4 ms·

>I waited 11 years, if it makes you feel better. And yes, I do know the difference between then and now. And you know why it's worse now? Because the demand is

>I waited 11 years, if it makes you feel better. And yes, I do know the difference between then and now. And you know why it's worse now? Because the demand is much higher! So, despite the INS's dickitude and the so-called "broken" immigration policies, MORE people are wanting to come here. Are you saying that just because people faced hardship earlier, it shouldn't be made easier now? If anything, the numbers show that MORE people are getting affected by the policies and MORE potential startups are getting nipped in the bud. >You need to comprehend before responding. The immigration system was as broken 20 years ago as it is today. During boom times it's broken; during bust times it is broken. During the dot-com boom, it was broken, and yet the dot-com boom still happened. It is a constant; you just route around it. I don't see any reason given for not fixing the system except handwaving here. Let me quote the article here: >Unlike a lot of problems facing our country, this one is easy to fix. We just need to increase the numbers of permanent-resident visas available for those trapped in “immigration limbo”. And we should create a Startup Visa that is more inclusive than the VC/Super Angel bill that is being proposed. This may give the economy a significant boost at no cost to taxpayers. What are your arguments against that paragraph? It is like someone in the 1920s arguing against women's suffrage. 'Hey, we never had the right to vote, but we always still influenced politics by working around it. There are some positive aspects to not having the right to vote. Lets not support it.'

ajays 16y ago
You seem to be arguing two orthogonal points here. On the one hand, you're saying that America's future will suffer dire consequences if the immigration system is not fixed. On the other hand, you're saying it is such a hardship that people have to go back when their visas expire, things are tough for immigrants, etc. Just step back a little and think rationally a little. If things are so bad, then why _are_ people trying so hard to get in? Do you see long lines outside the Chinese embassy? The Indian embassy? Once again: in the 20 years I've observed the system, it is as broken as ever. And during these 20 years, we've been through the Biotech boom, Internet boom, and are on the verge of another boom.
- cooldeal 16y ago
  >On the one hand, you're saying that America's future will suffer dire consequences if the immigration system is not fixed. Not exactly, but it will definitely help if it is fixed. >On the other hand, you're saying it is such a hardship that people have to go back when their visas expire, things are tough for immigrants, etc. >Just step back a little and think rationally a little. If things are so bad, then why _are_ people trying so hard to get in? Do you see long lines outside the Chinese embassy? The Indian embassy? >Once again: in the 20 years I've observed the system, it is as broken as ever. And during these 20 years, we've been through the Biotech boom, Internet boom, and are on the verge of another boom. All those immigrants can be easily turned into potential startup founders by increasing the permanent visa numbers. Many of them are highly educated and experienced. More startups = More potential good for the economy. What is your argument against this?
- kmfrk 16y ago
  cooldeal's criticism is that your world view is binary; there is no "better" or "worse", only "broken" and "just dandy". The problem argued is that the system prevents people from starting a business in the U.S. - something a "rational" person who is able to "comprehend" wouldn't conflate with everyone being prevented from starting a business. The system could be better. That's hardly a controversial statement. One of the biggest problem in this environment is the survivorship bias.
  - nir 16y ago
    His worldview isn't binary. He's merely providing some perspective by pointing out the system has been similarly broken for a while and apparently startups have still been starting up all the while. As a non-American without Green Card, I still think the startup visa is dubious. People who really want to do software startups in the US have been doing it for a while (typical example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippe_Kahn http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippe_Kahn ). I strongly doubt the US government (or board of VCs etc) will be able to predict success when deciding who should get the startup visas and the employment argument isn't convincing. Reddit, YC's most successful company, employs about 4 people I think?
- 16y ago

ajays 16y ago

You seem to be arguing two orthogonal points here. On the one hand, you're saying that America's future will suffer dire consequences if the immigration system is not fixed. On the other hand, you're saying it is such a hardship that people have to go back when their visas expire, things are tough for immigrants, etc. Just step back a little and think rationally a little. If things are so bad, then why _are_ people trying so hard to get in? Do you see long lines outside the Chinese embassy? The Indian embassy? Once again: in the 20 years I've observed the system, it is as broken as ever. And during these 20 years, we've been through the Biotech boom, Internet boom, and are on the verge of another boom.

cooldeal 16y ago
>On the one hand, you're saying that America's future will suffer dire consequences if the immigration system is not fixed. Not exactly, but it will definitely help if it is fixed. >On the other hand, you're saying it is such a hardship that people have to go back when their visas expire, things are tough for immigrants, etc. >Just step back a little and think rationally a little. If things are so bad, then why _are_ people trying so hard to get in? Do you see long lines outside the Chinese embassy? The Indian embassy? >Once again: in the 20 years I've observed the system, it is as broken as ever. And during these 20 years, we've been through the Biotech boom, Internet boom, and are on the verge of another boom. All those immigrants can be easily turned into potential startup founders by increasing the permanent visa numbers. Many of them are highly educated and experienced. More startups = More potential good for the economy. What is your argument against this?
kmfrk 16y ago
cooldeal's criticism is that your world view is binary; there is no "better" or "worse", only "broken" and "just dandy". The problem argued is that the system prevents people from starting a business in the U.S. - something a "rational" person who is able to "comprehend" wouldn't conflate with everyone being prevented from starting a business. The system could be better. That's hardly a controversial statement. One of the biggest problem in this environment is the survivorship bias.
- nir 16y ago
  His worldview isn't binary. He's merely providing some perspective by pointing out the system has been similarly broken for a while and apparently startups have still been starting up all the while. As a non-American without Green Card, I still think the startup visa is dubious. People who really want to do software startups in the US have been doing it for a while (typical example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippe_Kahn http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippe_Kahn ). I strongly doubt the US government (or board of VCs etc) will be able to predict success when deciding who should get the startup visas and the employment argument isn't convincing. Reddit, YC's most successful company, employs about 4 people I think?
16y ago