4 ms·

I might not have been clear on the numbers, but I believe any such restrictions on entry are not good. I don't believe any of them should be requirements. If

by fnid2 17y ago

I might not have been clear on the numbers, but I believe any such restrictions on entry are not good. I don't believe any of them should be requirements. If someone wants to come to the U.S. and try to create a business and has it all lined out -- let them come! Don't make them get approval from someone with lots of money.

ajju 17y ago
If someone wants to come to the U.S. and try to create a business and has it all lined out -- let them come! Has, what all lined out? There in lies the rub. If you let anyone who declares he is an entrepreneur in, the law will be a joke. Naturally, you have to have some firm qualifiers. As long as it is 5 jobs OR a million dollars in revenue OR investment and you have 2 (or 3) years to do it, I don't understand why that is unfair. 2 years is a lot of time to create 5 jobs. It's not an easy goal, but it's doable. I say this as someone who intends to go the EB6 route if this passes.
- fnid2 17y ago
  Perhaps I should ask you then, why would you take this visa deal instead of simply having the investors give you the money for you to create your business in your home country?
  - ajju 17y ago
    IMO, What country you should be in depends on who your customers are. Based on my experience, as a startup you should be where your customers are. If I was creating a business targeted at people in my home country, I would stay there and raise money there. In this case, I am creating a business whose customers are in the U.S. And so, so am I. Just on a much slower route to permanent residency. Were I not already in the U.S., other reasons for me to go the EB6 route rather than do business there could be (1)If it is much much much harder to get VC in my home country (2) If the kind of business I want to start can only be done in the U.S.

4 ms·

I might not have been clear on the numbers, but I believe any such restrictions on entry are not good. I don't believe any of them should be requirements. If

by fnid2 17y ago

ajju 17y ago
If someone wants to come to the U.S. and try to create a business and has it all lined out -- let them come! Has, what all lined out? There in lies the rub. If you let anyone who declares he is an entrepreneur in, the law will be a joke. Naturally, you have to have some firm qualifiers. As long as it is 5 jobs OR a million dollars in revenue OR investment and you have 2 (or 3) years to do it, I don't understand why that is unfair. 2 years is a lot of time to create 5 jobs. It's not an easy goal, but it's doable. I say this as someone who intends to go the EB6 route if this passes.
- fnid2 17y ago
  Perhaps I should ask you then, why would you take this visa deal instead of simply having the investors give you the money for you to create your business in your home country?
  - ajju 17y ago
    IMO, What country you should be in depends on who your customers are. Based on my experience, as a startup you should be where your customers are. If I was creating a business targeted at people in my home country, I would stay there and raise money there. In this case, I am creating a business whose customers are in the U.S. And so, so am I. Just on a much slower route to permanent residency. Were I not already in the U.S., other reasons for me to go the EB6 route rather than do business there could be (1)If it is much much much harder to get VC in my home country (2) If the kind of business I want to start can only be done in the U.S.