-1 to EB-2, and EB-2 to EB-3. This bill would eliminate the EB-5 -> EB-1 spillover, which has the effect of reducing the number of EB-2 and EB-3 green cards available per year.
  - davemc500hats 17y ago
    please point out the information that supports your conclusion above. i'm not convinced unused EB-5s contribute to solving for other backlogs. regardless, it's also not the case that all other backlogged visas are of higher priority than new visas. if there is a zero-sum game to be played, priorities could well be reviewed for all types of visas. your argument for not approving this legislation seems to revolved solely around the backlog issue. there are other better ways to solve that problem than by simply stonewalling all other visa legislation.
    - briansmith 17y ago
      Google for "EB-5 spillover", and/or have the lawyers that wrote the proposed legislation post their professional opinion.