3 ms·

I'm a little suprised by your reply - I haven't seen an entrepreneur say "We don't really want a founders visa" either. We've seen several threads on news.ycom

I'm a little suprised by your reply - I haven't seen an entrepreneur say "We don't really want a founders visa" either. We've seen several threads on news.ycombinator on the need for a "founder's visa" and immigration reform. The current H1 visa system is cearly busted. If there is going to be a new office set up for early-stage entrepreneurs, this is certainly one of the important tasks at hand for the federal office.

tptacek 17y ago
The top-ranked comment on the most recent HN thread on Founders Visas argues against them: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=815457 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=815457 Eyeballing the whole thread, it looks like support ran 50/50. Note that, for instance, arguing for a "more Canadian-style immigration policy" is not the same thing as supporting the Founders Visa proposal. We are allowed to believe simultaneously that H1-B is busted and the Founders Visa is a bad idea. Wait, no, here's a more recent thread about Founders Visas. It's got 89 votes. The top comment opposes founders visas: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=832363 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=832363 It refers to the HN thread on Graham's original post about Founders Visas. 196 votes on that post. Again, the top comment opposes the Visa: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=556908 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=556908
- gojomo 17y ago
  I see many of these comments as criticisms of superficial implementation details, that don't necessarily indicate opposition to all variants of the Founders Visa idea. Comment votes, top-comments or even prevalence of critical comments are not reliable indicators of net agreement/disagreement. Threads have lots of factors that cause criticism and disagreement to be over-represented, or cause quibbles to be misinterpreted as opposition. I myself would criticize the 'investors panel' mechanism because I support the overall gist of any policy to increase founder immigration. Sure, I understand bokonist's critique and I'd prefer saner non-political mechanisms for boosting beneficial immigration. But given that immigration policy will continue to be a bureaucratic mess -- there's no 'grand fix' proposal on the table as an alternative -- even a flawed program could be worthwhile. All the existing 'doors' through which immigrants enter are politically-flawed; why not have one more door, also admittedly flawed, through which a few more valuable immigrants might enter?
jhancock 17y ago
Most agree that things like the H1-B program are broken. We have tons of data over many years to support this. The assertion that creating a founders visa enables more successful startups that in turn makes the economy grow (preferably sustainable growth) has not been proven at all. Its a very nice assertion, and I'd like to buy into it, but I have seen no meaningful data in support.

tptacek 17y ago

The top-ranked comment on the most recent HN thread on Founders Visas argues against them: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=815457 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=815457 Eyeballing the whole thread, it looks like support ran 50/50. Note that, for instance, arguing for a "more Canadian-style immigration policy" is not the same thing as supporting the Founders Visa proposal. We are allowed to believe simultaneously that H1-B is busted and the Founders Visa is a bad idea. Wait, no, here's a more recent thread about Founders Visas. It's got 89 votes. The top comment opposes founders visas: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=832363 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=832363 It refers to the HN thread on Graham's original post about Founders Visas. 196 votes on that post. Again, the top comment opposes the Visa: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=556908 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=556908

gojomo 17y ago
I see many of these comments as criticisms of superficial implementation details, that don't necessarily indicate opposition to all variants of the Founders Visa idea. Comment votes, top-comments or even prevalence of critical comments are not reliable indicators of net agreement/disagreement. Threads have lots of factors that cause criticism and disagreement to be over-represented, or cause quibbles to be misinterpreted as opposition. I myself would criticize the 'investors panel' mechanism because I support the overall gist of any policy to increase founder immigration. Sure, I understand bokonist's critique and I'd prefer saner non-political mechanisms for boosting beneficial immigration. But given that immigration policy will continue to be a bureaucratic mess -- there's no 'grand fix' proposal on the table as an alternative -- even a flawed program could be worthwhile. All the existing 'doors' through which immigrants enter are politically-flawed; why not have one more door, also admittedly flawed, through which a few more valuable immigrants might enter?

jhancock 17y ago

Most agree that things like the H1-B program are broken. We have tons of data over many years to support this. The assertion that creating a founders visa enables more successful startups that in turn makes the economy grow (preferably sustainable growth) has not been proven at all. Its a very nice assertion, and I'd like to buy into it, but I have seen no meaningful data in support.