3 ms·

Here is a counter proposal: the government should approve this request, but stipulate that the immigrants relocate to somewhere other than silicon valley (so al

by johnrob 13y ago

Here is a counter proposal: the government should approve this request, but stipulate that the immigrants relocate to somewhere other than silicon valley (so all of the created jobs don't end up in the once place where they aren't needed).

danielharan 13y ago
So you get a visa, with fewer rights? How long would that restriction on their freedom of movement last?
- sanswork 13y ago
  In Australia they have something similar for a few professions(teaching being a big one). Generally it's 1 year in somewhere really undesirable, then 2 more years in ok places then freedom. Though in those cases you're being sponsored by a government organisation that is generally also your employer. The only way I could see making it work in this case would be if it was specific cities doing the sponsoring and requiring the business to be run out of incubator type offices for X amount of time. So not very well at all.
lotsofmangos 13y ago
Central planning worked so well for the Soviets. Does your rule still apply if one of them is called Musk?
asperous 13y ago
I disagree with this counter-proposal. It's arbitrary, counter to free market dynamics, against the constitution for citizens [1], pays specific privilege to one state/region. While they are at it while don't they just stipulate that approved applicants should pay johnrob's rent? (No offense, just trying to point out the arbitrariness of your counter-proposal) I appreciate that there are some depressing social forces in Silicon Valley, but this is extremely special interest in the greater scheme of things. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement_under_United_States_law http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement_under_Unite...
pc 13y ago
1) You can't just allocate the startups in arbitrary locations and get the same result -- being in SV changes the outcome. (I've tried to start companies elsewhere.) 2) People benefit from Google, Facebook, Airbnb, etc., even if they're not in SV. The immediate job creation is a tiny fraction of the wealth created by startups. It doesn't matter where Bell Labs was located; it just matters that they did what they did. Similarly, we should just focus on creating more Googles, not on which state's payroll taxes get the immediate boost.
- _delirium 13y ago
  If the issue really is that SV specifically needs more people to start companies, and having them do so elsewhere isn't possible or desirable, it seems like a first cut at solving the problem could be made without even changing visa regimes: just institute a program to convince more people from elsewhere in the U.S. to move to SV and start companies. With >300m people, most of whom don't yet live in the SF Bay Area, that's already a pretty large supply to draw from.
- johnrob 13y ago
  Why does sama talk about job creation instead of wealth creation?
tcwc 13y ago
The "Immigrant Investor" EB-5 visa already works a bit like this. "Targeted Employment Area" investments have half the normal capital requirement. http://www.uscis.gov/working-united-states/permanent-workers/employment-based-immigration-fifth-preference-eb-5/eb-5-immigrant-investor http://www.uscis.gov/working-united-states/permanent-workers...

by johnrob 13y ago

danielharan 13y ago

So you get a visa, with fewer rights? How long would that restriction on their freedom of movement last?

sanswork 13y ago
In Australia they have something similar for a few professions(teaching being a big one). Generally it's 1 year in somewhere really undesirable, then 2 more years in ok places then freedom. Though in those cases you're being sponsored by a government organisation that is generally also your employer. The only way I could see making it work in this case would be if it was specific cities doing the sponsoring and requiring the business to be run out of incubator type offices for X amount of time. So not very well at all.

lotsofmangos 13y ago

Central planning worked so well for the Soviets. Does your rule still apply if one of them is called Musk?

asperous 13y ago

I disagree with this counter-proposal. It's arbitrary, counter to free market dynamics, against the constitution for citizens [1], pays specific privilege to one state/region. While they are at it while don't they just stipulate that approved applicants should pay johnrob's rent? (No offense, just trying to point out the arbitrariness of your counter-proposal) I appreciate that there are some depressing social forces in Silicon Valley, but this is extremely special interest in the greater scheme of things. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement_under_United_States_law http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement_under_Unite...

pc 13y ago

1) You can't just allocate the startups in arbitrary locations and get the same result -- being in SV changes the outcome. (I've tried to start companies elsewhere.) 2) People benefit from Google, Facebook, Airbnb, etc., even if they're not in SV. The immediate job creation is a tiny fraction of the wealth created by startups. It doesn't matter where Bell Labs was located; it just matters that they did what they did. Similarly, we should just focus on creating more Googles, not on which state's payroll taxes get the immediate boost.

_delirium 13y ago
If the issue really is that SV specifically needs more people to start companies, and having them do so elsewhere isn't possible or desirable, it seems like a first cut at solving the problem could be made without even changing visa regimes: just institute a program to convince more people from elsewhere in the U.S. to move to SV and start companies. With >300m people, most of whom don't yet live in the SF Bay Area, that's already a pretty large supply to draw from.
johnrob 13y ago
Why does sama talk about job creation instead of wealth creation?

tcwc 13y ago

The "Immigrant Investor" EB-5 visa already works a bit like this. "Targeted Employment Area" investments have half the normal capital requirement. http://www.uscis.gov/working-united-states/permanent-workers/employment-based-immigration-fifth-preference-eb-5/eb-5-immigrant-investor http://www.uscis.gov/working-united-states/permanent-workers...