>Gupta described it as “DEI” to “prop up” Americans as a “preferred group.”
This is easily one of the most eyebrow-raisingly dangerous things I've ever seen a leader of any kind (business or political) in the US say out loud. It summons images of the USA on fire from coast to coast in riots.
Yeah that one got my hackles up. The idea that America should not be run for the benefit of its citizens is uhhhh saying the quiet part out loud, I guess.
It was clearly a minor joke but I don’t think people realize how close to the fire the immigration debate is. There are sections of X making plans for seizing the property and belongings of deported H1B visa holders. It’s extreme but not impossible.
Most of the people talking like that are far removed from real power and influence. But I suppose extending your twitter flamewar to include the chair of the FTC is one way to change that...
No, you misunderstand, I am not saying run a batch there. I am saying that YC should startup an org there that purely contracts to their startups, no need to hire, no need for H1Bs.
Citizenship, while usually a circumstance of birth, comes with a a shared responsibility of the society one is a citizen of. That responsibility also goes the other way, where the society has a duty to look out for the citizen
While it sucks that people from other societies dont feel like those societies are good for them, it doesnt mean that citizens of the host society should extend that responsibility to people who do not share responsibility for that society like citizens do.
Essentially these foreign workers are mercenaries, and do not derserve the same loyalty and protections that citizens do
Not taking a position on either side of the underlying debate, but obviously a government has a unique obligation to its own citizens, and ideally no unique obligation to an ethnicity or race.
Maybe in one thousand years we will all be one joint geo-political entity, which will be great, but until then it is an unassailable fact of physical reality that nations must prioritize their own citizens. That doesn't mean ignoring everybody else - just prioritizing.
Well, an American farmer cannot sell his grain in India. That also seems to be discrimination simply because he is in the wrong place. Are you arguing that all protectionism is flawed and wrong?
That might be true in practice but also 1) completely incompatible with global notions of fairness and justice, and 2) not an especially compelling political argument for getting countries to open up their markets.
That's a great ideal, but is obviously impossible to the extent that you are implying, until we can eliminate national and legal borders entirely, which is a distant-future goal. You're putting the horse lightyears before the cart.
>Gupta described it as “DEI” to “prop up” Americans as a “preferred group.”
This is easily one of the most eyebrow-raisingly dangerous things I've ever seen a leader of any kind (business or political) in the US say out loud. It summons images of the USA on fire from coast to coast in riots.
Yeah that one got my hackles up. The idea that America should not be run for the benefit of its citizens is uhhhh saying the quiet part out loud, I guess.
Always nice to know how someone really feels about a country that has made them very rich.
It was clearly a minor joke but I don’t think people realize how close to the fire the immigration debate is. There are sections of X making plans for seizing the property and belongings of deported H1B visa holders. It’s extreme but not impossible.
Most of the people talking like that are far removed from real power and influence. But I suppose extending your twitter flamewar to include the chair of the FTC is one way to change that...
Why not spin up the startups in those other countries then?
Heck, why not spin up YC Foundries elsewhere in the world?
No H1B needed.
YC has. There has been (if I remember correctly) batches entirely based on India.
No, you misunderstand, I am not saying run a batch there. I am saying that YC should startup an org there that purely contracts to their startups, no need to hire, no need for H1Bs.
Then you are competing for talent with Fortune 500 companies that pay more than startup wages.
in the US they are not competing?
Because US VCs seem to have an allergic reaction to EU regulation?
Was that a rhetorical question or do you miss the regularly scheduled front page posts complaining that the EU kills innovation?
Gotta be honest, I very strongly doubt that most H1Bs go to people out of the EU.
Ah, I see what you meant.
trolling very close to the sun
Capitalist right-wing vs nativist right-wing
[dead]
How is discrimination by citizenship more acceptable than e.g. discrimination by ethnicity or race? All of these are outcomes of birth lottery.
Citizenship, while usually a circumstance of birth, comes with a a shared responsibility of the society one is a citizen of. That responsibility also goes the other way, where the society has a duty to look out for the citizen
While it sucks that people from other societies dont feel like those societies are good for them, it doesnt mean that citizens of the host society should extend that responsibility to people who do not share responsibility for that society like citizens do.
Essentially these foreign workers are mercenaries, and do not derserve the same loyalty and protections that citizens do
Not taking a position on either side of the underlying debate, but obviously a government has a unique obligation to its own citizens, and ideally no unique obligation to an ethnicity or race.
A country's first responsibility should be to its citizens.
Maybe in one thousand years we will all be one joint geo-political entity, which will be great, but until then it is an unassailable fact of physical reality that nations must prioritize their own citizens. That doesn't mean ignoring everybody else - just prioritizing.
I vote to discriminate citizenship, economic or otherwise, based on the answer to this being a self evident truth
What obligation does the government have to those who are not their citizens? 100% a lottery, but your logic here is willful ignorance.
The point is to have a system that does not discriminate based on lottery.
Well, an American farmer cannot sell his grain in India. That also seems to be discrimination simply because he is in the wrong place. Are you arguing that all protectionism is flawed and wrong?
Until very recently, that was a pretty common view. Countries generally want unconstrained exports, while limiting competitive imports.
That might be true in practice but also 1) completely incompatible with global notions of fairness and justice, and 2) not an especially compelling political argument for getting countries to open up their markets.
That's a great ideal, but is obviously impossible to the extent that you are implying, until we can eliminate national and legal borders entirely, which is a distant-future goal. You're putting the horse lightyears before the cart.