[throwaway743824]

"It wouldn't be hard to have an immigration system which is biased toward useful vs. not useful."

I think that's extremely hard in terms of startups. You're essentially expecting the government to select what is valuable and what isn't. I don't like unclear visa situations either, but I haven't really seen a country effectively implement "come here and do whatever for a bit as long as you can take care of yourself". Which is what I would think is most compatible with creating startups.

[rdl]

People founding startups are a very small subset of overall immigrants. There is probably another form of visa which would work well for that.

Also, most people who do start startups are also competent, if not educated, enough to probably qualify under a more traditional points based system. A specific job accepted might be a +5 (and maybe make it contingent on remaining there for some period of employment), a college degree might be evaluated on school/program and +1 to +5, other specific achievements might get some bonuses, age (youth; working life before retirement, generally) would be some benefit, and such. Proof of assets is some benefit, and maybe sponsorship/bond/whatever from some entity could be a factor.

I think we could probably have a lower point threshold than Canada, although I'm not sure. That is mostly a political decision and should involve a lot of factors beyond economics.

If the negative consequence here is you have to come to the US for a job, but your immigration status isn't tied to that job, and you thus have to work in the US for 2-4y before getting PR or citizenship, that's not a huge bar to entrepreneurs, IMO. If you don't already have the business or funding, working in the US first is probably necessary anyway. The problem with H1B is retaining residency after switching to the startup.

[throwaway743824]

"People founding startups are a very small subset of overall immigrants."

True, even less create successful startups in a timely manner (even though they contribute overall). Which makes them so hard to target.

"Also, most people who do start startups are also competent, if not educated, enough to probably qualify under a more traditional points based system."

There's only so many ways to measure something and dropping out school to work for random Internet companies and starting your own before you have kids, which is a common profile for entrepreneurial people in Europe, tends to not tick a lot of them.

The US immigration system desperately needs reform, I just don't think any country has managed to create a formal system that is better for entrepreneurship than the realities of running your business illegally in the beginning (or at least pushing the meaning of a business visa). With some reservation for not having looked into the European startup/freelance visas.

[hkmurakami]

E2 visa is a decent proxy for usefulness already.

[throwaway743824]

Somewhat. The conditions are sort of awkward since you have to basically start a company, build contacts wherever you are for an investment and then at the same time build contacts in the US and move you company there.

I think a better situation would be something like a "mini E-2" where you with a lesser investment (say $20k) can start you US company directly, go there for a year and then after that show you meet similar requirements to an E-2, but with US investors. (there could be conditions that you can't hire people or whatever). I guess this is essentially what many people do instead of E-2, but with business visas and other visa schemes.

[hkmurakami]

Yeah agreed the bar for E2 is a bit high and a bit contrived (also not very transparent). But I also understand the government's desire to prevent visa fraud as well.