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

@2gov - Visas for startup founders movement

2gov.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–56 of 56 posts

Re: @2gov - Visas for startup founders movement

#51

Post by joe_the_user »

miloshh wrote: post #37
joe_the_user wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uh, while some folks may bring up racist or otherwise ridiculous objection to this idea, sachinag, bokonist and others have brought up well thought-out objections that I haven't seen answered with much thought (the claim that tourist visas are the only thing subject to abuse seems hardly creditable but I'll argue more if someone fleshes out this one existing counter-argument). It seems like the founder's visa already…

The thoughtful objections have not been against the idea as such, but mostly against the proposal that a board of investors or government officials would decide who is good enough. That would indeed a problem - startups that VCs or government approve would likely be the ones immitating the previous big thing, rather than building the next big thing. But I think a board is not necessary. In my opinion, all that's need…

Many well-informed criticism of state actions aren't against the goals of the intervention as such but merely against all the possible implementation those goals.

Re: @2gov - Visas for startup founders movement

#52

Post by fryduck »

Frankly, a lot of us aren't even funded by VCs anymore. Boot strapping and staying frugal has helped. I don't really have it in me to go grovelling to VCs anymore. DONE.

So whats in it for the individual startup chaps? Or will VCs continue to dominate everything?

Re: @2gov - Visas for startup founders movement

#53

Post by ardit33 »

I see over and over naysayers of this visa claiming all kinds of fraud that can happen, and all kind of reasons why it is a bad idea, without really addressing on how to make it fair.

To the all naysayers of the visa, there are easier system's to game the system. Marriage. That's right. I have a friend that did it (with way less than 20k). Sure there are some steps to prevent fraud (even interviews), but that doesn't stop most people getting married just for citizenship, except the most obvious cases.

According to the 'nay-sayers' logic, we should stop giving green card/citizenship through marriage, b/c maybe 15% of them are fraud.

If you really really want to live in the US, and have about 50k, you will find somebody that will marry (my friend found it for a lot less money). No need to go through this Visa problem.

It is kinda wierd, but it is much easier for a less educated person to game the system, then for somebody that is more educated (most under the table jobs,are blue collar ones).

In any way, saying we shouldn't let the Founder Visa b/c there might be potential fraud, is pure FUD. Fear, uncertainty, and doubt, just for your own little short sighted self.

If you enjoy an america without immigrants, a go live in West Virginia, or Alabama.

Re: @2gov - Visas for startup founders movement

#54

Post by jhancock »

gruseom wrote: post #41
jhancock wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have heard from a few investors that immigration issues caused problems. When I query about what percent of founders this applies to, I hear numbers like 10% or 20%. What numbers are you hearing? Unfortunately your challenge is flawed of finding investors that have experienced health care as more of a problems than immigration. The health care argument is that people won't consider quitting their day job because of…

This is one of the few comments in the thread that makes sense to me. I haven't asked anyone about percentages, but one thing we can say is that whatever the percentage is of foreign-founded startups trying to relocate to the US, that would be roughly the number who are having trouble doing so. As I pointed out in another comment, the best investors say that their bottleneck is finding good startups to invest in. Obj…

This has been a healthy debate. I only harp on the HC issue because I think its symptomatic of the community not thinking outside the box enough. I don't think its the only issue or possibly the largest one. Usually, the weekend posts on HN are a bit anemic, but not so this weekend. Here are two other articles and threads discussing troubles in startup-land: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=833234 and http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=832672

Taken as a whole, there is much room to discuss how to create a more effective environ for innovation, job, and wealth creation.

Re: @2gov - Visas for startup founders movement

#55

Post by netsp »

socratees wrote: post #49
netsp wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for pointing to that thread. Bokonist makes a strong case against accreditation bodies in general, barriers to entry and the associated slippery slope. While I am sympathetic to that idea, we have to remember that the Founder Visa is a type of liberalisation, not a type of barrier. The solution mightn't be perfect, but it could be better then no founder immigration. While accreditation is possibly bad in gener…

So if a VC firm overseas funds a startup, who gets the visa? Do you think the VC's overseas will be generous enough to let the founder get a US visa while they remain at their home country?

If a company is funded overseas, they probably want to stay where they are and the investor probably agrees.

A VC fund can probably pick up and move to the States if they wanted to anyway.

Re: @2gov - Visas for startup founders movement

#56

Post by ajju »

jhancock wrote: post #39
gruseom wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you please provide these examples? I know at least a dozen people who have personally experienced this, but I'm not going to name anybody. I also have read and heard many statements by people like PG, Fred Wilson, Brad Feld - people who really know about startups - who mention this as a key issue. I have not ever heard anyone bring up health insurance as this specific kind of impediment before, until a few moment…

I have heard from a few investors that immigration issues caused problems. When I query about what percent of founders this applies to, I hear numbers like 10% or 20%. What numbers are you hearing? Unfortunately your challenge is flawed of finding investors that have experienced health care as more of a problems than immigration. The health care argument is that people won't consider quitting their day job because of…

The percentage of founders that immigration issues cause problems for is a flawed metric. A very large number of potential founders do not go beyond seriously considering starting a startup once they look into how complicated the immigration issues are. So you need to look at potential founders.

I know, I am personally going through this right now and went to grad school with or worked with 10 different people who had the technical chops and a strong desire to start a startup but decided against it when they saw the risks it entailed from an immigration stand point.

Post reply on HN