The Startup Visa

The President announced yesterday that he was in favor of a Startup Visa. Hallelujah.

That led me to go back in time.

The first time I posted about #startupvisa on AVC was September 23, 2009.

The first time Brad Feld posted about #startupvisa was September 10, 2009.

The first time Paul Graham posted about #startupvisa was April 2009.

It's a shame that it takes almost four years before a good idea gets the President's support. And its a greater shame that there are many in Congress who will still vote against this idea.

#Politics

Comments (Archived):

  1. aminTorres

    #happy

  2. Andrew Brackin

    On behalf of foreign startup founders. Thanks Fred!

  3. FlavioGomes

    Only fitting for a Country that was founded and fuelled through immigration.

  4. Avi Deitcher

    Darn disqus failed to post my message!

    1. ShanaC

      no, it is there.

      1. Avi Deitcher

        Nah, I had to repost.

        1. ShanaC

          if you see this issue again, shoot me an email, ideally with photos

          1. Avi Deitcher

            Will try. Now I have to remember, when I am ready to post, to cut and paste into a note, and take a pic, and then try to post.

          2. pointsnfigures

            no gun control on this site? surprised. Just kidding : )

          3. ShanaC

            actually, you make me want an email gun. I want to see if it possible to shoot emails at people causing their computers to die 🙂

  5. Tom Labus

    The President supporting is one thing, getting Congress to make it law is another.Congress needs to hear a loud roar from all of us before they’ll move.

    1. fredwilson

      yup

    2. JLM

      .The fix is in and the Democrats and Republicans will be battling to see who gets the middle of the page credit.A guy named Rubio is going all in.This is completely about voting demographics..

      1. pointsnfigures

        The Republicans wil get 0 credit. At least in the MSM media. Republicans only like rich white people (and barefoot pregnant white women who don’t work) and don’t you forget it.

        1. JLM

          .The Republicans need to go back to basics and develop a basic plan of spaced repetition messaging. Strong, simple, repetitive and loud.It was the Republicans who freed the slaves.Hispanic cultural values align with Republican values.Basic messaging.The notion as to what the Republicans “are” is being drawn and drafted by the Democrats.Everyone knew that the Obama campaign was going to use the summer to attempt to define Mitt Romney. Knowing the attack is coming is not a defense. You have to hit back first.They successfully did define Romney and by the time Romney got his jock on, it was too late.The battle had been lost and all that remained was bayoneting the wounded.JLM.

  6. Rohan

    Channelling the spirit of Jeff Buckley, Hallelujah indeed..

  7. Patrick Dugan

    In Chile, they’re already doing this, they just passed a law effective in May that allows incorporation in a day without fee, done online.

  8. Avi Deitcher

    Fred, I am going to disagree with you here.We have a tax system of thousands of pages riddled with special deductions and carve outs, every one of which seemed to be a “good idea” at the time.We have Medicare with differential reimbursement rates all over the place that just happen to benefit one vendor.We have a government purchasing system full of “special needs” requirements that just happen to fit one expensive company with the right lobbyists.Do you really want our immigration system to look like that as well? You want that morass here? Sure, startups need skilled workers and founders. So does manufacturing. And agriculture. And medicine. And transportation. And and and…@FlavioGomes:disqus is right: the US was built on and fuelled by immigration. But it wasn’t quota-ed by industry. No one asked my grandparents if they were under the fish processor quota or the rail line quota. No asked Baron von Steuben or the Marquis de Lafayette.Startup Visa is a bad idea parading as a good idea: it tames on industry and confers power and control on politicos and bureaucrats.Let’s welcome every darn immigrant who has no criminal record, wants to work to better his/her future, his/her family and by extension the society and dedicates him/her self to the democratic principles of an open and liberal society (real meaning, not political).

    1. kidmercury

      great comment. silicon valley is naive enough to think it is the center of the world, which is its great folly.

      1. Avi Deitcher

        I think it has learned how to play the game. Hence the Startup Visa.. and the millions in lobbying from SV companies in 2012.

        1. kidmercury

          i think they don’t understand the game they are getting into. they can win on little issues but if they differ with what military and banking corporations want they will lose big time.

      2. fredwilson

        this has nothing to do with silicon valley. this has to do with immigrants who want to come here and start businesses.

        1. kidmercury

          silicon valley only cares about its own issues, except for the anti-2nd amendment stance, lol. which is fine, although i don’t think any viable solution can come about without addressing the core problems. the core problems relate to civil liberties (patriot act) and economics (debt).

          1. Avi Deitcher

            Every industry cares about its own, it is self-interest, it is human nature. We won’t get SV to support real immigration at the expense of the self-interested Startup Visa, any more than we will get Toll Brothers to support comprehensive tax reform at the expense of the mortgage deduction. Same idea.We will if we can show each self-interested party that its short-term benefits are outweighed by its long term costs.

          2. kidmercury

            yes i agree no one thinks outside of their own problems, and that is why i am so bearish on the political situation…..it is basically a tragedy of the commons unfolding, people only look to take rather than looking at the big picture. it is naive. i think people are going to need to learn the hard way.

          3. Richard

            I’m beginning to think that “the great recession” is now a crutch for a lot of issues. Every airplane, hotel, car rental agency, coffee shop, I have been in over the past few months has been packed. DC, NY et al are booming. I know of very few nonsecular (i.e. the buggy whip) that aren’t doing well. Thoughts?

          4. JLM

            .The economy contracted in Q4. No “weak” recovery bullshit — stone cold CONTRACTED Christmas retail sales and all.Consumer sentiment hit a new recent low — payroll tax impact, perhaps? More taxes coming and the impact of Obamacare — a tax program at its core.Healthcare prices runaway slope.We are creating at best 150K jobs a month when we need 250-300K to actually whittle away at unemployment.We have created a huge dependency on food stamps — you work to eat and when you do not have work, you still have to eat.Gasoline prices have doubled in the last 4 years.Huge new taxes coming and when you draw money from the private sector there is no multiplier impact.Real unemployment — absent phony workforce contractions of folks who have “stopped looking for work” 5MM+ and counting — is about 12% (U-3) and 20% (U-6).The public square is filled with the Wall Street crowd who, as always, got their’s first. Compliments of Mr Obama.The good times? On vacation for the duration in the Turks & Caicos?JLM.

          5. Richard

            .Issue: The economy contracted in Q4. No “weak” recovery bullshit — stone cold CONTRACTED Christmas retail sales and all.  Explanation: We don’t live in the 195Os Xmas universe, people are spending money year round and on education. Issue: Consumer sentiment hit a new recent low — payroll tax impact, perhaps? More taxes coming and the impact of Obamacare — a tax program at its core.I don’t own a landline? Research methods may be antiquated. Healthcare prices runaway slope.Yes, we are getting older, don’t eat well or exercise and we have a health care industrial complexWe are creating at best 150K jobs a month when we need 250-300K to actually whittle away at unemployment.Lots of employment is under the radar, mostly a skills issue not a jobs issueWe have created a huge dependency on food stamps — you work to eat and when you do not have work, you still have to eat.Yes, but this isn’t evidence of a weak economyGasoline prices have doubled in the last 4 years.So what? The auto is yesterdays technology,  Inflation is almost nonexistent.  Many young don’t aspire to own a car.Huge new taxes coming and when you draw money from the private sector there is no multiplier impact.Yes, but this is not evidence of a recessionReal unemployment — absent phony workforce contractions of folks who have “stopped looking for work” 5MM+ and counting — is about 12% (U-3) and 20% (U-6).This is a skills issue, have you seen a quiet restaurant in Austin? The public square is filled with the Wall Street crowd who, as always, got their’s first. Compliments of Mr Obama.No sequitur The good times? On vacationTry to get a flight to Miami, most are booked! 

          6. JLM

            .Forgive me but I am totally lost as to what your point is. Not trying to be either argumentative or contentious but what is the point?I do not agree with much that you have written but am missing the theme here.JLM.

          7. Richard

            I know it is a contrarian view, but can anyone say that austin or dc or ny or sf or la is in recession? A great recession? Doesn’t the fact that we have a large part of our population not working combined with the fact that we have 2% growth and no real inflation suggest somthing else? Might we have a recession industrial complex?

          8. JLM

            .I think we do have a “blame game” of blaming everything on the recession and doing nothing about it. But that is a leadership failure.Case in point — most of the jobs in America are created by small business. Not a FEW. Not SOME. MOST!And yet we do not fully fund the SBA, we do not force banks (who own a monopolistic charter) to loan up their assets and we cannot get the rules promulgated for the JOBS Act. Not doing these things is missing the best opportunity to create jobs.What we do do is fuck around with immigration (buying votes and renting supporters) and faux gun control (less than 3% of all gun crime is committed with long rifles). Because that is good theater and politics.The economy CONTRACTED in Q4-2012 CY (Q1-2012 FY) by 0.1%. This is the Christmas quarter and it was totally unexpected.We do not have anywhere near 2% growth in the economy on an annualized basis and the new low consumer confidence numbers show exactly that.How can you have growth when you have just raised taxes on everyone through the cessation of the payroll tax holiday? Increased taxes on a rate basis? Are enacting more taxes through Obamacare. When you withdraw fuel from the economy, the economy must decelerate.The unemployment numbers have stayed seemingly flat but in reality they are much, much worse as the BLS.gov continues to remove workers from the work force thus cooking the books. Absent the books being in the broiler, we really have about 12% U-3 and about 20% U-6.This is just raw and incontrovertible economic data. It is not really opinion.JLM.

          9. Dave Pinsen

            How about we hold off on bringing in millions of more job-seeking immigrants until that U-6 number gets back down to the single digits? Is no GOP Senator smart enough to make the obvious supply & demand case here?

          10. JLM

            .Close the borders and stop all those Canadians from slipping in — ummm, is it the Canadians or the Mexicans? I get confused easily.We need to close the borders.We need to stop giving legitimacy to criminals — illegal aliens.We need to cut off all benefits from all illegal aliens.I actually have no problem with amnesty — after a robust debate.Sometimes you simply cannot get the toothpaste back into the tube. So be it.I do have a huge problem with folks who think this is T ball and everybody wins. If you are an American citizen and you are unemployed it is perfectly fair to inject into the debate — hey, Congress, how about me?Amnesty is devolving into an entitlement just like everything else. Wrongheaded.JLM.

          11. bernardlunn

            The economy contracted in Q4 due to cutbacks in military spending. Take that out and you see growth. Peace dividend coming again?

          12. JLM

            .When you are paying with a credit card, there cannot be a dividend. You may have a lower bill but it is a decrease in borrowing not a cash dividend.I don’t agree that the Q4 impact is solely driven by a reduction in defense spending. That has not yet hit really.A contraction in GDP, even if the result of a reduction in government spending is never a good thing. It shows how fragile the economy truly is if such a discrete change in spending has such an obvious and apparent result.JLM.

          13. kidmercury

            they are living off credit. here are some data points i think are worth mentioning:consumer credit: http://www.federalreserve.g…auto loan duration rising: http://www.cnbc.com/id/4884…home equity loans rising (again): http://www.businessweek.com…student loans are the most ridiculous. and they are increasingly delinquent: http://www.zerohedge.com/ne…so long as the debt party continues, all we are going to get is the same thing we’ve gotten for the past 12 years: price inflation, asset bubbles, and growing income inequality and all the ensuing problems of that (excessive concentration in industries, a natural rise of oligarchies, etc)another housing bubble is already brewing. but the further down this path we go, the more unsustainable the system is. civil unrest is only a matter of time.

          14. Richard

            I agree with you on most of this, but is this a “great recession” or just a long drawn out game of musicl chairs?

          15. JLM

            .This is a new norm. Socialism is a paradigm shift and Europe has shown that. Japan has been under a no growth reality for 25 years with seemingly 0% interest rates..

          16. Dave Pinsen

            But Japan’s population has been shrinking over that time, so its real economy isn’t as bad as those growth numbers would suggest — Japan’s unemployment rate last quarter was only 4.1%. We have the worst of both worlds, a sluggish economy and a growing number of job seekers, so we have higher unemployment.

          17. Pete Griffiths

            “Socialism is a paradigm shift and Europe has shown that”what do you mean? thanks.

          18. JLM

            .Europe has devolved into a nanny state in which governments are unable to balance their budgets — perhaps a bad habit learned from their American cousins — and in which a high level of government entitlements has caused increasing pressure on progressively higher levels of taxation to pay for the nanny state.High unemployment is the new norm.It is a shift because it is not a cyclical change. It is permanent and will not return like a pendulum. The tectonic plates have become wedged. This is not a tidal phenomenon.The Europeans have been able to deploy their constant “peace dividend” — American subsidy of their defense needs v the USSR and Russia — to more government services.The greatest irony? Germany has conquered all of Europe with the Euro something it could not do with panzers.JLM,

          19. Pete Griffiths

            I think the history of the welfare state in Europe is linked to the rise of socialist ideas but that was by no means the only influence. Christian ideals played a large part in the labor movement and the post war momentum to ‘win the peace’ and deliver a ‘home fit for heroes.’ There was widespread support for a social safety net. As there was in the US as evidenced by the Roosevelt initiatives. I think it is a mistake to overstate the rise of the welfare state with ‘socialism.’I don’t think Europe had to learn unbalanced budgets from the US. 🙂 I think they were all too ready to figure that out for themselves. And I agree that the change is structural. I suspect that it is too easy to think of it as permanent though. For the average Joe a safety net, once experienced, is not easily relinquished and so there is indeed great resistance to cutbacks and democracy makes such resistance fairly effective in some societies, despite the needs of capital and financial realities. A lot of the problem comes down to exploding expectations. A health service was great when it just meant ready access to cheap antibiotics to control infections diseases and orthpedics, but it becomes unaffordable when everyone feels they have a right to any treatment. People who have contributed $x during their whole lives consider it their right to spend $10x in their last 3 years. Understandable but without a booming economy – unaffordable. Rationing is necessary. But I suspect that despite this resistance reality will eventually correct the system. What cannot be afforded will eventually bankrupt. All things must pass. :)Germany did indeed conquer in peace what it could not in war. And its secret weapon was trade schools. Highly skilled workers, a worker capital alliance (that is working for now at least) and access to markets has proven to be a potent combination.:)

          20. JLM

            .On a very serious note, the socialism of Europe was created in no small part because they were devastated by WWII and thus in many countries the slate was literally wiped clean. They had no —ism and certainly not one that worked.Government — or in the case of Germany, the conquering Allies — was the only source of sustenance and thus the dependency was not a voluntary or evolutionary phenomenon, it was a survival mechanism.There was almost no alternative other than government spending and assistance. Speak to an Englishman of a certain age about Brussels Sprouts and you will understand the desperation of those times.The Marshall Plan was no small part of that government delivered dependency.As to Germany, I beg to differ. Germany is a “maker” — always has been — and while they certainly do require skilled workers to make stuff, they are the world’s largest exporter and are dedicated to manufacturing.They went out and created markets for many of their exports like machine tools. Look how good their cars, appliances and consumer electronics are today.They have gotten off their butts — even after having most of their manufacturing capacity either taken by the Russians or destroyed by the balance of the Allies — and gotten out and sold the world.Then they brought the money home and saved it. Germans are very good savers.You cannot compare the socialism of Roosevelt who governed into the period of time of the fullest employment in the history of the US — World War II when every man and most every able bodied woman had a job. The highest work force utilization rate in history.That is also why one cannot compare the mess we are in today and then. We have no chance of attaining a level of employment like WWII, ever. We have no driver that is beyond the control of government to dumb down and destroy.As an example, government has destroyed energy related employment, electric generation and refining. If government was not in the way, we would have energy independence and be producing nuclear, clean coal, natural gas and oil driven energy thereby being independent of the Middle East and not being at risk for American blood and treasure in a part of the world that has no strategic importance other than oil.We have not become a nation who expects to get back what we have contributed, we are a nation that expects to get something for nothing.We are filled to overflowing with a sense of entitlement and our current regime has led the people to believe that under what is an extraordinarily progressive tax code that the rich (a balance sheet parameter not an income parameter) are not paying their fair share.Not just class warfare but a stupid class war. Not smart to declare war on the guys who create the jobs and set the prices.The Obama regime means not just to tax income, they mean to re-distribute wealth. Wealth being riches that were garnered years and sometimes generations ago.All of this necessitates a redistributive level of spending. The government takes and redistributes according to its matrix of dependent voting blocs.The spending is so out of control that people routinely confuse millions, billions and trillions. We cannot even really visualize the real level of spending and in our numbness we are unable to measure and manage.Through today the administration has not even mumbled anything that even remotely resembles a spending cut.We truly have a bottom 50% who are recipients of government largesse and they will never vote to tax themselves or as you so rightly note to give back any of the benefits they have received and they now believe to be literally rights equal to constitutional rights.In the game of life, liberty and the PURSUIT of happiness, they want to start the pursuit at the finish line.President Obama — a guy who himself got to start on third base because of affirmative action — has told them it is not only OK but that the folks whose pockets are being picked are BAD to boot.We are so deep in to Alice in Wonderland, we cannot even recognize ourselves any more.Further affiant sayeth not.JLM.

          21. ShanaC

            and trade unions in the case of germany. It gave balance back for their work + provided rigorous systems of training.

          22. kidmercury

            i suppose it can be seen as a game of musical chairs…..”chairs” (i.e. opportunities) are slowly being removed and people are being cut out of the game in the process…..the effect is gradual, at least for now. i think we have a few more panics over the next few years that will be fairly significant.

          23. Richard

            What is so interesting is that there is strong support for deflation and not inflation. In fact, it is rare to have inflation without a large group of 20-55 year spending.

          24. kidmercury

            i dont think there is deflation and think there is real inflation — rent, food, gas/energy all are up. and of course stocks! shadowstats.com is a measure i prefer and cites inflation at approximately 9% annually when factoring in food, energy, raw materials, taxes, etc.

        2. jason wright

          investors could seek out the talent, and support where ever it may be on the surface of this small planet.

      3. William Mougayar

        Why does it have to do with Silicon Valley.If there are 4 smart engineers/entrepreneurs in Timbuktu, and they have a damn good idea and have developed some software, but can’t grow or take it to market from Mali, then why not get them a visa and some US funding, mentoring, etc. and let them grow it to 20 or maybe 100 employees in the US.It’s a win, no? Actually, double-win, because when they make a couple of bucks, they will send 50 cents back to Mali to help other people get out of poverty or troubles over there.

        1. kidmercury

          i meant that the valley only cares about its own problems (getting software talent) and not broader issues. i think this is a mistake in that dealing with broader issues helps build a political base for other issues.

        2. Guest

          Indeed.

        3. Dave Pinsen

          Why not fund them in Timbuktu? How are 3rd/4th world countries supposed to advance if their most talented citizens get vacuumed out to 1st world countries?

          1. Carl Rahn Griffith

            Exactly. Thank you.

          2. William Mougayar

            I think launching from Timbuktu might be a tough thing. Do it from the US, then go back and help the ecosystem over there. Not picking on Mali, but just as an example.

          3. ShanaC

            war and all that jazz

    2. Henry Yates

      Great comment, however, I have sympathy with the startup visa. The US immigration system will take a long time to improve, if it ever does. The start up visa could be a great hack.

      1. Avi Deitcher

        I know. And every single one of those tax credits/deductions was a sympathetic reason and a “great hack.” And look where it got us.You think any one of those politicos is interested in helping startups? They love the idea that they can control it and have every other industry now come spend lobbying money for a Doctor Visa and Nurse Visa and Cornworker Visa and Blogger Visa and….

        1. Avi Deitcher

          Sorry, not usually so cynical (except about politicians). I have great faith in democratic countries and people. But I see the politicos so successfully manipulate smart people into accepting short term benefit for their long term detriment (sort of like spending lots of money today to be paid by debt-laden future generations) and it bothers me.

          1. FlavioGomes

            The spirit of the startup visa is what’s going to inspire folks. Unfortunately you are right. The risk to this being regulated out of proportion is high…But with a more optimistic view…some progress is being made with the simple acknowledgement of the President. A recent article in the the economist suggests that innovation is lagging. We need more of it and hopefully the startup visa proposals bring additional talent and ideas to our entrepreneurial markets.

    3. fredwilson

      you are making perfect the enemy of the good. if what you propose could happen i would be all for it. it can’t. so don’t throw out the baby with the bath water.

      1. Avi Deitcher

        No, I am making perfect the enemy of the very short term good for one particular industry. The benefits you get in the political system depend on the money you spend on lobbying, which depends on how much you have.VCs and startups have a pittance compared to big boys like agriculture (ADM?), automotive, manufacturing, transportation, medical. Once those guys get wind of the ability to get a visa program for each, how long before the Startup Visa ends up being the lonely bastard child with no support all over again.They divide you and then conquer.On a different tack: why are you willing to accept such a nasty compromise here, when you went for the throttle with SOPA/PIPA? Perfect vs good didn’t come into play there?

        1. fredwilson

          the startup visa is not about a single industry. it is about every industry. entrepreneurs exist everywhere. why are you so myopic?

          1. Avi Deitcher

            I disagree. Startups and VCs are an industry, with interests like any other. Is Toyota USA part of the startup industry? Definitively not. But if they can expand their plant in TN, why should they have any higher or lower preference than Airbnb (an existing company), or Benchmark (or USV, for that matter)?And what’s with the ad hominem? Not like you.

          2. fredwilson

            your tone inspired my tone

          3. kidmercury

            i side with avi in this beef, although from a beefing perspective i agree his tone could be interpreted as mildly inflammatory

          4. JLM

            .As a gentleman and knowing both Avi and Fred, my scorecard has a few erasures but it shows a draw.I admire the youthful optimism of Avi — a quality that life will soon beat the crap out of nonetheless.I admire Fred’s pragmatic insistence that with these chuckleheads in DC, we have to get done what can get done.We are still waiting to get the final SEC rules for the JOBS Act — which was right up there with penicillin in importance.Washington is the problem.JLM.

          5. fredwilson

            I was inflamed for a moment. But I calmed down hours ago

          6. Avi Deitcher

            @kidmercury:disqus you mind pointing out where? I didn’t see it. Feel free to do it online or offline.

          7. kidmercury

            hey avi, lol well i am mainly joking just around 🙂 but i thought your comment here — http://www.avc.com/a_vc/201… (where you mention fred’s stance on SOPA/PIPA) — might be construed as slightly inflammatory/aggressive, since it was personalized a bit towards fred and bluntly suggested he was being hypocritical. but fred’s been dissing a lot of people lately here; last week he ripped @brandon burns and myself a new one for defending fab and aspects of the retailing business model. this week he flamed you. next week i think he is going to start dissing people’s moms.

          8. Avi Deitcher

            I see. I thought it was on the topic – when to go all out, when to go incremental – rather than the person, and it was posed as a question rather than an assault (can a blog comment be an “assault weapon”?), but I could see how someone could misconstrue it.If I am with you and brandon, I am in good company. 🙂

          9. JLM

            .Actually if you very carefully read Sen Diane Feinstein’s recently introduced bill — “Assault blog posts” are outlawed along with AR-15s. Particularly if they feature a 30 round magazine..

          10. Cam MacRae

            fwiw, it reads like you pulled your punch and fred didn’t. put it down to different levels of investment.

          11. LE

            “And what’s with the ad hominem? Not like you.”I can see how that could be wrongly interpreted by someone (meaning not always but sometimes depending on how the day is going.) Fred isn’t wrong but he seems a little on edge as we all are from time to time.Your use of “what’s with” and “not like you” although the “not like you” I would also argue dulls down the “what’s with”. I like your points though (really I do but I can also see both sides).Note my sentence about Fred.I didn’t say “Fred is on edge” (that would be pointing a finger). And I certainly didn’t say “chill out Fred”!I said “Fred isn’t wrong” (so I complemented Fred first) then I said “seems a little on edge” (hedging my words) and finally “as we all are from time to time” (like “that’s ok Fred we all get like this”).Note the difference? Of course what I write also varies with how I am feeling at the particular time.Note the dig that JLM gets in here:”I admire the youthful optimism of Avi — a quality that life will soon beat the crap out of nonetheless.”He is simply criticizing you for not understanding how the world works. Like “of course it’s in his self interest to do that and you would to”.

          12. Avi Deitcher

            @JLM “youthful optimism”? I love it. I am in my 40s, I grew up estimating how long I had to live when the Soviets sent ICBMs our way. I remember Carter and Ford, although I was too young to vote during Carter-Reagan. I have been around long enough to see the optimism and pessimism, the good and the rough edges.You just made me 20 years younger. Awesome.

          13. JLM

            .As far a public policy goes, the integration of foreign car manufacturers into the US is one of the all time great foreign trade – jobs success stories ever and perhaps the beginning of GM’s problems as they were able to demonstrate they could manufacture cars in the US and do it at a lower price point.It all started with an obscure conversation about the percentage of American parts content in foreign cars and ended with giving foreign car manufacturers access to American markets in return for making their cars in the US.That Mercedes or BMW you are driving — likely made in the beautiful uplands of South Carolina.And Greenville, SC — thriving.JLM.

    4. ShanaC

      there were quota systems avi, albeit they were crazy looser because of factory work. We still see legacies of that quota system now.

      1. Avi Deitcher

        True, there were quotas, many of them in ways we would consider offensive now, others cleaner. But the ideas was to encourage immigration.

    5. Rohan

      How do you eat an 800 kg elephant?One bite at a time. I think that’s the goal. 🙂

    6. Richard

      Im all for this but the economy has changed vs the the time most of these dinosaurs in congress lived outside the beltway. Let’s not make the mistake they do and not fully vet out the idea ?  What is an entrepreneur in Today’s economy? What is a startup? For how long does the startup need to operates? Does it need to be profitable? Funded? Have a minimal value? What about those PhDs studying basic research? What about Startups like a groupon clone? What about Startups funded by the “rich uncle” ? What about foreign corporations spinning out Startups? These are just a few issues

    7. aminTorres

      I am having a hard time understanding why this is so troubling to some.I am also having a hard time about wrapping my head around the negativity lens that is being used to look at this issue.That is not American. I came to the US 8 years go with 80 bucks in my pockets … (I remember my dad pulling quarters out of a box where he collected coins to give them to me)… and a full scholarship. I have a six figures paying job and the most patriotic thing I’ve ever done (which I don’t even do for my own country) is to pay taxes to the city of NY.The Startup Visa may not perfect, nothing is, but there is A LOT of good in it, Let’s focus on the good. I much rather my tax moneys to go to any state of this country that any other country anywhere.Avi, I think we agree in more than we disagree on here, let’s use a lean approach here, let’s get something up and running and make it better. It is better than not getting anything done at all.That’s American.

      1. FlavioGomes

        Excellent!

      2. Avi Deitcher

        I am impressed that you came here and manage to do so well. Seriously. And I am glad that you managed to get that full scholarship. And working in a job, which means you earn a salary, pay your way, grow the economy, grow your employer (they aren’t paying you as a favour), means you are helping, and that *is* patriotic.My problem with the Startup Visa isn’t that it fixes only one thing. If that were true, I would agree, and then fix another and another incrementally. My problem with the Startup Visa is that the price of fixing that one thing is entrenching another disaster of special interests and political control. If we fixed the Startup Visas, and then the transportation, and then medicine, etc. In 10 years we would not have incrementally fixed everything; we would have a huge boondoggle of patchwork regulation, each industry vying with millions of lobbying dollars for *its* share of the visa pool, and the situation would be far worse. Immigration would look like Medicare or the tax system. The only ones who really benefit are the ex-elected officials on K Street.Incremental to me is: we need to let more people in. OK: anyone with a STEM master’s or PhD gets a green card, subject to no criminal activity, the usual. Next: anyone with any degree. Next: H1s are nice, let’s double them each year.The issue with Startup Visa is that it is industry-targeted, and it is targeted because the politicians *know* they can make it look like a win for the press, and get kudos from that industry, who will then cough up dollars for reelection campaigns (anyone here remember CREEP?), and then they will turn to agriculture and say, “hey, don’t *you* want visas too?? Just takes a few million dollars to some former senators or congressmen who run a lobbying office.” And then another, and then another.Incremental solves problems on a small scale across the board (horizontal solution, growing vertically); divide and conquer solves problems on a small scale vertically, and then charges rent to expand horizontally.

      3. ShanaC

        So what can we do to get you to stay here permanetly

        1. aminTorres

          I am a green card holder 🙂 I also just finished my citizenship paperwork

          1. ShanaC

            mazel tov

          2. Aaron Fyke

            I think the biggest problem is this:http://visual.ly/what-part-…You may have gotten your green card…and it looks like you might have done it post-post-9/11, when things started to improve. However, it is still ridiculous how little people realize that there is no “back of the line”. I like that the startup visa supports STEM university graduates, but I do feel that the problem is much bigger than that. The result? A significant fraction of immigration is illegal (The best I could find, http://en.wikipedia.org/wik…, showed that about 1.1m immigrants per year came here legally, and 1.5m immigrants came here illegally).So, I agree with you, let’s look at the good of immigration reform, but I think I agree with Avi more that it needs to be actually comprehensive, not just a patchwork solution.

        2. deancollins

          Shana…. for one get rid of “The Heart Taxation Act” basically my wife and i will be leaving the USA before the time limit for this is imposed on us.Its ridiculous that one the day of us leaving the USA that we should pay capital gains tax on properties we own in Australia that were bought and paid for before we even stepped foot into the USA in the first place.The fact that this piece of legislation was written by Charlie “tax cheat” Rangel 2 years before he got cheating his own taxes makes it even more laughable.

    8. Dave Pinsen

      “Let’s welcome every darn immigrant who has no criminal record, wants to work to better his/her future, his/her family and by extension the society and dedicates him/her self to the democratic principles of an open and liberal society (real meaning, not political).”That was a great immigration policy for the 19th Century, when this was a sparsely-populated, resource-rich country, with a burgeoning manufacturing sector offering jobs for new immigrants in the cities. It makes no sense today.Today there aren’t enough jobs even for college graduates, technology is eliminating jobs faster than it is creating them, and — unlike in the 19th century — we have a welfare state, which provides expensive health care to everyone here. It makes no sense to welcome more job seekers while unemployment is as high as it is, and it makes no sense to welcome poor immigrants who will pay less in taxes than they consume in government resources.By all means, let’s welcome every rare genius or talent who wants to come here. We already have a special visa for them, the O-1. And by all means, let’s welcome every funded entrepreneur who wants to start a business and create jobs for Americans — I think we already have a special visa for those immigrants too, the EB-5 (and if that doesn’t cover OPM-funded entrepreneurs, I’d welcome changing it so it does).If we can get past resistance from the AMA, adding a new visa for qualified foreign physicians, who would help expand access to health care and lowering its cost, would make sense.But bringing in new job seekers now would lower wages and increase unemployment here. It makes sense for GOP donors who want cheap, compliant, labor, and it makes sense for Democratic pols who want more future voters, but it doesn’t make sense for the vast majority of Americans.

      1. Avi Deitcher

        Why would that logic be more true now than in the early 20th century? Jobs were even more scarce, some of the late 19th/early 20th century recessions made the current situation look like a walk in the park. Those immigrants built the country, and the overwhelming majority were an enormous gain for the country. Which wave of poor immigrants was a net burden?Traditional American view (and the basis for liberal democracy) is that each person is a net contributor to society, and, given enough room, will be a good for society. This view says, “we got this American pie (pun intended), let’s welcome people who will grow it bigger and bigger.” There were plenty of nativists back then as well, if their view had prevailed, America would still be this large but weak isolated country.You do have a valid point that we have become a welfare society, wherein we transfer, via taxation and entitlements, from some members of society to others. You can argue about whether or not it is worth it, I prefer to avoid that political shark pit. The net effect is to make immigrants take longer to become a net gain. In business terms, it pushes out the period of time until a positive ROI. It takes longer, but the net gain is still there.You can choose to eliminate the immigration except in small cases (what you advocated above); you can accept the pushed out ROI; or you can accept the immigrants but restrict social benefits for a period of, say, 5 years (my preference, but might not pass legal muster).

        1. Dave Pinsen

          “Why would that logic be more true now than in the early 20th century?”For the reasons I’ve mentioned.”Those immigrants built the country”No, colonists and settlers before them founded the country, and made it a place later immigrants wanted to migrate to. That’s not to say immigrants didn’t contribute to the country, but neither your grandparents nor mine built this country. It was already a rising economic power in their day.”Which wave of poor immigrants was a net burden?”Probably none of them who arrived before the advent of our welfare state in the 1930s — before then, immigrants who couldn’t make a living here often went back home. But increasingly since then, poor immigrants are a net burden. And most of them haven’t climbed the economic ladder in the way earlier, Ellis Island immigrants did. That’s a hard fact, but it’s a fact nonetheless, as I pointed out to Fred here a few years ago.”Traditional American view (and the basis for liberal democracy) is that each person is a net contributor to society”In economic terms, today, most poor immigrants objectively are not.”if their view had prevailed, America would still be this large but weak isolated country.”If your view prevails now, America will become a third world country within two or three generations. It’s on that trajectory now.” In business terms, it pushes out the period of time until a positive ROI. It takes longer, but the net gain is still there.”There’s no evidence of that being the case with most poor immigrants in recent decades. You are just stating it as an article of faith.”You can choose to eliminate the immigration except in small cases (what you advocated above); you can accept the pushed out ROI;”I don’t believe there is any ROI to importing third- or fourth-world poverty. You are welcome to attempt to convince me otherwise, if you like. But consider this: if it were true, why wouldn’t other first world countries be competing with each other to import more immigrants from poor countries? Why is Israel building a wall to keep out African immigrants? Don’t Israelis want economic growth?”or you can accept the immigrants but restrict social benefits for a period of, say, 5 years (my preference, but might not pass legal muster).”It wouldn’t pass political muster, and so will never happen.

          1. Avi Deitcher

            No, it wouldn’t pass political muster, unfortunately. But that shouldn’t prevent us from discussing the ideas.”importing third- or fourth-world poverty,” implies that the people are the source of poverty, as opposed to the systems. An African or Mexican immigrant who struggles to get to American shores is not the inherent source of African or Mexican poverty; s/he is fleeing the poverty-creating system to an opportunity-creating place. I have far more respect for that immigrant who barely speaks English and works as a night janitor for 20 years, than for the trust-fund-baby who is living on the interest. Which is a net gain to society?I also don’t think (but do not know of studies) poor immigrants are coming to the US to get welfare benefits (free lunch). Many *do* choose Europe for that reason, however.I think we just have very different philosophies: people are not burdens, they are the sources of growth. To my view, Malthus has yet to be right.

          2. Dave Pinsen

            “No, it wouldn’t pass political muster, unfortunately. But that shouldn’t prevent us from discussing the ideas.”No, but we should acknowledge what sort of outcomes are politically possible.””importing third- or fourth-world poverty,” implies that the people are the source of poverty, as opposed to the systems. An African or Mexican immigrant who struggles to get to American shores is not the inherent source of African or Mexican poverty”What makes you so sure? Why don’t you think human capital has an impact on prosperity? Do you think it’s a coincidence that South Korea, whose 15 year olds are, on average, the best-performing academically in the OECD (according to the most recent PISA scores), has a per-capita GDP about double that of Mexico, which has the lowest PISA scores in the OECD? And if you want to blame that on the “educational system”, explain why Korean American kids do so much better academically, on average, than Mexican American kids.”I think we just have very different philosophies: people are not burdens, they are the sources of growth.”It’s not a question of philosophy. It’s an empirical question. If “people” in general were all sources of growth, growth companies such as Google wouldn’t be so selective in trying to hire the smartest.

          3. MikeSchinkel

            Dave Pinsen:”No, colonists and settlers before them founded the country, and made it a place later immigrants wanted to migrate to. That’s not to say immigrants didn’t contribute to the country, but neither your grandparents nor mine built this country. It was already a rising economic power in their day.”No, all those colonists and settlers were immigrants too. Google “define:immigrant” and you get “A person who comes to live permanently in a foreign country.” That’s effectively what the colonists and settlers were.Yes you can split hairs and say they were not immigrants because there was not an “official” country they came to live permanently in, but that’s just word hockey. And if you want to belabor the point maybe we should ask the native American indians their opinion.”But increasingly since then, poor immigrants are a net burden.”Economist magazine published a special report on Immigration in 2008 which contradicts that statement although with many nuances. As an aside that is why I like to get my insights from the Economist, they appear to me to be the least likely to spin facts to support a given ideology, at least as I have witnessed:http://www.economist.com/no…Note the above link is to just one of numerous articles in the special report; they don’t have a TOC page for their special reports; look for the sidebar with the links.”In economic terms, today, most poor immigrants objectively are not.”The study you quoted was published by an think tank whose position is to advocate for reduced immigration in the US:http://en.wikipedia.org/wik…That fact alone causes me to question their arguments and their conclusions because I know they have an ideology to promote.Note that I’m generally pro immigration from a humanist perspective but I’m more interested in what is the most pragmatic solution that does the best job of balancing the improvement of the lives for all involved. So I don’t have a strong position on this issus other than a desire to find the facts that best allow us to optimize the situation and a dislike for spin that obfuscates facts making it harder for good decisions to be made.

          4. Dave Pinsen

            “Yes you can split hairs and say they were not immigrants because there was not an “official” country they came to…”That’s not splitting hairs; that’s a crucial distinction.”And if you want to belabor the point maybe we should ask the native American indians their opinion.”Sure, ask them if they’d call the European conquistadors and colonists who came here were “immigrants”.”that is why I like to get my insights from the Economist, they appear to me to be the least likely to spin facts to support a given ideology…”I hate to sound harsh, but if you believe that, you are either ignorant or naive. The Economist has ideological biases in favor of migration/immigration and free trade.”The study you quoted was published by an think tank whose position is to advocate for reduced immigration in the US:”But the study is based on facts, which is why it’s consistent with other sources that aren’t advocates of reduced immigration to the US, such as the ones I included in my comment here a few years ago.”I’m more interested in what is the most pragmatic solution that does the best job of balancing the improvement of the lives for all involved.”How noble of you. But since we’re talking about immigration, it’s important to define “all”. If you define it as all Americans — including recent, legal immigrants — than mass immigration is not the best for most of them. It means government resources that could be spent on them will be spread more thinly, and it means more competition for scarce jobs.Now, on the other hand, if we define “all” as all people on planet earth, literally billions of whom are desperately poor, then the best thing would be to open our borders until we reach a migration equilibrium: when we are poor and crowded enough that no one else wants to come here. That might improve the lives of a billion or more people, even as it worsens the lives of most of the few hundred million current Americans.As @JLM:disqus correctly points out elsewhere on this thread, this isn’t T-ball: there’s no policy choice that lets everybody win.

          5. MikeSchinkel

            Dave Pinsen”If you believe that, you are either ignorant or naive. The Economist has ideological biases in favor of migration/immigration and free trade.”I am almost certainly both ignorant and naive. And for that matter I think it’s highly likely you are too.FYI, I don’t prefer the Economist because a simplistic assumption that I think they have a lack of bias, as you imply, I like them because they make their biases clear and they frequently report things that contradict their biases. That latter is something I find very few other news/information sources willing to do so I respect them for it and read what they publish with that understanding.”But the study is based on facts, which is why it’s consistent with other sources that aren’t advocates of reduced immigration to the US, such as the ones I included in my comment here a few years ago.”Although I find him more balanced than most on the right David Frum is an advocate for the Republican party so his positions are typically inline with the party platform. It’s not surprising to find him writing a negative spin on immigration. His “evidence” for that article? SAT scores. So if we have an increase in ESL students he is surprised that SAT scores decline? Doesn’t mean necessarily they are not intelligent, it means the results are not statistically valid. And that was written in 2010 when anti-immigration was really red meat for Republicans.The NYTime article is less suspect but it you had read the Economist study I linked it would have said much the same thing, that children of immigrants have a very different impact than first generation immigrants. But that’s a different discussion. Still the NYTimes article was mostly devoid of facts beyond anecdotes. It was a great human interest piece, but not a good basis for policy.Also, why are you bringing up these issues on a post about immigration for Startups? The people you are complaining about are not the ones that this post is addressing.”If you define it as all Americans — including recent, legal immigrants — than mass immigration is not the best for most of them.”That’s your opinion and you are free to have it. My opinion is not as black-and-white as that.It’s interesting that you have what comes across as such a strong negative opinion of this issue, almost visceral. That makes me wonder what caused you you to view this issue with such strong feelings.”That might improve the lives of a billion or more people, even as it worsens the lives of most of the few hundred million current Americans.”So, let them eat cake? We’ve got ours, let them get theirs? We were lucky enough win the birthright lottery, sucks to be you if you didn’t?”there’s no policy choice that lets everybody win.”Just wanting to understand what exactly you are saying. If you are saying that we are simply the lucky ones and we have no moral obligation to concern ourselves with those whose birthright was less preferable than ours, please state so explicitly so we’ll know where you stand.

          6. Dave Pinsen

            “FYI, I don’t prefer the Economist because a simplistic assumption that I think they have a lack of bias, as you imply”As your comment implied. And FWIW, Wikipedia pages aren’t absent bias either. The Center For Immigration Studies makes its perspective clear on its website:”The data collected by the Center during the past quarter-century has led many of our researchers to conclude that current, high levels of immigration are making it harder to achieve such important national objectives as better public schools, a cleaner environment, homeland security, and a living wage for every native-born and immigrant worker.””So if we have an increase in ESL students he is surprised that SAT scores decline?”It’s not just (or even primarily) a result of ESL students. Even 4th generation Mexican-Americans lag in educational attainment as well as pretty much every other socioeconomic category. There is plenty of research on this from numerous sources. Including, for example, this study by two UCLA sociologists.Also, remember that Mexico is the worst-performing country in the OECD in academics, according to the latest PISA stats. So it shouldn’t be surprising that people who come from a country that, on the whole, does poorly in academics, tend to do poorly when they get here. Similarly, it should be unsurprising that people who come from a country that does well in academics (South Korea), tend to do well when they come here.”That’s your opinion and you are free to have it.”It’s not just my opinion. It is a fact that poor immigrants consume more in government resources than they pay in taxes. And it’s a fact that the laws of supply and demand apply to the labor market, just as they do to other markets. You are welcome to do your own research on this if it interests you. Perhaps you would be less inclined to rationalize away studies you find on your own, than ones I provide links to here.”So, let them eat cake? We’ve got ours, let them get theirs?”We don’t all have “ours”, Mike. 20% of American men between the ages of 25 and 54 don’t have jobs. Why don’t you care about them? Why do you support policies that will tilt the economy further against them? Because the Economist says so?”Just wanting to understand what exactly you are saying.”See above. I’ve made my point clearly.

          7. MikeSchinkel

            Dave Pinsen – “As your comment implied. And FWIW, Wikipedia pages aren’t absent bias either. The Center For Immigration Studies makes its perspective clear on its website:”I think the only think we’ve both proven is that today we are able to find a biased source that reinforces our own opinions. Quoting anything these days is subject to bias concerns.I will say though that regarding Wikipedia being biased, maybe but can you honestly provide a better source that is generally less biased?”It’s not just (or even primarily) a result of ESL students. Even 4th generation Mexican-Americans lag in educational attainment as well as pretty much every other socioeconomic category.”Have you ever considered that one issue with immigration has to do with how we as a society and culture treat immigrants and what we do (or don’t do) to help ensure they become productive members of society?”Similarly, it should be unsurprising that people who come from a country that does well in academics (South Korea), tend to do well when they come here.”So are you saying you are +1 for South Korean immigrants and -1 for Mexican immigrants?”It’s not just my opinion.”Seriously? You are so certain of the infallibility of your own perspective that you assert it is only possible that it is pure fact? Really?Have you considered that other factors may be relevant? Have you considered that there are downstream benefits for immigrants that you are not considering in your calculation? When my state Georgia “got tough” on immigration it caused a $140 million loss for farmers according to Forbes. And I don’t mean they were required to hire non-immigrants at higher salaries, I mean there was nobody to do the job because non-immigrants would not do the work:http://www.forbes.com/sites… “You are welcome to do your own research on this if it interests you. Perhaps you would be less inclined to rationalize away studies you find on your own, than ones I provide links to here.”I have done research on this topic for years. And I have found it dominated by content published ideologues who have a particular world view they are trying to promote. And that frustrates me because we can’t have an honest conversation about any of it because everyone is trying so hard to spin the issue to have things seen their way. But then that’s no difference compared to any other wedge issue in politics, so why am I surprised?”We don’t all have “ours”, Mike. 20% of American men between the ages of 25 and 54 don’t have jobs. Why don’t you care about them?”You are implying that I don’t care about them, and you are dead wrong. We just have a difference of opinion as to what would benefit them.I think those people will continue be without work regardless of our immigration policy; lack of immigration is not a fix for them, but that’s a completely different discussion.I also think a pro-immigration policy designed to integrate immigrants into society would have a significant net positive and I’m assuming by your comments that you don’t. Since you don’t (right?) I’m also assuming you have an opinion that “It’s either them that’ll loose or it’s us that’ll loose and it ain’t gonna be us.” Am I correct in my assumptions? It’s okay if you feel that way, I think many (most?) people do. But I like to ask people to acknowledge that they have a “Look out for #1” philosophy rather than continue to rationalize otherwise, it makes for more honest communication.BTW, no need to continue this debate unless you absolutely feel compelled. You’ve not provided anything that I’ve found compelling to change my opinion and I doubt anything I can provide will change yours so we could waste more time or let it drop. I only replied because you just hit one of my hot buttons and I called you on it (though you don’t think I did) even though I new better than get sucked into the debate. <sigh>

          8. Dave Pinsen

            You don’t need to preface your comment to me with my name. The way comments are formated by Disqus lets me know you are responding to me.”I think the only think we’ve both proven is that today we are able to find a biased source that reinforces our own opinions. Quoting anything these days is subject to bias concerns.”That’s a false generalization. I’ve referred to facts which you’ve ignored (e.g., Mexico’s PISA scores), and you’ve made claims unsupported by facts (such as claiming that the poor academic performance of Mexican American students is due primarily to ESL students). I’ve also included sources that, if anything, are biased against the conclusions they’ve found. For example, the study by the two UCLA sociologists, Telles and Ortiz.”Seriously? You are so certain of the infallibility of your own perspective that you assert it is only possible that it is pure fact? Really?”No. You seem to have difficulty differentiating facts from opinions, as I mention again below. It’s a fact that poor immigrants consume more in government services than the pay in taxes (although it’s also true that poor natives cause a larger fiscal deficit than illegal immigrants, because natives are eligible for more government programs — this is a point the CIS paper I linked to previously made; and, IIRC, the National Academy of Sciences came to a similar conclusion in an earlier study.”Have you ever considered that one issue with immigration has to do with how we as a society and culture treat immigrants and what we do (or don’t do) to help ensure they become productive members of society?”Sure. And so have Telles and Ortiz, who ascribe some of the blame for the poor socioeconomic status of 4th generation Mexican Americans to society. All the more reason to focus on helping current Americans (including those 4th generation Mexican Americans) get a foothold on the economic ladder. Why not figure out how to help them succeed before bringing in millions of immigrants who, if history is a guide, will have face same difficulties (or worse, given our weaker economy today)?”So are you saying you are +1 for South Korean immigrants and -1 for Mexican immigrants?”In my initial comment to Avi I described the sort of immigration policy I’d advocate now, and it doesn’t make any reference to national origins.”When my state Georgia “got tough” on immigration it caused a $140 million loss for farmers according to Forbes. And I don’t mean they were required to hire non-immigrants at higher salaries, I mean there was nobody to do the job because non-immigrants would not do the work:”Interesting comment at that article,”Georgia currently has a 9% unemployment rate as measured by the most favorable metric. We are PAYING 9% of the population of Georgia to sit at home when there is honest work to be done?What’s wrong with this picture? I started my career picking crops … 5 cents for a quart box of strawberries, 10 cents for a quart of raspberries, $1.00 for a bucket of sweet cherries, & $1.25 for a bucket of sour cherries. It was honest work … and it taught me the value of money.Those values have stayed with me to this day. When I started my first company a few years later, these values of hard work and respect for the value of money played a key role in my successes”It’s also worth reading this, from CNBC reporter John Carney, “Phony Farm Labor Shortage: We Need To Talk About It”. Excerpt:”One way to test if there is a labor shortage on farms would be to look at the labor cost. If farms were truly struggling to find enough workers, their labor costs would be skyrocketing. But that isn’t what’s happening.The costs of workers hired directly by the farms didn’t grow at all between 2010 and 2011, according to the latest data from the Department of Agriculture. It contracted 3.8 percent, from $23.5 billion to $22.6 billion. Next year it is forecast by the Department of Agriculture to shrink by another 2.1 percent. In light of the rising revenues and profits of farms, this is not a labor market experiencing a worker shortage.What’s more, the total cost of hired labor on farms nationwide is still below pre-crisis levels, while farm profits are well above pre-crisis levels. This implies that far from farms seeing a labor shortage, there’s something of a farm labor glut going on.”Granted, that’s discussing national stats, rather than Georgia-specific. Feel free to provide the official (state or National ag agency numbers) stats for Georgia if you like. Maybe they paint a picture that bucks the national trends.”I have done research on this topic for years. And I have found it dominated by content published ideologues who have a particular world view they are trying to promote. And that frustrates me because we can’t have an honest conversation about any of it because everyone is trying so hard to spin the issue to have things seen their way.”You seem to have a devil of a time recognizing the existence of objective facts and separating them from opinion (a more neutral word than “spin”). Let me give you an example that may help. The study conducted by Telles and Ortiz about four generations of Mexican Americans contains data about their average educational attainment, poverty levels, etc. Those are facts. It also contains the researchers’ theories about why 4th generation Mexican Americans haven’t made more progress educationally, economically, etc. and what can be done to remedy that. Those are opinions.”You are implying that I don’t care about them, and you are dead wrong.”It was an obnoxious question, in response to a series of obnoxious question by you, implying that I didn’t care about poor people in other parts of the world. But it also emphasizes the point that policies can help one group of people while hurting another group of people. Which was JLM’s point.”Am I correct in my assumptions?”No.” But I like to ask people to acknowledge that they have a “Look out for #1” philosophy rather than continue to rationalize otherwise, it makes for more honest communication.”Are you always this obnoxious? Being concerned about the most economically vulnerable Americans, and how adding more job seekers now might affect them isn’t ‘looking out for #1’. What makes for more honest communication is not assuming that you are morally superior to the person you are communicating with.And thanks for suggesting that I didn’t need to respond to you. Allow me to reciprocate by suggesting the same. As for getting sucked into a debate, recall my correspondence was initially with Avi, you are the one who responded to me, if memory serves.

          9. MikeSchinkel

            Dave Pinsen – Sorry, I quote names so it’s clear to whom I’m speaking even if I don’t need to. Much like how my father taught me to use turn signals even if there is nobody around.”That’s just a false generalization.”No, that’s just your opinion. We can both have our opinions, but I won’t call your opinions “false.””I’ve referred to facts which you’ve ignored (e.g., Mexico’s PISA scores)”I haven’t ignored your facts. I have rejected the validity of your assertion that test scores define a causual relationship with your hypothesis that immigration is necessarily negative for the US economy. The pros and cons of issues like immigration are far too complex to accept a straight line between one fact to an overarching outcome.”and you’ve made claims unsupported by facts (such as claiming that the poor academic performance of Mexican American students is due primarily to ESL students).”And you are misrepresenting what I wrote. I used ESL as an example of a factor that your facts are not taking into consideration. I did not write ESL = poor academic performance of Mexican American students. My point was there are many factors you are not allowing in your consideration.”I’ve also included sources that, if anything, are biased against the conclusions they’ve found. For example, the study by the two UCLA sociologists, Telles and Ortiz.”And here’s another essay posted today from a well know right-learning pundit David Brooks who quotes “facts” to confirm his hypothesis that:”On immigration, the evidence is overwhelming; the best way forward is clear. … Increased immigration would boost the U.S. economy. … The second clear finding is that many of the fears associated with immigration, including illegal immigration, are overblown. … It’s also looking more likely that immigrants don’t even lower the wages for vulnerable, low-skill Americans. … The second big conclusion is that if we can’t pass a law this year, given the overwhelming strength of the evidence, then we really are a pathetic basket case of a nation.”From: http://www.nytimes.com/2013…Based on your comments thus far I’m sure you disagree with David even though he is quoting facts to support his hypothesis. Me, I tend to take everything with a grain of salt but then we’ve already determined that I am both ignorant and naive, right?”All the more reason to focus on helping current Americans (including those 4th generation Mexican Americans) get a foothold on the economic ladder. Why not figure out how to help them succeed before bringing in millions of immigrants who, if history is a guide, will have the same difficulties?”Because I think as a group that immigration will actually help them. What they need is an overall improved economy and I believe open immigration would be a huge boost to the economy. We disagree on this point so let’s just agree to disagree rather than you tell me I’m wrong because of your facts. We can both spend days finding and quoting material that will support our respectivel opinions, and what will that solve?However speaking of ignoring things, you’ve ignored my key question which is “How does the issue of low-skilled immigration relate to the topic of Fred’s post? Have you not simply hijacked this post’s comments for your anti-immigration rant?”Interesting comment at that article … What’s wrong with this picture? I started my career picking crops … 5 cents for a quart box of strawberries, 10 cents for a quart of raspberries, $1.00 for a bucket of sweet cherries, & $1.25 for a bucket of sour cherries. It was honest work … and it taught me the value of money. Those values have stayed with me to this day. When I started my first company a few years later, these values of hard work and respect for the value of money played a key role in my successes.”Funny, rather than address the facts I quoted that weaken your hypothesis you deflect to a rant about how you worked hard but out-of-work American won’t. Did you also walk 10 miles to primary school, in the snow, uphill, both ways?Who is it we need to demonize, the immigrants or “those good-for-nothing Americans?” (quotes=mine) Your assertion implies you think people who are capable of generated higher value for the economy should take jobs paying significantly less than their previous salary rather than find another higher value role in the economy. IMO having a large semgent of the population having to take jobs well below their previous pay levels is damaging to the economy in the long run because people relegated to a low paying position will have an incredibly hard time digging their way back out when many of them could contribute much more.I detect some angst towards others that it appears you feel are undeserving; am I off-base on that too?”You seem to have a devil of a time recognizing the existence of objective facts and separating them from opinion (a more neutral word than “spin”).”You seem to have a devil of a time recognizing the existence of objective facts and separating them from the validation of a hypothesis. Your facts don’t prove your hypothesis, they are merely one factor to consider.”But it also emphasizes the point that policies can help one group of people while hurting another group of people. Again, this isn’t T-ball, and there are people’s livelihoods at stake.”Saying it isn’t T-ball dumbs down the issue to a sound-bite and does a disservice to honest debate. You are claiming a zero-sum game and I am claiming that it is more complex than that and doesn’t have to be (zero-sum.)”Are you always this obnoxious?”Not at all. And yes I am being obnoxious in this thread; I tend to mirror the people I am communicating with. I appreciate that I’m being obnoxious, are you similarly aware of how your comments are viewed?”Being concerned about the most economically vulnerable Americans, and how adding more job seekers now might affect them isn’t a ‘looking out for #1’.”Your comments about picking strawberries and raspberries and how the most economically vulnerable Americans are sitting at home when “honest work is to be done” make it hard for me to appreciate that your primary concern is for those people “who won’t do honest work.”My gut tells me your there is more to your opposition to immigration than you are saying (or may even be aware of.) As an employer of many people over my almost 50 years I’ve had individual employees who frustrated me greatly, so much so that I used to have a saying I’d mention to my close friends in confidence when I was most frustrated: “You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make them think.”But when it comes to public policy I put on a completely different hat and try to envision what is good for the economy and citizens as a whole, I don’t allow my personal frustrations with prior employees to cloud my judgement. I also recognize that there will always be people on the low end of any bell curve even if I wish there were not. Good public policy doesn’t ignore those people nor assume they are all at fault. Remember, they vote too, and they can turn to crime if too desperate.In summary like David Brooks I too think that immigration is one of the best ways to help the entire economy, including the most economically vulnerable Americans. And on that let’s please just agree to disagre

    9. Brendan Duffy

      Your argument is technically sound, Avi. The question is, in an environment where a portion of the legislature is beholden to nativists, is it politically feasible?

      1. Avi Deitcher

        Politics = the art of the possible? I don’t really know. Sometimes my optimism does make my miss what is possible.

  9. kidmercury

    let’s see if it passes, i remain skeptical. the world is devolving towards nationalism, in spite of the nation-state becoming increasingly unfeasible. the terror hoax is why immigration got cut off and i suspect it will continue to be a major factor. in a way i am in favor of this, because perhaps it will contribute to cowardly and ignorant americans living up to their responsibility to live in awareness of the terror hoax. if they ignore that responsibility they should get the tyranny they deserve.

    1. Carl Rahn Griffith

      Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel…

      1. kidmercury

        #truth

    2. Danman

      What , if no nationalism, is poaching away talent from other societies and cultures instead of supporting and promoting transformative change in other places that can have a far greater marginal impact than someone coming to the states just to mix it up with every other startup dreamer. This post and your comment are ignorant of the impact American immigration has on source countries and societies. You want to tell yourself it’s a net positive, when in net it is a detriment that can even impact source country politics and history and development in deterministic ways. #TheRealTruth

      1. pointsnfigures

        Immigration isn’t a net detriment. If you isolate and focus on illegal aliens that take menial jobs and use up taxpayer funded government services, then it is. But, Startup Visa is a good idea. Of course, it could be abused, but all government programs can be abused.Gary Becker has done a lot of research at the University of Chicago on immigration and economics. He found that there are networks that are developed through immigration that have more positive externalities than negative. For example, The home lives for immigrants families left back in their country generally get better because the immigrant will send extra money back home. In our country, some immigrants with productive jobs become more productive members of society than many of our home grown citizens. They also register for our military in greater numbers etc. Becker thinks immigration is totally screwed up by bureaucracy not only in the US-but in governments world wide. Try to get a VISA to come to America in Poland. You have to save up enough money to bribe your way out.Becker’s solution: There is a supply of immigrants willing to take the risk to come to the US, and demand for high quality immigration. Where there is supply/demand, there is a price. The US ought to set a price and charge for citizenship. After you get over the shock of that idea, when you get into the weeds on it-the idea becomes compelling.As you read the comments here, you will read about government services, special needs, etc. If you are charging for immigration, you will get higher quality immigrants that don’t need them. They also will intrinsically be motivated, knowing they paid for the privilege of being a citizen. It’s a different psychological construct than sneaking across the border.

        1. fredwilson

          there are plenty of places in the world where you can buy citizenship

          1. pointsnfigures

            Singapore for example. But everyone wants to come here because we are the best place on earth.

          2. Rohan

            Hehehe. It’s all perspective….

          3. RudyC

            you must be sincerely joking? right? that kind of thinking went out a long time ago, friend..

          4. pointsnfigures

            So, where is better than the US? You could make an argument for Canada, but a country that has 20 yard endzones and 12 players I don’t know about.

          5. RudyC

            @fredwilson:disqus …including the US…it takes $500k and a few employees to buy residency in the US.

        2. JLM

          .Two things came to America on the Mayflower — syphilis and a bunch of folks who wanted to carve out a new life for themselves and were willing to brave a journey which literally was a killer, grapple with Indians and tame the wilderness.Syphilis is under control but the work ethic that these immigrants brought is no longer valued appropriately.I am in favor of anyone coming to the US who wants to work. Guy is willing to risk crossing the Rio Grande in summer to set stone, finish concrete and ranch — step to the front of MY line, my friend.Just agree that you will be a net tax contributor and not a government dependent and I am your greatest champion..

          1. Raj

            Corrected:Two things came to America on the Mayflower — syphilis and a bunch of debtors who wanted to escape their debts and were willing to brave a journey which literally was a killer, grapple with Indians and tame the wilderness.

          2. JLM

            Hmmm, there is no real evidence that the Pilgrims were debtors in any fashion. They were poor religious emigrants for the most part.I have no dog in this fight as I care not a whit about it.The original voyage was organized as a startup in which the colonists agreed to give one half of their holdings in the New World after 7 years of hard work developing them — to the original investors in return for their financing the journey.The colonists could work their own private holdings for 2 days per week — the origin of the 5-day work week and 2-day work weekend in the New World.JLM.

        3. ShanaC

          It is $680 to become a citizen, at least.

      2. kidmercury

        i’m confused because i’m not sure how much we disagree….i am pro-immigration, but the USA is the biggest thief in the world because of its foreign and monetary policies.

        1. pointsnfigures

          and Japan isn’t (poor monetary policy), or the EU? US isn’t any worse. Not any better either. But, at least we have the Bill of Rights for now.

          1. kidmercury

            i think the US uses its military power to engage in wars of offense, leading regime changes in countries whose government they don’t like. while monetary policy in most countries is terrible, US monetary policy has a larger impact because of how many countries peg their currency to the US dollar (they are stupid for doing so and deserve blame, but it does allow the US the privilege of exporting much of its inflation). there is also the undue influence the US has at the supranational level, given that world bank presidents are appointed by the US president — and in turn use their position in the world bank to get other countries to buy big industrial projects from US corporations. other places certainly have their flaws, big ones, but the ones listed here are distinctly american. as for the bill of rights, it has sadly been greatly eroded, to the point where i wonder if it even exists in practice or just on paper: the patriot act, no fly list, warrantless searches, and the rise of executive orders and executive bureaucracies have greatly eroded the intended form of government and the constitution.

  10. Abdallah Al-Hakim

    The longer and more difficult the US make it to foreign entrepreneurs to enter the county the more other countries will benefit! Canada has already passed a startup visa (has some flaws but is a good start) and other countries like Singapore are way ahead already when it comes to these policies.

  11. William Mougayar

    They don’t get it.Look at the Canadian program which Brad wrote about. It was a classical politically motivated move where they took credit for it & linked it to Canadian VC funding. In essence, if a credible Canadian VC wants to fund a company with entrepreneurs from abroad, that qualifies it. That’s it.It’s brilliant because only a handful get funded anyways, but it does get big headlines & sends the message that Canada welcomes startup entrepreneurs (which they did anyways as part of 250,000 new immigrants each year)

    1. FlavioGomes

      Canada has VC’s ???

      1. William Mougayar

        Ouch… No comment.

    2. Allen Lau

      The Canadian system is not perfect, but I still think linking it to VC / angel funding is a good idea. The government might not be best equipped to judge who is qualified.

      1. William Mougayar

        Of course that’s the only way. But their filter is a narrow one.

        1. Allen Lau

          Don’t disagree. It is narrow. But I don’t have a better suggestion.

    3. JLM

      .The other wrinkle from a US perspective is that the best entrepreneurs are going to school here.If we educate them, we are nuts to let them leave.JLM.

      1. William Mougayar

        Yes, I thought there’s a program already where they can stay for a year if they have a job, but I’m not sure if it applies to Masters & PhD’s only.

      2. LE

        “If we educate them, we are nuts to let them leave.”That’s why academics are in lala land. I mean what’s the chance that you would bring people into your business and teach them your secrets knowing they would leave? (Not saying there aren’t benefits to educating foreigners who will leave just doing a drive by on academics…Case in point that dude educated here that’s going to be running China.)

        1. JLM

          .Little known secret — many of the Red Chinese generals of Mao’s time were educated at VMI. A reason we may have stayed out of each other’s way for a long time..

  12. Adrian Clark

    More and more countries reckon this is a way to rebuild GDP, hoping some businesses will do well and a few businesses will strike it big – it’s a nationalised Y-Combinator. Here’s the UK version: http://www.ukba.homeoffice….

  13. andyswan

    Huge supporter of entrepreneurs here….heck I’m building the rest of my life around making them successful.No, I don’t care where you came from. There are no “African-entrepreneurs” or “Asian-entrepreneurs”….no hyphens in my world, no collections. Just individuals.But we MUST remember that as soon as we start allowing Government to pick winners, we are necessarily allowing Government to pick losers.We’ve seen this for far too long in the tax code, corporate influence, regulation, criminalization and every other liberty-restricting element of life that government touches.I have no question that the motives of everyone involved in the Startup Visa project are pure, especially Fred and including the President, but cannot in good conscience support this expansion of government power to choose winners in immigration by industry….because I know without a shadow of doubt that one day this very law will be used to allow one “friend of the family” in, while denying a place for the skilled brick-mason….whose calloused hands to wait their turn as he watches Solyndra 3.0 waltz on by.

    1. William Mougayar

      I agree with you, but it’s the ecosystem that chooses the winners, not the government. I think all you want is for the government to allow you to bring those talented people into the country.

    2. fredwilson

      go ahead and make perfect the enemy of the goodlet priniciples trump progressi am a pragmatist. i get stuff done. i don’t think about what should happen. i think about what will happen.

      1. andyswan

        I’m not after perfection. I didn’t even suggest it was possible. I don’t consider “expanded government power” to be progress, no matter which industry or group it might help in the short-term.It’s the exact same “principle” that led me to oppose the “progress” that many saw in SOPA, net neutrality, the patriot act, ObamaTaxCare, etc.When it comes to federal government power to corrupt and coerce— put me in the camp of NOT wanting stuff to get done.

        1. markslater

          fair points andy – then how would you do it different if you dont mind me asking?

          1. andyswan

            Open immigration for anyone 1) with no criminal record and 2) who will sign that they and their children are ineligible for all government benefit programs and 3) are subject to immediate deportation upon committing any felony.

          2. fredwilson

            never ever going to happen. its perfect. but it is also the enemy of the good

          3. markslater

            put like that – makes complete sense!

          4. andyswan

            Yes the ONLY reasons immigration is ever a problem is 1) crime and 2) draining of the public treasury.

          5. RichardF

            awesome!

          6. Aaron Klein

            Busy day for me, so glad to see I have no need to comment further. ;)This is how I’ve felt for years, as the dad of two legal immigrants.

          7. Jeffrey Hartmann

            Why do they have to be ineligible for all government aid? If they pay for it in taxes, they should be able to take advantage of it. I don’t mind with them having a time box where they can’t use it for a period of time but we shouldn’t prevent them from having access forever. People fall down sometimes, the point of the government benefit programs (not always in execution mind you) is to provide a safety net. I like people to have insurance, and I don’t mind paying for it if they paid into the system. We can obviously make things better with these systems so they aren’t abused (time boxing benefits for those that are able to work might be a good thing to try, vastly simplifying the system is probably a really good start as well).I really like the idea of more open immigration policies, but I am a pragmatist and think there are plenty of things we can do that will be a lot easier to pass. What do you do with the existing people here as well, that is a huge issue. I have many personal friends who make huge contributions to the community here, they have businesses, they pay taxes, they do work others do not want to do. They came here on lets say questionable circumstances because they had no other option to get here and saw America as the land of opportunity. They have blossomed here, and their children are well educated and were raised here from near infancy. I want more American’s like them here, they are foundation of what America is at its core. But we have chosen as a society to forget our roots and instead of welcoming the poor and downtrodden with open arms we are hold a sign ‘America is closed’. This attitude is what really needs to be fixed in my opinion.Jobs are not a zero sum game, the immigrants coming into the country grow the pie but too many people both on and off capital hill take the stance that they are taking jobs away. I can just here it now: “Hardworking ‘mericans are losing jobs to those damn spiks, guidos, (insert other racial slur here), think of the children!”. How many people made millions due to providing services to these communities? How many American owned businesses were built by these workers? Restaurants, Grocery stores, housing, etc. are all required by immigrants. They substantially grow the pie. Until America wakes up and remembers its roots, we are going to continue to make mistakes. Anything that gets us back to this attitude is good in my book. I don’t believe in perfect, but that doesn’t mean I don’t strive for perfection either. We need to still keep simplicity, fairness, and respect for others life and their property at heart when we make these small steps. Too often our leaders and our citizenry do not. But to limit our action with a ‘my way or the highway attitude’ is folly. Compromise is how things get done. I can tell you for certain that the rules on which our country were built were not just ‘delivered’ perfect with no argument and compromise. Life just doesn’t work that way.

          8. andyswan

            If they are ineligible for government aid then I know they’re coming in for the right reasons. I’m fine with them also being free from paying into redistribution schemes as well.In fact I think opting-out of the schemes of the collective is a human right that all of us should be afforded.

          9. ShanaC

            what is the right reason to come the US?

          10. andyswan

            opportunity to create, contribute, build wealth and liberty

          11. ShanaC

            How do you feel about refugees then?

          12. ShanaC

            The one problem with insurance is that too much of it also prevents you from taking risks. And I wish the government was better at balancing those sorts of issues in the way it structures aid programs

          13. Jeffrey Hartmann

            Actually this is a profound statement, and while I definitely consider myself a liberal I really think that we need to restructure how the aid programs work. I would love to see the aid programs give out much more money, but in a front-loaded way. Say you lose a job, Uncle Sam helps you pay for specifically targeted education and job training, but the money is for a specifically short term. You obviously would need to limit the number of times someone could use this sort of benefit as well. Right now we focus things on a hand out, not a hand up. I totally agree with so many conservatives on this issue, our entitlement programs suck. Focusing more on really helping people succeed when they scrap their knees and structuring the programs where it is very beneficial to get off them is key here. I have tons of ideas here but here are a few of them: welfare/unemployment becomes a government jobs program (Uncle Sam could use people to build infrastructure, clean highways etc.), increased access to SBA loans for those who have the aptitude to start a business, a one time I got a job benefit, automatically decreasing benefits that start high and rapidly drop to subsistence poverty levels (or not at all). Welfare and unemployment should be an awesome safety net that can REALLY get people back on their feet, not a cradle. I think the disabled and those who really can’t do work for legitimate reasons need a completely different program, but there are so many less of them.The government being an all encompassing nanny is what got us in the mortgage crisis after all. The government took all the risk, while the banks were laughing all the way to the … bank. That isn’t the governments job, it needs to be providing the things that we can not afford to do on our own and absolutely no more. Massive infrastructure projects that benefit everyone (commons style, not how we give monopoly power to certain industries in exchange for a subsidy), extremely high risk science and technology projects with high payoffs, a strong national defense, very minimal regulation to prevent gross fraud and ensure the basic safety of the populace, and a functional safety net that really gives a hand up. Not the bureaucratic albatross we have now where we have 12 different departments in the government to regulate salmon, or thousands of regulations to ‘gasp, think of the children!’. Sure it would be hard to get there from here, but every journey begins with a single step. For me it is all back to Fred’s comment of don’t let the perfect be the enemy of good. For the past year this has actually been my mantra and my wife is really tired of hearing it.

          14. Matt A. Myers

            It’s not as simple as you’re trying to make it out to be.How do you catch these people who committed crimes, enforce it?What about if these people get taken advantage of, and all of a sudden business (and they will, and do do this) pay as little as possible, below living costs — taking jobs away from others, who sure, maybe not as hard working — and though because living below living costs may / are statistically more likely to commit crimes ?And what happens when those people take jobs away from other people, other people who are on government benefits – and now need even more benefits because they aren’t going to be making as much money? Health issues will likely rise, crime will likely rise.The leading metric of “work getting done” is completely wrong. It’s GDP, where every financial transaction spent makes GDP go up. GPI is the method that needs to be used; Genuine Progress Index – whereby the health of an ecosystem is used as the leading metric, not things like if buying gas and gas-fueled cars that pollute our environment and make us sick = a good thing in GDP, whereby it would either be neutral or a bad thing relative to modes of transportation that are more efficient and not harmful to our health (which then if we get sick, in GDP it will show that someone being sick is a positive that because they’ll have to spend money on a doctor, medications, etc.. but in GPI, being sick would be a negative).GPI is needed so economists have a new, proper, healthy-holistic set of numbers to follow and manage. This is what the not-for-profit charity Neomae I am starting will help implement in Canada, of course along with subsidized yoga (and other things) for people.

          15. ShanaC

            2) Umm, does that include public education. I hope not. De Tocqueville never really liked the fact that we were very puritan and insisted on public education 🙂 Seriously though, one of the great things about public education (which also, in most cases, influences private education in this country) is the emphasis on civics. Americans aren’t born that way (even if they are) – they are educated into it. You want to the kids and grandkids to be Americans, they need to have the same opportunity of education as anyone else.

        2. fredwilson

          i know that and it bothers me to see someone so smart take that stance

          1. andyswan

            You should read the federalist papers again sometime. It’s fun to watch two very smart people disagree completely on the same problem. This debate is far from new.Hell I could argue that the entire Constitution is written in a way that was intended to make SURE that perfect was the enemy of the good, because our founders (smart guys) saw the danger of “the good” in government hands.Plus, it’s good for the DISQUSion.

          2. fredwilson

            we have amended that document 27 times i believe (need to check)it is not like the stone tablet that god gave mosesit is a document meant to be changed over time

          3. andyswan

            Well 15 since the first 10 were one batch with ratification…..and really the 2 about prohibition cancel each other out :)Yes…. and the amendment process is so arduous that I think it’s a shining example of making perfect the enemy of good by design!

          4. JLM

            .Bravo, you have already demonstrated more knowledge about the Constitution’s history than is known by 99% of America.It is very, very difficult to modify the Constitution, exactly the way the FFs intended it.Well played..

          5. kidmercury

            it’s not really that difficult to modify it. just issue an executive order! tada! problem solved!

          6. ShanaC

            it also means we’ve overly hallowed the document. Guys, it isn’t the bible.

        3. Matt A. Myers

          I really wonder what underlying anger you have that makes “expanded government power” such a wrong thing.The alternative is worse – and we already have that alternative in place; Profit-driven people/businesses who influence / bribe / lobby politicians (who are supposed to listen purely to citizens) are actually making decisions, so thereby it’s not really the government (the people) making decisions. It’s the ‘free market’ making those decisions, and where we are today is because of how much influence the free market has been able to have on government.

          1. andyswan

            No anger, just historical awareness.The rest of your comment reads precisely like an advertisement for the strict limitation of government power to me. What’s the profit motive in trying to influence a government that doesn’t have the power to do what you want?

          2. Matt A. Myers

            That’s not the actual problem.The problem is people with more money to spend, via profits, will be able to use it for influence, whereas others who don’t have as much or any to spend, will not be able to use money as part of leverage and manipulation. This of course perpetuates the most profitable businesses, which means lower profitable businesses become less to not sustainable.This is why unhealthy things get advertised more, convincing people to buy them, and why those products are more available to purchase – instead of healthier versions – because healthier versions don’t have as much profit to them, therefore there’s smaller marketing dollars, etc..This system has created a disposable society where we waste, instead of a society that buys into quality — which will have less profit to it because that time/money is going into either the manufacturing process, or the raw material.Do you disagree with this cycle existing, and if so, then why is it wrong?

          3. pointsnfigures

            I think they call the “alternative” you identify as Crony Capitalism. Or as we in Chicago know it-The Machine.

      2. Brandon Burns

        thats why you’re not a politician. :o)

      3. kidmercury

        the whole country agrees with you and repeatedly chooses the lesser of two evils. if you’re satisfied with the results over the past 12 years, keep it up. if not……

        1. fredwilson

          i am satisfied with the results of the past 224 years

          1. Aaron Klein

            +1

          2. andyswan

            that was a really good one Fred.

          3. JLM

            .Yes and in our short term cynicism, that really is the right yardstick.We continue to be the best deal out there warts and all.Well played.JLM.

          4. kidmercury

            of course, we can always cling to the glory days.

          5. fredwilson

            The Obama years?

          6. kidmercury

            hahahaha…..well i suppose it is always a matter of perspective…..perhaps you are comfortable describing great depression 2.0, the onset of which began during obama’s reign, as the glory days, although i aspire to a world in which poverty trends down, not up

          7. Cam MacRae

            One small point of order, Kid: Obama was still a nobody in 2006.

          8. kidmercury

            i guess it depends on when you want to pin the start date of great depression 2.0, but sure, many parties to blame and great depression 2.0 continues alive and well, with the worst yet to come, all under the reign of obama. not my idea of glory days, but then again i have a particularly strong dislike towards public policies that create poverty.

          9. Cam MacRae

            The generally accepted t_0 seems to be 2006, but the table was being laid out decades prior.The US really seems to have two choices: a debt jubilee or 20-30 years in the wilderness. I think we agree which one is more likely.

    3. Brandon Burns

      i agree with you in principle. however, industry preference has ruled visa law for decades — not just in the u.s., but in almost every country. its standard practice to give preference to “in demand” industries and skill sets, as its a tool for governments to insure that they grow their economies and work forces in a way that will keep them on top.because this system is already in place, it makes little sense to buck the trend now. and it makes total sense to get “startups” on the list along with STEM fields, wine industry / grape pickers, seasonal farmers, foreign language educators… and all the other random industries that are already on our countries preferrer skilled labor list.

    4. JLM

      .The government will continue to pick winners and, worse, push losers into the ditch — because NOTHING happened about things like Solyndra. Nothing.Not saying that is right but am saying it is REAL.The Solyndra episode is so corrupt as to be felonious. Huge amounts of money changing hands, big time fundraisers sullying the Lincoln bedroom sheets, huge campaign contributions resulting and the mainstream media virtually ignores the corruption.We are at an all time low in morality in Washington, DC and there is NO countervailing force..

      1. Jeffrey Hartmann

        I know people are going to crucify me for this but I’m going to say it anyway. People forget that Solyndra is something that Bush started and he actually tried to rush it through before Obama took office. I’m not biting on the George Kaiser connection, I think its bullshit.Not saying that this loan wasn’t a bad idea, but energy is a risky business and there is large payoff and large reward with these sorts of investments. Of course there is no reason to invest in diffuse energy (goto physics class if you don’t understand why), and we should be investing in stuff like Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors not solar if we really want to solve our energy problem. That being said investments in these areas are bound to be high risk/high reward propositions. I think the biggest problem with Solyndra actually was that we are allowing the Chinese to dump product here, and American companies can’t be competitive with that. If the government is going to invest in these sorts of things, we need to go all in and should have put trade barriers in place. Things were being produced without concern for environmental and worker safety and with huge Chinese government subsidy, the American product never had a chance. Solyndra’s technology was actually quite interesting. Their execution was shit to be sure, the trade environment was stacked against them and lots of other crap. But lets face it lots of company’s fall down trying to scale up and execute. Stop making Obama a villain for a failure in 1.3% of the DOE’s loan portfolio, its beneath you.

    5. Sean Saulsbury

      andyswam has his principles mixed up. The government has *already* picked loosers: everyone not in this country. By letting more people in via Startup Visa it picks *less* losers, i.e., is a *tiny* bit more of freedom. That’s not an expansion of government power, but a reduction. So we can, in good conscience, while standing on principle *and* doing the practical thing, support the startup visa.

      1. andyswan

        You obviously missed my “Open immigration” stance below.

        1. Sean Saulsbury

          If you are in favor of open immigration you should be in favor of the startup visa as a step in that direction.

    6. Matt A. Myers

      Immigration policy already exists to let specific people in with specific criteria. You can’t and don’t want people who can’t increase the productivity of society, unless you have systems in place that you know work help increase their productivity (health improving, education improving).

    7. FlavioGomes

      That startup may very well one day generate billions of wealth. Wealth that will be used to build tall stone buildings. Those calloused hands will be called upon eventually when the demand requires it.

  14. William Mougayar

    Here’s an idea. How about an “Adopt-an-entrepreneur” program.If I was a wealthy US citizen, I would put out $250K and sponsor a couple of talented foreign programmer or entrepreneur for a year and see what happens.If they get US VC funding in 1 year, then they should stay. If they don’t, they can return. It’s like an extended Accelerator program. Give them a chance.

    1. andyswan

      So for $750,000 I can smuggle anyone into the country I want but Jose in Mexico has to wait in line before he can join his cousins on the American job-site?

      1. William Mougayar

        I didn’t say that. I think somewhere else in these threads it was implied that the US has to fix their overall immigration process as a starting point. I was just talking in the context of tech startup visas.

      2. ShanaC

        we do that already with real estate developments.

      3. William Mougayar

        You’re making a perfect argument that would get debated for days in Congress and distract them from getting things done.

      4. JLM

        .If Jose is smart, he is just north of McAllen, Texas in the brush country right now because the winds of amnesty have begun to blow..

        1. LE

          “If Jose is smart, he is just north of McAllen, Texas”If Jose was smart he would have been anticipating this well in advance of any cutoffs and dates and already be settled in this country. As the say by time it makes the NYT it’s already to late.

          1. JLM

            .LE, babe, they do not read the NYT in Monterrey, my friend.Hell, we consider it a comic strip in Texas..

          2. LE

            Reference to the paper of record was arbitrary and meant “keep on top of the news somehow” (you said “If Jose was smart”).By the way regardless of what the people in Texas think of the NYT you aren’t denying that it has influence are you? (Food fight!)

          3. JLM

            .Of course not. What the Hell are you going to use to line a bird cage? The Austin American Statesman? Hell, no.The NYT is a great newspaper, just spoofing you a bit.Next thing you will be telling me is you have BBQ in NYC, eh?http://themusingsofthebigre…On Earth as it is in Texas!JLM.

          4. LE

            I’m not in NYC. I’m in the Philly metro area. And we’ve been raised to think we suck here. [1] I remember the first time traveling to other cities and having cab drivers say things like “we just love it here”.”On Earth as it is in Texas!”Musical selection of the day (Carly Simon, “You’re so Vain” live in Martha’s Vineyard):http://www.youtube.com/watc…[1] See how it’s not a good idea to talk about your deficiencies and how it just maintains old stereotypes? As opposed to you (and NYC’s) rah rah about how great your region is.

          5. JLM

            .I love Philadelphia. Best pretzels in the world. I have eaten many an entertaining dinner on the deck of the Moshulu and in Head House Square.Last fist fight I was in was in an Irish pub right around the corner from HHS — I was finally able to use my hand to hand combat skills from Ranger School. Surprisingly, they worked as advertised.Plus I love the cradle of liberty that is Philadelphia..Did I mention cheese steaks?You have much to love and be proud of, friend. And even a Texan would tip his hat to ya’ll.JLM.

      5. LE

        “So for $750,000 I can smuggle anyone into the country”For my $750,000 I want “will that be all Mr. LE anything else I can do for you?” (Actually that is what my wife does, never mind).

      6. ShanaC

        it is $500,000 for an eb-5 if you know what you are doing

    2. JLM

      .It is long overdue for Canada and Mexico to become part of the US with commonwealth status like Puerto Rico.Build a 12-lane highway, a railroad, a power grid, a telecom ROW and a pipeline from Winnepeg to Huatulco.A nuclear power plant every 200 miles and a landing strip every 300 miles.JLM.

      1. William Mougayar

        Let’s do it :)Virtually, there is no border.

  15. ShanaC

    A) We need people who don’t want to start business as much as work in them. It is fine if everyone is not an entrepreneur, just as it is fine that everyone is not Shakespeare.B) I’m annoyed by this bill. what if you graduate with a skiled degree (or just a degree). You need to apply for H1B1. You can’t go crisscrossing the US as a fry cook, and then go use your degree, or something like that. Not only that – none of the time you spent in school counts towards time spent here for greencard/citizenship purposes.Just to give you an idea about how not nice it is: My best friend has been here for about 7 years. She’s in the middle of a phd in Comp Sci. Normally, those 7 years would count on a greencard, so if she had one, she could take a citizenship exam (which she would). Nope – student visas don’t count at all towards greencard time.(and for our friendly canadians: if you come here on NAFTA – same problem.)

    1. Carl Rahn Griffith

      My L1 work visa experience, 2002-4 – let alone visa issues regarding my wife – was enough to put me off for life…

      1. ShanaC

        I’m tempted to petition the government over it, and buy ads on facebook against the top 40 undergraduate schools to piss people off about their friends.

  16. Saurabh Hooda

    That’s a really great step. I hope it will not have too many terms and conditions to make it impractical. One that i found just after reading 2 paragraphs is:–They could “remain permanently” in the country if their startups continue to grow, he said.—Where is the world you have something that continue to grow 🙂

  17. Mario Bucolo

    Canadian initiative, start on April 1st, wake-up things? Hope there are no limitation on people with a degree in US…

  18. Elia Freedman

    I get frustrated, too, with our government’s speed to fix things. But then I remember that it was designed that way. Deliberation is a good thing at the government level. I think SOPA and PIPA and the speed by which they were passing through Congress is the anomaly. (And look how bad those were.)

    1. JLM

      .The JOBS Act which was to be like the discovery of penicillin was signed in April of 2012.The SEC has still not finalized the rules.The SEC is still a 2R 2D body — supposed to be apolitical. SEC still does not have an effective head.Washington just can’t get stuff done.This is a failure of leadership that begins at the top.If I were President, I would call in the SEC and tell them — “Two weeks and if not done then all of ya’ll are fired. Understood? Get out of my office.”JLM.

      1. Elia Freedman

        Good point, JLM.

  19. BillMcNeely

    Work visas are one area America needs to get better at. They work overseas because the visa is tied to a person or company and a fee charged. Somebody else is responsible for your conduct and the fee authorizes you to use benefits in that country.American businesses seem to want all the cost savings associated with a foreign worker with skills but can’t be bother with a little bit of outlay of time and cash. I can’t tell you how many job postings I have seen where firms say we don’t sponsor visas. No wonder we have an illegal immigrant problem.

  20. JLM

    .On a day when the US economy is acknowledged to be CONTRACTING again and consumer confidence is at a new low — when payroll taxes are siphoning cash from every paycheck in America, tax rates have gone up and the unclean worm that is the cost of Obamacare is now just beginning to feast on the lining of your wallet, having already digested all the cash — it is good to see that we are debating immigration because it takes our eye off the really important stuff like the economy and jobs. Typical sideshow discussion.Whose fault?Having said that I come down on the side of getting done what can get done.This government obviously is not competent to build a fence (me, I would have taken bids from Viking Fence of Austin, Texas and given them the job) along our southern border, so let’s get what we can on immigration.Why?Because it is a political football — which Pres Obama spiked with his Executive Order Dream Act ambush — and not one person involved really gives a crap about the social issues or we would be seeing a more robust debate focused on border security, offshoring and job growth incentives.I applaud every commenter on this blog today — unique historic happening EVERYONE IS ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.Having said that, the immigration issue WILL be resolved with a general amnesty and a path to citizenship like the Natchez Trace — clear, unambiguous and right along the Mississippi, waterfront lark.Why?Because this has absolutely nothing to do with immigration. This has to do with harvesting this demographic to create a voting bloc and to attempt to gain authorship and branding for the next Congressional and Presidential elections.Start your engines, the mid-terms have begun.If successful, the Democrats will regain the House.When the Bill makes it to the President’s desk it will be decorated like a Christmas tree with more amendments — includig the ones contemplated by this AVC debate — that is the new norm.The Congress passed a $60B disaster relief bill replete with $45B of other crap. Crap $45B. Disaster relief $15B.And that fat cat from Jersey — Big Chris Christie — got a huge dividend for his Obama bromance. He will be re-elected as Gov because he, in essence, became a Democrat.It has become so desperate and silly in Washington that this is the only kind of legislation that can be accomplished.JLM.

    1. LE

      “And that fat cat from Jersey — Big Chris Christie — got a huge dividend for his Obama bromance. He will be re-elected as Gov because he, in essence, became a Democrat.”Unless of course he continues to get dissed by his own party and can’t deliver for NJ as a result of that bromance. Did he consider that possibility – he didn’tWhat happened with the Sandy Aid:http://www.app.com/article/…Specifically “GOP Gov. Chris Christie questions tactics by House members from his own party.”

      1. JLM

        .He scared off Corey Booker and that might be game, set, match right there..

    2. ShanaC

      You mean Chris Christie the guy who put NJ bonds at risk?

  21. Guest

    The US government goes out of its way to make it easier for American Companies to acquire Global Markets (through Trade agreements) but acquiring Global Talent? That’s a fallacy. Keep that Out!

  22. RudyC

    This President should just as Reagan used to say, “Stay the Course”. In my opinion that means finish what he should have in his first admin. As far as start up visa is concerned, no. Considering that most states don’t have some kind of tech this will become about immigration period. It’s honestly not worth the political capital.He should do:1. Support marijuana reform: This is a BS policy that has to go away. The IRS has simply put killed any support that the states/cities have fostered. Considering that the most profitable product the cartel produces is marijuana it is time to take this off the drug list. The President has supported doing something but surprise, nothing has happened.2. Legalized gambling: Enough said..same as topic 1. Nothing done, much promised.3. Prosecute Wall Streeters. Countrywide Mozilo maybe able to prove he ‘didn’t know’, Shearson with the transfer of billions of and on the ledger sheet will have a harder time proving and Jon Corizine is a simple as Bernie Madoff. This again is an embarassment to the country, period!4. Let’s start w/that and we can take the list further..btw: full disclosure, I voted for this man, tells you what I thought of the other clown…

    1. JLM

      .Tom’w I will go to the funeral of a fine young man who overdosed on heroin. He came from a wealth family, his parents did nothing wrong, he was a damn good kid.He is dead.His parents are devastated.I am heartbroken at the loss of that human potential.There is no solace available to anyone.Legalize marijuana — the first drug he ever used — and then buy stock in a casket company. There will be many more dead as they graduate from marijuana to heroin.Spare me all the sophomoric, libertarian arguments.I mourn for the dead.JLM.

      1. fredwilson

        It could just as easily have been alcohol. Addiction is a disease.

        1. JLM

          Of course alcohol is part of the problem. I am not sure this has anything at all to do with addiction. Happens all too fast. Almost not enough time to get to addiction.You get drunk, you smoke a joint.You smoke a joint, and then you try some coke.You try some coke, you…………………..try some heroin.You don’t know shit about heroin, so you overdose.YOU DIE.I don’t care what the first step is on the road to death.I want it stopped and everyone needs to get over the notion that marijuana is a stopping point, it is not.It is the first turn in the death spiral. A link in the chain. Break the damn chain.JLM.

          1. fredwilson

            Its been a stopping point for me and almost everyone I know. Its like alcohol but not as dangerous

          2. JLM

            .Good point, it was not legal and the conduit was not as open.Today, weed, coke, heroin — all at the same party in different rooms.Your kids are at that party — what’s behind door no 3 — and they are stoned.The cemeteries are filling up with folks who are not you.The US had a moment of clarity on this when they tried to help stomp it out in Columbia in the 1970s when we had SF units down there killing drug lords.We will lose the war in A’tan because we ignored the poppy fields.For all of that BIG PICTURE, it is the micro that has captured me.I don’t want to go to any more funerals. Particularly for your kids.JLM.

          3. RudyC

            @JLM…I’m sorry for your lose, I truly am. But it is a simple fact that people are going to be using marijuana, period. My mother probably over uses prescription medicine more so, but facts are facts.People are going to die, period. I do not buy the idea of ‘weed’ being a ‘gateway’ drug. I’ve also heard the argument that by putting weed along side of herion gives it the impression that if weed didn’t kill me, neither will herion.All I’m saying is the violence the drug cartels are pushing on us, mainly here in California is way out of hand. It is prohibition all over again. It has to stop, PERIOD!

          4. JLM

            .Surrender is not a survival strategy.Sometimes fighting and never surrendering is the right strategy. Stakes are way too high for me to ever consider surrendering.I would rather try to drain the Atlantic with a bucket than ever accept that a young person has to die on heroin because “people are going to die”.Not on my watch do I ever surrender. Ever. Never. Charge Hell and quench its fires with a good spit and half a thimble of water.You do not have to buy anything as it relates to marijuana being a gateway drug, I am not selling you anything. The evidence speaks for itself.The cold dead body of that young kid is all the evidence one needs. He started on marijuana. Ended with heroin. Lost his life in the process.No quit here when facing evil. Not when something as precious as life is involved.JLM.

          5. RudyC

            weed in this country will be one day legal in some way. Hopefully, not in the way Cali has it set up but a more legit format with tight regulations on suppliers.You can argue and I would agree that the ‘fight’ is what is keeping drugs alive in this country. Most herion is coming from Afgan, which in turn the admin. has ordered the soldiers NOT to destroy, of from what I understand, most of the herion is coming back w/soldiers.Mexico has made itself into the largest distributors of illegal drugs in the US. It’s only a matter of time before the cartels come into the US. We are funding them by NOT making weed legal. Mexico manufactures weed and meth. Meth is a small market. Most of the profits come from weed which subsidize the others, much like a business. Take the major market money maker out of the equation and the other drugs price has to go up, not down. Much like cigarettes, people have stopped smoking as much for the education as much as the price.

          6. JLM

            .Your facts are just not right. Read this fairly scholarly piece on the Afghan heroin issue. It is illuminating.http://services.lib.mtu.edu…Most of the Afghan heroin ends up in Europe. 90% of European supply is Afghani.The US Army is allying itself with the warlords against the Taliban. The warlords are the protectors of the drug producers.Ironically when the US Army wins, the warlords win and the drug producers win.This is homegrown corruption and accounts for a $4B annual income. Huge stakes in that part of the world.The Taliban, in retaliation, has now gone into the financing of poppy crops providing seed and credit. A crafty means of undermining US military and warlord legitimacy.The Afghans are producing both heroin and hashish (marijuana derivative). A very complex problem.The experience with cigarettes in the US as it relates to education, taxes and enforcement has been a very good but gradual experience. But they never surrendered to the tobacco companies.FYI, there IS an existing Federal tax on marijuana and it is routinely used to make cases. Tax cases..

          7. sdefor01

            Thank you JLM. Amazing what facts are revealed when we squelch out the TV chatter, seek to truly understand the issues, and READ!

          8. JLM

            .I think that 90% of what we hear on television is bullshit. The facts of a situation are obscured and some folks get away with saying anything and the media is not smart enough or experienced enough to call bullshit on them.My favorite recent one was the utterance by Sec of Defense Panetta when he said that they did not send in soldiers — into Benghazi — because they “did not fully understand the situation on the ground”.Having been a professional soldier and a Ranger, that is exactly WHY you do send in soldiers. To sort out what you do NOT know.Plus they had a couple of former SEALs on the ground. They are not chopped liver.They also had cameras on the ground and cell phone contact. They had a drone overhead and a C-130 Puff the Magic Dragon gun platform.The right thing to have done was to saddle up a company of Rangers and say to the Captain commanding: “Captain, take your company up there and sort that shit out pronto. Report back as soon as you have boots on the ground. Questions?”That was all it would have taken.Nobody in the media ever questioned Panetta’s utterance. It was all bullshit.Knowing the truth of a situation is essential to solving any problem.JLM.

          9. pointsnfigures

            sorry for your loss JLM. But my libertarian head is for the legalization of all drugs for a variety of reasons-most stemming from Milton Friedman and the opportunity costs to contain them. No drug user should have access to any government program. change the economics, change the behavior.

          10. JLM

            .Normally such an argument might get a bit of traction but the dead bodies — when you know them — take the theory out of it and make it very, very, very real.An epiphany moment.A wonderful family. Tragedy.JLM.

          11. Richard

            5-20 years from now we will learn just how harmful pot is and only a fools fool will smoke it and it will cost 5k in bealthcafe premiums to do so.

      2. ShanaC

        I honestly think the laws and treaties we have on scheduling make addiction problems worse.Schedule 1 drugs are effectively unstudyable in wide, double blind studies.Meanwhile we already are seeing evidence that certain cannaboids, for example, help cause people to eat when they are severely nauseated (eg: those going through cancer). And we’re not sure about which ones do what, or the mechanisms by which they do so.Or why E + Therapy makes dealing with PSTD easier: http://www.nytimes.com/2012…Or why super low doses of LSD seems to help with severe anxiety, especially that of impending death of terminal patients.So we don’t know how these drugs work and why they affect the brain the way they do^Meanwhile, the most probable first highly addicitive drug your friend was probably was exposed to (if he is close to me in age) is schedule 2: Methyphenidate. (trade name: Ritalin*). I’m pretty sure most people here if they know someone with severe ADHD probably wouldn’t get rid of that drug.*And as an FYI: Methyphenidate is one of this country’s most studied drug because of its use on children. If used correctly it is extremely safe.^Granted, we don’t really know a lot about psychiatric drugs, which are blunt tools for some serious illnesses

      3. FlavioGomes

        Nonsense… The only reason he was likely exposed to heroin was that the pot was relegated to the back alley’s of the criminal underworld…where heroin hides best.

  23. Shaun Kruger

    The really unfortunate thing is that such permission is required at all to come here and start something valuable. How much great talent will never be able to come here because there is such a strong desire to keep strangers out?

    1. FlavioGomes

      Not sure if that’s true, but I feel as if it is.

  24. LE

    “It’s a shame that it takes almost four years before a good idea gets the President’s support.”Obama was busy meeting his kids teachers and doing the JFK thing with Michelle when he was first elected so you need to give him a break.Seriously while I don’t know what the correct time for something like this to happen is (I mean it’s not 20 years and it’s not 3 mos it’s somewhere in between) you have to keep in mind that in a major issue like this there are many sides to consider in order to not screw up and come to the right conclusion (as if that can actually happen). Because once a path is set it’s hard to reverse course. And all sides in the debate need to be considered. I mean how quickly should that process happen? And why is it fair if the aforementioned people have decided that this is a good idea that it is a good idea in total for all parties affected?Things take time, proposals take time, people take vacations, phone calls don’t get returned that’s the nature of something that involves many people. I mean if you want to make a restaurant reservation for just yourself you can do that it a second. If you need to do it for 16 people and coordinate times and dates it will take a bit. I don’t have to go through purchasing to buy something. I just get in my car drive to the Apple store 15 minutes after I decide I want something I have it in my hand (store is really close). I have customers that require purchase orders and signed paperwork and invoices to make a $30 purchase. [1]Additionally things done quickly tend to get pushed through and take advantage of people’s lack of time to carefully consider all the implications and launch a counter offensive (my ex is a master of that process).As an entrepreneur the great thing is if you have an idea you can do it and you don’t need to convince anyone and you are there to clean up the mess. But once there are others involved you have to be careful. Try buying carpet for the house on your own. And if you are a politician you aren’t going to immediately get on board and support something without extracting something in return. That’s the nature of the way it all works. That’s not going to change even if you get hipsters from Brooklyn to run the country. People are people.Anyone care to elaborate on the reasons for the opposition to this idea “many in Congress who will still vote against this idea”?[1] True story we have city governments and school districts that can’t use credit cards to make a purchase. So we have a policy that if they need to use a PO we have a minimum purchase of $95 and have never had a complaint about that. That’s in addition to the amount of work it takes them to actually do a PO to buy something. Not to mention getting you “signed up as a vendor” (fill out a few pages of paperwork). There’s a startup idea in there somewhere that’s not being exploited in this area.

    1. JLM

      .Not ready for prime time then. Not ready for prime time now.A damn good — single trick pony — campaigner and nothing more. A wily, skillful, adept practitioner of running a big data, cutting edge campaign and one of the biggest liars of our times, Hell any time.Completely devoid of any leadership talent or interest.He knows exactly what he is doing. Like Hitler and Mein Kampf, it is in his books. Bigger than Dallas.JLM.

      1. LE

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wik…(Except I agree with you but it’s always great when a discussion goes that direction.)

        1. JLM

          .I am not in any way suggesting any comparison between Obama and Hitler.It’s the books.Everything about Hitler’s future policies and craziness was in Mein Kampf. People failed to read and comprehend.Everything about Obama’s future policies is in his two books. People failed to read and comprehend.Any other linkage is not my intention. Only the books.JLM.

          1. pointsnfigures

            No, Obama is more like his bud Bill Ayers, and that’s not really typed Tongue in Cheek.

          2. JLM

            .Irony, you funny drunken bitch.Of course, the urban legend is that Monsieur Ayers did, in fact, ghost write one or both of Pres Obama’s books.Life is stranger than fiction.JLM.

          3. pointsnfigures

            he babysat the kids.

  25. Balu Chandrasekaran

    Great discussion going on here. I have a personal perspective and a policy perspective.Personal: I’ve lived in the US since 2003 and moved here for college. My undergrad alma mater (or some generous donor) paid $160K for me to attend college. Then I worked for 3 years, then got myself an MBA, and have spent the last year and a half as a founder. As ShanaC mentioned, the 10 years I’ve spent here simply don’t count towards the greencard. So from a personal standpoint, I’m happy to see the US take any steps in this direction. Because this is my home and I refuse to go anywhere else to build the companies I want to build. So like @twitter-43411847:disqus, I am simply thankful for any steps the US will take.Policy: Recently, my friends wrote me about Canada’s startup visa program (see http://startupnorth.ca/2013…. Canada and Australia are both light years ahead of the US in terms of their thinking about immigration policy with their points-based immigration systems. They also have easier political systems to work through and they don’t have to deal with the very complex issue of immigration from south of the border.The proposed Startup Visa and the STEM greencard are not so much “special needs” policies as they are simply an acknowledgement of the reality of this country’s political dynamic today. Even the most comprehensive immigration reform here will not be all that comprehensive. It will involve compromises, and two of those compromises are the Startup Visa and the STEM Greencard, because they are both more palatable to the US Congress than a broad-based “entrepreneur visa” that will allow anyone wanting to “start a company” to do so.Hey I’d love for there to be a broad-based entrepreneur visa that is agnostic of industry. But as @fredwilson:disqus said, you have to get shit done. A broad-based entrepreneur visa just ain’t gonna happen in 2013. Maybe in 2021.P.S. FYI, Obama’s administration has already made it easy for immigrant entrepreneurs already in the US to stay here through a “backdoor” solution. The USCIS now allows certain US-based foreign-born entrepreneurs to file employment-based greencard petitions without a sponsoring employer. This has gone under the radar, but is a step in the right direction.

    1. JLM

      .Why not marry an American woman?.

        1. JLM

          .That particular entreaty will not likely be the successful endeavor one might envision.”Woman, get away.”Not approved by charms schools everywhere.JLM.

      1. FAKE GRIMLOCK

        WHY FORCE SOMEONE TO?

      2. ShanaC

        what is wrong with marrying for love? or out of tradition?

        1. Balu Chandrasekaran

          How about killing two birds with one stone.

      3. Balu Chandrasekaran

        Ah yes, that thought has definitely crossed my mind. Waiting for the one 🙂

        1. Julianna Dawry

          Marry me

      4. Lindsey fowler

        Or better yet, marry an american with a 2 year contract ? Just about time you get a citizenship…

  26. John Ruffolo

    Fred, in Canada, we announced a Start-up Visa program last week that will be game-changing for immigration for the tech community in Canada. We used the US as a model of what not to do with regards to immigration policy….

  27. Victor Balasa

    This sounds like an educated plan from Obama. I hope it passes through the Congress with ease.From my viewpoint as a european tech entrepreneur, it makes moving to the US even more appealing.

  28. Terry J Leach

    It boogles my mind when I try to understand why anyone in congress would be against Startup Visa. Why? Are they against jobs and wealth creation? It makes zero sense! Being against Startup Visa means this country is no longer a country that creates new solutions.

    1. JLM

      .Because it does not represent a voting bloc of any kind and therefore it cannot be used to retain entrenched politicians..

    2. Carl Rahn Griffith

      Anyway, why should all entrepreneurs be expected to flock to the USA? It’s a loss to their own country of origin, which paid for their education, etc. What we need is a mind-set where people believe they can innovate and start-up anywhere in the world, not just the USA. It’s a global economy, after all – and if we made it all a bit more equitable there might be some more parity and true globalisation/harmony in the world…

      1. Terry J Leach

        Who says all entrepreneurs expect to come to the United States? If an entrepreneur believes that US is the best place to create her or his dream, then they should be allowed the possibility of making it happen. Immigrants have created some of the US greatest companies. They felt that this was the country to have it happen.There is no magic pill or dogma to transform the “mind-set” of entrepreneurs to believe that their talents would be best used at their country of origin. They know reality. Have you read the World Bank ranking of economies for ease of doing business? Here is a link http://www.doingbusiness.or…. I would challenge you to talk with any entrepreneur from one of the poorly ranked economies about changing his “mind-set”,

      2. FAKE GRIMLOCK

        BECAUSE USA WANT TO WIN.

        1. Carl Rahn Griffith

          Team America!Great movie. Loved the puppets.

  29. cfrerebeau

    As an entrepreneur who had to get a visa to work here, I can but only support this project. As my startup scaled up I was able to be sponsored. But it was a real pain.However I believe evil is in the details and I can see how criteria on how to pick entrepreneur that are eligible for a visa will be difficult – and I hope their will be no quota per country like for the H1-B. Anyway anything will be better than what we have now.

  30. Guest

    I support immigration reform in general. I also support US business that outsource in order to lower costs. I do not, however, support the “Startup Visa”. Here’s why:* What is wrong with domestic entrepreneurs that were born (or naturalized) here? I don’t see why there should be a demand for those aboard when we have plenty here.* I was reading through the comments on startupvisa.com. I somewhat agree with this one:“lengels8220The only PROBLEM with that idea, is that, IT AIN’T THEIR COUNTRY. They can go home and work within their own communities, instead of taking resources from American citizens who have been here their whole lives, often many generations.· March 8 at 11:04am“* I feel that the Startup Visa would drain funding away from US citizens. That we would be letting outsiders “leapfrog” over Americans competing for either capital or employment. This is not a failure by the US to recruit, it’s a failure to recognize what we already have. This not a matter of “all or nothing”. Immigration reform, in general , can be a controversial topic at times when unemployment is high (and even when it is “low” so to speak) because they view newcomers as potential competition.I’m all for allowing those that are already here the opportunity to legitimize their citizenship. However, realize there is a big difference between agricultural workers and technology “entrepreneurs” . You will not find them enjoying Napa Valley wine and cheese while sitting in front of their Macbook Pro’s reading through the latest Techcrunch articles or Lean Startup methodology. They (and not just immigrants, but the blue-collar community as a whole) live a lifestyle asymmetric to most of us, but they are still happy. Their goal is to provide for their family and loved ones, not to make the already wealthy limited partners of a Venture Capital firm even richer.* Here’s a comment from a TechCrunch article on the matter:”Flooding the country with more foreigners will not help things. You would think that with a country with a population well over 300 million they could find bright young people inside the country and not need to import them.”* Do I think that there are some problems to the current immigration policy? Yes, there are. But understand that there is a process to which these things are reformed. We must not let one group skip to the front of the line just because they want to start a business here and raise VC money. As a nation, we must first improve from within. The greatest threat to our national security is not terrorism, but our economic instability. We must balance the federal budget in the year 2013. After we have solved our domestic problems, we can then start to allow more immigration. At this time, it is a low priority and I am disappointed with Obama’s lack of urgency on serious issues.

  31. Voltaire's Ghost

    Making perfect the enemy of good?Coming to a different conclusion is not making perfect the enemy of good. Using history as a guide to makie an informed decision is not making perfect the enemy of good.’Good’ is not what is easy, nor most convenient. Learn from past mistakes … and the mistakes of the past are that narrowly defined rules/regs that seemingly benefit, or favor, one particular group over another do not seem to work, nor are they fair.Making perfect the enemy of good?The way this staement is being used almost reminds of the misued adage “it’s better to seek forgiveness than ask permission.”It is a statement now used for convenience, or laziness at its worst. In truly NEW areas or endeavors the statement above should be given credence. However, I am not sure the intent of the spirit in the above phrase(s) should be used as an excuse to do whatever one wants to do … especially when history (hell, often just common sense) offers data, information and results that strongly indicate what is likely to happen.Voltaire quote: “There is a wide difference between speaking to deceive, and being silent to be impenetrable.” ~Voltaire

  32. Eric Brooke

    Fred I wish you good luck with The Startup Visa campaign.I am part up the Startup Visa Canada campaign team (http://startupvisa.ca) and as you may know it will now be launched in April this year. We learnt a lot from yours and your colleagues campaign. I am sure will get some some parts right and some parts wrong, so maybe you can learn from our journey. Like you it just seems to make sense and it often frustrates me when people i hear “but what if” statements and reminds me why I thrive in startups where the statements are “lets get shit done”, or “fail fast and learn”.A couple of the stats that I use from the US -1) 46 percent, or 23 out of 50, of the country’s top venture-funded companies had at least one immigrant founder.2) 52% of startups in silicon valley were formed with an immigrant founder (http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3…One of my favourite star trek/Spock quotes is “infinity diversity leads to infinity possibilities”.I have no doubt that Canada will have a competitive advantage over the US while Canada has the visa and the US does not. That said I wish you every luck and when you do get it. We have to think up the next advantage 🙂

    1. fredwilson

      Thanks! We will need it

      1. Balu Chandrasekaran

        I have a lot of respect for Canada’s policies, but to play devil’s advocate here, I don’t think Canada having the startup visa will give it that much of a competitive advantage. No better place to start a company than here in the US. And entrepreneurs are a plucky lot, we will find ways to overcome the obstacles in our path.

    2. William Mougayar

      “I have no doubt that Canada will have a competitive advantage over the US while Canada has the visa and the US does not.”I’m glad Canada has this program, but the above comment is a slight over-statement.

      1. Eric Brooke

        Time will tell 🙂

  33. Perry Obsternoffan

    Go ahead and roll out the “This will help our economy” BSThe economy is broken, and it’s not because we don’t have enough qualified workers, if that were truly the case unemployment would be fixed instead of more or less stabilizing because of people giving up and dropping out of the workforceThis industry thrives on change, if anyone tells me they can’t take a highly competent coder in A and make them a highly competent coder in B then they are smoking crack. Same goes for Architects etc. Heck most of these guys do that kind of thing themselves for fun.I am on the inside looking out and I have seen how this is played from the Big Corp side of things. You hire foreign visa applicants that are very bright, get locked into your company for a long time, and who you can hire for a less than a local, and think that you can work harder than a local (though this is a bit of myth) since they have little recourse.The candidates that are in the US are quite qualified but would cost more, have more mobility if the economy changes, and are less likely to get bludgeoned by management in general and have much less of a hat-in-hand attitude.This is justified by saying that the exact qualifications cannot be met by citizens applying, and wonder of all wonders it almost looks like the resume of the visa applicant was hand written for those special requirements even though plenty of near hits exist within our own population (guess what, they were)Some of this is financial, a whole lot of this is cronyism (managers hiring from their own cultures) a big does of ageism ( I am truly ashamed of my industry for this ), educational bias and prejudiced (People with Masters and PHD’s will make better employees than people with BS or self taught skills etc. because that’s what I obtained) and a lot of it is just plain laziness on the part of organizations being unwilling to train and keep workforce’s updated properly (which is why I think efforts like Udacity are awesome).If the economy was fixed and booming and we desperately needed talent then of course immigration should be eased but this whole thing is just vile as far as I am concerned.I understand why Fred and other VC’s like a larger pool to select from, same for businesses etc, I really do, I do as well, it benefits those groups, but I don’t see it benefiting America substantially when compared with keeping people from dropping out of the workforce.The question should not be how to make this easier for industry xyz, the question should be does this make sense as National policy.Sorry, in the short term this hurts our citizens, in the long run it institutionalizes prejudices and bad behavior on the part of the business world.

    1. ShanaC

      I never understood the negativity against self taught people….

  34. Pete Griffiths

    4 years in politics is blindingly fast. 🙂

  35. FAKE GRIMLOCK

    MORE SKILLED DEVELOPERS = GOOD.THEM IN AMERICA = GOOD.ANYTHING THAT DO ABOVE?GOOD.

  36. Deepak Shenoy

    As an Indian, this isn’t great news – if it leads to more (and talented) Indians going away and not helping this country develop. But then if the US is their market, it’s best to be there, and then they’ll usually find a way to start stuff up in India as well.But the US immigration system is scary anyhow. You get a work visa, you have to leave if you’re fired, and collect no benefits even if you paid in. A green card takes years, and then you go into visa limbo for a while in between, with no travel abroad allowed etc. A startup that has been funded by a VC decides that an immigrant founder is not useful and fires him, that founder has to leave the country (and if there’s a legal battle, fight it from outside!). And you can’t even leave and start another company bootstrapped – because the visa is linked to funding or something. Startups fail quite often, so it’s a pretty big risk that you’ll be told to get the heck out if the last pivot didn’t work out.I understand these are risks people are willing to take, so more power to them. What it will definitely do is to create an industry (both in India and the US) for quasi legal immigrants to game the system for this fancy visa. And hopefully, as a positive measure, India’s politicians might find it useful to set up better policies for startups which will help the lot that are trying to build a business for the Indian market.

  37. Semil Shah

    And, the only catalyst for this change is the pounding the GOP took in the 2008 and 2012 elections when it comes to demography, especially the rising class of Latino voters. So, in another era, this would’ve taken much longer.

  38. MikeSchinkel

    Four years is a long time. But it’s a lot better than never.

  39. Brendan Duffy

    Cheer up, Fred. On the Washington timescale, four years is light speed.

  40. Bennett Resnik

    Finally, this is a great step forward.

  41. Garrett Buxton

    This policy is not “industry-targeted” (@deitcher:disqus). It’s American economy-targeted. A “Startup” should be viewed as any company that brings jobs and innovative thinking to our society.

  42. Vikas Paul

    will it guarantee the employment to US citizens only ?

  43. Derek

    On one hand, I agree that it’s a shame it took so long. On the other, it’s important to remember that there are 300 million people in this country.

  44. pointsnfigures

    What would you have paid to make all that malarky go away? Or, what would the initial company have paid to make you a citizen? That’s Gary Becker’s argument.

  45. Deepak Shenoy

    That I don’t like this idea does not mean I will attempt to stop a startup visa. (“I might not like what you’re saying but I will defend your right to say it”) Like you say, it’s someone’s own choice to go where they want and that’s fine. Perhaps my tone should have been that India’s policies should react and make this a better place for startups.At some point in the past, India saw most of its talent go abroad (“brain drain”) but that has changed now, almost reversing itself. And it’s not because the US doesn’t want Indians, it’s more because things have improved in India. My concern that people will go back might only be because I’m thinking of the past – just an old guy speaking :)I am personally concerned about certain concepts of US immigration, like having your ability to live linked to your employment status. Which I might add is worse in countries like Dubai/Middle East (where employers can take away your passport!). The startup visa might not help ease those fears, but as I said, there are enough people willing to take the risk, and they should.