Neither interpretation's fair to either of you, though.
(I have no horse in this race; living in Europe, the idea of a visa seems a bit anachronistic, really.)
Here's the different kinds for Sweden: http://www.migrationsverket.se/info/1074_en.html
In Germany the first permit that you get (an H1B equivalent) is tied to one job, and hence, tied to the place where you have that job. After 5 years of working full-time (and a long string of other checklist items), you're eligible to begin the application process for permanent residence (which I now have).
However you can still (with the permit to stay) move between UE countries, just get back to Italy and declare revenue (as entrepreneur).
I can understand why visas might seem obsolete from a European perspective, but from an American perspective regulation is a necessity. Per year we already accept the highest number of permanent residents in the world. In 2008 we naturalized a record number of people. And most importantly, per year we grant the highest number of people political asylum. These numbers, combined with the fact that unemployment in the US is the highest it's been since the early 1940s, makes accepting large number of immigrants impossible.
I'm not defending this bill or the current system; I know there are areas that need improvement. But fundamentally the US needs some sort of visa system.
This claim is specious: the high-end immigrants who are likely to start tech companies and earn PhDs are enormously employable and likely to employ others. If you want more employment, bring in people who are likely to make jobs; notice the high number of tech startups with founders who are immigrants or the children of immigrants.
Still, I doubt that these visas are going to have any noticeable impact on unemployment because the rate at which they'll be granted isn't going to be high enough.
As for immigration more generally, see James Fallows' comments here: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/201001/american-decline . Allowing immigration is one of the relatively few things that America does right.
Heh, there are still people in EU countries (Romania, Bulgaria the least) that need visas to work in another EU country. So it's not all rosy within EU borders either.
That's what I mean; living in Europe you think about visas so rarely, despite crossing borders and looking at jobs overseas, that the whole idea begins to look archaic and paranoid.
Look at http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4659.htm.... It says that the US government is just now processing applicants who filed under EB-3 back in 2001 and 2002.
Put the "EB-6" people in the same line as the EB-3 people and the proposed legislation becomes a lot more fair, but useless. Speed up the EB-3 process and lots of people stuck working under a H1-B would quit their jobs and start their own businesses. The could do so with the money they've saved, or negotiate fair deals with investors.
I recommend everybody to read the proposed change to the law. It is a very small "patch" that is easy to read and understand, especially once you've read the rest of the discussion on this topic.
we can attack the problem by focusing on improving INS processing times, rather than excluding other valid applicants (of any type). we are certainly not suggesting StartupVisa green card applicants "move to the front of the line" ahead of anyone else, simply that their application be considered fairly & reasonably along with others.
Are you saying you'd have EB-6 applications also take 8.5 years?
furthermore, the job creation / economic output benefits don't need to wait for green card processing to be solved.
there's being practical, and then there's simply being defeatist.
i'd rather be part of trying to provide solutions to INS processing times than to wait on innovative solutions to job creation & immigration reform.
However, besides her, I've met others in similar or worse situations, stuck in the EB-3 queue. Even if my friend got her green card under EB-2, I'd still be advocating for the EB-3 workers.
Which, I must confess, appeals to me personally, but if we concede that we need the ability to legislate, then the simple potential for abuse can't be showstopper for any individual piece of legislation.
Rates and/or severity of abuse maybe, but not the simple possibility of it.
Why can't H1-B's do that right now? AFAIK there is nothing stopping them from moving to an EB6. I would.
I don't think that is an argument against speeding up EB-3. I think that should happen as well, but is obviously much harder politically.
I'm sure they will. However, rich people are such a minority that in 90%+ of cases this law will be used for its intended purpose.
Rich people can also "abuse" speeding and parking ticket laws(you can speed and park anywhere if you can afford the tickets), tax laws, etc. Just the way of the world. I wouldn't lose too much sleep over it.
I give you and startupvisa.com for actually taking a political issue to the point where one of the power-holding senators was willing to introduce legislation. And maybe if it comes to a vote while attached to the military funding bill or something it will pass! I don't think populists have enough power to speak out against the bill, so whether or not it passes probably comes down to random DC "inside baseball".
META: I ask that if you (anyone reading this) do not have something profoundly interesting to say that you not reply with any political discussion.
US immigration is so unbelievably messed up that there is little productive we can say. Like... there are actually networks of secret immigration prisons that lose people regularly. http://www.thenation.com/doc/20100104/stevens
Also see http://www.amnestyusa.org/uploads/JailedWithoutJustice.pdf but note that there is a much stronger political message.
Fixing the world one step at a time is not a bad approach.
Starting by steps that have great potential for generating wealth is a sensible strategy if you are thinking of taking any more steps.
META:
Lest someone else respond to me, I don't mean to imply that there aren't many more viable strategies for fixing the world! If you think you can save the world, I would prefer to discuss it with you via email rather than in this thread.