Hacker News Reader

I disagree. I studied at CCNY in NYC and did internships at Stanford University and for Google's GSoC using my CPT, and then worked for a cool startup for 2+ years on OPT and extension. We then did the H1B lottery and didn't get selected so I had to leave.

It's not fun, but I don't regret it. I had a super good time in the US, learned a lot, and it opened my mind in many ways. I think if people are interested in spending time in the US, it's worth taking a shot, even with all that immigration struggle.

That's true. The U.S. is indeed a great place to live, and the people are really friendly and treat you as one of them (at least in NY and CA). But unfortunately the immigration laws are kafkaesque and designed to keep immigrants out, and the current administration is making it even more worse.

Considering that around 20% of the world's immigrants live in the US, saying that US immigration is "designed to keep immigrants out" is grossly misleading.

In the mind of Stephen Miller that 20% is the bug not the feature.

The public supports maintaining or increasing immigration to this country. This administration does not.

Define "immigration". One of the problems that smart, educated, intern-level immigrants have is they are getting caught in the crossfire of millions of uneducated day-laborers streaming over the border.

We should have increased immigration on a merit-based system (obviously college students would be a strong merit).

> The public supports maintaining or increasing immigration to this country. This administration does not.

https://www.npr.org/2018/01/23/580037717/what-the-latest-imm...

Americans could be forgiven for having poll whiplash this week.

"Shock poll: Americans want massive cuts to legal immigration," said a headline from the Washington Times.

"Americans broadly embrace the Democratic immigration position," declared a Washington Post headline, with the release of a new ABC/Washington Post poll.

On immigration, as on any other issue, it can seem that there's a poll result that supports just about any position. Here's a look at immigration polls to explain what findings are shaky — and to highlight what can reasonably be concluded about Americans' views on immigration.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Lie_with_Statistics

https://fs.blog/2015/11/map-and-territory/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Map%E2%80%93territory_relation

https://www.academia.edu/16741004/Modelling_Myth_Vs_Reality_...

Immigration is one of the most divisive and polarised issues in US public policy, and one that brought to power the current POTUS. Saying the public unilateraly supports one side or another is naive at best, intentionally misleading at worst.

Since 45's election, the public has become more supportive of increased immigration.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/235793/record-high-americans-sa...

Anti-immigration sentiment peaked in 2014.

Do you have a source for that number? I'd like to read into that.

The number may be wrong the sentiment seems reasonable. I would hardly call the U.S. hostile toward immigrants. I can’t think of many other countries that are as diverse as the U.S. Just in my apartment building I live next to a Russian couple, a Chinese couple, a Korean couple, and a Guatemalan couple.

19.8% of the world's foreign born population lives in the US. 14.3% of people in the US are foreign born. According to this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_d...

I'd just recommend reading this essay by William Han, who despite having two Ivy league degree, and spending 15 years lawfully in the U.S., was still forced to leave: https://www.vox.com/2015/6/23/8823349/immigration-system-bro...

There was a discussion here on HN on it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9764564

This was before the current administration. The reality is very different now

You must be one of the following ?

1.You have an outstanding student loan which you are paying off with a non US salary.

2. You were on a scholarship.

3. Rich.

One of the above indeed.

To add to your pt.5, even if you were an Indian student in the last decade (like me in 07-09),even if you went to one of the top 5 universities in your field and even if you are in a high paying job (location adjusted), the path to GC doesn't realistically exist.

People like me got screwed the most because when we started basing our lives here, there was a 5-7 wait for a green card. It has been a decade since but still no realistic path exists as the wait has grown exponentially.

>To add to your pt.5, even if you were an Indian student in the last decade (like me in 07-09),even if you went to one of the top 5 universities in your field and even if you are in a high paying job (location adjusted), the path to GC doesn't realistically exist.

Well, technically, it does if you're in the O or EB-1 category. But probably over 95% of Indians are not.

Since it has not bee mentioned yet, the priority date for Indians in EB-2 (typically a MS or PhD degree) is June 1, 2009. This means they are currently processing candidates who had cleared their labor certification by June 1, 2009 - over a decade ago.

That date has barely moved in the last decade. I remember it being about 2006 back in 2012. It quickly moved to 2008, and then regressed all the way back to 2003, and then jumped to 2008 again.

I know Indians who started working in 2008. Because of the economic downturn, the company did not apply for their green card (almost guaranteed to get rejected as it's pretty hard to show a shortage in a recession). The company finally applied for them in 2011, so their priority date is 2011. They've been working over a decade, and USCIS is not even close to processing them.

Once you have a priority date, a change in job, or a change in location is not a realistic option. The laws allow you to do it, but then the employer has to redo the labor certification, potentially risking a rejection, or a new priority date.

Things have been bad for Indians since the Obama days. Whatever Trump may have added to it is just noise.

(Edit: Amusingly, the priority date for Indians with only a BS degree (EB-3) is April 2010. They are now ahead of the MS/PhD's in the queue. They usually lagged by several years. Interesting...)

I agree & I immigrated to Canada within an year of graduation and is now a permanent resident of Canada. US H1B & OPT is BS.

Students from India and China should tread carefully. All this trouble and high tuition fees will land you in financial & immigration trouble.

>US education only makes sense for rich students, who want to study for a few years and return.

I want to add that it doesn't make sense at all for funded PhD students, whose advisors draw a lot of funds from the state and federal governments to support them. We're spending a lot of public money educating international students, then forcing that talent and investment out the door when they're done. Why not keep them in the country for a bit to innovate for American companies and pay income taxes?

Two things come to mind:

1. Most of them do not want to stay for a bit but permanently so when asked to leave after x years they will be even more unhappy because now they have settled down, made friends and raising family etc. And I am sympathetic to this argument.

2. Sending immediately back also seems morally right thing to do. While US companies may benefit a bit but 3rd world is in desperate need of well trained experts. Sending those PhDs etc back may be more helpful in getting those countries develop and become self dependent than just aid programmes.

I would suggest considering Canada as an alternative. My experience has been mostly positive as an international student in Canada.

There are also many European universities that are welcoming of international students. I'd steer clear from the UK for now, though. No idea how hard it is to get a EU student visa compared to a Canadian one, though.

FYI Canadian Unis are getting worried about Indian intl. students.

Worried in what way?

Where they're going to put them all.

Put them where ?

Are you saying Canadian universities operate like airlines ? (overbook & bump)

All of your points except 1. seem predicated on the notion that you'd want to stay in the USA after your studies. What if you don't?

Well... how else do you pay back the loan you take to study in USA? This is a problem for a huge portion of students, immigrant or not.

You can argue that students can go back to their own country and repay the loan? That is practically impossible for almost every student coming from India and China.

What happens to a foreign student who leaves the US and just doesn't repay their loan? It seems to me that nothing would happen at all?

You can't get a US student loan without a citizen or permanent resident cosigner.

Banks cooperate internationally, you're on the hook both in your home country(or whatever country the co-signer is from)and the country the college is in. it's impossible to just skip out on loans nowadays(unless the trusted co-signer disappears with you ofc)

Foreign students get loans from their home country not the US. No US institution will lend to a foreign student without a domestic co-signer, for precisely this reason.

> There is a 100 year wait for a green card

No, there's not. That's a hyperbolic projection which requires assuming no one ever leaves the queue (not by giving g up, not by dying, not by no longer being qualified) except by reaching he head and getting a visa.

Obviously, over a 100 year wait time, that's not remotely possible, even as a rough approximation.

Which is not to say the situation isn't miserable for Indian (Chinese, Mexican, and Filipino, too) GC applicants in many categories (not the same ones for each), but it’s not a 100 year long wait.

Where else in the world can you realistically earn as much here in the Bay Area though?

Indian students in family have been choosing Germany and Australia since Trump took over. USCIS has devolved into a garbage agency that pushes Trumps agenda that he can not achieve legally.

It may simultaneously be true that more students have been choosing USA than Germany or Australia since Trump took over.

My point has been about my family only. US enrollment of Indian students has dropped 30% last year.

This was perfectly said, and spot on. (Thank you.)

Reading about how Canada welcomes skilled immigrants, almost brought tears to my eyes. If your English is good and you've studied in Canada (even just a bachelor's degree), you're given a Post-Graduation Work Permit (PGWP) upon graduation, and are practically guaranteed to eventually get a Canadian green card via the Canadian Experience Class (Express Entry) program.

For folks outside Canada, good English, education beyond a bachelor's degree, and 3 years of skilled work experience, guarantees you'll have enough points to get a Federal Skilled Worker green card immediately.

I haven't looked at countries besides Canada; but I would strongly recommend Canada over the U.S. for anyone seeking to migrate on the basis of skills.

Relevant: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/28/opinion/canada-immigratio...

> But Canada’s hospitable attitude is not innate; it is, rather, the product of very hardheaded government policies. Ever since the mid-1960s, the majority of immigrants to the country (about 65 percent in 2015) have been admitted on purely economic grounds, having been evaluated under a nine-point rubric that ignores their race, religion and ethnicity and instead looks at their age, education, job skills, language ability and other attributes that define their potential contribution to the national work force.

The Government of Canada enacted that policy because it's what the people of Canada demanded. The government doesn't make us be welcoming, we make the government be welcoming.

Through what means did the Canadian public "demand" this policy? How was this public demand measured (in general, and in detail in order to craft the particulars of the policy)?

But is your policy particularly welcoming? It’s basically, “you’re welcome here, but only if you speak English and preferably have a college degree.” I took the Canadian points-based immigration test for funsies (it’s online). If Trump rolled out the exact same test here—particularly with the focus on English language proficiency—it would be pilloried by our left as racist, classist, and xenophobic.

I don't want to get into political debates, but this is wrong. Democrats have always pushed for a merit-based points-based immigration for a while now. The 2013 immigration bill contained a merit-based system not unlike Canada's. A points-based system would only be pilloried by your caricature of the left.

The fact of the matter is that the GOP is often quite dishonest. In public, they say things that often sound very reasonable, and hold positions similar to that of the Democrats/left (points-based immigration, protect pre-existing conditions, retain medicare, etc) -- and it helps them win votes. But as we all know, what they actually do (with executive action, bills introduced in Congress, etc) is often the very opposite of what they say.

I won't be commenting on this topic anymore.

> Democrats have always pushed for a merit-based points-based immigration for a while now.

This documentary shows how much Democrats dislike this idea, though in some cases they're willing to accept it in exchange for an amnesty.

https://vimeo.com/ondemand/hdwn/222701211

> The fact of the matter is that the GOP is often quite dishonest.

The same can be said of the Democrats. All politicians are dishonest; heck, all human beings are dishonest. The degree to which is a matter of opinion. Any reasonably intelligent person should have no problem constructing a narrative that demonstrates genuine dishonesty on behalf of their ideological enemies. An intellectually honest person can easily demonstrate genuine dishonesty on behalf of both sides.

The 2013 proposal was very different from the Canadian system. First, the points based system would get, at most, less than half of visas, and the merit based category (tier 1) would get half of those. So less than 1/4 of visas would be merit based, versus 65% in Canada. Second, even the merit based category had a family ties component. That component was worth 10 points, twice as much as having a bachelors degree, and the same as having a master’s degree. The other part of the points based system (tier 2) was directed mainly to high-demand, low-skill immigration.

Moreover, the system would not replace the existing family ties based system, but been a large number of additional visas on top of the existing allotment. And it would have granted amnesty on a scale never seen in Canada.

> I haven't looked at countries besides Canada; but I would strongly recommend Canada over the U.S. for anyone seeking to migrate on the basis of skills.

I would also suggest to consider the Netherlands. The procedure for highly skilled migrants is super simple. Pretty much the only condition is that your employer pays you a sufficient wage.

https://ind.nl/en/work/Pages/Highly-skilled-migrant.aspx

Canada is an English speaking country except Québec. Why would a highly skilled immigrant learn yet another language to immigrate to Netherlands, if given a choice between an English speaking country and non English one ?

Everybody speaks English in the Netherlands. People live there for years without learning the local language. Working language in many companies that hire migrants is English.

Can those employees progress in their career without speaking the native language ?

Will the kids get an education in English ?

Can the immigrant take part in social activities ?

Can they talk to their doctors or to the grocery store in English without misunderstanding.

How is the attitude towards English ? Will a nationalist government change those English friendliness ?

There are things like these a skilled economic immigrant should consider before immigrating to a non English speaking country.

Take the example of Québec, although it's a province in the English speaking Canada, immigrants who speak only English are not welcomed and frowned upon. They find it hard to get by. They end up moving to other provinces. If the immigrant is not white, the difficulties are 2x in Québec. To be fair, Québec's hate for English is well founded if you examine their colonial history and hence the strict language laws.

Because very often English is the language of business, and the highly-skilled migrant visa makes no demands of you to learn Dutch. Practically speaking, Netherlands is (enough of) an English speaking place.

> I would also suggest to consider the Netherlands

Unless you want to become a citizen, you'll need to learn Dutch (which is a good thing IMHO but some disagree) and renounce your other citizenship.

Sweden has an even simpler system, if the employer can prove that you are needed (and for most professions reading here that's less than trivial) you are almost guaranteed to get permanent residency in 4 years and become a citizen in 5 years if you want to

You can get permanent residence after 5 years in the Netherlands too, and the language level required is pretty basic. It's not very hard to pass the required language tests within 5+ years.

The limit to one nationality is maddening, however.

I just moved to the Netherlands after four years of university in the US and a few years of unsuccessful H1B applications. It's fantastic and a lot less stressful than the US!

Why do you dislike the one nationality limit?

>Why do you dislike the one nationality limit?

Because it is deeply arbitrary. Plenty of people can have dual nationalities in the Netherlands, just not me. Even the Dutch Queen has two nationalities. If I married a Dutch person I could become Dutch and have two nationalities, no problem. Hopefully the law will be changed...there has been talk of it.

I'm already eligible to apply for Dutch citizenship...I'm a well-integrated contributing member of society who would love to spend the rest of my life in the Netherlands. I tick all the boxes. I want to be able to vote and have representation (I'm a taxpayer as anyone else, after all). I want to spend the rest of my life here. But it's not limited to the Netherlands...I dearly want to become European. Dutch citizenship would give me the right to live and work anywhere in the EU (and plenty of other EU countries have no issues with people having two nationalities).

I can't give up my US citizenship because of family and other ties. If I needed to return to the US for an extended time (e.g. more than a couple months) to, for example, take care of my aging parents, I would lose everything I've worked towards in the Netherlands. The residence clock would reset and I'd have to find a new highly-skilled job and start all over. Same if I ever wanted to take a (temporary) job in another country. And if you renounce US citizenship, it's hard to ever visit the US again.

US immigration policy is now somewhat akin to charity rather than intended to maximize the highly skilled talent pool. This isn't intended as a criticism, but by and large most of our immigration pool comes from poor countries and does not have specialized skills. And we're pretty lenient on illegal immigration which is largely low skilled labor as well. There's a movement right now to change it to be more like the Canada system, more closely based on skill. Whether that's better or worse is subjective I suppose.

> US immigration policy is now somewhat akin to charity rather than intended to maximize the highly skilled talent pool.

No, it's not.

It's largely intended to acheive different social values (particularly community cohesion and undivided loyalties, as opposed to optimizing labor pool to serve capital), which is why the major segment is family unification, but it's not a charity, operating on s need basis (the refugee component is charity-like, sure, but that's not a main component of the immigration system, and the US isn't particularly refugee friendly, even before Trump.)

Québec is an exception to this. Québec do not follow the Express Entry system. Québec has its own immigration system called Québec Skilled Worker Programme which is currently dysfunctional, plagued with delays. Québec gives more importance to knowing French rather than any other skills in selecting immigrants. As a result, Quebec has a pool of unemployable but French speaking immigrants.

Well it seems to me most of the students from India assumed it is kinda shortcut to US permanent residency. And it is no longer happening. The trouble is all grandstanding of students and Indian government of shunning US and instead preferring Europe or Australia is not really working. I recently read an amusing news that Indian government asking european, australian governments to allow more indian students and less restrictive policy on movement. While European telling back that India does have good educational institutes so why do they want to come there in first place. Normally it would be exactly other way round where foreign governments wanted more international students.

At this point of time it is fair to say it is stronger wish of Indian students to migrate to first world. Whereas first world nations are no longer excited to have more students from outside just because they can pay fees but in return most of them want to settle there. This assumption of first world education will include permanent immigration is no longer valid.

More importantly it also exposes hypocrisy of large majority of students who write idealistic crap in admission essays, benefit from huge privilege in grossly unequal society in India and then try to comfortably settle down in egalitarian first world. It is likely protectionist move by US government but these student whining that 'world is not fair' and that they have legitimate rights to visa and GC reeks of something similar to 'White privilege'.