Study: Immigrants Founded 51% of U.S. Billion-Dollar Startups • Hacker News Board

Re: Study: Immigrants Founded 51% of U.S. Billion-Dollar Startups

#691

Post by gwern » Wed, Mar 15, 2017, 10:29 PM UTC

timthelion wrote: post #680

gwern wrote: post #669

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No amount of statistics change the fact that arguing against open borders is an authoritarian stance. That so? > I could throw just as many statistics against you and your drug use if I wanted, but I'm not an authoritarian. Go right ahead. > And as to lying with statistics, I don't think that the left is alone in that. And yet, that still doesn't make it right.

> That so? Yes, by way of tautology arguing for a regulation on the movement of people is arguing for a regulation which effects the freedom of individuals and arguing to regulate the freedom of individuals is authoritarian. > Go right ahead. " In 2002, 29% of convicted inmates reported they had used illegal drugs at the time of the offense, down from 35% in 1996." - https://www.bjs.gov/content/dcf/duc.cfm Vs foreign…

> arguing to regulate the freedom of individuals is authoritarian.

'literally any regulation is authoritarian' --timthelion 2017

> you are far worse than your average mexican when it comes to crime

That's not true. The population of Mexican immigrants is not the same as the population of Mexico which is not the same as the population of the USA which is not the same as the fraction of drug users. You also get the conditioning wrong: the relative risk or odds is what matters, and that requires both population prevalences of drug use, and the lifetime drug use rate in the USA is quite high - for hallucinogens alone it's easily 10%. Throw in marijuana, underage alcohol, and so on... Also, illegal immigration is a crime, so if you want to compare crime rates, you ought to be taking that into account in estimating immigrant crime rates. (Illegal immigration is OK because it's victimless? Well, so is using LSD. You can't have it both ways.) Nor can you compare the immigration incarceration rate because the populations differ drastically in demographics (gender, sex etc) and is censored (given deportation, self-deportation, or voluntarily leaving afterwards).

Re: Study: Immigrants Founded 51% of U.S. Billion-Dollar Startups

#692

Post by xapata » Wed, Mar 15, 2017, 11:09 PM UTC

gozur88 wrote: post #554

xapata wrote: post #462

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not obvious at all. I thought we were sharing a frustration for the recent trend in politics to make implications rather than explicit statements. I didn't think I was assigning new meaning, but only exactly what Bannon intended. I can, obviously, never be certain I've understood him correctly, so I just make my best guess. It's reasonable to expect that different people will make different guesses. What is your inte…

>I didn't think I was assigning new meaning, but only exactly what Bannon intended. I can, obviously, never be certain I've understood him correctly, so I just make my best guess. Why are you guessing at all? Why are you assuming he isn't saying what he means? >What is your interpretation of Bannon's words? What they mean in English.

> saying what he means

> What they mean in English.

If I told you to "take a hike" would you believe I was encouraging you to walk outdoors?

Re: Study: Immigrants Founded 51% of U.S. Billion-Dollar Startups

#693

Post by akhilcacharya » Fri, Mar 17, 2017, 7:11 PM UTC

camus2 wrote: post #613

akhilcacharya wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't change his ancestry.

> Doesn't change his ancestry. Doesn't change the fact that Jobs was an american citizen, not an immigrant.

...because of birthright citizenship

...that the same people oppose

Re: Study: Immigrants Founded 51% of U.S. Billion-Dollar Startups

#694

Post by Shubham28 » Sat, Mar 18, 2017, 10:38 AM UTC

oh_sigh wrote: post #303

Shubham28 wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think he is referring to Sundar Pichai

Sundar is just an employee who worked his way up through the ranks...he was not involved in founding Google.

But the poster never mentioned founders, he says leaders. Even when talking about Microsoft, I think he is referring to Satya Nadella since both Gates & Balmer were not immigrants.

Re: Study: Immigrants Founded 51% of U.S. Billion-Dollar Startups

#695

Post by dave_sullivan » Mon, Mar 20, 2017, 6:48 AM UTC

patrickg_zill wrote: post #681

dave_sullivan wrote: post #667

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Concerning your more specific question of "will the wall work" That's not my question. My question is "What are we getting for the money?" Again, you seem to be suggesting "lower crime". I disagree, but let's play devil's advocate: how much lower do you think crime would be? Now divide that by the cost of the wall. That's your "per unit cost of lowering crime with a wall". What's the answer? > my view would be "we…

See, this is why I didn't bother to answer your question in detail: despite me supporting with sources my factually accurate statement concerning lower crime, you simply hand-waved it away with no evidence of your own, as I suspected that you would.

Hey man, I wish we could all get along, we're on the same team. I read your sources; they prove nothing. You think immigrants are more prone to crime and we should build a wall on the border of mexico? But you can't begin to quantify what we'd get for it? Then you say shit like, "Well let's just wait and see how it goes, haha..." You're on the wrong side of history, and you don't even know why.

Re: Study: Immigrants Founded 51% of U.S. Billion-Dollar Startups

#696

Post by masondixon » Mon, Mar 20, 2017, 8:34 PM UTC

int_19h wrote: post #690

masondixon wrote: post #678

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So larger number of immigrants overall What is the rationale behind this? Or how will this benefit existing citizens? Where do you draw the line for a cap on immigration, and why? There is an almost infinite number of people who want to come to the US. Decisions must be made fairly and consistently, and to the benefit of the standard of living of existing citizens. H1-B = 236K applicants / 85K spots So that is ~150…

> What is the rationale behind this? Or how will this benefit existing citizens? Where do you draw the line for a cap on immigration, and why? There was no rationale. You keep pointing at Australia etc as a desirable model, and I told you what you'd need to do to make your system more like those countries, and what the result of that would be. In particular, those countries don't have quotas on skilled immigration. W…

Thanks for the chat. I learned a lot.

I think we both agree system needs reforming, and subtracting the political rhetoric from both sides, there is middle ground reform that should hopefully prevail.

Re: Study: Immigrants Founded 51% of U.S. Billion-Dollar Startups

#697

Post by masondixon » Mon, Mar 20, 2017, 8:55 PM UTC

cromwellian wrote: post #683

masondixon wrote: post #679

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I could not find the quote from Bannon or Miller saying that "Camp of the Saints is my favourite novel"? Where can I find this? >> You're in denial, the evidence is staring you in the face, you're just not concerned. That's your prerogative, but you're probably not one of those who are going to be hurt by Bannon's misguided nationalism. Its a book he has read. That is all. Fake news and false outrage. > What I find…

>As Dr. Kaku says in the video, "the scientific establishment would collapse...50% PhD are foreign-born.". So your solution is immigration? Wouldn't the solution be to fix the education system? Either-or fallacy. Keeping foreign born Phds out doesn't help us, and doesn't help create more native American Phds. We could strengthen our education system and education culture without Affirmative Action for White Males By…

> What I hear you saying is "if only we banned these foreigners, maybe our native born people would have a chance in Phd programs". And what I interpret that to mean is "Let's not spend $80 billion on free college for everyone who wants it, because that would be 'big gubmint socialism', instead everything will work out if we just institute protectionism immigration policies."

You seem to view everything through a racial/foreigner lense. It muddies the debate. America is a melting-pot already, and US citizen focused policies are to the benefit of all US citizens regardless of race, birth-country, sex, etc. You are implying hidden motives in everyone's actions which cannot be argued against because we simply do not know what is going on in their heads.

Education is a big money making industry. It brings wealth into the country. There is far more incentive to bring in foreigners than to improve the opportunities for US citizens (who are not all white males - why does race and sex have to come into this I have no idea).

I appreciate the discussion, it has been a good insight to another side of the debate floor.

Re: Study: Immigrants Founded 51% of U.S. Billion-Dollar Startups

#698

Post by kashkhan » Mon, Mar 20, 2017, 11:59 PM UTC

dgellow wrote: post #642

kashkhan wrote: post #493

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the US is not being destroyed by immigrants coming and stealing the territory and resources. The US has plenty of unused fallow land that immigrants can buy/lease with real money and work with real labor. the US doesn't give free territory and resources to immigrants. It should allow them to freely trade in it.

You're strawmanning me. I never said anything about the US being destroyed by immigrant or a stealing of territory or resources. In fact I never mentioned the US. The comment I responded to was: > universities have limited classrooms and labs to fill. A country is not limited. That's factually incorrect. A country is limited in a lot of ways. To be honest I think that your definition of "immigrant" is biased.

universities are close to 100% full and have no more space. A country like US is not even 3% filled.

Re: Study: Immigrants Founded 51% of U.S. Billion-Dollar Startups

#699

Post by int_19h » Tue, Mar 21, 2017, 1:37 AM UTC

masondixon wrote: post #696

int_19h wrote: post #690

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What is the rationale behind this? Or how will this benefit existing citizens? Where do you draw the line for a cap on immigration, and why? There was no rationale. You keep pointing at Australia etc as a desirable model, and I told you what you'd need to do to make your system more like those countries, and what the result of that would be. In particular, those countries don't have quotas on skilled immigration. W…

Thanks for the chat. I learned a lot. I think we both agree system needs reforming, and subtracting the political rhetoric from both sides, there is middle ground reform that should hopefully prevail.

I would encourage you - and, really, anyone who is interested in any kind of immigration reform - to explore the existing laws and processes and find out how they work. I'm often amazed at how little most Americans (on both sides of the political spectrum) know about their immigration system - mostly the bits that come from the news, and which are, of course, cherry-picked to support some political narrative. The bulk of it is not really all that interesting, and so goes completely unobserved, but it's what most of us who have to go through this are actually dealing with.

The easiest way to do so is to put your immigrant hat on. Pretend that you're a foreigner who knows English, and see how you'd go about immigrating to US. Literally starting from a google search along the lines of "US immigration", and then go from there. When you see various different options presented to you (like student, family, investor etc), conjure virtual personas corresponding to either one of those, and see how far you can get down either track, what are the things that are required of you, what quotas apply if any, how much it costs in fees, what the processing times are etc. Consider how you'd plan around all that. Also see how it works if you're married - how you bring your spouse to the country, whether they can work at all before they can get a green card, what about children etc.

Once you get to the end of it, try doing the same thing, but for "legally bring my parents/siblings/... to the country". Again note the various options, requirements, fees, processing times etc.

It can also be instructive to do it for a few other English-speaking countries (or those that have their immigration materials available in any language that you can understand), just to see how they all compare.

It's a lot like gun control. Based on your politics, I think it's a safe bet that you get annoyed when left-wing politicians talk about "weapons or war" or some such, without any actual knowledge of how guns work or how to operate one, beyond "it's a shoulder thing that goes up". To write meaningful gun legislation, one has to understand guns well, right? Well, same thing applies here.

Re: Study: Immigrants Founded 51% of U.S. Billion-Dollar Startups

#700

Post by jimmyk » Tue, Mar 21, 2017, 6:16 PM UTC

surfmike wrote: post #489

jimmyk wrote: post #473

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Immigrants as a whole pay their way in the United States, have lower crime rates." Would that be the case if the US didn't have visa programs which select for high quality immigrants balancing out illegal immigration and visa programs which do not select for high quality immigrants?

I don't know, you'd have to look to studies. Anecdotally, my first generation friends had parents who didn't come on study or skilled worker visas. They are all net contributors to society and many sacrificed a lot to get their kids into good private schools. They weren't upper middle class but still made it happen. Besides, the US really doesn't have much of a safety net, so even if I wanted to live "on the dole" he…

Besides, the US really doesn't have much of a safety net, so even if I wanted to live "on the dole" here I don't really know how that's possible.

Social security disability is certainly one way. Having children is another way that will guarantee benefits for years. The US spends hundreds of billions each year on safety net programs. Someone is living off of it.

It would be very interesting to see how many people are lifetime net-spenders of tax money (not counting money paid as wages to government employees/contractors). I can't find any study that has tried to estimated that, but I would think that anyone who spent a few non-retirement years on safety net programs or in prison and whose income never went above the 50th percentile would probably be in that category.