
How Indian Immigrants Have Changed the face of Silicon Valley - kareemm
http://www.sanfranmag.com/story/home-where-brain
======
DavidMcLaughlin
I interviewed someone last week for a European multi-national. He was a dream
candidate, with much more experience than me (I wasn't interviewing him as a
manager, but as a potential colleague) and for much bigger companies than me
(Yahoo! to name one) and I probably over-compensated in the technical
interview because his resume put mine to shame, but he answered all the
questions and we had a good chat about various technologies relating to the
position. The only reason he wanted to leave San Fran was because he had to as
he is an Indian and having visa issues - so now a European company gets the
talent. Thanks, America!

------
dbc
"India’s best and brightest swept inland, helped turn a valley full of
orchards to Silicon."

Uh, no. Those orchards were gone long before South Asians came to Silicon
Valley in significant numbers. The demographic makeup of SV engineers was
overwhelmingly white American until around a dozen years ago.

With the importation of so many engineers into the US, wages were suppressed
and many American students who had the potential to become engineers made the
rational decision to pursue other career paths.

~~~
miloshh
"The demographic makeup of SV engineers was overwhelmingly white American
until around a dozen years ago."

A dozen years ago was 1997. Do you seriously think this is true?

"With the importation of so many engineers into the US, wages were
suppressed..."

You seem to think that white Americans work hard to "create" jobs, which are
then "stolen" by hordes of immigrants. In other words, white Americans "give"
and immigrants "take". That's just not how it works.

Immigrants in SV are on average smarter and work harder than Americans - not
because there's something wrong with Americans, but because these immigrants
are a highly biased sample of the world's huge population.

~~~
dbc
"A dozen years ago was 1997. Do you seriously think this is true?"

Of course. That's why I wrote it. This is based on my living and working in SV
at the time.

"You seem to think that white Americans work hard to "create" jobs, which are
then "stolen" by hordes of immigrants. In other words, white Americans "give"
and immigrants "take". That's just not how it works."

Who are you quoting when you put quotes around the words "create", "stolen",
"give", and "take"? Are you trying to give the impression that you are quoting
me?

The wage issue is basic economics: if you increase the quantity supplied of
something (such as wheat, or trained engineers), the price will drop.

~~~
miloshh
No, it's not supply/demand economics, that was my point. It would be if
Americans created jobs that immigrants later filled. That is not happening.

Rather, both Americans and immigrants worked hard to build a tech industry
that then created jobs. Without the immigrants, the Americans would not have
been able to create an industry more significant than, say, the Japanese or
Italian tech industry. Thus many jobs would not exist, and the wages would not
be higher.

You did not say words like "create", "stolen", "give", and "take", but they
are implicit in making your supply/demand argument work.

~~~
netsp
I am morally opposed to immigration restrictions in general. But I agree with
dbc. An increased supply in engineers lowers price (wages). If all immigrants
left SF tomorrow, the companies left short would bid up the price of an
engineer. That _is_ basic economics.

The words you have put in quotes are the moral judgements you believe are
attached to those events. dbc gave no indication of such a position. He is
just talking abut the dynamics of the market. An engineering shortage would
have encouraged more engineering training. The number of white engineers is
not static.

*The other things that would happen if immigrant left is that it would become more rational to hire engineers outside of SF ultimately damaging the prosperity of the city. SF engineers should not want to lose the immigrants.

------
bkovitz
"For decades, those swells traversed the Pacific and smashed to rolling white
breakers south of San Francisco. India’s best and brightest swept inland,
helped turn a valley full of orchards to Silicon. And Silicon turned to gold,
as baby-faced kings with Coke-bottle glasses made millions overnight."

Could someone please summarize the factual content of the article? The title
makes me interested, but I don't have the patience to wade through the
novelist-wannabee writing.

~~~
4chan4ever
I looked at the HN comments page expecting to see the usual: a bunch of
sycophantic comments to the effect of "America is evil! Her immigration
policies are backward!!" I wasn't disappointed.

But I'm glad somebody else noticed the pretentious, creative writing 101
nature of the writing. This author is someone who has yet to learn the value
of simple, effective language.

Now where's that copy of Strunk and White....

------
iamelgringo
As a US citizen, I'd like to apologize for our inane immigration system.
Hopefully we can get it changed in the next couple of years.

~~~
anamax
> Hopefully we can get it changed in the next couple of years.

The problems aren't new. It's unclear what's changed recently that would allow
them to be fixed.

In fact, I suspect that they're actually going to get worse, as protectionism
is the first response to economic woes.

Also the folks who say that they care about making it easier for "the best and
the brightest" to come to the US insist on joining forces with the "let
everyone in" folks. The two issues are separable and latter has considerably
more opposition. If the former is your real goal....

------
euroclydon
I have no doubt that expelling and turning away top Asian talent is bad for
American business innovation, but there is another problem here. The advanced
degree system is not designed to benefit the individual. I think the amount of
work one must put in and the financial rewards one reaps upon graduation are
out of sync. PG says as much in his essays.

For a business, they know that if someone has been willing to put up with
eight years of crap as a student, they're likely to put up with many more
years of it as an employee. Maybe there needs to be a visa program for Asian
students without advanced degrees who are starting businesses.

~~~
kareemm
> Maybe there needs to be a visa program for Asian students without advanced
> degrees who are starting businesses.

Or smart people, period. I'm Canadian and have an undergrad degree in Psych
and Computer Science. I've written code at big media companies that you've
heard of and started an online education company from scratch with an American
co-founder that's growing nicely.

All told I've helped generate millions for the economy and created hundreds of
jobs for Americans, and it's _still_ a pain in the ass for me to start a
company in the US (technically, I can start a company without problems. But
working for a company I start is nearly impossible w/o an American co-
founder).

------
fnid
I think the limit on H1B's will benefit large multi-nationals and harm smaller
American based companies. I also think it will benefit the American born
engineer.

The multi-nationals like IBM, Cisco, et al have already moved many of their
engineering jobs overseas. They also have the big bucks to pay American
citizens to do those jobs. The result is that smaller firms must rely on them
for contractors and consultants which increases the price for these engineers
_even more_.

The result is that engineers get paid more money to do local work through
multinational corporations who farm them out to the smaller firms without the
resources to find them or the deep pockets to give them permanent salaried
jobs.

It also increases the prices for technology for local firms who can't afford
custom systems or assistance developing their wares.

Either way, I'm not sure "American" companies are harmed, there is a division
among the companies in America who are harmed and those who benefit. The large
ones with offices overseas may very well benefit, relative to the harm done to
smaller firms.

Also, American citizens will benefit through the availability of cheaper
products produced in foreign lands, including software and hardware products.
Holding America up as a torch doesn't make much sense here because _all_ of
america won't experience the same effect.

Furthermore, there is a lot of criticism of the program because many
economists, including Milton Friedman have called it a "corporate subsidy" and
others argue that there in fact _are_ enough americans to fill the technology
positions.

Really, there is a lot of irrationality on both sides of the debate. Arguments
are made on "right now" rather than the future of America. It is only the
corporations who are saying that this issue has a deliterious effect on our
future. They say we need to change the policy for our future, because they are
feeling the pain right now. I'm not really sure who is right.

------
makmanalp
The comments are scary.

------
indiejade
Can't remember the last time I saw such a fabulously written piece.

~~~
4chan4ever
Fabulously written? Please. The writing was sophomoric and cluttered with
pretentious metaphors and turns of phrase. The fledgling writer's first
attempt at self-aggrandization.

Heh.

~~~
hansef
Agree. I was willing to roll with it through the couple of introductory
paragraphs, thinking this was just how the writer chose to set the stage for
their piece. However I abandoned reading half-way through after realizing that
every sentence in the article was going to be a throbbing, oozing purple
jumble. Metaphor should be the spice of writing, not the base, otherwise it
loses all power and simply becomes cloying.

