What happens when a startup goes under? Visa cancelled? Well that's reason to pour more resources in or just pretend it's still alive. What happens if they do some consulting on the side to stay alive? What happens if it ends up all consulting? What happens if people come out with the intention of doing this. How are you going to stop it? Force them to develop products?
What is a startup? Does a lawn mowing startup count? How about if they invent their own lawn mower? in 'The Founder Visa,' Graham proposes that the Governemnt could "use investment by recognized startup investors as the test of whether a company was a real startup." Recognised by who? Do you really want to erect an official barrier to entry for investors?
What about an existing startup in country X that wouldn't mind moving to the US. Now they need an officially recognised investor. They don't need an investor. They need a visa. They can pay for it. The investor is in a position to sell a visa, even if it looks like he is just getting a good deal on some stock. It might even look like that to the investor. I offered a deal. They took it. The power to grant a visa is worth money and even if you can control the granter's morals or incentives (you can't), you cannot control the grantee's reasons for accepting a deal.
4 consultants doing remote work for mostly US clients decide they could double their (say $150k p/a) revenue by moving to the US and doing the same. Theoretically, they can afford up to $150k p/a for the visa. Say they take $100k "investment" form a recognised investor in return for a promise to pay $50k p/a. How would the visa process weed these candidates out. Review the business plan? Make sure that they are planning to build a business that scales? Consulting doesn't scale. Are you sure? Will we have a list of business plans that scale?
The article mentions setting up "a board of investors, entrepreneurs, and tech lawyers who are used to vetting tech ideas; they'd review applications and choose which ones are worthy of a Founder Visa." This, it reckons, would be open to corruption.
I don't think it is possible to have "controlled immigration" that is this controlled to this extent without these ugly issues.