I used indie hacking to sponsor my own green card
swizec.com
swizec.com
For most people, the marriage path is something you take only AFTER you've gotten your green card. When you get a green card, you can apply for full citizenship after 5 years. The only benefit of the marriage path is it'll let you do it after just 3 years instead.
The other "marriage path" is one that is relatively good if you're not already in the US. If you're overseas, your spouse can apply for an I-310 and, SWOOSH, in just half a year to a year+ you can interview to be given a visa that will let you come to the US. Then you can start the insane process of applying for a green card and 3 or 5 years later you'll get to vote!
If you're undocumented your only hope ~~is~~was DACA unless you manage to somehow get asylee or refugee status. My family finally got asylum after living here for almost 2 decades. In two years I'll be able to apply for a green card and then just 5 years later I can vote too
TL;DR: The marriage path is not really an option for most immigrants already in the US
Yeah, in general the US immigration system discriminates between undocumented immigrants who (a) entered on a visa, and then never left versus (b) those who crossed the border illegally. People in category (a) can apply for green cards in many situations (e.g. marriage, or employment sponsorship after getting TPS) that those in (b) can't. Often times the wider public is not aware of this distinction.
What the author is describing, the EB-2 NIW, is well known amongst immigration attorneys.
1. Immigration of any kind is highly scrutinized
2. Law enforcement suspicion can be aroused by something as trifling and absurd the fact that "Subversion" [0] sounds like "subversive"
Putting aside the debate of what the word "hacking" actually means, wouldn't you advise a client to avoid writing a headline of "I used hacking..."? If your client runs afoul of the law for any reason, this seems like the kind of documentary "evidence" that prosecutors would be happy to entice a grand jury with.
[0] https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2013/09/michael-lewis-goldma...
https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Al... (page 12)
Maybe they can’t find something fraudulent perse (although HACKING is in the title) but could find his defiant tone offensive and could make it very difficult to proceed.
Having gone through L1 process myself I don't believe the 5 years until application is an official requirement. L1 visa itself maxes out at 5 years, so filing for the greencard with the work permit(EAD) at 5 year mark will leave the employee unable to work until the work permit is granted. I have seen cases when companies would file for a greencard almost immediately after transferring the employee on L1 visa.
I simply left for another employer who filed it right away.
I was curious if it has ballooned back up since May 2021.
I wonder how many people just slightly less motivated or talented than you are turned away (or even more troubling: less able to afford prolific immigration lawyers). I understand the importance of immigration controls writ large, but this is transparently ridiculous.
They do come, more than any other place but most don't come because uprooting your life and getting through the visa process is a lot more friction than working locally or semi-locally. If you live in Greece you would go to Germany before coming to sf.
I'll try to clarify a little bit
> they do come, more than any other place but most don't come
With most being, most of the
> just slightly less motivated or talented
than the author of the article. That our comments come in the wake of.
I think we agree on that: that most of those outside of the very top of the tech elite do not come.
And we're also not in dispute as to how it can become the tech capital of the world because I think most of the top talents that could come do come.
But the most that don't come are those who are just slightly less motivated or talented than the very top.
I think our disagreement here is probably all about degrees and relative amounts rather than about the substance of the the points. I could be misunderstanding what you're saying, but here's how I see it.
Say there exist 1 million top tech talents in the world. I say most of those that can come do come to the Bay area. The crucial part is: can come. What does "that can come" mean?
It means how much demand is there in the Bay area for top tech talents. Let's just say the demand is like 500,000 top tech talent jobs in the Bay area. That means out of a million top tech talents in the world there are 500,000 that can come to the Bay area. What I'm saying is that most of those do come. So at the very least 250,001 top tech talents do come to the Bay area. that's what I'm saying. I think the reality is very much in line with that thesis.
I admit I have no hard data to back this up it's just my feeling that it should be the case. I'd be very surprised if the reality that I described (adjusted for the actual amounts,) was not the case. I mean if it was not the case I'd be happy to learn, and that would be surprising and interesting, and a highly useful lesson that I could update my perspective with because it was so surprising to me. But I highly doubt that it's not the case.
Also the more we talk about this the more I'm sure that we don't actually disagree about that.
Do I think that most of the subtop tech talents do not come to the Bay area? Yes I absolutely think that the vast majority of not-elite tech talent in the world (so those outside of that hypothetical 1 million) do not come. One reason is obvious which is just because there's so many tech talents in the world and there's not enough demand in the San Francisco Bay area to accommodate all of those.
The second part of that is those sub-top tech talents that could come. so where there is a demand for subtop tech talents do most of those come or not? I honestly don't know. I think it could go either way: maybe they come because they seek a better life and they want to get a higher salary and that high grade experience; Or maybe they don't come because they're just not motivated enough to overcome the immigration process barriers and maybe they're not (by definition) talented or experienced enough to command the even higher salaries that would make that an attractive proposition for people with that given level of motivation. I think it could go either way.
Now none of this contradicts the idea I think you're proposing that the US immigration system presents real and troubling barriers to staffing the US tech industry. I agree: I think that's a real tension the US faces. I'm not pretending that's not a problem nor trying to say it's some easy problem.
The smartest person I know (in terms of registered iq, academic performance and reasoning capabilities) is doing a low paid job in southern europe and he's happy.
Anyway, I understand how you could have taken what I said to mean I think they're wasted but that's not what I mean.
The bizantine bureaucracy without clear guarantees and timelines, the theoretical risk of being deported, the less theoretical risk of being under surveillance, the limits on what you can do on H1B... it makes people feel very unwelcome.
I would never have considered going to the States due to the sheer difficulty and risk of it. Because my country of origin is not somewhere I ever want to see again, even the smallest risk of deportation is completely unacceptable to me.
Growing up I realised the cost of living in an American society would be higher than its benefits.
But it does seem risky making a public post about this.
By using the word “hacking” and the implications in the post that the lawyers painted a very sanguine view of the qualifications as well as the admission that the lawyers wrote the reference letters and just had the “highly successful” friend sign, seems very risky.
The US government has revoked greencards and naturalization in the past for what they consider fraudulent applications.
I am definitely not saying or implying that anything was fraudulent, but you never know who might read your post and decide that it seems suspicious and worth doing an audit.
Everyone has the opportunity to change anything before signing
People should really read about US visa types. Well, for any country they want to get into. There are often times some really obscure paths prescribed by the government that even people working for that government don't know how to process because so few people (sometimes none) have used those paths.
The crux of this article is that there is way more than H1B / wage slave visas that allow you to be present for a long time and support yourself.
Like this?
https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/visa-inf...
I gave up on a top CS university in the US when I realized that even doing everything right could mean that I could be kicked out of the country after the elections or another 9/11. I'm still happy where I'm at, and I know I'm in an incredibly privileged position... but it just sucks.
Also, understand sooner or later there is a legislative exit for this issue. I am sure, once there is great labor pressure in the US market, there would steps taken to mend the GC waiting line issue.
My impression is that the U.S. government mostly doesn't enforce its laws against unlawful entry. And that the Democratic party wants a path to full citizenship for anyone who manages to stay in the country long enough.
So I'm curious if this approach would work:
1. Enter the U.S. illegally to start the clock.
2. Work remotely "from India" for some company. Have a trusted friend/relative in India forward enough of your paycheck to the U.S. to cover your cost of living.
3. When the political climate is right, get onto whatever path to citizenship is being offered.
I know that the Democratic party uses the term "undocumented" rather than "illegal", presumably for rhetorical reasons. But I assumed that they also meant "undocumented" in the literal sense, i.e. that a person would have little or no paper trail to prove their residence.
The Transportation Security Administration confirmed to Fox News on Friday that it allows illegal immigrants to use arrest warrants as an alternative form of ID to board airplanes.
"For non-citizens and non-U.S. nationals who do not otherwise have acceptable forms of ID for presentation at security checkpoints, TSA may also accept certain DHS-issued forms, including ICE Form I-200 (Warrant for Arrest of an Alien)," a TSA spokesperson told Fox News. That refers to a civil immigration arrest warrant, not a criminal arrest warrant.
The agency added that the document will then be validated via an "alien identification number" being checked against a number of Customs and Border Protection (CBP) databases.
"All passengers whose identity is verified through alternate procedures receive additional screening before being allowed into the secure area of the airport," the statement said.
But unable to drive legally, work legally, apply for benefits legally, or do pretty much anything else. Sure you can board a flight; for whatever that's worth. TSA accepts foreign passports as identification too so...I wouldn't say it's worth all that much.
Of course it's a stressful life and they have to work under the table and can't travel internationally, but if their main goal is for their kids to be Americans, they may think the sacrifice is worth it.
If you're talking about DACA their eligibility to change of status is also measured in decades. But you have the problem of being detained and deported at any moment during those decades of waiting.
And for point 2 you've upped the penalties to tax evasion as well. If the company you work for knows you are working illegaly or no in the US and not paying payroll taxes on it it's going to cause a lot more problems.
Some American politicians have hinted at the possibility of mass amnesty for illegal immigrants, but it is an issue that is widely unpopular--partially due to how that could change the eligible voter population.
I think it is more likely that amnesty either never happens, or it is only offered to specific small groups of people.
Otherwise, America is extremely unkind towards anybody who breaks their laws--especially if your goal is to later apply for a visa or Green Card.
Finally, crossing through the southern border is not so easy. Other immigrants die when they make the journey.
Oct. 22, 2021 A record 1.7 million migrants from around the world, many of them fleeing pandemic-ravaged countries, were encountered trying to enter the United States illegally in the last 12 months, capping a year of chaos at the southern border, which has emerged as one of the most formidable challenges for the Biden administration.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/22/us/politics/border-crossi...
That's just not even remotely true. It's wildly popular.
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/06/17/americans-b...
74% want to give legal status to all children. 75% want to give a path to legality for everyone. Even most of Republicans want to do so!
There aren't that many positions in the US that are so wildly popular.
Can you imagine anything more popular than giving people free money in their bank accounts? Well that's only supported by 78% of people. Legalizing illegal immigrants is as popular as giving everyone in the US free cash.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/03/us/stimulus-check-polls.h...
Now, that's with actual humans. Politicians often care about businesses more than humans, and US businesses benefit tremendously from this underclass of workers that have no rights and often live in fear.
If you ever get arrested for anything, get background checked for anything, get reported by somebody to the police, need to deal with legal matter, need health insurance, or if one day somebody at ICE missed his morning coffee......
Life as a fugitive is not fun. Even if currently the law is not strictly enforced.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-60162500
At best, this is a perilous, uncertain and undignified route.
Full path to citizenship is for those who 'were brought as kids/infants' i.e. who had no say in how they came into the country. If they are still minors and need their parents, then some 'form of stay' for their parents.
If you cross the border illegally as an adult and barring any special circumstances, you will most likely be deported. It would also be difficult to get a professional job since a lot of companies participate in the eVerify program.
> Full path to citizenship is for those who 'were brought as kids/infants' i.e. who had no say in how they came into the country.
It's true they had no say, but as adults they do have a say and can decide to leave at any time and apply for the proper visa from their country.
So while technically you're right - as adults they have a say - it's asking quite a lot. Very few people would move to a (likely much poorer) country with no social support, and likely with no money, just because of a decision their parents made. For all intents and purposes their home is the US, and their identity is American.
If someone has lived in the same country for the entirety of the life that they can recollect, most people would consider that "their country". Your strict viewpoint also presents the opportunity for absurd scenarios when coupled with birthright citizenship, for example a Mexican woman is giving birth to twins...one comes out on the south side of the Rio Grande, and the other comes out 5 minutes later on the north side of the Rio Grande. According to you, 18 years later the first born would have no respect for the law, and the second born would be some kind of pure embodiment of America.
It's different if you had a choice in the matter but how does DACA affect the decisions that you made? If you knew that DACA was going to be a thing, would you have decided to illegally immigrate instead? I think that would have been pretty much impossible if you were a kid.
> apply for the proper visa from their country
If you've been living in the US for as long as you can remember then the US is your own country.
Also, the law itself is a slap in the face to everyone who made the decision to follow and respect the law. Immigration law is deliberately designed to be at least a little dehumanizing to the immigrant: it's NIMBYism, but for people instead of duplexes. The only thing that we should be giving the people who followed the law is an apology for having to go through such a nightmare. We absolutely should not retain such a restrictive system purely for the sake of making people who followed it feel like their sunk costs went into something.
Your best bet is to secure 500K-1M in assets to invest in the US and use that route. I know some rich people who have given up their citizenship for tax purposes and will regain the citizenship using this route when they wish to retire in Montana.
Technically renouncing citizenship for tax purposes can make the renouncer inadmissable to the US. If the immigration authorities decide these people are inadmissable, no amount of money will get their citizenship back.
There will be a way. Even if you have to get the law changed, it’ll be possible given a big enough budget
A lot of people do what you say, but for a few months at a time (within the terms of their visa), every 3-4 years. During those months you could maybe get rent a Manhattan apartment (on airbnb or something) and experience living in New York, visit national parks or other attractions, do some shopping, and after a few months (6 months is the legal limit I think) you've probably experienced most of what you need to know.
(Just another law in the long series of laws containing the word "reform" that makes things so much worse for the groups covered by the law.)
From the Congressional research service's report on immigration backlog [1], for applicants from India, the projected backlogs for various employment-based green card applications applying in 2020 are:
EB-1: 8 years.
EB-2: 195 years.
EB-3: 27 years.
Projecting out to 2030, the report says (for Indian applicants):
EB-1: 18 years.
EB-2: 436 years.
EB-3: 48 years.
"20-30 years" has been wishful thinking for Indian applicants for a long time now.
[1]. https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R46291
EDIT: I was bored, so I performed a linear extrapolation using the 2020 and 2030 estimates. Two points and a straight line through them gives:
eb-1 eb-2 eb-3
2024 12 292 36
2023 11 268 34
2022 10 244 32
2021 9 220 30
2020 8 195 27
2019 7 171 25
2018 6 147 23
2017 5 123 21
2016 4 99 19
2015 3 75 17
2014 2 51 15
2013 1 27 13
EB-2 is definitely not a 10 year wait.
Puny aur punarjanm
Most people in the tech hypes about US. Is it really worth as the hype to go through all these burdens and immigration process?
Does it really make a difference being somewhere else (for eg. Finland, France, Germany, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, UK etc.) and being in the states? I am really curious to know about it.
There is a meme that most of the open source projects stand because of some European dude doing off the charity work! The European companies also offer work permit for the qualified people!
Money and career opportunities. Silicon Valley is to software as NYC or London are to finance. Working there will super-charge your bank balance and future career path disproportionate to your ability (meaning: you will work far harder for far less reward in other places).
Yes if you want the best compensation. No if you value other things like staying in your home country near family.
Overall, I would say this is a great place to start a career as a foreign national but far from a perfect place to retire or even raise a family, unless you happen to be quite well off by that point.
If you know the fundamentals, you can code, and you can answer LeetCode-style questions in an interview setting, $80-100k with minimal or no experience is certainly doable.
Yes. If you are any good you would make at least 2x in the US. Probably 3x to 4x.
Let me put it this way: In the 7 years I've lived in SF, I have built more wealth than my parents have in their entire lifetimes.
A lot of it comes down to being surrounded by people with a can-do attitude who hype each other up instead of the European (at least Slovenian) attitude of "Bah why even bother trying? Even if you succeed the govt/people/someone is just gonna steal it anyway and the only people who are successful are crooks and cheats"
It took a lot of work to get out of that mindset. In large part thanks to being surrounded by people who are the exact opposite.
I wouldn't generalize to Europe here. I think it's a common mistake that I often make myself is to compare the US to Europe as if both were homogenous. San Francisco is different from Detroit, and Germany is different from Poland both economically and regarding people's mindset.
I've moved from Switzerland to NYC on an E-2 visa. I've worked multiple years for both a Swiss and a German startup and have been in contact with Swiss and German founders through an accelerator. I've never heard any founder or software engineer say that taxes, administration, or other people kept them from reaching for the stars. I've also learned that taxes in NYC are easily as high as in Germany and that paperwork in the US is just as burdensome as everywhere else I've had to do it.
I think the reason that so many ambitious people are drawn to Silicon Valley and NYC is that they know it's a place where other ambitious people are. That's precisely why I came, and it's a self-fulfilling prophecy. And I went despite the high taxes (easily 3x of what I paid in Switzerland), higher rent, and burdensome immigration process because I want to be in this environment.
You allude to the fact that people are what matters, but I feel that a lot of the discussion about what makes a good startup ecosystem is about money, taxes, and other administrative side-shows. Those only matter if you have the right atmosphere to start with, and I think we should talk about this more. Especially now that most of us are working remotely and physical location will become less critical.
But the scale is different. The amount of capital in SFBA dwarfs all other markets combined. And while you can make great indie films anywhere and even have a runaway succes or two, blockbusters happen in Hollywood and Bollywood. There’s a whole industry and ecosystem that knows how to make them.
Same with startups. If you want to be in a place with dozens, even hundreds, of people who know how to take an idea from $10mil to $100mil at every level of a company – that’s SFBA.
Meanwhile Slovenia just announced an innovative new govt pre-seed startup fund investing up to a whopping $100k if you have strong revenue. Our entire GDP is less than Apple’s quarterly profits.
And I figured if I’m moving out of country might as well go all the way to SFBA. I can always come back later with lessons learned.
I think the E-2 is not talked about very much in our community, which is too bad, as I would love to learn from other founders who took this route. It's not a green card but one can renew it indefinitely for as long as the business is operational.
What's your business? If it's tech-related, did you have any trouble explaining it to the consulate? I read that the E-2 is geared more towards traditional "brick and mortar" type businesses like a gas station or a restaurant. I have lawyers who help me with the business plan etc. but I still wonder how I am going to explain SaaS / custom software to the consular officer.
It's tech related and I didn't have any issues with the consulate. My feeling was that they mostly cared about revenue and hiring targets and less about technical details. Feel free to reach out on Twitter, I'm happy to chat or share more details.
[1]: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/20/heres-why-so-many-americans-...
Time and time again, any attempts to provide a safety net are destroyed at the onset.
Majority of blue collar manufacturing jobs have left for China. Most states are flat lining and apart from tech what major growth industry is there? I guess if you work for a government supported industry you are safe (defense, military etc.)
In this environment seeing people fly in from the rest of the world and earn massive salaries on the coasts while the rest of the country is being strip mined for every last penny that it has left is not something that will endure support for immigration.
This environment has resulted in >50% of the population with a great sense of anger against the perceived causes. They will continue to vote in more and more extreme version of Trump to 'solve the problem'.
Yes the US is risking its last growth industry but those people do not care (rightfully so since they don't feel as if they are benefiting anyway).
I really don't know how the US is going to come back from this. The end result of this is some sort of collapse. There needs to be bold leadership at all levels that pushes back on the causes of these problems but I don't see anybody on the horizon willing to do this.
Also, in the article you linked, they mention that the same stat for households making $100k+ a year is 17%. 17% of people making 6 figures don't have $400 saved??? If people are unable to save 0.4% of their income, no amount of economic growth will help them.
This is a combination of the uselessness of self reported statistics, poor budgeting skills, and ambiguous questions.
[1] https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/files/2017-repor...
[1]:https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/11/this-is-the-real-reason-most...
That's a bad way to prove your point, because the 40% in your stat is _down_ from 50% a few years prior. The number of bankruptcies has also been steadily falling since 2010.
My point is that things are better than you think, and generally improving.
https://www.uscourts.gov/news/2021/11/08/bankruptcy-filings-...
https://www.statista.com/statistics/817911/number-of-non-bus...
From your original source:
>Among those with a credit card, about half always or almost always paid their bill in full each month, while 2 in 10 did so some of the time and slightly over one-fourth carried a balance most of the time(figure 18). Twenty-eight percent of those with a credit card paid only the minimum on their bill at least some of the time. The frequency of regular borrowing with credit cards during 2017 is similar to 2016.
It is absurd to look at these stats and think that everything is fine. These are worrying numbers. This shows that there is a certain % of the population living paycheck to paycheck and honestly for people looking this was obvious in 2019. The outcome of this situation now coming to fruition where people don't want to work below a certain wage level and so many jobs go unfilled.
Furthermore the sign of bankruptcies declining does not disprove the claim that the majority of bankruptcies are medical related.
Less people would rely on a credit card for $400 today than 10 years ago. That's a sign of decreasing poverty.
I'm not arguing that everything is perfectly fine. There are people struggling. But the trend is undeniably positive. People are better off today than 10 years ago, and the same was true 10 years ago as well.
> Furthermore the sign of bankruptcies declining does not disprove the claim that the majority of bankruptcies are medical related.
This was your claim:
> Honestly the point was to demonstrate the declining standard of living of Americans.
Yes, most bankruptcies are medical related. But bankruptcy rates are down, so your point that this indicates declining standard of living is nonsense.
All they see is probably what they watched on the TV show Silicon Valley or what they hear in the news. I fully believe that if things were improving for them, they would be welcoming immigrants with open arms (or at least not minding them). However that is not the case. So in an environment where there isn't abundance but scarcity, it is a zero sum game.
The solution to this issue is not a "conversation", its action. Obama was elected in a massive landslide by these very people because he promised "Hope and Change". Instead he accelerated efforts to further destroy what little the middle class had left. So as a response, the people elected a populist who promised to stop the bleeding in an aggressive manner (ie. stop immigration). He did not fulfill any of his promises and now we are left with a population that is even more angry. The next step is going to be even worse.
Immigrants don't "destroy towns" they reinvigorate them[1].
1. https://www.forbes.com/sites/ashoka/2017/03/02/why-embracing...
The only hope I have is that most efforts to automate real software development have fallen apart thus far and that it is hard to do this job for many people trying to "learn to code". However I worry about what AI advancements will bring. No way to know until it happens...
Huh, why it blows your mind? Is it some kind of human right that anyone can come to US at any point in time and just start living there. Besides if they are so talented why they can't stay in home country and apply the talent.
We'd have more resources available if there was less illegal immigration.
Everyone wants reform. More border security, less visa lotteries. Visas on merit.
Wrong. The resources are under the control of the capital elite. They can decide at any time to allocate them to suit socially useful purposes, horde them or gamble them on the latest NFT fad.
Immigrants have no control over resource allocation.
It's harder to get into other countries, especially long-term.
If we end the visa lotteries, curb illegal immigration, we'll have more room for merit based immigrants.
This is a total non-sequitor. Having "more room," removing the entirely artificial barriers to citizenship, has nothing to do with illegal immigration and visa lotteries. The people in charge can remove the barriers whenever they decide to, but instead they work to convince you that "illegal immigration" is causing the problem. They blame "illegal immigration" because it provides an easy scapegoat for their negligence, a convenient foundation on which to build mass support for their subsequent election while ignoring the problems their base actually has.
Yes illegal immigration takes away from legal immigration. Yes our immigration system needs updating. No, we don't agree on how to update it.
Both sides have had congress. Your quarrel is not with me, but with your representatives. I scold mine every election cycle, have you ever?
Bullshit. This line of thinking is designed to get immigrants fighting and hating each other. A tool for the elites to divide immigrants into "deserving" and "undeserving" factions.
No other country just lets you walk in, I'd love to just walk into Japan and be a citizen without learning the language or anything, but I'd be doing myself and their country a disservice.
Do you honestly think the immigrants who did all that shit want to see people cut the system? I'll give you a hint, no they don't.
Illegal immigration causes family hardship, deaths from the journey, 33% chance of rape for girls, human trafficking, cartel violence / funding, gang proliferation, etc.
Supporting that enables those things to continue. You aren't being compassionate, you're being childish.
There's a massive difference between "just walk in" and what we actually have: waiting a hundred years for the probable chance at a backlog somewhere being cleared to process your highly restrictive visa. You are being hyperbolic.
>Illegal immigration causes family hardship, deaths from the journey, 33% chance of rape for girls, human trafficking, cartel violence / funding, gang proliferation, etc.
All those effects are caused by the militarization of the border and the failure to create realistic paths to citizenship. You are blaming the victims of our system for the horrors that are visited upon them by people that take advantage of the artificially high barriers.
This is why when I had the choice, I picked Germany over the US. Because I know that no matter what, in 3 years, I can apply for a PR, and in 8, citizenship. The new government is talking about reducing this time frame, but even if they don't it's still a lot faster than waiting decades for a GC.
While the US is still the top immigration destination of choice amongst Indians, other English speaking countries are now easier to get into and most Indians prefer a stable future so they skip the US in favor of other countries.
Long term, if the US wants to retain it's ability to attract top talent, they need to do away with place-of-birth based visa and GC restrictions.
Career-wise, meaning actually having a job and working for someone else, there's no place that compares to US compensation standards - some may even argue it's a bubble situation.
"Why I Became an American" by Enes Kanter Freedom - https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/12/why-enes-k...
Also, there's nothing special about the US in this case. Germany would probably be an easier go.
It's not that special of a case. For as much as people in the US complain about their government, most of the world is much worse.
This is ripe for abuse, they can get paid less than their others in the same jobs, or be exploited by the body shops / mills etc, they move jobs less frequently than someone who would purely have based on career or financial choices, all of which have material impact in the money they can make.[1]
Also it is not unusual for such people to have kids who because they usually born in America are American citizens and may not have citizenship in the country of origin etc, so the risk of stranding the family is also a factor.
Finally English speaking countries generally get more immigrants as language barrier is major factor same reason why U.K. is more desired than other countries in Europe, or Australia/New Zealand are also typically attractive destinations.
For all the negative press about U.S, it is still have one of the largest immigration programs of anywhere in the world and also the jobs that can be had, so it is generally simply easier to get to U.S. and live here than anywhere else.
[1] I wouldn't use inflammatory terms like slavery, however traditionally U.S. has been "built on the backs" of immigrants, First actual slaves and indentured labor(most Europeans up to the revolution came this way ), then poor immigrants. As long as it was better than back home people would keep coming, and as long it was even slightly cheaper than what it would cost locally or jobs citizens won't prefer to do, it will be profitable.