

The Startup Visa Act Must Be Stopped - bEtsy
http://www.businessinsider.com/why-the-startup-visa-is-actually-a-really-bad-idea-2010-3

======
rajat
The biggest issue I have with the Startup Visa Act is that if this is a person
that we want to let in because of an investment, then this is a person we want
to let in, period. Just give them a green card.

What this act tries to do, in a sense, is outsource the decision making (to
the investors).

The biggest problem with the H1B visa is that it allows the employer to hold
this unholy ax over the visa holder. It's absurd and counterproductive. These
are people we should want in this country. Arguments against illegal
immigration do not apply here.

So, if an investor actually invests in a startup with a foreign founder, just
give that person a green card or a long visitor's visa depending on what he
wants (I assume not everyone wants to move to the US). The whole talk of a
successful entrepreneur is ridiculous when so many startups fail. We want that
entrepreneur even if this particular venture fails.

~~~
BerislavLopac
Finally a concrete, constructive suggestion that actually makes sense.

~~~
wdewind
I agree 100% in theory, but in concrete it just doesn't work. How do we
determine the person is an entrepreneur we want in? It's easy to say if we are
going to give them an H1B or a startup visa (whatever that ends up looking
like) we should just give them a green card, but it sounds to me like a major
part of this issue is who is actually doing the deciding, not only what the
decision itself is.

For instance, we trust the government with software patents right now and over
and over again they approve what we consider to be horribly damaging patents.
We should trust them to evaluate an entrepreneur as well?

There is a reason this decision is outsourced to the employers/investors: it's
actually the more free solution. Otherwise it's up to the government to
determine who's/what's worth paying for, and just hoping they are right. This
way we've already established a market for the person before they enter the
country. It's far from perfect, but if you just give people green cards how
many people do you think will suddenly want to be entrepreneurs to get their
green card?

The government doesn't seem capable of regulating anything right now, so I'm
pretty content to outsource the decision to investors and employers. At least
that way they have a chance to get a Fred Wilson, instead of a guarantee not
to.

~~~
fnid2
Investors are only 10% correct at predicting startup success so I'm not sure
they are the ones to be relying on for an accurate assessment.

~~~
anamax
> Investors are only 10% correct at predicting startup success so I'm not sure
> they are the ones to be relying on for an accurate assessment.

We're only relying on them to identify some likely candidates. Those who work
out get to stay.

~~~
fnid2
so if an entrepreneur signs up, (s)he's got a 90% chance of being sent home? I
wouldn't like those odds.

------
mjhnghfh
I think the startup visa is an excellent piece of legislation. I know of
several startups now based here, and lots of budding entrepreneurs moving to
town - just because of the Visa requirements. And with this city's links to
China and India I'm confident this will be the home of the next big thing.

Of course I'm in Vancouver (BC) and these are guys being frustrated by the US
process. Some of them hope to eventually open branch offices in Silicon valley
so you will pick up some of the outsourced work.

------
aditya
As Dave rightly schooled me here:
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1149503>

_aditya: dude, if you can't create at least 5 jobs in 2 years with $250K in
capital, you're a pretty pathetic excuse for an entrepreneur._

The article is a little too sensational, which seems to be the norm with
BusinessInsider these days.

~~~
simon_
And the stuff about it being "bad for investors" is pretty rich. Sure, there
are might be some funny incentives created by a Founder Visa program, but none
that wouldn't be transparent, known, and probably avoidable.

------
blizkreeg
I posted a similar analysis a few days back about this Startup Visa.
[shameless self-plug] [http://vinthanedar.com/2010/02/26/my-thoughts-on-the-
startup...](http://vinthanedar.com/2010/02/26/my-thoughts-on-the-startup-visa-
bill-fail/)

------
HowardRoark
Does this mean I can't bootstrap my company?

~~~
mjhnghfh
Of course you can - you just have to bootstrap it in China or India. Then when
you are succesfull, and after having created lots of jobs in China or India,
paid lots of taxes to China or India and earned lots of foreign currency for
china or India.

The US will then allow you to come in and buy their companies - as long as
they get a few % commission to Wall st.

------
pchristensen
I think pg, bfeld, ericries, etc would all agree with these complaints about
the Startup Visa as presently constituted. The people that wrote the bill
structured it _so that it would be easy to implement as a first step_. It's
not meant to be comprehensive, it is a tweak to an existing visa class that's
not being fully utilized. But it will give _immediate, positive results_ that
can be used to push a more effective, fair, etc version later.

Hacking Washington isn't the same as hacking computers.

~~~
philwelch
So the legislative approach is to put something out there as quickly as
possible and then iterate on it? Fitting.

~~~
patrickk
The thing is, iterating on the legislation may not be possible.

If you are a smart, clued-in high tech founder who isn't completely in love
with your initial vision, then it's possible to iterate from a potentially
disastrous idea into something people will pay for.

With the Startup Visa Act, if the initial flawed piece of legislation doesn't
produce some notable successes, then unimaginative lawmen who didn't like the
idea in the first place will point to the initial lack of results and kill off
any hope of iteration number two or three - which may be what in fact is
necessary for the Act to succeed in achieving it's original aims.

------
gasull
Is the Startup Visa better than the status quo?

All the criticism about the Startup Visa seems right, but still, for someone
seeking a visa it's still better to have also this option than not having it.

People criticize things for not being perfect (or actually very imperfect)
when what is important is if it is a step in the right direction. Does the
existence of the Startup Visa make things easier for foreign entrepreneurs
compared with what we have now? Yes it does.

~~~
HowardRoark
No it doesn't. Its just another form of slavery like H1b.

~~~
fnid2
It's not slavery, because slavery is not a choice. H1B holders choose to
accept the terms and can choose to go home. Slaves can't.

~~~
geebee
I agree. While I take a very dim view of the H1B visa, I don't think it's
helpful to liken it to slavery.

In fact, in some ways, it's not even entirely appropriate to compare it to
indentured servitude, since these folks were essentially "owned" - the main
difference being that they were released at the end of their term of service
(the reality was pretty brutal, from what I've heard).

On the other hand, the H1B is particularly offensive in that the quid pro quo
is purely visa and green card "sponsorship". The employer is allowed to bestow
a government status - legal residency - that the worker could not otherwise
obtain.

I'm actually kind of amazed that people put up with this in 2010, that a
corporation would have that kind of power over an individual. I think a lot of
it comes from a lack of understanding of what's really going on.

~~~
helwr
you can always leave your sponsor,you know, and find a better one. i did it 5
times in 5 years. felt like a runaway slave with the first one, escaped south
went to new york, and i'm a free man now, my own masta

------
ntulip
A new kind of visa is just insane. An overhaul on how immigration is done in
the US needs to be done. Since that won't happen, the next best thing is
another band-aid. A Startup Visa.

------
olliesaunders
The article convinced me there are problems with the act but why must it be
stopped? Should I go round with a sledgehammer destroying works of art that
are incomplete too?

~~~
dlytle
It must be stopped because it doesn't increase the number of green cards
issued, it just reallocates them. As such, it will damage the existing system,
rather than just creating a new damaged system.

To build on your analogy, it's like burning half of an incomplete work of art,
to get wall space for another one.

------
charleyrock
Please give me a break! First, congratulations - your sensational headline got
me to read the article. But, other than the "granular" problems you point out,
the larger arguments are just silly.

The Act does not tip the power construct unfavorably towards investors. Any VC
worth a damn is a partner not an adversary. If a VC uses conditions in the Act
to exert leverage in negotiations, he is not worth having as a partner in the
first place.

The Act does not increase entrepreneur risk. Every founder has to consider
many different areas of risk to his business, to his family and to his
lifestyle. Rather than increasing risk, the Act presents an opportunity. As
with any opportunity to gain something, there is a chance that you will fail.
The Act would only increase entrepreneur risk if it changed the law in that it
reduced opportunity - it doesn't.

The Act is bad for (US) investors because good entrepreneurs will self-select
away from the US? Come on! That is absurd and in fact the opposite should
happen.

Sorry, but the article seemed for the most part insincere or misinformed.

~~~
angkec
um, I'm new to HN, but how do you downvote a comment?

~~~
psranga
You need to accumulate a certain number of points (by posting comments or
stories that get upvoted). Then you get the privilege of downvoting.

~~~
angkec
Thanks for the explanation!

