6 ms·

The Startup Visa Act Must Be Stopped

51 points by bEtsy 17y ago

aditya 17y ago
As Dave rightly schooled me here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1149503 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1149503 aditya: dude, if you can't create at least 5 jobs in 2 years with $250K in capital, you're a pretty pathetic excuse for an entrepreneur. The article is a little too sensational, which seems to be the norm with BusinessInsider these days.
- pegobry 17y ago
  That's a good point but it doesn't change that the overall dynamic of the Act would be to put way too much power in the hands of investors. I hope you're right and that's how it will work out, though.
- simon_ 17y ago
  And the stuff about it being "bad for investors" is pretty rich. Sure, there are might be some funny incentives created by a Founder Visa program, but none that wouldn't be transparent, known, and probably avoidable.
rajat 17y ago
The biggest issue I have with the Startup Visa Act is that if this is a person that we want to let in because of an investment, then this is a person we want to let in, period. Just give them a green card. What this act tries to do, in a sense, is outsource the decision making (to the investors). The biggest problem with the H1B visa is that it allows the employer to hold this unholy ax over the visa holder. It's absurd and counterproductive. These are people we should want in this country. Arguments against illegal immigration do not apply here. So, if an investor actually invests in a startup with a foreign founder, just give that person a green card or a long visitor's visa depending on what he wants (I assume not everyone wants to move to the US). The whole talk of a successful entrepreneur is ridiculous when so many startups fail. We want that entrepreneur even if this particular venture fails.
- BerislavLopac 17y ago
  Finally a concrete, constructive suggestion that actually makes sense.
  - wdewind 17y ago
    I agree 100% in theory, but in concrete it just doesn't work. How do we determine the person is an entrepreneur we want in? It's easy to say if we are going to give them an H1B or a startup visa (whatever that ends up looking like) we should just give them a green card, but it sounds to me like a major part of this issue is who is actually doing the deciding, not only what the decision itself is. For instance, we trust the government with software patents right now and over and over again they approve what we consider to be horribly damaging patents. We should trust them to evaluate an entrepreneur as well? There is a reason this decision is outsourced to the employers/investors: it's actually the more free solution. Otherwise it's up to the government to determine who's/what's worth paying for, and just hoping they are right. This way we've already established a market for the person before they enter the country. It's far from perfect, but if you just give people green cards how many people do you think will suddenly want to be entrepreneurs to get their green card? The government doesn't seem capable of regulating anything right now, so I'm pretty content to outsource the decision to investors and employers. At least that way they have a chance to get a Fred Wilson, instead of a guarantee not to.
    - fnid2 17y ago
      Investors are only 10% correct at predicting startup success so I'm not sure they are the ones to be relying on for an accurate assessment.
      - anamax 17y ago
        > Investors are only 10% correct at predicting startup success so I'm not sure they are the ones to be relying on for an accurate assessment. We're only relying on them to identify some likely candidates. Those who work out get to stay.
HowardRoark 17y ago
Does this mean I can't bootstrap my company?
- mjhnghfh 17y ago
  Of course you can - you just have to bootstrap it in China or India. Then when you are succesfull, and after having created lots of jobs in China or India, paid lots of taxes to China or India and earned lots of foreign currency for china or India. The US will then allow you to come in and buy their companies - as long as they get a few % commission to Wall st.
charleyrock 17y ago
Please give me a break! First, congratulations - your sensational headline got me to read the article. But, other than the "granular" problems you point out, the larger arguments are just silly. The Act does not tip the power construct unfavorably towards investors. Any VC worth a damn is a partner not an adversary. If a VC uses conditions in the Act to exert leverage in negotiations, he is not worth having as a partner in the first place. The Act does not increase entrepreneur risk. Every founder has to consider many different areas of risk to his business, to his family and to his lifestyle. Rather than increasing risk, the Act presents an opportunity. As with any opportunity to gain something, there is a chance that you will fail. The Act would only increase entrepreneur risk if it changed the law in that it reduced opportunity - it doesn't. The Act is bad for (US) investors because good entrepreneurs will self-select away from the US? Come on! That is absurd and in fact the opposite should happen. Sorry, but the article seemed for the most part insincere or misinformed.
- angkec 17y ago
  um, I'm new to HN, but how do you downvote a comment?
  - psranga 17y ago
    You need to accumulate a certain number of points (by posting comments or stories that get upvoted). Then you get the privilege of downvoting.
    - angkec 17y ago
      Thanks for the explanation!
pchristensen 17y ago
I think pg, bfeld, ericries, etc would all agree with these complaints about the Startup Visa as presently constituted. The people that wrote the bill structured it so that it would be easy to implement as a first step. It's not meant to be comprehensive, it is a tweak to an existing visa class that's not being fully utilized. But it will give immediate, positive results that can be used to push a more effective, fair, etc version later. Hacking Washington isn't the same as hacking computers.
- philwelch 17y ago
  So the legislative approach is to put something out there as quickly as possible and then iterate on it? Fitting.
  - plinkplonk 17y ago
    legislation and quick iteration don't go together.
  - patrickk 17y ago
    The thing is, iterating on the legislation may not be possible. If you are a smart, clued-in high tech founder who isn't completely in love with your initial vision, then it's possible to iterate from a potentially disastrous idea into something people will pay for. With the Startup Visa Act, if the initial flawed piece of legislation doesn't produce some notable successes, then unimaginative lawmen who didn't like the idea in the first place will point to the initial lack of results and kill off any hope of iteration number two or three - which may be what in fact is necessary for the Act to succeed in achieving it's original aims.
  - pchristensen 17y ago
    Not iterate - build on. And immigration reform is somewhere between health care and abortion on the "politically charged" spectrum, so a perfect, sensible solution wasn't coming anytime soon.
gasull 17y ago
Is the Startup Visa better than the status quo? All the criticism about the Startup Visa seems right, but still, for someone seeking a visa it's still better to have also this option than not having it. People criticize things for not being perfect (or actually very imperfect) when what is important is if it is a step in the right direction. Does the existence of the Startup Visa make things easier for foreign entrepreneurs compared with what we have now? Yes it does.
- HowardRoark 17y ago
  No it doesn't. Its just another form of slavery like H1b.
  - fnid2 17y ago
    It's not slavery, because slavery is not a choice. H1B holders choose to accept the terms and can choose to go home. Slaves can't.
    - geebee 17y ago
      I agree. While I take a very dim view of the H1B visa, I don't think it's helpful to liken it to slavery. In fact, in some ways, it's not even entirely appropriate to compare it to indentured servitude, since these folks were essentially "owned" - the main difference being that they were released at the end of their term of service (the reality was pretty brutal, from what I've heard). On the other hand, the H1B is particularly offensive in that the quid pro quo is purely visa and green card "sponsorship". The employer is allowed to bestow a government status - legal residency - that the worker could not otherwise obtain. I'm actually kind of amazed that people put up with this in 2010, that a corporation would have that kind of power over an individual. I think a lot of it comes from a lack of understanding of what's really going on.
      - helwr 17y ago
        you can always leave your sponsor,you know, and find a better one. i did it 5 times in 5 years. felt like a runaway slave with the first one, escaped south went to new york, and i'm a free man now, my own masta
blizkreeg 17y ago
I posted a similar analysis a few days back about this Startup Visa. [shameless self-plug] http://vinthanedar.com/2010/02/26/my-thoughts-on-the-startup-visa-bill-fail/ http://vinthanedar.com/2010/02/26/my-thoughts-on-the-startup...
olliesaunders 17y ago
The article convinced me there are problems with the act but why must it be stopped? Should I go round with a sledgehammer destroying works of art that are incomplete too?
- dlytle 17y ago
  It must be stopped because it doesn't increase the number of green cards issued, it just reallocates them. As such, it will damage the existing system, rather than just creating a new damaged system. To build on your analogy, it's like burning half of an incomplete work of art, to get wall space for another one.
ntulip 17y ago
A new kind of visa is just insane. An overhaul on how immigration is done in the US needs to be done. Since that won't happen, the next best thing is another band-aid. A Startup Visa.
mjhnghfh 17y ago
I think the startup visa is an excellent piece of legislation. I know of several startups now based here, and lots of budding entrepreneurs moving to town - just because of the Visa requirements. And with this city's links to China and India I'm confident this will be the home of the next big thing. Of course I'm in Vancouver (BC) and these are guys being frustrated by the US process. Some of them hope to eventually open branch offices in Silicon valley so you will pick up some of the outsourced work.

51 points by bEtsy 17y ago

As Dave rightly schooled me here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1149503 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1149503 aditya: dude, if you can't create at least 5 jobs in 2 years with $250K in capital, you're a pretty pathetic excuse for an entrepreneur. The article is a little too sensational, which seems to be the norm with BusinessInsider these days.

pegobry 17y ago
That's a good point but it doesn't change that the overall dynamic of the Act would be to put way too much power in the hands of investors. I hope you're right and that's how it will work out, though.
simon_ 17y ago
And the stuff about it being "bad for investors" is pretty rich. Sure, there are might be some funny incentives created by a Founder Visa program, but none that wouldn't be transparent, known, and probably avoidable.

rajat 17y ago

The biggest issue I have with the Startup Visa Act is that if this is a person that we want to let in because of an investment, then this is a person we want to let in, period. Just give them a green card. What this act tries to do, in a sense, is outsource the decision making (to the investors). The biggest problem with the H1B visa is that it allows the employer to hold this unholy ax over the visa holder. It's absurd and counterproductive. These are people we should want in this country. Arguments against illegal immigration do not apply here. So, if an investor actually invests in a startup with a foreign founder, just give that person a green card or a long visitor's visa depending on what he wants (I assume not everyone wants to move to the US). The whole talk of a successful entrepreneur is ridiculous when so many startups fail. We want that entrepreneur even if this particular venture fails.

BerislavLopac 17y ago
Finally a concrete, constructive suggestion that actually makes sense.
- wdewind 17y ago
  I agree 100% in theory, but in concrete it just doesn't work. How do we determine the person is an entrepreneur we want in? It's easy to say if we are going to give them an H1B or a startup visa (whatever that ends up looking like) we should just give them a green card, but it sounds to me like a major part of this issue is who is actually doing the deciding, not only what the decision itself is. For instance, we trust the government with software patents right now and over and over again they approve what we consider to be horribly damaging patents. We should trust them to evaluate an entrepreneur as well? There is a reason this decision is outsourced to the employers/investors: it's actually the more free solution. Otherwise it's up to the government to determine who's/what's worth paying for, and just hoping they are right. This way we've already established a market for the person before they enter the country. It's far from perfect, but if you just give people green cards how many people do you think will suddenly want to be entrepreneurs to get their green card? The government doesn't seem capable of regulating anything right now, so I'm pretty content to outsource the decision to investors and employers. At least that way they have a chance to get a Fred Wilson, instead of a guarantee not to.
  - fnid2 17y ago
    Investors are only 10% correct at predicting startup success so I'm not sure they are the ones to be relying on for an accurate assessment.
    - anamax 17y ago
      > Investors are only 10% correct at predicting startup success so I'm not sure they are the ones to be relying on for an accurate assessment. We're only relying on them to identify some likely candidates. Those who work out get to stay.

HowardRoark 17y ago

Does this mean I can't bootstrap my company?

mjhnghfh 17y ago
Of course you can - you just have to bootstrap it in China or India. Then when you are succesfull, and after having created lots of jobs in China or India, paid lots of taxes to China or India and earned lots of foreign currency for china or India. The US will then allow you to come in and buy their companies - as long as they get a few % commission to Wall st.

charleyrock 17y ago

Please give me a break! First, congratulations - your sensational headline got me to read the article. But, other than the "granular" problems you point out, the larger arguments are just silly. The Act does not tip the power construct unfavorably towards investors. Any VC worth a damn is a partner not an adversary. If a VC uses conditions in the Act to exert leverage in negotiations, he is not worth having as a partner in the first place. The Act does not increase entrepreneur risk. Every founder has to consider many different areas of risk to his business, to his family and to his lifestyle. Rather than increasing risk, the Act presents an opportunity. As with any opportunity to gain something, there is a chance that you will fail. The Act would only increase entrepreneur risk if it changed the law in that it reduced opportunity - it doesn't. The Act is bad for (US) investors because good entrepreneurs will self-select away from the US? Come on! That is absurd and in fact the opposite should happen. Sorry, but the article seemed for the most part insincere or misinformed.

angkec 17y ago
um, I'm new to HN, but how do you downvote a comment?
- psranga 17y ago
  You need to accumulate a certain number of points (by posting comments or stories that get upvoted). Then you get the privilege of downvoting.
  - angkec 17y ago
    Thanks for the explanation!

pchristensen 17y ago

I think pg, bfeld, ericries, etc would all agree with these complaints about the Startup Visa as presently constituted. The people that wrote the bill structured it so that it would be easy to implement as a first step. It's not meant to be comprehensive, it is a tweak to an existing visa class that's not being fully utilized. But it will give immediate, positive results that can be used to push a more effective, fair, etc version later. Hacking Washington isn't the same as hacking computers.

philwelch 17y ago
So the legislative approach is to put something out there as quickly as possible and then iterate on it? Fitting.
- plinkplonk 17y ago
  legislation and quick iteration don't go together.
- patrickk 17y ago
  The thing is, iterating on the legislation may not be possible. If you are a smart, clued-in high tech founder who isn't completely in love with your initial vision, then it's possible to iterate from a potentially disastrous idea into something people will pay for. With the Startup Visa Act, if the initial flawed piece of legislation doesn't produce some notable successes, then unimaginative lawmen who didn't like the idea in the first place will point to the initial lack of results and kill off any hope of iteration number two or three - which may be what in fact is necessary for the Act to succeed in achieving it's original aims.
- pchristensen 17y ago
  Not iterate - build on. And immigration reform is somewhere between health care and abortion on the "politically charged" spectrum, so a perfect, sensible solution wasn't coming anytime soon.

gasull 17y ago

Is the Startup Visa better than the status quo? All the criticism about the Startup Visa seems right, but still, for someone seeking a visa it's still better to have also this option than not having it. People criticize things for not being perfect (or actually very imperfect) when what is important is if it is a step in the right direction. Does the existence of the Startup Visa make things easier for foreign entrepreneurs compared with what we have now? Yes it does.

HowardRoark 17y ago
No it doesn't. Its just another form of slavery like H1b.
- fnid2 17y ago
  It's not slavery, because slavery is not a choice. H1B holders choose to accept the terms and can choose to go home. Slaves can't.
  - geebee 17y ago
    I agree. While I take a very dim view of the H1B visa, I don't think it's helpful to liken it to slavery. In fact, in some ways, it's not even entirely appropriate to compare it to indentured servitude, since these folks were essentially "owned" - the main difference being that they were released at the end of their term of service (the reality was pretty brutal, from what I've heard). On the other hand, the H1B is particularly offensive in that the quid pro quo is purely visa and green card "sponsorship". The employer is allowed to bestow a government status - legal residency - that the worker could not otherwise obtain. I'm actually kind of amazed that people put up with this in 2010, that a corporation would have that kind of power over an individual. I think a lot of it comes from a lack of understanding of what's really going on.
    - helwr 17y ago
      you can always leave your sponsor,you know, and find a better one. i did it 5 times in 5 years. felt like a runaway slave with the first one, escaped south went to new york, and i'm a free man now, my own masta

blizkreeg 17y ago

I posted a similar analysis a few days back about this Startup Visa. [shameless self-plug] http://vinthanedar.com/2010/02/26/my-thoughts-on-the-startup-visa-bill-fail/ http://vinthanedar.com/2010/02/26/my-thoughts-on-the-startup...

olliesaunders 17y ago

The article convinced me there are problems with the act but why must it be stopped? Should I go round with a sledgehammer destroying works of art that are incomplete too?

dlytle 17y ago
It must be stopped because it doesn't increase the number of green cards issued, it just reallocates them. As such, it will damage the existing system, rather than just creating a new damaged system. To build on your analogy, it's like burning half of an incomplete work of art, to get wall space for another one.

ntulip 17y ago

A new kind of visa is just insane. An overhaul on how immigration is done in the US needs to be done. Since that won't happen, the next best thing is another band-aid. A Startup Visa.

mjhnghfh 17y ago

I think the startup visa is an excellent piece of legislation. I know of several startups now based here, and lots of budding entrepreneurs moving to town - just because of the Visa requirements. And with this city's links to China and India I'm confident this will be the home of the next big thing. Of course I'm in Vancouver (BC) and these are guys being frustrated by the US process. Some of them hope to eventually open branch offices in Silicon valley so you will pick up some of the outsourced work.