
VCs are suing the US for delay of immigration program - tlb
https://www.recode.net/2017/9/19/16332666/national-venture-capitalist-association-international-entrepreneur-rule-immigration-trump
======
tomc1985
Silicon Valley needs to stop harping on the Visa program and simply pay people
what they want to receive. It is amazing that an idea can bring in $50 million
in investment and they're still splitting hairs on individual salaries. There
is plenty of talent stateside - stop bitching about the costs and just fucking
pay it.

These cost minimization assholes need to be swept away. Companies are sitting
on larger stockpiles of cash than ever before, owing to years of White House
uncertainty; they have the money and simply need to spend it. On one hand you
hear about how SV is just sooooooo flush with cash and then in the other hand
entrepreneurs complain that talent is too expensive. Every single one of those
clowns is a fraud.

~~~
gumby
I think you have it backwards. This is to help bring in people who will start
companies in the US and hire people in the US.

The major VCs mentioned in the article (such as Accel) already have VC arms
overseas, funding companies which employ foreigners in their home countries.

If you want more of the latter (using US capital to build companies, jobs,
products etc) then go ahead, recind this visa.

~~~
weirdstuff
Please excuse this more radical point, but part of me is ok with rescinding
the visas to force some investment back into the domestic population. (Out of
necessity.)

We have a large enough population that there's no reason we should be hurting
for talent, and part of me wonders how much of that disinvestment has been
enabled by importing instead of breeding our needs. We're exploiting poor
conditions in other countries in order to attract their best, as well as
creating poor conditions here for natural born citizens to suppress their
demands from resource owners.

~~~
gumby
> rescinding the visas to force some investment back into the domestic
> population. (Out of necessity.)

But it won't, the US investment dollars will simply be spent in the
entrepreneur's home country, which won't create any US jobs and in fact will
help dilute the power and influence of Silicon Valley.

> We're exploiting poor conditions in other countries in order to attract
> their best, as well as creating poor conditions here for natural born
> citizens to suppress their demands from resource owners.

Well you could see it that way; in my case it is a quality of life sacrifice
to work in the US in exchange for significantly more interesting work
environment; on the other hand my wife couldn't deal with the lower quality of
life here (worse and more expensive medical system, worse food, schools, etc).

I suppose if you have a zero-sum model and don't believe Adam Smith and David
Ricardo on the benefits of free trade your position would make sense.

~~~
pm24601
> But it won't, the US investment dollars will simply be spent in the
> entrepreneur's home country, which won't create any US jobs and in fact will
> help dilute the power and influence of Silicon Valley.

This is a benefit. It would spread wealth and enable more people to be
tech/entrepreneurial.

> in my case it is a quality of life sacrifice to work in the US in exchange
> for significantly more interesting work environment

... which should not be exclusive to silicon valley.

------
frgtpsswrdlame
Reading these comments it seems like where you land depends on whether you
believe there are lots of Americans who have the drive/willingness to found
their own company. If so then constraining the visa makes sense because VCs
already have a large supply of business. Similar to the H1B debate where we
recognize that companies don't really care about immigration, they just want
better employees for cheaper, this debate's core is that VCs just want to be
able to fund better companies for cheaper. I'd say I'm fine with Trump tossing
this Visa in the trash. Silicon Valley is an American creation so I don't mind
if its benefits go to Americans.

~~~
austenallred
About 50% of the biggest Silicon Valley companies were created by immigrants,
so I’d be careful before claiming that Silicon Valley is an “American”
invention and that the value should accrue to “Americans,” unless your
definition of “American” includes immigrants.

If an immigrant comes here and starts a company or helps make a company
successful even the native-born Americans are better off. IMO that’s the most
American thing that can possibly happen, and if we should be terrified at the
thought of it happening somewhere else instead.

~~~
mdorazio
What percentage were created by H1Bs? I think you're conflating "immigrant"
with "H1B visa holder". The two are not the same. Many of us who are critical
of H1B and similar visa programs are very much in support of immigration in
general.

~~~
jogjayr
> What percentage were created by H1Bs?

Well H-1Bs are generally prohibited from doing any paid work outside their
current employer. So it would be a miracle if that number was non-zero. But
it's still not. Zenefits co-founder Laks Srini had to be hired as a database
administrator on an H-1B so that he could leave his previous employer [1].

It seems unfair to say people on visa programs don't become entrepreneurs
when, in most cases, they legally aren't allowed to.

1\. [https://www.computerworld.com/article/2852250/it-
outsourcing...](https://www.computerworld.com/article/2852250/it-
outsourcing/silicon-valleys-h-1b-immigration-position-has-some-holes.html)

~~~
CJefferson
People complaining about H1B visa aren't (generally) complaining about the
people on the visas themselves, they are complaining about the system of H1B
visas itself.

------
jstewartmobile
I think it's pretty dirty. Recent contributions that impress me the most
typically come from western europeans / canadians who got solid educations on
the taxpayer's dime back home. SV wants their know-how without having to foot
the tax bill for it.

Meanwhile, the rest of the US is littered with marginal state and private
institutions that leave local kids with big debts for small skills.

This is a typical SV f __*-everybody move though. Europeans get screwed by
paying for an education that benefits the US. Americans get screwed for paying
megabucks all these years for the military-industrial complex that SV grew out
of, but the jobs are reserved for the anointed of the earth, and the profits
are stockpiled in Ireland /Netherlands/Bermuda.

------
arikr
For what it's worth, the program doesn't provide a substantial advantage over
existing visas, due to the requirement of $250k+ in funding.

Immigration lawyers I've discussed this with have noted that if someone has
$250k+ in funding, they are generally able to get an O-1 visa, anyway.

So while this process would likely be easier, it won't help many people who
couldn't get a visa via another path.

If the requirement was changed to benefit people pre-funding and give them 2-4
years to show promise, then this would be an extremely beneficial rule.

~~~
8ytecoder
In general the visa program is designed for employees and executives. It's so
much easier to move to the US as one of the two instead of a founder. An
"international manager" for example qualifies for the fastest Green Card
process. A founder, whereby no one can fire but yourself, can't get into any
of the existing visa criterion. To clarify, for both H1B and O1 you need to
have a manager (I presume a co-founder would somehow qualify) to be able to
fire you. It's a core criteria.

~~~
technotony
Your O1 information is incorrect. You can self apply for O1 or apply with a
manager. It's often used for creative careers, eg actors (and amusingly porn
stars according to my attorney), where the concept of a manager doesn't make
sense.

------
mankash666
Regardless of politics, this is one Visa category that's unequivocally
beneficial the US. These entrepreneurs are creating jobs & pumping money into
the economy

~~~
whathaschanged
If they're creating jobs and then bemoaning the lack of developers and the
need to import more foreign talent to fill those roles,then no,they aren't
creating jobs.

~~~
inlined
Even if this were true, the jobs they create are now subject to US taxes.

~~~
toomuchtodo
I would like to see proof that these jobs could not be created by US citizens
who don't need to be imported from other countries.

Because you _say_ you can't obtain the labor and skills locally doesn't not
make its so.

EDIT: @maxerickson (cause of those darn HN throttling limits)

Because I want to see US citizens employed before importing labor for jobs
that supposedly have no candidates in country, if we're building policy.

~~~
gambiting
I'd love to know how can you provide such proof or what you would expect as
proof. We've advertised for a senior programmer position for months and had
very little local(national) uptake. Almost nothing. Then we hired someone from
abroad, but 99% because they were one of few people who actually applied.

Does that mean that we could never ever fill this position with a local
person? How do you prove that?

What makes it more complicated is that it's extremely easy for someone to say
"just offer 2x the salary and someone will come" \- and that's probably true,
but it's extremely ignorant of other market factors in the area.

~~~
toomuchtodo
> We've advertised for a senior programmer position for months and had very
> little local(national) uptake. Almost nothing. Then we hired someone from
> abroad, but 99% because they were one of few people who actually applied.

What pay are you offering for the role?

> What makes it more complicated is that it's extremely easy for someone to
> say "just offer 2x the salary and someone will come" \- and that's probably
> true, but it's extremely ignorant of other market factors in the area.

It is easy to say that when labor law isn't favorable to importing labor from
other countries, which as a US citizen I am in favor of. If your business
can't support a wage that attracts talent without importing someone from
another country, perhaps that's a problem with the business fundamentals.

As a citizen of my country, my fellow citizens are my primary concern, not
someone's business. We all have our ideals that have been shaped by our life
experiences.

~~~
KGIII
Tongue in cheek; Masters required, Ph.D. preferred, 10 years experience in
Rust, must be willing to relocate, 7 years experience with Windows 10
required, generous salary starting at $60,000/year.

Not too long ago, I was helping a friend find a job and was a bit startled by
some of the requirements. One that really stuck out was needing a few years of
experience in a Java version that was still in the beta phase. (I think it was
8.)

I don't know if it's an HR issue, a communications issue, or what... I'd
speculate that it is intentional, so that they can claim they can't find local
talent and justify hiring from abroad. Call it a hunch...

I'm not sure why companies are so against training, but I suppose that's a
topic for another thread.

~~~
Apocryphon
The aversion of modern tech companies, and companies in many industries
besides, to training new hires is mind-boggling. I suppose in the startup
world the lack of resources to do so is in part justifiable. So resources end
up being poured bidding for the few qualified senior engineers instead. Or
lobbying to continue to be able to hire from abroad.

------
pascalxus
Once again, we see high-powered liberals trying to circumvent the democratic
process by Suing to enact political change. Everyone should be held to the
same rulebook. The courts are not there to subvert the political process.

~~~
jhpriestley
The courts have a defined role within the political process - the
interpretation of the law - which they are following here. Both conservative
and liberal activists have a long history of suing to enact political change.
It is important that these issues are worked out in court precisely so that
the rulebook is applied with more fairness.

------
samfisher83
Why don't they open offices in a more immigration friendly country?

~~~
peterlk
Because US markets are worth doing business in.

~~~
samfisher83
I understand, but if the US doesn't want immigrants then why not open up in
Canada or some other place that have freer immigration law. Or is America the
only place you can be successful?

~~~
mankash666
That's a fair question, and a real trend. In the short term it doesn't seem
detrimental to the US economy. I believe that the US will gain pole position
in the future by encouraging immigration of high skilled, entrepreneurial
individuals. And data suggests a similar benefit.

------
alexanderstears
It's amazing VCs have standing. Very unfortunate that we need executive action
to allow entrepreneurs to make America their base of operations - not to get
too CATO-y here, but it'd be excellent if the right to earn a living was
identified as a Constitutional right.

Beyond the program proposed, I think anyone in America should be allowed to
start a company and should be allowed to stay in America contingent upon their
company growing - automatic citizenship for anyone who started and owns >50%
of a company that has at least a million /yr in payroll for Americans.

~~~
sremani
50% equity in a million payroll company? Sure, who will not sign up for it.
But what we are talking is people getting checks in 250K range and them being
able to be in USA to raise capital. We already know tech sector does not
employ that many people at least not until Series A. This is not about
creating lots of jobs either, the most successful one would be lucky to have a
thousand direct hires.

Selling tech entrepreneur-ship as jobs program is a joke. This is giving more
power to VCs just like their corporate brothers to import talent. Good or bad,
I am not sure, but the winners are certainly the 1% not the 99%.

~~~
alexanderstears
_50% equity in a million payroll company?_

And started it - i.e had their name on the articles of incorporation.

------
hack4supper
A quick summary of the article: [https://summarybrew.com/p/top-venture-
capitalists-are-suing-...](https://summarybrew.com/p/top-venture-capitalists-
are-suing-the-trump-administration-after-it-delayed-a-key-immigration-program)

------
sudosteph
The really ironic part of this is that while VCs will claim "America First" is
exclusionary(it is), their practice of "Silicon Valley First" is accepted as a
normal fact of life.

Opportunity in America is not equal. Many smart, working class kids would love
to be an entrepreneur, and it's not lack of ambition or talent holding them
back. It's simple economics and lack of mentorship or investment available.

I'm all for bringing more entrepeneurs into the US. But I wish VCs were half
as interested in growing talent here, at public universities across the nation
and in cities not as hip as SFO.

~~~
anindha
Could you explain what you mean by the "economics" holding them back? Someone
living here starts off in a much better position than any foreign
entrepreneur. If they can't figure out how to get the attention of an investor
then they probably wouldn't be a great entrepreneur.

~~~
htormey
" Someone living here starts off in a much better position than any foreign
entrepreneur. "

I don't think you can make a blanket statement like that. I come from Ireland
where I received a 4 year degree in CS for free. Most of the Americans I
worked with over the years are saddled with huge amounts of college debt. This
is a massive advantage in my favor.

Having to spend 4-6 years waiting for a green card so I can start my own
company is a massive disadvantage. Having to deal with the annoying vagaries
of the US immigration system just to get a job is also a massive disadvantage.

Coming from a country that has good free high school education is a massive
advantage compared to most places in the USA.

Having parents who are financially well off and can support you while you are
in school is a massive advantage. Having parents who went to university and
can tell you the difference between schools or guide you through the byzantine
application processes are massive advantages.

~~~
anindha
Many students here receive financial aid - 69% of Stanford undergraduates [1].

[1] [http://news.stanford.edu/2016/02/25/tuition-financial-
aid-02...](http://news.stanford.edu/2016/02/25/tuition-financial-aid-022516/)

~~~
htormey
Sure, Stanford, Harvard & many top tier universities provide financial aid. I
think that's awesome and to be encouraged. Getting into those institutions or
being even aware of them is another matter. The disadvantages that many
American's face start way downstream in high school, etc.

If you don't have parents who have gone to college before or go to a school
with good teachers, you probably won't even know to apply to a top tier
school.

A common theme that I have seen amongst my friends who have gone to
Stanford/Berkeley/etc is that their parents had them doing extracurricular
activities from a very young age to pad their entrance letters. Poorer
families, have less resources and hence less time to engage in activities like
this.

Just getting into Stanford or a top US college requires an incredible amount
of work above and beyond good grades.

I have a very good friend who charge's $200 an hour to put together college
application letters for top schools.

Income inequality in the USA is a huge disadvantage that many Americans face.

I'm not saying that income inequality is not an issue many immigrants don't
face. I'm just particularly aware of it coming from a country (Ireland) that
has good social benefits, like free healthcare, educations, etc. I think these
things put me at an advantage compared to what many of my American peers had
to go through.

------
rm_-rf_slash
I imagine a legal victory for the VCs will be spun by the administration as
example of "liberal elites" and "activist judges" subverting the
democratically elected government.

A legal victory won't change many minds, but it could at least prevent some
unnecessary economic self-harm.

------
mariushn
Why not move to Canada?

~~~
yahna
Money and opportunity to work on interesting stuff.

I've been thinking about moving back.

------
danjoc
"the Trump administration violated federal rulemaking laws"

"The court challenge concerns the International Entrepreneur Rule, a program
instituted under former President Barack Obama"

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_entrepreneur_rul...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_entrepreneur_rule)

"this rule does not need to be approved by Congress."

It seems like VCs were unable to get a law passed, so they tried to use their
influence over the president to slip one past the democratic process. That
seems dishonest. I'm glad to see president Trump standing up to that sort of
intimidation. If they want a law, they need to participate in the democratic
process like everyone else.

~~~
terravion
No actually, a lot of immigration is administrative (as opposed to
legislative). The congress has delegated wide authority in this to the
executive branch. However, for the executive to exercise this authority there
is a whole body of procedure that all administrative agencies have to follow
so that it isn't capricious rules that change with the executive's mood. Not
following the administrative procedures is what's a subversion of the
democratic process (i.e. the executive is exceeding the authority granted to
it by our representatives.)

~~~
danjoc
>rules that change with the executive's mood

That seems like a mis-characterization of the situation. Trump's mood hasn't
changed. Making major changes to immigration policy and trade deals was the
foundation of Trump's presidential campaign.

~~~
terravion
The law, that Trump and every other president is sworn to uphold, says the
administrative regulations are supposed to be created only following the
legislatively mandated rule making process. While Trump's appointees are free
to initiate a new rule making process--as for example his FCC commissioner is
doing to the chagrin of most HN commenters on net neutrality--he's not free to
just decide to change administrative regulations absent the appropriate
procedures and evidence even if he campaigned on that rule change. If the case
is as the NVCA claims--where the administrative procedures act wasn't
followed, I hope they win.

~~~
danjoc
>the administrative regulations are supposed to be created only following the
legislatively mandated rule making process.

The administration hasn't created new rules. They've delayed rules that have
not yet taken effect.

>While Trump's appointees are free to initiate a new rule making process--as
for example his FCC commissioner is doing to the chagrin of most HN commenters
on net neutrality

Which the FCC did by blocking rules before they were to take effect. Sounds
like the same strategy to me.

------
EternalData
If you're big on America First, why wouldn't you want the best foreign
entrepreneurs to come and found great companies that generate American jobs,
American taxes, and American products?

~~~
irrational
Because many of Trump's base are low-educated rural people who see the
American jobs being generated by the best foreign entrepreneurs as requiring
higher education and skills than they possess.

~~~
rayiner
I'm a high-income, highly educated immigrant. I grew up among similar people,
and witnessed the extreme derision directed at "low-educated rural people."
Given that, it's a bit difficult for me to blame Trump's base for not wanting
more of us here.

~~~
nostrademons
Eh, I don't blame them, but I also don't blame the high-income highly-educated
immigrants for feeling derisive toward people whose only asset is that they're
American. I think Tom Lehrer's 1967 observations are still remarkably on-
point:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIlJ8ZCs4jY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIlJ8ZCs4jY)

~~~
rayiner
I think it's pretty hypocritical. India and China certainly don't subscribe to
the "credo nation" concept that American elites have embraced. In Bangladesh,
when we speak about other Bangladeshis we identify precisely where in the
country their families are from. (It'd be like making it a point to note that
someone was from Texas or Virginia.) But when we speak of people from outside
the country, we call everyone "bideshi" ("foreigner"), regardless of
nationality. An American could move to Bangladesh as a young child and live
there her whole life, but she'd always be "bideshi."

~~~
selimthegrim
Do people from West Bengal, Assam, Tripura, who speak Bengali count as
bideshi?

------
MattCuery
I don't get how hn can be behind this and question how this goes against
America first when y'all always whine about "muh mentorship". Y'all know the
value of mentorship and incubation and the cost involved in incubating talent.
Talent needs to be developed and cultivated right? So why bring in 'founders'
from abroad based on very speculative certia with investment levels below the
amount to employ a few Americans to compete at least initially within the
American domestic market? Why not throw those resources to create firms in
America, even if in the spirit of sino-inspired copyism,to create not just
work opportunities but founder opportunities for Americans?

~~~
biocomputation
I always ask the same question about huge American tech companies. They have
almost unfathomable amounts of cash, but complain about the lack of qualified
American talent. If there really is a shortage of qualified American talent,
then American tech companies should use some of the cash to train American
citizens.

H1B and similar really are about labor arbitrage. It's amazing that anyone
thinks the best paid jobs in America should go to hundreds of thousands of
foreign nationals. (There are hundreds of thousands of H1B workers in America
right now doing jobs that Americans are imminently qualified to perform.)

Not to mention, non-profits are exempt from the annual cap on H1B. This
includes virtually all hospitals and universities. If Democrats are serious
about the middle class, then they really should do something about this.

~~~
trgv
> They have almost unfathomable amounts of cash, but complain about the lack
> of qualified American talent. If there really is a shortage of qualified
> American talent, then American tech companies should use some of the cash to
> train American citizens.

You believe that anyone can be trained to be an effective programmer. If
that's true, then there's some truth to your argument: why not invest in
education and training to meet the high demand for programmers?

But I disagree with that premise. I think "ability to be a great programmer"
is generally something you're born with, or at least something that's been
determined by the time you're ~18. Therefore it makes perfect sense to import
programmers to meet the demand. The US population is just not big enough to
meet the demand for programmers and it would be insane/damaging to the economy
to refuse to employ non-Americans.

I think the reason for H1B workers is supply and demand. The demand for
developers far, far exceeds the supply.

~~~
Apocryphon
> But I disagree with that premise. I think "ability to be a great programmer"
> is generally something you're born with, or at least something that's been
> determined by the time you're ~18.

That's your opinion, but it's far from a majority one. It flies in the face
with the continuous education/MOOCs/coder bootcamp industries and the "anyone
can be a coder" mantra of the current age. Either you're right, or all of
those programs and institutions are hucksters.

Not to mention, "great programmer" is hyperbolic when many many coding jobs
these days are really just about fixing broken JavaScript and gluing together
APIs. Software has eaten the world, and Sturgeon's law applies to software as
much as anything else.

