5 ms·

It's another measurable, negative impact of the America First philosophy [1]. 40% of the Fortune 500 companies are founded by immigrant families [2][3], so the

It's another measurable, negative impact of the America First philosophy [1]. 40% of the Fortune 500 companies are founded by immigrant families [2][3], so the U.S. is really shooting itself in the foot (again). [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America_First_(policy) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America_First_(policy) [2] F500 2010: http://research.newamericaneconomy.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/new-american-fortune-500-june-2011.pdf http://research.newamericaneconomy.org/wp-content/uploads/20... (pdf) [3] F500 2017: https://startupsusa.org/fortune500/ https://startupsusa.org/fortune500/

screenbeam 6y ago
America first is a great policy. Our people need jobs and our policies should reflect that.
- mrkurt 6y ago
  Immigrants create economic growth though. They come here, spend money, start businesses, and generate more demand for the things that create jobs. In fact, preventing immigration reduces jobs. Companies will happily offshore any position they can. Jobs don't just exist in a vacuum. They're the result of a relatively complex economy, but growth generally creates jobs. So we should grow.
  - screenbeam 6y ago
    Yeah if an immigrant is going to create more jobs than he consumes let them in. Duh
- Falling3 6y ago
  It's a false dichotomy rooted in isolationism and justified by xenophobia. It takes care of Americans in name only.
- TeaDrunk 6y ago
  Our policies should reflect that our people also includes immigrants and that we are strongest when the definition of american is == "the best and the brightest from around the world".
- anon102010 6y ago
  I don't think the America First folks realize how damaging these trump policies are to america. The brain drain effect is almost always linked to poor economic performance. And the rules are so ham fisted now. Bipartisan H1B reform goes nowhere (prioritize US masters degrees, block H1B dependent employers from more H1Bs etc). Stupid stuff is everywhere. Immigrants bringing in revenue (plenty) support US jobs in the US. It's going to be a rude shock to the less skilled american worker to find a lot of jobs going remote overseas (Canada even) and their middle management / entry level office jobs vanishing. This historic effect here, where another country educates someone, and then they come to the US, is INSANELY profitable for the US. Seriously, in a ruthless way folks who are not successful in school, have health issues, have criminal backgrounds, are disabled etc don't come in on these visas. Instead its ambitious folks ANOTHER COUNTRY has invested a lot into coming to the US. How does that hurt the US? This has always been a huge advantage the US has had. Crazy to see the US throwing it away.
  - screenbeam 6y ago
    Coming here is fine. Investing money here is fine. I am talking about wholesale offshoring and onshoring.
- tim58 6y ago
  Currently people with a Computer Science degree have ~95% employment during the worst economic downturn of my lifetime. I don't need goverment protection for my job. In order to be more competitive my company needs more workers with Computer Science degrees. Reducing the supply of computer science degree holders actually hurts my long term career prospects by reducing the international competitiveness of the type of business that would hire me.
  - anon102010 6y ago
    No kidding, the US is gobbling up the worlds wealth through tech. The stupidity of throwing this away is monumental.
    - screenbeam 6y ago
      Good! America first
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- sg47 6y ago
  Your statement proves why you need immigrants to do high-skilled work.
  - screenbeam 6y ago
    Stay home
bruceb 6y ago
This 40% stat gets pushed all the time with no context. The way it sounds is that super immigrants are starting these companies. But the way the study is, a 5 person founding team could have 1 person who was son/daughter of immigrant and then it is counted. Lots of valuable brains are outside the country, but doesn't mean we should traffic in somewhat misleading statistics.
- burkaman 6y ago
  How is that misleading?
  - belval 6y ago
    To be clear I have no skin in the game (not from the US), but if the GP's claims are true, then I was misled because I did think that the 40% that gets thrown around was founded only by immigrants. Does it change my view on immigration? Of course not, but it does indicate that if immigration was stopped entirely then it is not true to say that that 40% slice of fortune 500 companies would simply never have been founded.
    - burkaman 6y ago
      I mean if somebody told you "40% of fortune 500 companies are founded by first generation immigrants" that wasn't true, but I've never heard that, and I can't immediately find an article that says that. The claim as stated here, "40% of the Fortune 500 companies are founded by immigrant families", is very straightforward.
      - bruceb 6y ago
        BS. What is the image that comes to mind with: "40% of the Fortune 500 companies are founded by immigrant families" Sounds like they were solely responsible for creating this company. Now a more precise statement: 40% of Fortune 500 companies had at least one immigrant or American with at least 1 immigrant parent on found team. Changes the image in one's mind a lot. Why not actually be straightforward instead of misleading?
deegles 6y ago
It really should be called "America Alone." A real America-first policy would encourage and fight for high skill immigration, since that builds the economy of the US and depletes talent from other countries.
magicsmoke 6y ago
A players hire A players, B players hire C players. If ability is normally distributed, and immigration is a filter for A players, their descendants will regress to the mean to become B players. B players want their C player American kids to have jobs over the A player non-American immigrant. America first.
linuxftw 6y ago
Being an immigrant is not virtuous in and of itself. How many of those 40% 'immigrant families' immigrated here poor and climbed the economic ladder, and how many took stolen wealth from a feudal system in the old country and built a business? Instead of investing in our domestic population with job training and scholarships, corporations are importing labor from overseas. Those people getting imported have degrees (sometimes of dubious quality) paid for by socialist states, often work for 'staffing agencies' to circumvent benefits and PTO of the real company, have very little job mobility, are most often paid below-market rates. It's basic economics. More labor means cheaper labor. Why are Blacks and Hispanics underrepresented in Software development [1]? If you compare the overall employment figures to the overall demographics of the country, they're almost identical, but way, way off for software development. It's because the most vulnerable people in the US don't have access to jobs and education, and corporations have no incentive to train entry level workers when they can just import them. > so the U.S. is really shooting itself in the foot (again). In what manner? The US doesn't need every genius walking on planet earth to reside in the US. EDIT: reference 1: https://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat11.htm https://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat11.htm
- Aperocky 6y ago
  > More labor means cheaper labor. The US population has grown from ~150 million in 1950 to ~350 million now.
  - linuxftw 6y ago
    Interesting. Describe real wage growth over that time period.
    - Aperocky 6y ago
      If you think the average wage in 1950 can get you more stuff than 2020, educate me then. The only thing that got more expensive relatively speaking is housing. Which kind of make sense because land area don't tend to change. Look around at your house and answer if you could get the same stuff (or even, poor replacement of the same stuff) if you're at the same percentile of income in 1950s.

screenbeam 6y ago

America first is a great policy. Our people need jobs and our policies should reflect that.

mrkurt 6y ago
Immigrants create economic growth though. They come here, spend money, start businesses, and generate more demand for the things that create jobs. In fact, preventing immigration reduces jobs. Companies will happily offshore any position they can. Jobs don't just exist in a vacuum. They're the result of a relatively complex economy, but growth generally creates jobs. So we should grow.
- screenbeam 6y ago
  Yeah if an immigrant is going to create more jobs than he consumes let them in. Duh
Falling3 6y ago
It's a false dichotomy rooted in isolationism and justified by xenophobia. It takes care of Americans in name only.
TeaDrunk 6y ago
Our policies should reflect that our people also includes immigrants and that we are strongest when the definition of american is == "the best and the brightest from around the world".
anon102010 6y ago
I don't think the America First folks realize how damaging these trump policies are to america. The brain drain effect is almost always linked to poor economic performance. And the rules are so ham fisted now. Bipartisan H1B reform goes nowhere (prioritize US masters degrees, block H1B dependent employers from more H1Bs etc). Stupid stuff is everywhere. Immigrants bringing in revenue (plenty) support US jobs in the US. It's going to be a rude shock to the less skilled american worker to find a lot of jobs going remote overseas (Canada even) and their middle management / entry level office jobs vanishing. This historic effect here, where another country educates someone, and then they come to the US, is INSANELY profitable for the US. Seriously, in a ruthless way folks who are not successful in school, have health issues, have criminal backgrounds, are disabled etc don't come in on these visas. Instead its ambitious folks ANOTHER COUNTRY has invested a lot into coming to the US. How does that hurt the US? This has always been a huge advantage the US has had. Crazy to see the US throwing it away.
- screenbeam 6y ago
  Coming here is fine. Investing money here is fine. I am talking about wholesale offshoring and onshoring.
tim58 6y ago
Currently people with a Computer Science degree have ~95% employment during the worst economic downturn of my lifetime. I don't need goverment protection for my job. In order to be more competitive my company needs more workers with Computer Science degrees. Reducing the supply of computer science degree holders actually hurts my long term career prospects by reducing the international competitiveness of the type of business that would hire me.
- anon102010 6y ago
  No kidding, the US is gobbling up the worlds wealth through tech. The stupidity of throwing this away is monumental.
  - screenbeam 6y ago
    Good! America first
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
sg47 6y ago
Your statement proves why you need immigrants to do high-skilled work.
- screenbeam 6y ago
  Stay home

bruceb 6y ago

This 40% stat gets pushed all the time with no context. The way it sounds is that super immigrants are starting these companies. But the way the study is, a 5 person founding team could have 1 person who was son/daughter of immigrant and then it is counted. Lots of valuable brains are outside the country, but doesn't mean we should traffic in somewhat misleading statistics.

burkaman 6y ago
How is that misleading?
- belval 6y ago
  To be clear I have no skin in the game (not from the US), but if the GP's claims are true, then I was misled because I did think that the 40% that gets thrown around was founded only by immigrants. Does it change my view on immigration? Of course not, but it does indicate that if immigration was stopped entirely then it is not true to say that that 40% slice of fortune 500 companies would simply never have been founded.
  - burkaman 6y ago
    I mean if somebody told you "40% of fortune 500 companies are founded by first generation immigrants" that wasn't true, but I've never heard that, and I can't immediately find an article that says that. The claim as stated here, "40% of the Fortune 500 companies are founded by immigrant families", is very straightforward.
    - bruceb 6y ago
      BS. What is the image that comes to mind with: "40% of the Fortune 500 companies are founded by immigrant families" Sounds like they were solely responsible for creating this company. Now a more precise statement: 40% of Fortune 500 companies had at least one immigrant or American with at least 1 immigrant parent on found team. Changes the image in one's mind a lot. Why not actually be straightforward instead of misleading?

deegles 6y ago

It really should be called "America Alone." A real America-first policy would encourage and fight for high skill immigration, since that builds the economy of the US and depletes talent from other countries.

magicsmoke 6y ago

A players hire A players, B players hire C players. If ability is normally distributed, and immigration is a filter for A players, their descendants will regress to the mean to become B players. B players want their C player American kids to have jobs over the A player non-American immigrant. America first.

linuxftw 6y ago

Being an immigrant is not virtuous in and of itself. How many of those 40% 'immigrant families' immigrated here poor and climbed the economic ladder, and how many took stolen wealth from a feudal system in the old country and built a business? Instead of investing in our domestic population with job training and scholarships, corporations are importing labor from overseas. Those people getting imported have degrees (sometimes of dubious quality) paid for by socialist states, often work for 'staffing agencies' to circumvent benefits and PTO of the real company, have very little job mobility, are most often paid below-market rates. It's basic economics. More labor means cheaper labor. Why are Blacks and Hispanics underrepresented in Software development [1]? If you compare the overall employment figures to the overall demographics of the country, they're almost identical, but way, way off for software development. It's because the most vulnerable people in the US don't have access to jobs and education, and corporations have no incentive to train entry level workers when they can just import them. > so the U.S. is really shooting itself in the foot (again). In what manner? The US doesn't need every genius walking on planet earth to reside in the US. EDIT: reference 1: https://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat11.htm https://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat11.htm

Aperocky 6y ago
> More labor means cheaper labor. The US population has grown from ~150 million in 1950 to ~350 million now.
- linuxftw 6y ago
  Interesting. Describe real wage growth over that time period.
  - Aperocky 6y ago
    If you think the average wage in 1950 can get you more stuff than 2020, educate me then. The only thing that got more expensive relatively speaking is housing. Which kind of make sense because land area don't tend to change. Look around at your house and answer if you could get the same stuff (or even, poor replacement of the same stuff) if you're at the same percentile of income in 1950s.