Hacker News Reader

Comment by t1o5 | Hacker News Reader

ex H1B here. Yes Trump is right.(though I do not like him personally, he is right in this matter) Most of the corporate America is exploiting H1B workers. I have worked in one of those firms and I have friends in many other firms. These are not Indian body shops, these are American companies. Everyone's topic of discussion when we hangout is how our H1B visas were being exploited and there is nothing we could do about it. We were bound to the employer with no hopes of promotion and the long wait for GreenCard (10 years). H1B has become a system to pay lower wages than a skilled visa. How can it be a skilled visa, if the visas are allocated based on lottery ?

So we decided to do something about our situation. We started foraying into the immigration systems of other countries and we decided to use the express entry system of Canada. So we all applied for it ourselves, got evaluated for our skills & degrees and now I am happily typing this as a permanent resident from Canada.

Express Entry System -

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/express-entry/grid-crs.asp

View on HN

Of all of the political candidates, only Trump and Sanders spoke out against H1-B visa abuse used to depress wages. (Former) Presidential Candidate Senator Marco Rubio of Florida wanted to triple the number of H1-B visas to 250,000 from 85,000 and accepted $2 million donation from Disney.

Disney of Florida had recently replaced 250 US IT workers with foreigners on H1-B. Trump especially spoke out against this move. Clinton was silent.

Clinton accepted $675,000 from Goldman for 3 talks. Wall Street banks like Goldman hire lots of high tech computer programmers and it is in their interest to depress wages as well as those firms in Silicon Valley. Trump was right that Clinton was bought off (she could have donated the $675,000 for charity as President Obama did with his Nobel Peace Prize Award money).

Incidentally, HP head and Republican Meg Whitman came out against Trump and she mentioned other reasons, but her true motivation is that HP would have to start paying market wages for all of its high tech workers if Trump won.

The "depressing wages" point is dumb. These engineers will still be part of the labor pool, they'll just be doing work for our foreign competitors. And HP can still hire them, do you want them to just open up more space in Bangalore, or would you rather those wages go to US based locations?

And it's not a zero sum game. One of my H!B hires had unduplicatable skills and created about 20 high paid jobs in our company. Other H1B hires enabled a contracting firm I worked for to get a large contract that kept 7 other people employed.

Did you read the article? Many tech jobs can't be done effectively in India or overseas with low quality labor for any number of reasons. The 250 American workers for Disney had their jobs replaced in the US, not by overseas workers.

> "These engineers will still be part of the labor pool, they'll just be doing work for our foreign competitors"

Well, let them work for Samsung instead of Apple then.

> "One of my H!B hires had unduplicatable skills and created about 20 high paid jobs in our company."

The point of the H1-B visa is precisely for those cases where there are no Americans that can do the job, so your hire follows the law. But then if it such a hard to find job, then the scarcity implies the person should get a higher salary, especially if he/she created "20 high paid jobs for our company."

Letting them work for Samsung lowers our standard of living.

Please explain.

> One of my H!B hires had unduplicatable skills and created about 20 high paid jobs in our company.

That type of thing was the original intention, and I think most people would be okay with that.

But a gigantic majority of H1Bs are not used to fill positions that require unique skills. If 99.9% of H1Bs are abusing the system to avoid paying market wages then the system is broken and it needs to be fixed.

> do you want them to just open up more space in Bangalore

Yes. We have higher wages for our higher standard of living. As you said, it's not a zero sum game and all things are not equal.

> One of my H!B hires had unduplicatable skills and created about 20 high paid jobs in our company

Can you give details so it can be judged if this is true, and if so how common/relevant it is?

He was a japanese physicist, lost his job when Supercollider project canceled. Instead of going back to Japan, I was able to hire him as lead graphics engineer on a Macintosh imaging product, he was super creative in developing unique graphics effects and his product became our biggest and most profitable. The company grew to 140 employees, his team was 20, but it's reasonable to think about a quarter of the workforce was tied to it given it was about a quarter of our revenues.

Sounds like an excellent use of H1B; but I'm sure it's not a common one.

Was he making as much as an American? Also did he get huge bonus for the excellent work he did?

So how much were you paying him? (Last week?) there was an article about someone trying to double the H1B minimum wage to $140k; surely if this physicist is as important as you say he is, you were compensating him around that figure, no?

and someone like this smart person in your example would now be highly unlikely to get an h1b visa with the current lottery system. once you introduce a lottery, it's no longer about hard to find skills, it's about how can you churn out most applications to win most visas. i'll be looking for the elimination of the lottery system in any proposed fixes.

As someone who is solidly for this move, it is a bit silly to point out Clinton accepting money from Goldman for 3 talks when Trump literally puts wall street and others in his cabinet.

Broken clock is right twice a day...

> Clinton accepted $675,000 from Goldman for 3 talks

Okay, I get it, Clinton bad etc. But Trump has appointed tons of people from Goldman to his administration[1] and filed an executive order against financial industry regulations[2] - you know the regulations put in place after the last Wall Street crash, to prevent a similar crash?

Can we stop pretending that Trump isn't bought off by Goldman now?

[1] http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/trump-adds-goldman-...

[2] https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/02/03/presi... https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/02/03/presi...

Not a Trump fan at all here, but technically I think it's more the other way around. Trump is buying up Goldman, rather than they buying him. I have yet to see a clear line of influence from Goldman to Trump personally. It seems more like he's hiring old buddies for potential future favors from them. Reverse lobbying! You heard it here first!

How is giving Goldman people government positions buying them if not by giving them the power to set rules as they like? It's not like they are in it for the cushy gov't benefits.

I am saying the causality here is backwards (I think). It is not the case that Goldman did something for Trump so now he has to make these appointments. It is that he is giving them these appointments so they return the favor in the future. I think he is doing this for future business needs after he is done being president, but I am sure it could be any number of other reasons.

These corporations are huge, with many many employees (over 30 thousand just at Goldman Sachs).

Just because you used to work for Goldman in the past, does not mean you are a current and future supporter of Goldman.

Nor does it mean that you are a bad person.

Trump is hiring people that know how these companies work from the inside-out. Which is the exact type of person you need to be able to deal with these companies head-on.

That has to be a self-delusion of the highest magnitude ever recorded. "Sure he's let the fox run the henhouse; but who knows better than a fox?"

Assuming that anyone who works for GS, or banking in general, are homogenous in morals and ethics and ability is equally delusional.

These guys are not 'anyone'. That's just deliberately ignoring the point.

Tom Wheeler had been a telecom CEO and lobbyist prior to running the FCC. He turned out OK, solidly reining in the industry he had worked for. He knew what to watch out for, and didn't need to rely on lobbyists to explain things to him.

So it works. Integrity and patriotism matter of course. Diversifying investments prior to taking office would help reduce temptation.

Corruption is by association, not direction. So Trump's involvement with Goldman at all is indication of a quid-pro-quo that stinks of corruption.

Trump may be right about H1Bs, but he's knee deep in corruptive patterns. The details will come out when those "old buddies" start doing their "former" businesses huge favors.

> but he's knee deep in corruptive patterns.

Well, you might be right, but it helps to cite evidence to your assertions.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/goldman-sachs-power-wh...

I see allegations, but no true corruption. Could you please cite a specific example? Hiring a Goldman banker is no proof of corruption.

I said corruptive patterns, ie, things commonly associated with corruption, like hiring insiders from the very companies the agency is regulating.

Insiders tend to be knowledgeable

There is a big difference between selling out Americans to be replaced by foreigners whether H1-B as in Disney, Silicon Valley, and Wall Street or illegal immigrants replacing working class American jobs and depressing working class jobs and what Trump is doing now with Wall Street.

If Trump were truly bought off by Goldman, he certainly would not be behind legislation that fixes the broken H1-B Visa system. Goldman, Wall Street, Silicon Valley and other firms will have to start paying market wages instead of depressed wages because of the H1-B Visa reform.

It's possible that he's trying to stick it to Silicon Valley as payback.

Technology salaries are probably a drop in the bucket cost-wise compared to the profits that will be made from deregulation of the industry. So while Goldman might have to pay a few million more in salaries, it's offset by the billions more in profits that they will rake in (over the short-term, until they destroy the economy again, that is).

Tech companies aren't going to see a similar measure to increase their profits to offset the labor costs increases.

I don't think so (sticking it to SV). He was threatening to reform the H-1B visa program during his campaign.

Sure, but he was also blasting SV "elites" the entire time too. I mean, look at all the people that wrote this:

https://shift.newco.co/an-open-letter-from-technology-sector...

The SV elites were very much against him because he wanted to protect US STEM worker by fixing the broken H1-B program that stopped SV firms from hiring H1-B for depressed wages.

> Clinton accepted $675,000 from Goldman for 3 talks.

So what? That is what people with her credentials are worth on the speaking circuit. God forbid someone get paid what they are worth, what do you think this is, a meritocracy?

> she could have donated the $675,000 for charity as President Obama did with his Nobel Peace Prize Award money

The Clinton's donated over $15MM to charity over the course of 2008-2015 and paid over 40% of their income as taxes. I'm pretty sure they've done more to help people than you (the average you, for all I know you're Bill Gates) or I ever will.

The mob boss who donates to the orphanage is still the mob boss.

>> Clinton accepted $675,000 from Goldman for 3 talks.

> So what? That is what people with her credentials are worth on the speaking circuit. God forbid someone get paid what they are worth, what do you think this is, a meritocracy?

$675,000 for 3 talks to Goldman leaves many with the implication that Clinton was "bought" by Goldman, whether true or not (and how to prove that?). It gave both Sanders (who asked that Clinton dispose the contents of the 3 talks which she never did but which Wikileaks eventually did do) and Trump significant ammunition against Clinton in the campaign.

If you are running for President, esp as a Democrat, it is unwise to accept money like that from Goldman or Wall Street. She could have said when she accepted each payment from Goldman that she was donating that money to charity so as not to leave people, potential voters, with the impression that she was "bought." Perceptions matter and as someone who came from a family that ran multiple times for President (3 times prior to this election) she should have known better.

Clinton proposed automatically giving H1Bs a green card, which would have removed them from indentured servitude. Your narrative ignores the actual policy.

> Clinton proposed automatically giving H1Bs a green card,

When? Her proposal, as reported in the media was, "'staple' green cards on STEM grads' diplomas". Was there other proposal she made specifically addressing H-1Bs?

> Her proposal, as reported in the media was, "'staple' green cards on STEM grads' diplomas".

Well, that's a terrible idea if she said that. She apparently wanted to depress STEM wages in the US and put Americans STEM workers, who worked very hard for their degrees and skill out of work. The green card, H1-B should only be given for STEM jobs for which there is no American.

So Clinton wanted to depress STEM wages and take STEM jobs away from Americans and Trump wanted STEM workers to be treated fairly.

It does the exact opposite by making employers pay at least as much for an H1B as for an equivalent local worker. You're suggesting that they not even be allowed into the country, which would incentivize American companies to set up their campuses in other countries that take a more liberal view to immigration.

I agree wages are depressed but how do you know Meg Whitman's true motivation?

That is amazing! However I would like to point out, H1B is not only for Silicon Valley. There are many automotive companies which require foreign talent in specialized fields. Very smart people with multi-disciplinary knowledge are nowhere to be found in auto sector. Signal Processing and vibrations and programming and control systems understanding etc. is required to deal with things like active noise control which is now a need in auto sector. The Canadian Automotive R&D is not as good as in US. Also, there's no way we can work remotely. So our fates are still determined by 'lottery based skilled visa' allotments.

"lottery based skilled visa" sums it up.

I am not assuming that you are in Detroit. I used to work remotely for an Automotive company in Detroit for their telematics unit. Some colleagues I know commute from Windsor.

Lottery based skilled visa means that there's many more skilled people on the other side, and less spots for them. Unless you have a way of quantifying extremely small differences in skill (and keeping the process balanced), I don't see how you feel a lottery is unfair.

Points based system is the right way of quantifying skills & it seems to be working well for Canada.

for ex: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/express-entry/grid-crs.asp

Anything else than pure salary can be gamed. We are for better or worse a capitalist society so lets use the one currency we have to determine who is most needed instead of making up new currencies.

Why don't we just allow more of them to become Americans?

This. We can happily allow millions of illegal immigrants in to work as seasonal farm labor, or import unskilled refugees from war-torn, ideologically questionable areas, that become a drain on social services, but we throw up barriers for well-educated people who will immediately start contributing, if we'd let them. It's nuts.

Hear, hear! I am firmly in the camp of the people who are really ticked off about illegal immigration, but in addition to stopping that, I've always thought that we should be increasing _legal_ immigration as much as possible.

I'm so sick of people copping out and trying to have it both ways. Bring in the immigrants who want to work, especially if they have skills. Filter out the gangbangers and the terrorists as much as possible. Win-win. Today we have the worst of both worlds.

That your first adjective to describe war zone refugees is unskilled says more about you than anything else.

Not entirely true. Companies like Infosys, cognizant, Accenture spams the visa applications with huge amounts, causing the H1B visas go into lottery process (if applications exceed the 85k visa availability). And for this spamming they deserve to be blamed. These companies alone file more than 100k LCAs each year. LCA is the first step before applying for H1B. This is a major issue for students who pursue Masters in US Universities, gain very special skills and have to leave US because they couldnt get the lottery. There's a difference between skilled people and talented people with specialized skills.

edit: one can write good programs, other can invent frameworks

The Masters in US is gamed too. Many of those students are the ones who could not clear the campus interviews of Infosys, Cognizant or Accenture when they were in the college for Bachelors. So they come to "study" MS in the US so that they can get into the H1B system easily.

As far as I know, the MS hires do not posses any special skills. Most of them fake their experiences to get into the companies. There are specific "one room consultancy" companies setup in the US to hire these MS graduates in OPT, fake their resumes, run their fake payrolls and push them to an employer.

"The Masters in US is gamed too. Many of those students are the ones who could not clear the campus interviews of Infosys, Cognizant or Accenture when they were in the college for Bachelors. So they come to "study" MS in the US so that they can get into the H1B system easily."

I don't mind a bit of cynicism but this is absurd. Why the hell is "study" in scare quotes? It's a pretty standard thing for fresh graduates to better their chances for employment by getting higher degrees.

"As far as I know, the MS hires do not posses any special skills."

Maybe you should keep your speculations to things you do know.

I think you're being making the classic mistake of using your narrow experience range into making far larger proclamations based on speculations and innuendo. As an employer in silicon valley myself, I would definitely look upon a resume from a person with a Master's degree from US more closely than someone coming off of the infosys/wipro train. That is not to say that there's a clear yes or no either way but having an MS from a US university is at least one positive signal among other signals I'd look for in a resumé.

How about IITians from India, getting high quality education for free using Indian tax payers money and moving to US.

Someone coming off the free education that the Indian government provided using Indian tax payers money should keep quiet and should be ashamed of himself to be called a silicon valley employer.

You are welcome - An Indian tax payer.

"user: throw2bit" "created: 2 hours ago"

"You are welcome - An Indian tax payer."

I would have thought about dignifying this childish tantrum with a response if you at least had the decency and guts to write this under a real name.

you are partially right about the 'gamed' system and contractors gaming the process. However,'the MS hires do not posses any special skills. Most of them fake their experiences to get into the companies.' this is not entirely true.

Yeah this fixation on Silicon Valley is dumb. The worst affected will really be other industries. Small wonder that Lofgren who is a Bay-Area Representative is the one sponsoring the auction system. Many Si valley jobs for which H1Bs are hired are generalist in nature. And it is for generic programmer jobs that you have potential for wage abuse. But outside Si valley, for much lesser wages, companies rely on highly specialized skills. So specialized that often these are jobs-for-life without much transferability. Think about skills in microbiology, materials science, etc. relevant to specific products in specific companies like P&G, Dow, etc. These employers and employees will be majorly shafted if legislation is made with just Silicon Valley in mind.

The whole notion of pay big $$s if the specialized skills are worth so much is wrong because these companies have smaller budgets for personnel than plant.

The fixation on Silicon Valley isn't dumb when wages were deliberately suppressed by Google, Apple, Adobe and others. The big tech companies really do want to keep salaries low and H1Bs can help them with that, along with paying for the really smart people that they can bring in too.

Except that Google, Facebook, Cisco would gladly sponsor you for green card - if they're gaming the system they would surely try to string you along until you've used up your H1B renewal before doing that?

If you start out making much less than other candidates, even after many years of CoL raises you will still be making less.

Source: drastically underpaid for my experience because I was an idiot.

At one of the big Silicon Valley tech companies? Google at least has a policy that promotions & annual raises normalize to level-defined salary bands, i.e. if you have a higher salary coming in relative to your coworkers of equal skill, you will get smaller raises until your salaries equalize.

Google also had artificially lower salary bands by colluding with other tech companies to not fight for talent.

Well, true, and I'm not exactly happy about that...but that cartel was eventually broken when Facebook refused to play ball.

The point is that Google purposefully tried to keep the wages low. If not for FB, they would have never changed the practice. I have zero trust in Google for doing the right thing regarding salaries.

You don't have to trust in Google, only in self-interest. The reason FB broke the cartel is because they felt they could pick up some talented people by paying more. The reason Google normalizes salaries is because it negatively affects morale (and hence productivity & retention) when you have people paid dramatically different amounts for equal work. The reason big tech companies sponsor green cards is so they don't have to use up their H1B quota on you, and can instead get new H1Bs. They may not be doing it for your benefit, but that doesn't mean that you don't benefit from it.

The fun thing is that it also probably reveals a bunch of other problems, like the issue of admission of wrongdoing in settlements.

No, never moved to California. I'll defend that one as not a mistake, though.

Yes, everyone wants to keep their costs low. Especially software companies because most of their expenditure is on personnel. However, in meat-space companies like pharma, chemicals, etc. plant, hard goods, etc. cost more than personnel. A senior-level manager often cannot pay $30k extra just to match Si valley salaries in an auction because they don't have so much room on personnel.

These norms are not set by individuals, but by a system of financial analysts, shareholders (think large pension funds, etc.), etc.

> this fixation on Silicon Valley is dumb

The tech industry accounts for the vast majority of H1B visas: http://www.myvisajobs.com/Reports/2017-H1B-Visa-Category.asp...

"vast majority" still excludes tens of thousands of people. These are real people with real families and real jobs in real companies, not just some statistical data points.

So a fix for 90% of the problem is out because it's bad for a small percentage? Everything is a trade-off, a solutions for the vast majority of cases outweighs the inconvenience on a small minority

Uh ok. You can slice up 90% in many ways. But why choose to cut it such that you lose 100% of other industries? That sounds quite effed up.

Well, the car companies and other companies need to open up offices where tech workers want to live as some firms have already done. Sorry, but a lot of tech people don't necessarily want to live in Detroit or parts of Michigan. They do want to live in SF, Boston, NYC, DC.

I believe the proposed solution to the H1B issue was to simply increase the minimum wage for H1B's to $140k. If a company is bringing over top-talent that is irreplaceable; surely that salary is justified. Otherwise, they probably don't need you as bad as they say they do.

Raising wages combats the symptoms (wage depression) but not the cause (lack of mobility).

The only way to truly solve the issue is to tie the H1B to the person and let them work freely in the US after a short time.

How would that solve the symptoms? And why is that the cause? I think the actual issue is that there aren't enough top-talent individuals in the country already; meaning the real cause is actually our broken education system.

Opening the flood gates might solve the issues of select individuals and some companies, but it doesn't solve wage depression.

Most people in the industry believe that the best way to increase your income is to change jobs. How often would you change jobs if failing to secure a position resulted in your near-immediate ejection from the country? Probably not often, and that's the situation that many H1B workers are in.

The general belief is that H1B workers are underpaid because they have less flexibility in the labor market. While they can move jobs, it's somewhat tedious and requires both companies to work together to make the transition. It's not impossible, but it's certainly not easy.

If there were less friction involved with moving jobs, people on H1B could shop around for a better positions without worrying about their residency should things go wrong.

140k might sound great in silicon valley. its enormous amount of money for a place like detroit. i am sure they will pay some of the people that sort of money to keep them here. but think about all others who will go back to their own countries and create new startups that will compete with the US industry.[1]

[1]http://money.cnn.com/2017/02/02/news/india/snapdeal-india-ku...

> "We were bound to the employer with no hopes of promotion and the long wait for GreenCard (10 years)."

I don't doubt that many immigrants harbor this impression, but it is wrong. A H1B visa holder can switch companies at any time, by having that company apply to have the visa transferred to them. 99.9% of the time, this doesn't impact your GreenCard wait at all, because your Priority Date can also be transferred to your new Green Card application. I have a friend who has been on a H1B for 8 years, is currently at his 4th job, negotiated a 30% pay bump every time he switched, and still has the same Green-Card priority date that he had from his first application.

The fact that so many H1B workers harbor this misconception, and are afraid to switch jobs, is what gives employers the confidence to abuse their employees. If enough H1B workers start quitting on bad bosses, we'll see some pretty rapid change.

Eh, the truth is somewhere in the middle. I say this as someone who actually went through the process.

Sure you can switch employers while on an H1B. I did. But that's an extra moving part added to the process. It's extra effort added to both sides, employer and employee. They need to really want to hire you to go through all that. If it's a tiny startup, the amount of work might just be too much (and you wouldn't want to work for a tiny startup anyway, as an H1B worker).

Also, if you somehow lose your job as an H1B holder, you only have a limited time interval to get a new job. There's a lot of pressure to just accept any job that comes along, regardless of all other considerations.

Also, typecasting is very real. The whole H1B / greencard process really, really puts the pressure on you to stay in the same job description for a long time. It's not set in stone, and there are exceptions, but as a rule you're basically forced into a straightjacket.

Basically, if you're caught in this process, there's the freedom & opportunity Big Carrot dangling ahead at the end of many years of wait. Meanwhile, your hands are tied and your actions are to a large extent dictated by a faceless, remote bureaucracy that has the full power to decide your fate. It's extremely frustrating.

I'm so pleased to hear this. Please, fellow American citizen hopefuls and potential American citizens tired of Trump, come on over to Vancouver or Toronto, we desperately need you to raise the decade old stagnation of tech worker's salaries.

All is not well. You are going to have to deal with a significant salary cut around 40~50% not factoring in exchange rates. You also have to deal with small supply, high rent and cost of living. Prepare to commute for hours packed into the Skytrain like sardines in a can and bus. that is provided you don't get "renovicted" where landlord kicks you out to accommodate their relatives. You also have to deal with the isolation, cliquey and outwardly friendly but internally unfriendly and flaky citizens and sleepy eyed nature of No Fun City. You also have to deal with the fact that this is essentially a socialist country with socialist values which means lot of your taxes are going to people who have nothing to do with you or care for.

But hey, our ruling party thinks that's a small price to pay for Living In the Best Place on Earth™

Unless you make an obscene income (a few 100k) or lower your taxes by holding a mortgage, you'll be paying more taxes (which includes Medicaid, Social Security, etc.) in California than in Ontario or BC.

The rest of your post sounds about right.

who is paying 100,000 USD / year in Vancouver vs 30,000 USD / year for a junior developer?

It's unbelievable that the average entry level's tech worker in Vancouver makes just as much as a barista in Seattle.

You can't compete or create a world class unicorn in Vancouver, period.

Dude, we already have that. It's called San Francisco.

Do you have 30,000 USD / year average salaries for junior developers there too?

I think not.

Canadian by birth. Indian by ethnicity. Vancouverite by choice. Let me know if you have questions about relocating, personal or professional.

So, dumb question, how easy is it to obtain a Canadian work permit/residency but continue working in the Valley?

Very hard. You need a US work permit to work in the Valley. Most early stage companies are not gonna have a Canadian subsidiary.

I do run a consulting company that consults to US companies. That is possible. But at that point, if you consult with startups, you won't be getting options.

As another Canadian, we need more people like you here! You guys make a significant contribution to our country :)

Happy to be at a place where my skills are appreciated. More of my friends will soon be ex H1Bs.

As a Canadian, it is my pleasure to welcome you into our community!

Darn it Canada! Can you stop being nice for a second while we in the US figure out what we're doing? /s

Seriously Canada... Seriously! Stop being nice.

I really feel welcomed here. I should have done this earlier, but better late than never.

Did you do the immigration paperwork before looking for a job in Canada? What I'd like to know is if its better to have this paperwork sorted out before applying for jobs in Canada.

Interesting that age figures so heavily into this scoring system...

But pretty logical, no? You don't want someone to migrate to your country in his late 50's / early 60's, contribute to your economy for a few token years and then piggyback on your medical welfare system for rest of 15-20 years. Whats the incentive for local citizens to welcome immigrants in that case? (And no, I don't want to consider rare examples of superstars in their 60's. I am just talking about average Joe's).

Some studies (search Google) have shown the average age of an entrepreneur is around 40. And I'd like to see the backlash the US would get from the world if they implemented many of these criteria.

Canada has a separate visa process for entrepreneurs:

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/publications/entrepre...

The program being cited is for workers, similar to the US H1B. And others have addressed why age is a sensible factor.

You can't get social security unless you pay in for a sufficient number of years

But that's not the only program. You can get Supplemental Security Income without even being a citizen or ever having paid in.

https://www.ssa.gov/ssi/spotlights/spot-non-citizens.htm

Also you can generally get Medicare if you're old and you've paid in for a few years.

It makes some sense as a way to weight for "promise". Many of the other factors (level of education, language ability, work experience) are measuring things that an older candidate will be more likely to have already, but which a younger candidate may be more easily able to acquire after immigrating.

> the long wait for GreenCard (10 years).

Can you explain this? I'm currently waiting for a greencard.

green cards are equally distributed to all countries. 7%? hence the amount of time you will wait is dependent on where you are from. for india/china, i believe its close to 8-9 years. but if you come from a country where no one applies for green card, chances are this process will be done in 6 months.

> green cards are equally distributed to all countries.

Well, no, but there is a cap on the per-country share of the total quota in each eligible category.

So you're talking about a sponsored greencard by your company? This is weird as this wasn't mentioned to me. There is a fixed step-by-step process to have a greencard and you have to go through all of them.

Did you hire a lawyer to do the paperwork or did you do it yourself ?

No lawyers needed. Its a simple online system. If you have the skills and you can prove it( IELTS,work experience,your degrees), the system awards you the points. No employers needed, no lawyers needed, you are totally in control of your visa. This is the beauty of this system. There is no place for bad apples like the H1B in this skills based system. You cannot fake it.

"May the skilled ones win"

Out of curiosity, which language test did you take?

IELTS (Non academic stream)

Thanks, Do you know how long it might take to get that approved?

If you satisfy the points under this grid -

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/express-entry/grid-crs.asp

and your documentations are correct, 6 months is the SLA.

For anyone considering this who has an American criminal record, even a misdemeanor (!), understand that it is extraordinarily easy to become permanently barred from Canada if you don't perform the immigration steps correctly. There is an official bribe of up to $1,000 that must be paid before you can even be considered, and unless you are exactly truthful to a fault the Canadians can find cause to permanently and irrevocably bar entry. They have access to American criminal databases and you will be checked, and turned back, at the border for even a day trip. (This bugs me by itself. I didn't harm your sovereign state.)

I know of one person who will never in her life see Canada because she got the paperwork about a twenty-year-old misdemeanor wrong, even after the $1,000 appeal to the Minister. Definitely get a lawyer. The fetish for American criminality is one thing about Canadian immigration that I would hope to see reformed. Canada is very welcoming unless you've had a taste of American justice, then they make you work very hard to enter. Caring about criminal records is common, of course; having direct access to neighboring criminal records is not, among most world countries.

Given that a number of American states are law-and-order criminal record factories, and given that a criminal record is not necessarily indicative of someone's life (if it were, I'd be selling heroin instead of debugging right now), it seems time for Canadians to revisit this policy. I'm guessing there was a flood of cons to Canada at some point that made them skittish and enshrine a bunch of hoops in legislation. With a lot of Americans now looking for possibilities such as these in the current environment, there is a huge reform opportunity here to make Canada even more welcoming.

> I'm guessing there was a flood of cons to Canada at some point that made them skittish and enshrine a bunch of hoops in legislation.

Not really; it's more of an outcome of political balance. Our conservatives have historically been ornery about immigration, but our progressives made it a focus of their policy. (This is very untrue now, few outright oppose immigration, but historically shaped the dialogue). To accommodate the disagreement we somehow came to a skills-oriented system with a high-threshold for ability and other qualities.

We have/had our own problem with authoritarians, and it's shaped our policies in some particularly Canadian ways.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com