3 ms·
I've always been curious if it matters as much as people claim, or if the funding will just go to someone else with a similar result. We'll get to see if this b
by nitwit005 9mo ago
I've always been curious if it matters as much as people claim, or if the funding will just go to someone else with a similar result. We'll get to see if this becomes the new normal.
- ytoawwhra92 9mo ago> if the funding will just go to someone else with a similar result To Americans? They're being outcompeted for this funding despite having many significant advantages over the people they're competing with. I think it would be naive to expect people starting from a position of strength and getting outcompeted nonetheless to achieve "similar results" when given funding.
- ThrowawayTestr 9mo ago"out competed" in this context means "not willing to work for less"
- ytoawwhra92 9mo agoI was talking about founders, who are in direct competition with one another for VC funding. But if you want to talk about employees, what you're saying isn't really true. Sourcing, recruiting, interviewing, hiring, and relocating immigrant workers is very expensive. For an immigrant to outcompete a citizen on cost they have to be significantly cheaper than the citizen - but if they're on an H1B you have to pay them the prevailing wage for their position! So there's a floor on just how much immigrant workers can undercut citizen workers. Immigration certainly puts downward pressure on wages across a whole industry, but looking at software in particular we see wages having risen consistently for decades now. You can look at what companies are paying their H1B software workers and see that it's typically a very generous wage by US standards. But, weirdly, a majority of US CS graduates don't work in software. It doesn't make sense that they would be holding out for more money than immigrant workers to the point that they end up exiting the industry altogether and taking a less lucrative job. Not to me, at least. I think what you're saying, if it's happening at all, is likely only happening at the bottom end of the market. Which kind of proves my point.
- junofan 9mo agoThere’s millions of us and billions of them. I think we’re doing okay.
- ytoawwhra92 9mo agoAre you? Things seem to be going from bad to worse in the US right now. From the outside it seems like decades of terrible policy in all areas is catching up to the country.
- soco 9mo agoYou are actually correct, I believe. But this is exactly the principle of capitalism isn't it? Market forces, invisible hand, the theories changed over the years but it boils down to the same thing: letting everybody compete. But you cannot have your cake (only locals employed) and eat it too (big wages) in this free competition - some will be underbidding the others.
- nitwit005 9mo agoThe reason people test ideas, is because our assumptions are often wrong. And really, our information is pretty terrible, as we lack any inside information. Imagine you only learn the country that takes the gold metals at the Olympics, but you have no ability to learn about how the athletes actually performed. The USA rarely wins at some sport, so everyone assumes they're terrible at it. But, of course, if they're winning sometimes, the performance is actually likely extremely close.
- ytoawwhra92 9mo agoLabor protectionism is an idea that has been tested many, many times. It's funny you should bring up the Olympics. Did you know some countries offer financial incentives and a pathway to citizenship for immigrant athletes who are able to compete at an elite level?
- nitwit005 9mo agoIf there is a relevant example for this discussion, kindly share. And yes.