I am not so sure. I am a WASP which means that they shouldn't have any xenophobia against me. I can't get a visa either.
Personally I am guessing that the education they receive is as bad on the subject of economics as it is here and the people really just assume that those who come from the outside is out to get what they have. This wouldn't be so bad when the economic times are good, but when they are bad (or perceived to be bad, historically they are ridiculously good) people becomes less willing to talk to, and help, strangers.
You have an accent. Trust me, I'm from Indiana. You're a stranger. My accent is weird enough from having left Indiana... Let's not even talk about my Hungarian wife.
The uber-conservatives driving the anti-immigration movement don't want WASPy Canadians or Europeans because they are very likely liberal, and therefore outsiders to the "real America" that they are trying to defend.
Except this guy (and many, many, many others) is not one of the "several billion". He is highly educated, and highly intelligent. This sets him far apart from the majority of the world's population, which is predominantly impoverished, uneducated, and illiterate.
Surely he is not just another one of the uneducated, unwashed masses that America fears so much from its immigrants?
I simply don't understand why productive, educated, intelligent people are ever turned away. These people will find opportunities elsewhere - and make some other country more powerful in exchange.
There was time when you would give your kidney to be in the USA - what Americans need to wake up and realize that that day has passed. The US is still a very valuable place to be, particularly for a tech entrepreneur, but the advance in the rest of the world over the past two decades has been even more dramatic. The US is unquestionably losing its edge, and IMO there is more justification than ever for a (finally) sane immigration policy.
Not at all. Immigration laws are not the primary inhibitor of migration, (lack of) money is the greatest barrier. The fact that you say your un-learned opinion is a "fact", proves burgerbrain's point that immigration laws are more xenaphobia than anything.
> "Several" billion? That's half the world's population.
Yes, it is. Are you suggesting that more than half of the world's population wouldn't move to the US if doing so was a reasonable option for them?
Seriously - for most people, being poor in the US would be a huge step up. (As someone put it, almost every "Occupy" protestor is in the 1% on a world-wide basis.) And they're pretty sure that they would do better than the worst.
US immigration policy is clearly not motivated by ethnic identity or "xenophobia". The 1965 immigration act and the visa lottery make that clear. But I sincerely ask: why would it be wrong to base immigration policy on such concerns? A nation should have the right to preserve its identity and make-up.
Whether or not it is "wrong" is irrelevant. It would fly in the face of one of the things we claim to like most about this country. And it would probably end up hurting us, one way or another.
(Irrelevant: yes, I think it would be "wrong". I consider discrimination to be a form of human rights violation. Not being a citizen doesn't mean you don't have rights. Or, it shouldn't. /idealism )
So, this guy started working before he had his visa? Even worse he started a job that required personal, non-refundable investments of time and money. I have zero sympathy - this is common sense. Sure they shouldn't have rejected his application as they did, but he shouldn't have assumed he would easily get the visa. Not the kind of guy I would want to work for... at least until he learns some basic life skills to match that education.
Things have gotten better under President Obama recently after an initial turn for the worse. The Neufeld memo denied visas to founders on account of initiating a strict requirement that an employer vouch for an immigrant in a variety of ways, for them to be eligible for an H1-B. We don't have employers as founders, turns out.
However, these recent changes open the door for H1-B and EB-2 visas as founders: http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f... Vivek Wadhwa is hopeful that adjudicators will shortly be much friendlier to founders applying for visas, as long as they have a board set up and are funded.
"So, this guy started working before he had his visa? Even worse he started a job that required personal, non-refundable investments of time and money."
Have you read the requirements of an E2 Investor Visa? You have to:
* Set the company up (register your C-Corp/LLC, etc)
I seriously do not understand why people come/stay here given the way they are treated by our government. You must be masochists. Things have actually gotten worse under Obama, not better (and I am liberal).
What is it like in Israel for startups? In theory his kind of internet startup could work from almost anywhere in the world. Since he is in Vancouver now, might as well bring in the tax dollars for Canada.
ps. what is with linking through Digg for this - and they are still framing sites?
Sure, I get that, but if you could go to Vancouver (which apparently is a startup-mecca too) you'd have far less fear about being deported (and ill will from nearly 50% of the population). Why put yourself through that - running a business is enough stress.
The USA is like going to a store, filling up your cart, but just before you are about to checkout and make them money, they drag you out the door instead.
I seriously doubt the Vancouver scene is even remotely as big as the one in the Bay Area. The only thing that comes close to SV on this continent is NY, and even that is a decade behind.
But do you need the "biggest and best" scene, or do you just need a decent environment where what you are trying to do is not uncommon and the resources you need have already been established?
I've been at a startup that was about as far outside of the bay area as possible - North Idaho. We had a great product in a nice space and were fairly successful at selling it and making modest profit.
But the start was rough. Unless it's a one-person gig (and there aren't many of those out there) you need two things - bodies and money. The further you are away from metro areas the harder it is to find both - the people with the skills either left or are already working somewhere and the investors aren't multi-millionaires, they are angels with $10-20k each, sometimes $100k+.
It's possible though. That startup eventually sold but long after a more inferior competitor sold for a lot more which had more to do with their location (Cali, I think in the valley) than how well they functioned. And the company I was with sold for less than we thought it would and long after the window in which acquisition would have been ideal.
There's just no visibility outside of major (tech hub) metro areas. You don't get any buzz even if you are in magazines and the like, and you don't have the contacts that can really help you out. It's a major negative.
Pure (somewhat educated) conjecture: if that startup would've been in Seattle or Portland it would've sold much earlier and for much more than it did, maybe in year 6 instead of year 10. If in the Bay area I think it would've sold by year 3 instead of year 10.
Sounds like if the goals are acquisition and quick payouts, the place to be is SV. However, you indicated that the company in Idaho was better run or had a better product. Isn't that better for the end users in the long run? Wouldn't that indicate there's a better chance of a company staying around for the long haul and providing better service and what not?
Wouldn't be surprising at all if your competitor that was acquired was absorbed or shut down within a year. For the founders - sure, that's success - they had an exit. But how is this necessarily good for the long term economics of those businesses?
The original video story on this talked about all the jobs that 'high tech entrepreneurs' create. But how long do those jobs last? Sure, there's no such thing as a 30 year job for most people any more, but isn't this type of behaviour contributing or accelerating this trend?
True, the main goal wasn't necessarily getting acquired, although typically that's what you expect to happen with a lot of tech startups. To get big we would've had to change direction (which wouldn't have been a bad idea).
Whether or not we were to get acquired, it was just tough to find quality employees and the money to pay them until sales went into the black. It took about 3 years to become solvent and even then that did help luring good programmers to Idaho.
Can you point me to more information about Vancouver for immigrants? I'm still on a student visa in the US but eventually I'll face problems like this Israeli.
Comparing the startup scene in Vancouver to the one in the Bay Area is like, well, comparing a basket of oranges to an entire orchard. Or a bunny hill to a black diamond run.
The level of acceptance for hackers, much less hacker-entrepreneurs, is worlds apart. There are numerous places in Canada that would proclaim the title of "Silicon Valley North", I've lived in almost all of them. None come remotely close.
Being from China, you have one major advantage over most of us: you're in the booming market of China.
If I knew anything about your country, language and culture, I'd probably give it a shot. You should use your situation to your advantage in my opinion. The asian culture is so foreign to us North Americans that it makes it nearly impossible for us to do business over there, yet, there's a huge opportunity.
Everyone thinks this way, but then it's so hard for an average Chinese to succeed in his own country in the form of startups. Seems like there's more barriers facing a Chinese startup than an US equivalent.
Plus there's this distant fear that the country will fail sometime in the future and all the sweat into the startup will evaporate.
This is probably why so many Chinese are fleeing the country.
I know. But having being born in China and stayed in the US for the last 3 years, I feel there are many more barriers for a Chinese startup than a US one. That's why I've started my own in the US, even knowing that there will probably be some messy business when my student visa expires.
Israel is very friendly towards startups. Launching from here is definitely an option, albeit not an optimal one.
I can very much understand that Israel's physical and cultural distance from SF can pose a problem. Do not underestimate the importance of being physically close to customers and partners - not to mention VCs.
Also there's the fact that your tax dollars will very likely be paying to demolish Palestinian homes and blow up Palestinian schools and burn people a live with White Phosphorous.
If you start a start in Israel, you will be losing money because (quite like) there's an international boycott on Israeli goods.
It's similar to what they say about LA: there's a million waiters who are all there hoping for their chance to be the next Brad Pitt or Natalie Portman.
You want to be where the action is, it maximizes your chances of success. Sure, you could attempt to run your startup from Milan, Barcelona or Marseille, but the amount of talent and opportunities for support are infinitesimal compared to what SF will have to offer.
If you're 100% determined to obtain success at any cost, it's worth packing your bags and leaving Peripherystan to come to the big city.
I'd question whether being in "the valley" really does increase your chance of success, and also question what's meant by 'success'. If you raise a few million in a first or second round, hire people, then close up shop 2 years later, was that a 'success'? That's probably easier to do out in CA, but if you define success as a longer-term sustainable organization, does being out there really make that much of a difference? Successful companies are built all over the place.
Agreed, this was my same thinking when I was in the USA until 2008. Sure, my employer and my wife's both offered to get us a green card, but why wait? I had applied to YC earlier that year with an idea for a start-up that was based on my living in DC and was turned down. I went back to the UK, applied with a different idea that was more appropriate to the UK / Europe. That got funded by Seedcamp, and off we went.
I have no doubt that the USA / SV is a great place to start a company, but why waste your life trying to satisfy government bureaucrats that you should be allowed in when there are plenty of other places that want you?
If you are European, you can move to any of the hubs like London or Berlin. They might not be as brilliant as SV, but they have their own advantages, and the key for an entrepreneur is to get down and make use of these advantages. Folks in the Persian Gulf (I am from Bahrain) can move to any of the hubs there like Dubai or Bahrain, and there are plenty of gaps in the market that an entrepreneur can fill by starting a company. And of course the BRIC countries have huge growth for their own nationals to ride.
So why go through the headaches of government immigration?
(PS I am really sorry for entrepreneur that this story describes. I just hope fewer people have to go through that fate.)
Also, entrepreneurs shouldn't forget that if they do get into the US and make it big with their startup, they might be subject to the 30% exit tax (on their net worth) if they ever want to end their relationship with the IRS. They are dangerous people to do business with!
Even when visiting, the entire entry process with all the yelling to stay in line and complete your paperwork and fingerprinting and photographing is bad enough, then all the security theatre on the way back out again. You come away with the distinct feeling of being tolerated but not welcome, and that saying the wrong thing to the wrong person at the wrong time could see you detained for a period of time.
I always want to say 'OK, I get it, you don't want me here, sorry for trying to do business with your citizens'. But of course I just shut up and smile for the camera.
> I seriously do not understand why people come/stay here given the way they are treated by our government. You must be masochists.
The immigration thing definitely sucks, but other things probably make up for it. You're probably underestimating the good parts of living in the US, especially from the point of view of someone who comes from a poorer country or, in some cases, for an entrepreneur who lives in a developed country but doesn't have access to places like Silicon Valley and NY.
Also note that, with the possible exception of Canada and Australia, most other developed countries are at least as restrictive as the US regarding immigration from developing countries.
I'm from Brazil, which is considered one of the leading countries among the "emergent" countries. Yes, things have been improving in the last 20 years. But it still sucks. For instance, consider that the GDP per capita in Brazil is still far lower than places like Portugal and Greece, which are not exactly booming. In fact, there's a significant number of Brazilian immigrants in Portugal even though they're not exactly welcoming us with open arms.
In another area: half of slums in Rio are now dominated by drug gangs, and the other half by paramilitary militias. One of those militias recently killed a judge. A state congressman had to flee the country due to death threats from militias. I'll take your bureaucratic nightmares anytime. ;-)
Rule of law trumps everything. Once you start giving special treatment for individuals you do not know where you will end up. I am not saying that this is not happening at all, but law needs to be uphold. Assuming his stay is against the visa law he should definitely leave, and he did the right thing to leave. I am not saying that the laws are perfect either. It took me 9 years to get my permanent residency, so I am someone who has been through the process.
I also found article a bit biased, in the sense that it does not give proper detail about his visa status and in what terms he was allowed to the country and why he was asked to leave. Article is emotional.
I think the biggest merit of starting a company in US is the aura of credibility it gives. The other is the huge market size. Ask this question yourself, would you be willing to give your credit card number to a (for no particular reason) Hungarian or an Israeli company or to a company from US? How much sense of security do you feel?
Of course, ventura capital and startup culture in US is leaps and bounds ahead of the rest of the world.
Amit and CruiseWise went through StartupChile, btw. I'm somewhat disappointed that the international talent competition angle didn't play into the story more, based on our initial pitch. We (Bloomberg administration, Startup Visa) pitched this story to ABC with the added angle of capital flight, since CruiseWise raised money from US investors.
Not only are people being denied the opportunity to create jobs in the US, but US money is following them out of the country. Not a good combination, right?
As a tech entrepreneur and global itinerant, I'd love immigration laws around the world to be more lax, but please...
"One of the 20 Hot Silicon Valley Startups You Need to Watch"
If this were true, I think there'd be more of a case. But remember there are other people in this world aside from tech entrepreneurs. Some of them are in pretty horrid situations and seek asylum.
Assuming the US has an intake quota and that intake quota is divided between reasons for immigration, then proponents of the Startup Visa are petitioning that other seekers of asylum or immigration take a back seat. I absolutely support this to an extent, but do we want them to deny all non-tech immigrants for every kid with a website?
At what point does a startup deserve to take someone else's place in the queue. And I'm well aware that politicians hate to concede there's a queue, but of course there is.
Actually, there's a bunch of 'visa slack,' since the 10,000 limit for the EB-5 investor visas generally only sees 1-2000 successful applications. What the primary Startup Visa bills call for is to take those unused EB-5 visas and make them available to founders.
The argument is that sweat equity should be equivalent in some way to cash money investment, which is what the EB-5 represents.
The fundamental problem with immigration rules is that the people who follow them are usually the ones a country wants. The skilled, educated people are unwilling to risk getting deported and having worldwide travel restrictions for the rest of their lives.
The desperate unskilled have far less to lose if they are caught so are more willing to take the chance.
I was born and raised in Guatemala of U.S. citizen parents and I spend most of my time fighting this broken and violent immigration system through citizenorange.com and presente.org. I'm a lurker here on hacker news mostly because technology news is a welcome respite from this mess.
I just wanted to say that I don't blame folks if they decide the U.S. is not the place to be. God knows I hope to be able to do some of my pro-migrant work from Guatemala someday. At the same time I wanted to tell people that there is a way to fight this messed up system which DREAMers (undocumented youth who only know the U.S. as their home) have paved the way for.
It will be a long time before Congress fixes this mostly because debates over the immigration system have nothing to do with rationality, they have mostly to do with the contentious subject of what it means to be an 'American,' where xenophobic ideas certainly play a large role. In the meantime, though, there are administrative things that can be done through Obama administration if you fight hard enough for them and embarass them enough. I'm certain, for example, that this entrepeneur will be fine after this article for instance (he's also lucky he's dealing with USCIS and not ICE).
I'm just writing this all out in case there are folks out there who are willing to give coming here to the U.S. a shot and taking on fixing this broken immigration system in addition to creating companies. If all the good folks leave, this problem will never get fixed. And if it looks like your against the wall, there's a good network of pro-migrant activists like me that will fight for you to resist and stay.
The only things the US has left are the culture and the hype - people are either taken in by the ability to be at the epicenter (which is very important for most entrepreneurs) or by the propaganda/marketing/promises. Otherwise, it's pretty easy to start a company in other countries, especially if it's mainly operating online.
The US is unbeatable in one thing, though: you can find almost anything you want at prices much lower than any other countries. That's an important advantage no matter what industry you're in, or heck, even for everyday life.
It's not like he'd get deported even if he got arrested, sure as hell wouldn't happen in California. Just continue working and have your lawyers stall and get the Visa stuff handled. You won't be able to travel outside the states and then come back in until your paperwork is done but that shouldn't be a huge problem in the internet world we live in. Or have an investor sponsor you at one of their (most likely many) companies so you have a valid job that the government can't complain about.
To be fair, the government is only going by what they know. If anyone could go created an LLC, call themselves CEO and be free to work here then everyone would do it. Most likely he didn't keep up with his visa paperwork and this is the result.
Update: USCIS just reversed its decision and allowed back Amit into the country. (Source: he just posted on his facebook wall).
I know Amit and how hard working he is and am very thankful this was resolved so quickly. At the same time, I hope it grows into something more than just a lone media frenzy-induced example. If the US is to stay competitive, it needs to reconsider its immigration policies. (Full disclosure: I am a foreigner myself).
66 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 128 ms ] threadPersonally I am guessing that the education they receive is as bad on the subject of economics as it is here and the people really just assume that those who come from the outside is out to get what they have. This wouldn't be so bad when the economic times are good, but when they are bad (or perceived to be bad, historically they are ridiculously good) people becomes less willing to talk to, and help, strangers.
xenophobia means fear of foreigners or strangers, and as such has nothing to do with race or religion per se.
Surely he is not just another one of the uneducated, unwashed masses that America fears so much from its immigrants?
I simply don't understand why productive, educated, intelligent people are ever turned away. These people will find opportunities elsewhere - and make some other country more powerful in exchange.
There was time when you would give your kidney to be in the USA - what Americans need to wake up and realize that that day has passed. The US is still a very valuable place to be, particularly for a tech entrepreneur, but the advance in the rest of the world over the past two decades has been even more dramatic. The US is unquestionably losing its edge, and IMO there is more justification than ever for a (finally) sane immigration policy.
Yes, it is. Are you suggesting that more than half of the world's population wouldn't move to the US if doing so was a reasonable option for them?
Seriously - for most people, being poor in the US would be a huge step up. (As someone put it, almost every "Occupy" protestor is in the 1% on a world-wide basis.) And they're pretty sure that they would do better than the worst.
(Irrelevant: yes, I think it would be "wrong". I consider discrimination to be a form of human rights violation. Not being a citizen doesn't mean you don't have rights. Or, it shouldn't. /idealism )
However, these recent changes open the door for H1-B and EB-2 visas as founders: http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f... Vivek Wadhwa is hopeful that adjudicators will shortly be much friendlier to founders applying for visas, as long as they have a board set up and are funded.
Have you read the requirements of an E2 Investor Visa? You have to:
* Set the company up (register your C-Corp/LLC, etc)
* Invest/put a large amount of money at risk
* Employ staff
BEFORE you apply for the visa itself.
What is it like in Israel for startups? In theory his kind of internet startup could work from almost anywhere in the world. Since he is in Vancouver now, might as well bring in the tax dollars for Canada.
ps. what is with linking through Digg for this - and they are still framing sites?
The USA is like going to a store, filling up your cart, but just before you are about to checkout and make them money, they drag you out the door instead.
But the start was rough. Unless it's a one-person gig (and there aren't many of those out there) you need two things - bodies and money. The further you are away from metro areas the harder it is to find both - the people with the skills either left or are already working somewhere and the investors aren't multi-millionaires, they are angels with $10-20k each, sometimes $100k+.
It's possible though. That startup eventually sold but long after a more inferior competitor sold for a lot more which had more to do with their location (Cali, I think in the valley) than how well they functioned. And the company I was with sold for less than we thought it would and long after the window in which acquisition would have been ideal.
There's just no visibility outside of major (tech hub) metro areas. You don't get any buzz even if you are in magazines and the like, and you don't have the contacts that can really help you out. It's a major negative.
Pure (somewhat educated) conjecture: if that startup would've been in Seattle or Portland it would've sold much earlier and for much more than it did, maybe in year 6 instead of year 10. If in the Bay area I think it would've sold by year 3 instead of year 10.
Wouldn't be surprising at all if your competitor that was acquired was absorbed or shut down within a year. For the founders - sure, that's success - they had an exit. But how is this necessarily good for the long term economics of those businesses?
The original video story on this talked about all the jobs that 'high tech entrepreneurs' create. But how long do those jobs last? Sure, there's no such thing as a 30 year job for most people any more, but isn't this type of behaviour contributing or accelerating this trend?
Whether or not we were to get acquired, it was just tough to find quality employees and the money to pay them until sales went into the black. It took about 3 years to become solvent and even then that did help luring good programmers to Idaho.
Comparing the startup scene in Vancouver to the one in the Bay Area is like, well, comparing a basket of oranges to an entire orchard. Or a bunny hill to a black diamond run.
The level of acceptance for hackers, much less hacker-entrepreneurs, is worlds apart. There are numerous places in Canada that would proclaim the title of "Silicon Valley North", I've lived in almost all of them. None come remotely close.
If I knew anything about your country, language and culture, I'd probably give it a shot. You should use your situation to your advantage in my opinion. The asian culture is so foreign to us North Americans that it makes it nearly impossible for us to do business over there, yet, there's a huge opportunity.
I can very much understand that Israel's physical and cultural distance from SF can pose a problem. Do not underestimate the importance of being physically close to customers and partners - not to mention VCs.
If you start a start in Israel, you will be losing money because (quite like) there's an international boycott on Israeli goods.
http://www.bdsmovement.net/
You want to be where the action is, it maximizes your chances of success. Sure, you could attempt to run your startup from Milan, Barcelona or Marseille, but the amount of talent and opportunities for support are infinitesimal compared to what SF will have to offer.
If you're 100% determined to obtain success at any cost, it's worth packing your bags and leaving Peripherystan to come to the big city.
I'd question whether being in "the valley" really does increase your chance of success, and also question what's meant by 'success'. If you raise a few million in a first or second round, hire people, then close up shop 2 years later, was that a 'success'? That's probably easier to do out in CA, but if you define success as a longer-term sustainable organization, does being out there really make that much of a difference? Successful companies are built all over the place.
I have no doubt that the USA / SV is a great place to start a company, but why waste your life trying to satisfy government bureaucrats that you should be allowed in when there are plenty of other places that want you?
If you are European, you can move to any of the hubs like London or Berlin. They might not be as brilliant as SV, but they have their own advantages, and the key for an entrepreneur is to get down and make use of these advantages. Folks in the Persian Gulf (I am from Bahrain) can move to any of the hubs there like Dubai or Bahrain, and there are plenty of gaps in the market that an entrepreneur can fill by starting a company. And of course the BRIC countries have huge growth for their own nationals to ride.
So why go through the headaches of government immigration?
(PS I am really sorry for entrepreneur that this story describes. I just hope fewer people have to go through that fate.)
I always want to say 'OK, I get it, you don't want me here, sorry for trying to do business with your citizens'. But of course I just shut up and smile for the camera.
The immigration thing definitely sucks, but other things probably make up for it. You're probably underestimating the good parts of living in the US, especially from the point of view of someone who comes from a poorer country or, in some cases, for an entrepreneur who lives in a developed country but doesn't have access to places like Silicon Valley and NY.
Also note that, with the possible exception of Canada and Australia, most other developed countries are at least as restrictive as the US regarding immigration from developing countries.
I'm from Brazil, which is considered one of the leading countries among the "emergent" countries. Yes, things have been improving in the last 20 years. But it still sucks. For instance, consider that the GDP per capita in Brazil is still far lower than places like Portugal and Greece, which are not exactly booming. In fact, there's a significant number of Brazilian immigrants in Portugal even though they're not exactly welcoming us with open arms.
In another area: half of slums in Rio are now dominated by drug gangs, and the other half by paramilitary militias. One of those militias recently killed a judge. A state congressman had to flee the country due to death threats from militias. I'll take your bureaucratic nightmares anytime. ;-)
I also found article a bit biased, in the sense that it does not give proper detail about his visa status and in what terms he was allowed to the country and why he was asked to leave. Article is emotional.
I think the biggest merit of starting a company in US is the aura of credibility it gives. The other is the huge market size. Ask this question yourself, would you be willing to give your credit card number to a (for no particular reason) Hungarian or an Israeli company or to a company from US? How much sense of security do you feel?
Of course, ventura capital and startup culture in US is leaps and bounds ahead of the rest of the world.
The US is really good at advertising.
Real url: http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Economy/visa-problem-prevents...
Flagged, hoping a mod will change the url.
Not only are people being denied the opportunity to create jobs in the US, but US money is following them out of the country. Not a good combination, right?
If you're interested in helping out, crowdsource a few calls to the House to collect staffer information, to 10x our advocacy effectiveness, here is a call script (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1H5S8SZjA2SSDUGfQxKV4isjd...) and spreadsheet (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?authkey=CIeunIEE&...)
Assuming the US has an intake quota and that intake quota is divided between reasons for immigration, then proponents of the Startup Visa are petitioning that other seekers of asylum or immigration take a back seat. I absolutely support this to an extent, but do we want them to deny all non-tech immigrants for every kid with a website?
At what point does a startup deserve to take someone else's place in the queue. And I'm well aware that politicians hate to concede there's a queue, but of course there is.
The argument is that sweat equity should be equivalent in some way to cash money investment, which is what the EB-5 represents.
The desperate unskilled have far less to lose if they are caught so are more willing to take the chance.
I just wanted to say that I don't blame folks if they decide the U.S. is not the place to be. God knows I hope to be able to do some of my pro-migrant work from Guatemala someday. At the same time I wanted to tell people that there is a way to fight this messed up system which DREAMers (undocumented youth who only know the U.S. as their home) have paved the way for.
It will be a long time before Congress fixes this mostly because debates over the immigration system have nothing to do with rationality, they have mostly to do with the contentious subject of what it means to be an 'American,' where xenophobic ideas certainly play a large role. In the meantime, though, there are administrative things that can be done through Obama administration if you fight hard enough for them and embarass them enough. I'm certain, for example, that this entrepeneur will be fine after this article for instance (he's also lucky he's dealing with USCIS and not ICE).
I'm just writing this all out in case there are folks out there who are willing to give coming here to the U.S. a shot and taking on fixing this broken immigration system in addition to creating companies. If all the good folks leave, this problem will never get fixed. And if it looks like your against the wall, there's a good network of pro-migrant activists like me that will fight for you to resist and stay.
The US is unbeatable in one thing, though: you can find almost anything you want at prices much lower than any other countries. That's an important advantage no matter what industry you're in, or heck, even for everyday life.
It's not like he'd get deported even if he got arrested, sure as hell wouldn't happen in California. Just continue working and have your lawyers stall and get the Visa stuff handled. You won't be able to travel outside the states and then come back in until your paperwork is done but that shouldn't be a huge problem in the internet world we live in. Or have an investor sponsor you at one of their (most likely many) companies so you have a valid job that the government can't complain about.
To be fair, the government is only going by what they know. If anyone could go created an LLC, call themselves CEO and be free to work here then everyone would do it. Most likely he didn't keep up with his visa paperwork and this is the result.
I know Amit and how hard working he is and am very thankful this was resolved so quickly. At the same time, I hope it grows into something more than just a lone media frenzy-induced example. If the US is to stay competitive, it needs to reconsider its immigration policies. (Full disclosure: I am a foreigner myself).