21–30 of 156 posts
Ww2 caused a lot of jewish immigrants to emmigrate from europe and some emigrated later from russia. They have been very successful in general. I am sure this particular population already skews the statistics already.
The publisher of this "Study" is from New American Economy, a think tank "fighting for smart federal, state, and local immigration policies that help grow our economy and create jobs for all Americans." So I don't think it is 100% neutral in terms of its view on immigrants.
...And suddenly a wave of downvotes in less than 2 minutes. No justified concerns attached to them though.
The publisher of this "Study" is from New American Economy, a think tank "fighting for smart federal, state, and local immigration policies that help grow our economy and create jobs for all Americans." So I don't think it is 100% neutral in terms of its view on immigrants.
Do you have any criticism of the actual study or are you immediately dismissing it because you think the publisher is probably biased?
1) Doesn't belong on HN.
2) Comments so far are unsubstantive -- ranging from "middlebrow dismissal" to flamebait.
3) Doesn't appear to be conducive to any sort of useful discussion.
The publisher of this "Study" is from New American Economy, a think tank "fighting for smart federal, state, and local immigration policies that help grow our economy and create jobs for all Americans." So I don't think it is 100% neutral in terms of its view on immigrants.
You bring up a valid point in identifying the authors of this study. I'm just not sure what a truly neutral position in that debate would look like.
Maybe it had taken some more time but, locals would have ended up setting up these either way.
A big maybe.
China is an example that screams, immigrants do not matter much for economic success.
I think there is some bias due to historical events. Ww2 caused a lot of jewish immigrants to emmigrate from europe and some emigrated later from russia. They have been very successful in general. I am sure this particular population already skews the statistics already.
Definitely some selection bias. Many wealthy people in the US are immigrants. Also, many wealthy people probably choose to immigrate to the US to start their business because of lower barriers to entry. EDIT: Also, if this [1] is correct, 13.7% of people in the US are immigrants. So how many people are immigrants OR first-gen? And since ANY of the founders can be immigrants/first-gen, more founders means higher likel…
Not all these people were wealthy before they arrived; Andy Grove of Intel was a Hungarian refugee, for example.
I've flagged this post because (IMHO): 1) Doesn't belong on HN. 2) Comments so far are unsubstantive -- ranging from "middlebrow dismissal" to flamebait. 3) Doesn't appear to be conducive to any sort of useful discussion. Edit: Clearly I've struck a nerve someplace.
Immigrants is such a broad term its nearly meaningless. From the article: "The share of the most successful and globally-recognized U.S. companies that have immigrant founders is growing, according to NAE's Hanna Siegel and Andrew Lim, while the Trump administration has tried to make it more difficult for immigrants to come to the U.S., often claiming that they take American jobs and lower wages." No mention what typ…
So the methodology, even a table listing every founder is in the linked 2011 report https://www.newamericaneconomy.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/0...