Hacker News Reader

Comment by rrrrrrrrrrrryan | Hacker News Reader

> The real losers here are the students who studied in the US, worked hard to find a job and only submit a single petition through their employers. It's now way less likely they will get picked in the lottery.

I'll never understand why we don't just staple green cards to master's degrees. It's absolutely absurd that we're choosing to kick out talented, hardworking people who are already established here, who are disproportionately young and healthy. And they're at the very beginning of their careers - they're ready to pay a lifetime of taxes. They're the absolute opposite of drains on society.

View on HN

> I'll never understand why we don't just staple green cards to master's degrees.

As someone who has interviewed and worked with a number of international students with master's degrees, approximately 70% of them somehow manage to get a master's from a US college without actually knowing anything, so my cynical side says we definitely should not automatically add green cards to master's degrees.

How similar is that 70% to US students though. It amazes me how little my friends in the last years of their CS major know about CS or software, so it doesn't surprise me at all if 70% of all masters holders know very little about what they studied.

Hard disagree.

The reason to give almost anyone working a tech job a green card quickly is so they don't depress the market wage by being indentured serfs.

The absolute worst thing the US could do to the Indian IT sweatshops is to give a "tech worker" a guaranteed green card in 18-24 months so that they can change employers. Those companies would quit applying for visas almost immediately.

> approximately 70% of them somehow manage ..

Need a source for this. I'm sure there are a vast number of master's students who get their degree from shitty colleges to just be able to work here, but the vast majority of international co-workers I've had were amazing.

It isn't shitty colleges, it's just cheating. I've seen it first hand with people that I personally know in CS masters programs

> Providing a green card upon completion of your master's degree.

Seems like an interesting idea. Why do you think it's not already being done? I haven't really explored the idea very carefully, but this would amount to giving universities the power to grant citizenship to foreigners, which seems like it has a lot of potential for abuse.

But i would have applied for trump university right away!

Remove the potential for abuse by still requiring the application to be approved.

> this would amount to giving universities the power to grant citizenship to foreigners

Just a note that green card holders are residents, not citizens. They don’t get to vote, they just get to pay taxes.

Still potential for abuse of course, but an important distinction.

> Just a note that green card holders are residents, not citizens.

While there are time and other requirements after getting lawful permanent resident status (“green card”), the main limitation on access to citizenship is getting status in an immigrant category and thereby becoming an LPR.

The citizens of Washington DC (or the other U.S. territories) don't have voting representation in Congress, but it isn't a potential for abuse.

The difference between H1B and permanent resident is massive. Residents aren't beholden on their employer to remain in the country.

When I had a friend deported for losing the lottery (she had a masters in a math related field) our friend group had a lot of discussions about the topic. Masters degrees can be gamed, and some people do get them simply because it gives them more time. But difficult degrees in industries that America needs (STEM was our initial thought) we should be encouraging people in those industries to stay with a green card or some extremely long visa that isn't just chance. Determining the fields would be the hard part.

PhDs on the other hand, regardless of the field, you've contributed something unique to the collective knowledge of humanity. Instant green card, it's even dumber to kick them out.

Green cards, also aren't citizenship but are simply a step to getting there. There are many types of visas that let you work but have stipulations, especially around leaving the country. If there really is some kind of fear of people collecting citizenship after spending decades in the country and becoming highly educated, special visas with rules are always an option. But there should be a viable path to citizenship either way. We should not be kicking these people out.

> PhDs on the other hand, regardless of the field, you've contributed something unique to the collective knowledge of humanity. Instant green card, it's even dumber to kick them out.

Depends on the field. I've met PhDs that are fantastic, and I've also met PhDs whose defining contribution to human knowledge over their entire lifetime was "I made this algorithm 2.3% faster in a specific tiny edge case that no one will ever care about."

>"I made this algorithm 2.3% faster in a specific tiny edge case that no one will ever care about."

That's pretty much what most research or even startups are like. You bet that 5% will blow up, and hence you fund the other 95%.

Because that is not how American immigration has traditionally worked. Many of us are from families that did not have the means to put someone through graduate school, they arrived as Irish orphans or with $8 in their pockets. The graduate student doesn't need the citizenship, the person with $8 in their pocket does. Imagine a world where the graduate student who is already guaranteed to be pretty successful AND the immigrant who came with $8 dollars have good lives. That's what America is about to me. That is why we limit immigration number by country (so more people have an opportunity) and promote familial immigration, not immigration of elites. If you want that system there are plenty of countries with golden visas, one right next door to the USA.

It's not exactly what you're talking about but there's a post degree completion extension for F-1 visas, and extension for that for masters/doctoral students that can extend the visa (iirc) for up to three years and allow one to work. I've known several people that transitioned from their F-1 OTP to H1-B. I've even known people who sought out masters programs to extend their student visa just to avoid returning to their home country due to political turmoil and violence.

But that said, you would make it more difficult for American citizens to attend American graduate degree programs that they subsidize with their taxes. There's a finite number of seats for students and I'm not sure if they're better filled with locals or people who want guaranteed permanent residency.

Then make VISAs an auction if the goal is maximum value extraction, not some weird arbitrary 'allow all X class (in your case master degree graduates) because they are of 'more value' for 'XYZ reason'. But that isn't the goal nor the will of the American people who have codified a system of ensure the chance for immigration is spread across the world. We are a nation of immigrants most of whom came with nothing. Our goal is giving that opportunity to others who need it. Plenty of countries offer 'golden visas'. If that is how one wishes to immigrate, one can move to one of them today.

The US offers permanent residency if you invest enough and create at least 10 jobs.

https://www.uscis.gov/green-card/green-card-eligibility/gree...

This could dramatically increase the value of a degree for a foreigner. I'm curious what some of the effects would be--an increase in tuition rates for foreign students? A corresponding reduction in the number of US students who are able to get admission to US universities? Obviously some of these effects could be limited by regulation, if desired (i.e., universities could be restricted from admitting more than their allotted number of foreign students). Is it right to concede to the university our shared public power of granting residency?

> I'll never understand why we don't just staple green cards to master's degrees.

It can be easily gamed and would lead to a rise in education industry specifically for this.

I think the better would be to give a green card after getting a US degree in areas that matter to the economic growth, and the students have worked here, in those industries for 5 years.

The majority of international students coming to the US are wealthy or from upper middle class families . Do you really want to shut out deserving people who cannot afford to study in the US . Or make the US similar to Vancouver, BC where all the wealthy elite moved and bought up all the businesses and real estate after working for a few years ?

Not for Masters degrees, undergrad yes, because you don't have a lot of scholarships, but for Masters degrees you have a good chance of getting an assistantship or a scholarship.

> Do you really want to shut out deserving people who cannot afford to study in the US

The parent poster did not say anything about stopping other avenues of immigration. Immigration is expensive. Do you think a lot of people who aren't privileged enough can easily immigrate?

Because that would lead to an influx of an infinite number of people from a particular south asian country.

A solution to that would be tightening up admission requirements. But if universities deem that applicants are legit, there is no detriment to the supposed "influx" that you are pointing to. At that point, that's just the US drawing in trained labor force

So what?

They have to get accepted into a program and graduate and they have to have the funds to pay tuition. Then they'll work productively here and pay taxes. I can't think of any reason why this would be a bad thing except the bigoted "ugh, too many Indian people."

Absorbing educated people from other nations is an economic superpower.

How many white collar jobs do we actually need?

As many as can be absorbed without leaving blue collar workers (further) behind

> How many white collar jobs do we actually need?

More educated immigrants lead to more jobs and economic growth.

Where does this universal truth come from?

Various sources.

1. https://www.cato.org/blog/fiscal-impact-immigration-united-s...

2. https://www.aclu.org/other/immigrants-and-economy

3. https://www.bushcenter.org/catalyst/north-american-century/b...

4. https://budgetmodel.wharton.upenn.edu/issues/2016/1/27/the-e...

5. https://www.cbpp.org/research/poverty-and-inequality/immigra...

Because American's have chosen to have immigration opportunities spread among different countries and specifically written that into our system? Because I don't want a system that promotes elites that 'have the funds to pay tuition'? None of my grandparents could have afforded that high bar. If you have the funds, you don't NEED to immigrate as much as others do.

None of your grandparents would have made it to the US under the current system either (probably)

Lower ranked US universities will grant admission to anyone who can afford their fees. Majority of the people coming to the US are from tier 3/4 colleges in their home country. There are few states in this particular country that have consultancies submitting thousands of student applications. Everything is taken care of - from the application form filling to preparing SOPs and letters of recommendation. Always a good idea to understand the ground reality before jumping to conclusions.

US had that most of its history with European immigrants. Just show up and not be sick and feeble. Later they added a basic literacy test.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com