14 ms·

Trump plans to halt entrepreneur visas

64 points by elsewhen 9y ago

subterfudge44 9y ago
It is worth asking how successful the visa has been. From what I have seen the visa was heavily abused by progeny from corrupt Indian politicians who sent their kids to USA with boatload of money.
maxxxxx 9y ago
Will that also affect rich guys who buy real estate?
- jmcgough 9y ago
  Of course not, we give them sweetheart deals and tax breaks.
- xenadu02 9y ago
  No, if you have a million bucks to throw at an “investment” you can become a permanent resident immediately.
  - mc32 9y ago
    Yes, just like the others on this list[1]. I think they are by far a net positive to the countries which have these visa/citizenship options. They immediately add to the local economies. They also tend to integrate well, given they are typically well educated. [1]https://corpocrat.com/2015/10/20/25-immigrant-investor-citizenship-programs-in-the-world/ https://corpocrat.com/2015/10/20/25-immigrant-investor-citiz...
- m52go 9y ago
  In general, politicians don't hurt themselves or their friends. Trump won't be the first or last politician to operate like that.
luka-birsa 9y ago
I find it very interesting, the constant A/B tests that Trump is keen on. Nobody rational would dare to upset the entrepreneurship in US, so I kinda want this to happen, just to see how this will play out. Granted, I'm not planning to move to US really soon, so I might be biased, but I've really wanted for Brexit to happen and I'm EU. That is turning out as a disaster, just like rational people suggested. Trump has yet to truly permanently fuckup something so I started to wonder if I was wrong. I see that we're keeping our options open.
- jmcgough 9y ago
  The only clear consistency in his policy is undoing everything Obama did. It's really weird and petty.
  - danjoc 9y ago
    That was his campaign platform. Why is keeping promises weird or petty?
    - CydeWeys 9y ago
      It's absolutely petty. The job of president is to do whatever is best for the country, not to resolve grievances against the previous president by getting revenge at the expense of the country. And there are plenty of promises that Trump isn't keeping.
      - oceanbreeze83 9y ago
        is it proper to do what is right for the country even if that is opposite of what your campaign promises were and opposite of what the elextorate wanted? genuinely curious. not american, live in asia, so quite impartial
        CydeWeys 9y ago
        Yes, it is. Previous presidents have had no problem doing what was right over upholding campaign promises (many of which quickly became outdated). It also doesn't help that many of Trump's campaign promises, like bringing back coal jobs or dictating Mexico's national construction budget, were completely impossible to uphold anyway. So we knew going into this anyway that a lot of his campaign promises were just lies to get elected, so he's going to break many of them anyway; upholding the petty ones that hurt the country while breaking all the rest is not redeeming, it's just shit layered on top of other shit.
kharms 9y ago
His top advisor complained that Silicon Valley had too many Chinese CEO's, so this isn't surprising. It'll be interesting to see which country takes our place as the 'brain magnet.' >“When two-thirds or three-quarters of the CEOs in Silicon Valley are from South Asia or from Asia, I think...” Bannon said. “A country is more than an economy. We’re a civic society.” http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/steve-bannon-disgusted-asian-ceos-silicon-valley_us_582c5d19e4b0e39c1fa71e48 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/steve-bannon-disgusted-a...
- sortaThrowaway 9y ago
  Do you think China Leadership would be happy if 2/3rds of High Tech Chinese firms were lead by non Chinese? (edit: I know the 2/3rd isn't accurate. The point which was clearly not well presented is there is an actual debate to be had on what the optimal benefit is for foreigner vs natives when it comes to immigration. No one cares if foreigners make up some % of tech firms. Might care if the % got too high. What is to high is debatable. This goes for any country)
  - manigandham 9y ago
    Who cares what the percentage is? As long as they're decent, law-abiding, tax-paying entrepreneurs, what is the problem?
    - gdilla 9y ago
      race. race is the problem. Where've you been?
      - manigandham 9y ago
        I'm asking why race is such a problem... Did you misunderstand or are you saying race is a problem for you?
        gdilla 9y ago
pkaye 9y ago
If you read the article, this is for a rule that was to take effect middle of this month. So it shouldn't be impacting anyone yet. I guess we will have to wait and see what his long terms plans are...
- jhowell 9y ago
  In addition, the agency is expected to start the formal process to eliminate the rule. A USCIS spokesperson said the rule is "under review."
- Overtonwindow 9y ago
  Interesting to note as well that under Trunp's executive order, for every new rule, two must be rescinded. Which two? Conversely if two are being rescinded, for which new rule is taking their place?
factsaresacred 9y ago
Hold up: this is a rule that is a few months old and has never actually been implemented. Trump does not want to implement it. So it changes absolutely nothing except a counterfactual future in which it helps create more jobs. I don't think it's a good idea to not implement it - it would allow an additional 2,940 entrepreneurs into the US each year - but important to note it changes no existing policy.
vmarsy 9y ago
As discussed previously [1], this is good given how unattractive the visa rules were in the first place : > From the article: > "To qualify for the rule, entrepreneurs would have to meet high standards. A foreigner must demonstrate that he or she will contribute to economic growth or job creation and show that a reputable investor has put at least $250,000 into the company. Under this rule, they can stay in the U.S. for 30 months, with the possibility of a 30-month extension. They cannot apply for a green card during this period." > This sounds like a pretty lame visa. How are you supposed to build a startup if you only have 30 months to do so? Why would investors risk $250k if the founder may be deported in 30 months? What happens after the extension period? [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14606478 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14606478
Old_Thrashbarg 9y ago
This is sad for the US. But I do wonder if, on the whole, this is a good thing. I've always wondered if the US's largest "foreign aid giving" is not the actual measly sum of money it gives, but rather just kicking out high-skilled workers, sending them back to China, India and elsewhere. I imagine it's a boon for those developing countries. Instead a natural brain-drain, the country doing the draining is stopping it. I'd love to hear some stories about entrepreneurs who wanted to come to the US, but had to go elsewhere and ended up building large businesses. I do see a lot of cool startups coming out of India (that we use for our startup, like Chargebee and VWO) - I wonder if they would have been tempted to start them here in the US if it were trivial for entrepreneurs to enter. Perhaps a rare case of the road to heaven being paved with bad intentions.
- chongli 9y ago
  sending them back to China, India and elsewhere I doubt they're going back to China or India. Far more likely is that they're coming to Canada or going to Australia or Europe. We have tons and tons of Chinese people coming to Canada to go to school. It's not a stretch to see them setting up shop here after they graduate. Wealthy Chinese families recognize how safe they are in the West. They don't mind paying high taxes to get away from the CCP.
  - Old_Thrashbarg 9y ago
    True. Some will go other places like you mention and some will remain in their home countries. In any case, it's not just having talent go to developing countries that I see as a positive, but also seeing other countries' increasing tech scenes. I think having geographical diversification in the tech world is healthy. For starters, if one country ever elects a leader that wants to attack tech and automation as aggressively as the US leadership is attacking immigrants, then human technological progress will be less affected.
- fredley 9y ago
  Swamp the drain?
- deleted 9y ago

64 points by elsewhen 9y ago

It is worth asking how successful the visa has been. From what I have seen the visa was heavily abused by progeny from corrupt Indian politicians who sent their kids to USA with boatload of money.

maxxxxx 9y ago

Will that also affect rich guys who buy real estate?

jmcgough 9y ago
Of course not, we give them sweetheart deals and tax breaks.
xenadu02 9y ago
No, if you have a million bucks to throw at an “investment” you can become a permanent resident immediately.
- mc32 9y ago
  Yes, just like the others on this list[1]. I think they are by far a net positive to the countries which have these visa/citizenship options. They immediately add to the local economies. They also tend to integrate well, given they are typically well educated. [1]https://corpocrat.com/2015/10/20/25-immigrant-investor-citizenship-programs-in-the-world/ https://corpocrat.com/2015/10/20/25-immigrant-investor-citiz...
m52go 9y ago
In general, politicians don't hurt themselves or their friends. Trump won't be the first or last politician to operate like that.

luka-birsa 9y ago

I find it very interesting, the constant A/B tests that Trump is keen on. Nobody rational would dare to upset the entrepreneurship in US, so I kinda want this to happen, just to see how this will play out. Granted, I'm not planning to move to US really soon, so I might be biased, but I've really wanted for Brexit to happen and I'm EU. That is turning out as a disaster, just like rational people suggested. Trump has yet to truly permanently fuckup something so I started to wonder if I was wrong. I see that we're keeping our options open.

jmcgough 9y ago
The only clear consistency in his policy is undoing everything Obama did. It's really weird and petty.
- danjoc 9y ago
  That was his campaign platform. Why is keeping promises weird or petty?
  - CydeWeys 9y ago
    It's absolutely petty. The job of president is to do whatever is best for the country, not to resolve grievances against the previous president by getting revenge at the expense of the country. And there are plenty of promises that Trump isn't keeping.
    - oceanbreeze83 9y ago
      is it proper to do what is right for the country even if that is opposite of what your campaign promises were and opposite of what the elextorate wanted? genuinely curious. not american, live in asia, so quite impartial
      - CydeWeys 9y ago
        Yes, it is. Previous presidents have had no problem doing what was right over upholding campaign promises (many of which quickly became outdated). It also doesn't help that many of Trump's campaign promises, like bringing back coal jobs or dictating Mexico's national construction budget, were completely impossible to uphold anyway. So we knew going into this anyway that a lot of his campaign promises were just lies to get elected, so he's going to break many of them anyway; upholding the petty ones that hurt the country while breaking all the rest is not redeeming, it's just shit layered on top of other shit.

kharms 9y ago

His top advisor complained that Silicon Valley had too many Chinese CEO's, so this isn't surprising. It'll be interesting to see which country takes our place as the 'brain magnet.' >“When two-thirds or three-quarters of the CEOs in Silicon Valley are from South Asia or from Asia, I think...” Bannon said. “A country is more than an economy. We’re a civic society.” http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/steve-bannon-disgusted-asian-ceos-silicon-valley_us_582c5d19e4b0e39c1fa71e48 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/steve-bannon-disgusted-a...

sortaThrowaway 9y ago
Do you think China Leadership would be happy if 2/3rds of High Tech Chinese firms were lead by non Chinese? (edit: I know the 2/3rd isn't accurate. The point which was clearly not well presented is there is an actual debate to be had on what the optimal benefit is for foreigner vs natives when it comes to immigration. No one cares if foreigners make up some % of tech firms. Might care if the % got too high. What is to high is debatable. This goes for any country)
- manigandham 9y ago
  Who cares what the percentage is? As long as they're decent, law-abiding, tax-paying entrepreneurs, what is the problem?
  - gdilla 9y ago
    race. race is the problem. Where've you been?
    - manigandham 9y ago
      I'm asking why race is such a problem... Did you misunderstand or are you saying race is a problem for you?
      - gdilla 9y ago

pkaye 9y ago

If you read the article, this is for a rule that was to take effect middle of this month. So it shouldn't be impacting anyone yet. I guess we will have to wait and see what his long terms plans are...

jhowell 9y ago
In addition, the agency is expected to start the formal process to eliminate the rule. A USCIS spokesperson said the rule is "under review."
Overtonwindow 9y ago
Interesting to note as well that under Trunp's executive order, for every new rule, two must be rescinded. Which two? Conversely if two are being rescinded, for which new rule is taking their place?

factsaresacred 9y ago

Hold up: this is a rule that is a few months old and has never actually been implemented. Trump does not want to implement it. So it changes absolutely nothing except a counterfactual future in which it helps create more jobs. I don't think it's a good idea to not implement it - it would allow an additional 2,940 entrepreneurs into the US each year - but important to note it changes no existing policy.

vmarsy 9y ago

As discussed previously [1], this is good given how unattractive the visa rules were in the first place : > From the article: > "To qualify for the rule, entrepreneurs would have to meet high standards. A foreigner must demonstrate that he or she will contribute to economic growth or job creation and show that a reputable investor has put at least $250,000 into the company. Under this rule, they can stay in the U.S. for 30 months, with the possibility of a 30-month extension. They cannot apply for a green card during this period." > This sounds like a pretty lame visa. How are you supposed to build a startup if you only have 30 months to do so? Why would investors risk $250k if the founder may be deported in 30 months? What happens after the extension period? [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14606478 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14606478

Old_Thrashbarg 9y ago

This is sad for the US. But I do wonder if, on the whole, this is a good thing. I've always wondered if the US's largest "foreign aid giving" is not the actual measly sum of money it gives, but rather just kicking out high-skilled workers, sending them back to China, India and elsewhere. I imagine it's a boon for those developing countries. Instead a natural brain-drain, the country doing the draining is stopping it. I'd love to hear some stories about entrepreneurs who wanted to come to the US, but had to go elsewhere and ended up building large businesses. I do see a lot of cool startups coming out of India (that we use for our startup, like Chargebee and VWO) - I wonder if they would have been tempted to start them here in the US if it were trivial for entrepreneurs to enter. Perhaps a rare case of the road to heaven being paved with bad intentions.

chongli 9y ago
sending them back to China, India and elsewhere I doubt they're going back to China or India. Far more likely is that they're coming to Canada or going to Australia or Europe. We have tons and tons of Chinese people coming to Canada to go to school. It's not a stretch to see them setting up shop here after they graduate. Wealthy Chinese families recognize how safe they are in the West. They don't mind paying high taxes to get away from the CCP.
- Old_Thrashbarg 9y ago
  True. Some will go other places like you mention and some will remain in their home countries. In any case, it's not just having talent go to developing countries that I see as a positive, but also seeing other countries' increasing tech scenes. I think having geographical diversification in the tech world is healthy. For starters, if one country ever elects a leader that wants to attack tech and automation as aggressively as the US leadership is attacking immigrants, then human technological progress will be less affected.
fredley 9y ago
Swamp the drain?
deleted 9y ago