461–470 of 615 posts
I personally consider that opening borders is a moral imperative, but I understand why it is controversial. I understand that the arguments against "letting everyone in" have some merit, though I ultimately disagree with them. What is a real head scratcher to me is the US policy on highly-skilled immigrants. There are certainly some political constituencies in favor of those, but I can't think of anyone against, at l…
I sympathize with the author, the path to a green card is ridiculous. [1] But that's where my sympathies stop. It's not a hidden process either. If staying here matters to you better work tirelessly to put yourself on a path to permanent residency and you better be the one to push it daily or it won't happen. Here we have a highly educated, Ivy Leaguer with a LAW DEGREE , who didn't. But about 500,000 people a year d…
I think you overestimate the straight-forwardness of this. Option #2 means including economic incentives in your relationship ("I better rush towards marrying someone, lest I get kicked out!"). Option #3 is very restricted -- if you are on a non-immigrant visa (e.g. student visa), then the simple fact of applying for the lottery (and thus signalling immigration intent) will likely make you ineligible for a renewal.
Applying for the green card lottery does nothing to hurt any current or future visa applications you make. Visas with a nonimmigrant intent will ask questions like:
"Do you have a current I-485 application in process?"
"Have you previously applied for an I-485?"
"Have you been rejected for an I-485?"
For those that don't know, an I-485 is an AoS (adjustment of status) application.
You can truthfully answer "no" to all of these questions because an I-485 is something very specific and entering the DV lottery is not that.
So you have to be really careful about what is said (eg nonimmigrant intent for a visa) and what are the actual rules. If the form simply asks about I-485 applications, you can truthfully answer "no" even if you want to stay here forever.
By the time you get to filing an I-485 you're basically done with a PR application. You're just waiting for it to come through. It may take 6 months or 12 months but it won't randomly take years (like a Labor Certification can).
Now as far as work visas go, the H1B allows an immigrant intent so none of this is an issue.
For visas that don't (eg Canadian TN, Australian E3), even there the rules are murky. USCIS says that, for example, filing an I-485 shows immigrant intent but they've also issued a ruling saying that filing an I-485 can't solely be used to deny a renewal or the issuing of those visas. So what does that mean in practice? Well, nobody really knows.
That too is a problem.
But I digress...
My main point is you are 100% incorrect when you say applying for the DV lottery impacts your ability to apply for a nonimmigrant visa in any way. It does not.
I sympathize with the author, the path to a green card is ridiculous. [1] But that's where my sympathies stop. It's not a hidden process either. If staying here matters to you better work tirelessly to put yourself on a path to permanent residency and you better be the one to push it daily or it won't happen. Here we have a highly educated, Ivy Leaguer with a LAW DEGREE , who didn't. But about 500,000 people a year d…
I think you overestimate the straight-forwardness of this. Option #2 means including economic incentives in your relationship ("I better rush towards marrying someone, lest I get kicked out!"). Option #3 is very restricted -- if you are on a non-immigrant visa (e.g. student visa), then the simple fact of applying for the lottery (and thus signalling immigration intent) will likely make you ineligible for a renewal.
I'm a New Zealand citizen. It's true. We do dream like that. But I visited America and I don't think I'll ever go back. I didn't see any culture. But I live in Asia now. There's heaps of culture here.
How different is American immigration policy than other similar countries, like Canada, the UK, Australia, and the author's New Zealand? I'm sympathetic to everyone trying to immigrate to the US, but I'm guessing he would have similar issues in any country. Probably less frustrating, though.
It is also difficult to get visas for non-EU spouses. Unless you can demonstrate sufficient funds to support them. You either need a good chunk of cash in the bank or a job paying at least 25k GBP per year (more if bringing children). This has made it difficult for a lot ExPats to return home with their families and has caused a lot of anger in that community.
There is also talk of further restrictions on non-EU immigrants such as requiring non-EU immigrants who aren't earning sufficient amounts to leave after 6 years. At the moment its just talk but given the current government it could easily become law.
Disclaimer: I am a Canadian permanent resident. > I like it here. This is the real problem, you have a severe case of non-reciprocal love. In that case the answer is obvious: move over, find another love, come to Canada or go to Northern Europe. U.S. immigration is an American problem,since they are the ones loosing talent and entrepreneurial people. It is not an immigrant's problem, since they don't have the powers…
Just to clarify in case people still have the impression that Canada is good for immigration: Maybe Canada is better than America for immigration, the experience is getting worse. After the new immigration minister came up in July 2013, the government has changed policies to make immigration slow and the path to citizenship much harder. 1) A Labour Market Opinion (LMO), which is required before a work visa, itself us…
In short order they had setup a thriving massage studio based on traditional Chinese methods, had a child, and were able to afford a nice apartment and car. Apart from the the private Christian group that helped them enter Canada, they were entirely self-reliant.
They showed greater entrepreneurism and work ethnic than the majority of Canadians, by far. Despite their many challenges (including the presumed murder of their families in DPRK), they remained delightful, generous, and happy people that were a pleasure to be around.
I'm getting a little emotional as I write this because I was shocked -- disgusted really -- when I learned that the Canadian government was kicking them out of the country. They were forced to apply for citizenship in South Korea, and told only to return if they were rejected from S. Korea.
Unfortunately, I don't know how the story ended because, somewhat alarmingly, we've lost contact with them although my wife was speaking to the woman almost daily via WeChat before they left. I hope they are able to establish a more permanent home for themselves in S. Korea or wherever they ended up.
So, yes, I would say the government has changed its policies recently, and not for the better. Why these people would be forced to leave is beyond me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Except for the tech corporations who are suppressing wages--which is all of them This is not true. I'm on an H1B, and I can change jobs freely. Employers can't prevent you from changing jobs. Employers have zero power to suppress wages if you have an H1B -- because you can get a better paying job. (This is unlike the L-1, which locks you to your employer.) The only thing preventing someone from getting a better pay…
> This is not true. I'm on an H1B, and I can change jobs freely. To another employer willing to sponsor your H1-B. Correct? However, doesn't this cause timeline issues? There were lots of problems with changing companies resetting your timeline. When did that change?
If your company hasn't applied for a greencard for you, there really is nothing tying you to them.
If they do apply for your greencard, you are tied to them for about one (or two) years.
Drawing on this story and [others](http://politicaloutcast.com/2013/02/usa-trying-to-deport-chr...), it seems immigrants are only protected if they are willing to break U.S. law. It is a very dangerous incentive to deport those not breaking the law and welcome those who do. People might get the wrong idea.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it's mostly because those commentors on HN can't code worth their salt, and can't find a job, in an industry with thousands of unfilled positions, and need a scapegoat to pile hatred on. Most of the points stated on those hateful comments are either factually wrong, or overstate something as being the norm, when it probably happens less than 10% of the time. For one, if you are even decently good at software deve…
No, it's mostly because those commentors on HN can't code worth their salt, and can't find a job, in an industry with thousands of unfilled positions, and need a scapegoat to pile hatred on. I don't think that's true, but I don't expect we'll be giving programming tests to each commentor to get hard data Most of the points stated on those hateful comments are either factually wrong, or overstate something as being th…
> I cannot imagine why we don't have a system for taking students who come to this country to be educated in college and give them a work visa not tied to a company.
This exists already. It's called "F-1 OPT". It allows students to work in the field of their major for 12 months normally, but if they had a STEM major, for 29 months.
> I wonder why we don't allow a pool of skilled workers into the country under circumstances where they have a job waiting but are not tied to that employer.
That's what the H1B is. You need to "have a job waiting" but you "are not tied to that employer"†.
The only thing preventing an H1B holder from getting a better job is how good they are at what they do, and whether the company they want to switch is willing to handle an "H1B transfer".
Most companies in tech are willing to do perform an H1B transfer, and there's great job mobility in tech, especially for the most talented H1B holders, who are widely sought after.
†Note: Before the year 2000, you couldn't change jobs on the H1B, and you were tied to your initial visa sponsor. This changed after Congress passed a law (called "AC21") that enabled H1B visa holders to change jobs.
So this idea that H1B visa holders can't change jobs is a myth. Also your pining for work visas to be "abolished" without offering a meaningful alternative is equivalent to pining for no skilled immigration. Without work visas, the only people coming here would be refugees and family members. What you should've said is "we need better work visas" or "we need to lift the quota on them".
A lot of international students who study here, and graduate from U.S. schools end up effectively getting deported because of the quota on H1B visas. Here's one HNer who's getting kicked out thanks to the H1B cap: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9767627
Even so, by the end it will have taken almost 4 years. This isn't bad by the standards of what others have gone through but it's terrible we're in a situation where 4 years for PR is defined as "not terrible".
So I sympathize. I want to stay here too. But there are three things I want to say here.
1. As another poster said: maybe this is how it should end up. There is, after all, a glut of lawyers. This makes it difficult for an employer to justify the expense of going through the process;
2. Job losses and an abundance of qualified applicants make getting an LC far from certain. This isn't really a problem for tech companies. I imagine it's a huge problem for a law firm;
3. I see no mention of the DV lottery. I don't know the exact probabilities but applying 10-15 times from New Zealand must have a decent chance of your number coming up. Did he ever apply? If not, why not?
Contrary to what at least one poster said, it absolutely has zero impact on your nonimmigrant visa applications to have entered the DV lottery. over the years I applied probably 6 times? My number never came up. Not unexpected. I've met several people whose number did come up.
How long is the typical career in corporate law? How long does a job typically last with a law firm? I don't know. I'm not a lawyer. Is it 5-10 years? If not, will the employee still be around at the end? It seems reasonably likely they won't be.
So, my sympathies. It's a shame you're not Australian, because we have it easiest of probably anyone barring arguably Canadians.