Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Study: Immigrants and their kids founded 45% of U.S. Fortune 500 companies

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 156 posts

Re: Study: Immigrants and their kids founded 45% of U.S. Fortune 500 companies

#61

Post by ilikehurdles »

hartator wrote: post #54
ilikehurdles wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a hypothesis related to this. I believe that surviving being a child refugee in America is something that really brings out the grit in a person. Seeing the things your family goes through to provide a normal life for you in a strange and new place, overcoming ethnic biases, language barriers, and life on government assistance really brings out the attitudes of drive and perseverance toward reaching one's goal…

Andy Grove came in the US at 20. He was never on government assistance nor saw his family having to adapt to a new place.

I was just speaking from my own experience; but I'm sorry about how I phrased my comment. I never mentioned that in my comment and it can be easily read as referring directly about Andy Grove (who I know almost nothing about).

Re: Study: Immigrants and their kids founded 45% of U.S. Fortune 500 companies

#62

Post by shados »

lukaa wrote: post #42

I think problem is not in immigration but in type of immigration.So it would be nice not to stop by just say immigrants founded companies.It should be examined how many of that immigrants are highly educated and have parents like that and how many just enter USA in uncotrolled immigration.

I remember one of the first time the company I work for had a "First gen in tech" event. We had a funny discussion about how, technically, I was part of the target audience. I'm as much of a white western dude as they come, but I'm technically on a green card, my parents are not in the US, I'm the first of my family to be in tech. Checks all the boxes.

In practice I'm definitely NOT the kind of person these things are aimed at. Being a white Canadian dude who just moved a few hours south because the job market was more interesting isn't exactly a life changing experience or even challenging.

Still, if I founded a company, I'd be on that list. Worse, if my children were to found a company, they'd be on that list too, even though they wouldn't have an ounce of hardship (at least from birth situation) or diversity in their bones.

Re: Study: Immigrants and their kids founded 45% of U.S. Fortune 500 companies

#63

Post by magduf »

gingabriska wrote: post #49
256 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are a lot of other differences between America and China that make this a terrible comparison.

Japan, Korea, Germany are also in line and also India (with successful space program without immigrants). There are many countries which are successful without immigrants, some of them are even democracies.

>Japan, Korea, Germany are also in line and also India (with successful space program without immigrants).

This is just plain wrong, in the case of Germany. Germany has a huge immigrant population, and has since WWII when they brought in tons of Turks to be laborers there. There's an enormous Turkish population in Germany, and it's not new. Germany probably would not be where it is now without them.

Japan and Korea don't have many immigrants, it's true, but they were both occupied by the US for some time (and Japan still is, in a way, as is Germany).

Re: Study: Immigrants and their kids founded 45% of U.S. Fortune 500 companies

#64

Post by js8 »

tehlike wrote: post #21

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.

It's not just Jewish people, though. Smart people in general emigrate sooner when a country is turning sour.

Re: Study: Immigrants and their kids founded 45% of U.S. Fortune 500 companies

#65

Post by joshuaheard »

save_ferris wrote: post #25
kediz wrote: post #15

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.

Serious question: what does a neutral view on immigrants look like? How does one take a view on immigrants without aligning with one side of the debate? 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 if the study was not published by a pro-immigrant think tank, but was published by a think tank focused on, say, economics or social policy.

Re: Study: Immigrants and their kids founded 45% of U.S. Fortune 500 companies

#66

Post by DoofusOfDeath »

save_ferris wrote: post #25
kediz wrote: post #15

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.

Serious question: what does a neutral view on immigrants look like? How does one take a view on immigrants without aligning with one side of the debate? 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.

> Serious question: what does a neutral view on immigrants look like? How does one take a view on immigrants without aligning with one side of the debate?

Maybe we should distinguish between an article being neutral vs. a person holding a neutral view.

IMO, an article would be neutral if it provided the strongest arguments from all relevant viewpoints, including supporting data.

I'm not sure what a neutral view would be, though. Aside from taking a stance of agnosticism / uncertainty, but I don't think that's what we're talking about here.

Re: Study: Immigrants and their kids founded 45% of U.S. Fortune 500 companies

#67

Post by [deleted] »

pjc50 wrote: post #18
metalchianti wrote: post #8

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.

[deleted]

Re: Study: Immigrants and their kids founded 45% of U.S. Fortune 500 companies

#68

Post by IloveHN84 »

metalchianti wrote: post #8

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…

I would not call H1B a "low entry barrier"..

Re: Study: Immigrants and their kids founded 45% of U.S. Fortune 500 companies

#70

Post by Shivetya »

save_ferris wrote: post #25
kediz wrote: post #15

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.

Serious question: what does a neutral view on immigrants look like? How does one take a view on immigrants without aligning with one side of the debate? 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.

to be honest, I read CATO for a view that seems to favor issues with both sides of the issue. Example, they are very quick to point out that crime does not increase with immigration, illegal or not, nor are the same used to smuggle drugs. However they are quick to support the idea that illegal immigrants to this country should be benefits of the welfare state.

What it all comes down to is that like the rest of the world, the US needs to manage its influx of those seeking to immigrate here and yes, it should be able to reject any number of them.

Post reply on HN