> None of the gear in this article is particularly cheap.
The $4 baseball cap isn't bad :) Darn Tough socks are also arguably also pretty cheap over a lifetime of use since the company mails you a free replacement pair if you wear one out
Hi Peter - I understand that it's possible for recent STEM graduates to be self-employed, or a 1-man C-Corp, for the first year of their post-completion OPT. But in the 2 year STEM extension, it seems that you need a distinct supervisor to fill out I-983.
How do you suggest that a "solo entrepreneur" modify their business structure so that they can continue working on their business projects during the STEM OPT period? I've heard some people say that you need to have US Citizen co-owners of the company who own a majority share; others say that it suffices to have US Citizens on the Board, as this technically gives them the ability to remove you. Is there any such setup that is clearly within the bounds of the STEM OPT program?
Also - are there any other options aside from the STEM OPT extension? In particular, if the individual is from an E2 treaty country, is this the sort of business that could qualify for an E2 visa, or do those businesses have to have the potential to employ US Citizens?
In the end, it's up to the school and they all view this differently but I see the focus as supervision (not ownership) so you need someone, an advisor or board member, who is well educated and experienced in the field who would act as the STEM OPT supervisor/mentor.
Hi Peter - a followup question if I may. Do you think that this kind of "solo entrepreneur" business model would be a good fit for the E2 visa? In particular, where the individual does not envision employing any other people, nor getting large amounts of VC funding (think more like bootstrapped growth). Or does the E2 visa require more 'scale'?
The E-2 visa really is the entrepreneur visa in the U.S. since the applicant can own the entire business and run it but it does require a "substantial" investment and a good business plan showing that the company will grow and hire U.S. workers over time. "Substantial" is a relative term (depending on the minimum cost to establish and run a particular business) but in practice, the investment must be at least $100k even if the cost to establish and run the business is in fact less.
This is not really a fair comparison - even without a congestion toll, people have to pay to drive on a road. They need to buy the car, pay for its maintenance, fill it with gas, pay for insurance, pay annual registration fees to help maintain the roads. Presumably some of the money from buying a train ticket goes into doing the equivalent things: purchasing and maintaining the trains, etc.
Not saying the implicit subsidies/taxes on each mode of transport is equal, but it doesn't seem to be as simple as 'one is paid and the other is free'.
Most of the things you mentioned only benefit the car owner, and they can choose to adjust them based on their need and budget.
This is about the cost to other people for your choices: if you buy an SUV, you get the positive effect of feeling more macho but the people whose health is at greater risk as a direct consequence of that decision aren’t consulted. This kind of thing allows those communities to provide the negative feedback required to keep a system stable.
Yes, for the same reasons – the desire to feel strong and powerful isn’t exclusive to men! That product class has a higher profit margin so car companies have been running a marketing campaign for decades promoting them as powerful, safe, etc. to get buyers to pay extra.
I have a few blogs where I post useful content with human written articles, but the images are AI generated. They make the article better and add visual context without me having to pay graphic designers for stuff i'll never make money on.
> I continued to do so because I was working towards permanent residency in another country.
I'm curious, what country let you work towards permanent residency without you being physically present in it? (Sounds like you were driving around different places at the time)
Depending on your background and circumstances, there are ways to opt out of the race to a greater/lesser degree. Moving to a cheaper city in your country, or a cheaper country altogether, is one of them. Finding a less stressful way of making less money is another.
It's just hard being reminded that there's no escape hatch - we've welded them all shut for eternity. Being reduced to choices within a system but the choice horizon never extends to the system itself and won't within my lifetime makes me feel trapped.
If induced demand for housing were accepted, it might expose how weak an argument it is against road use. 'Lets not build more roads because it allows more people to make journeys they want to make'?
> Every foreign employee getting that tech job is a US citizen from the Midwest not getting it.
This concentration of high paid tech jobs would not exist in the first place if it weren't for the foreigners. Look at the number of tech startups founded by immigrants. More broadly consider that if a different country became the global hub for top tech talent, capital would go there, and that country would become the home of high paid tech salaries.
The main input into a tech company is 'human capital' (hard working, highly intelligent, people) - Americans benefit from the spillover effects of having their country be the global nexus of human capital.
BTW, India is seeing significant upwards pressure on tech salaries and a boom in the number of domestic tech companies and jobs. This is at least partly spurred by restrictive American immigration policies forcing Indians to go back home. Purely economically speaking, I don't think America is the winner here.
I interned at a company that can hire H1Bs. They do so often. My manager and several coworkers were not US citizens. I received the hourly equivalent of more than $78k/yr, with a great working environment. I'm not sure what your comment proves?
There are several companies in my area that can only hire US Citizens, and they all pay lower than the company I interned at.
This kind of issue cannot be analyzed anecdotally.
The article says that most of these approvals are going to tech entrepreneurs / startup founders. The effect of this seems to be to create new companies that otherwise wouldn't have existed, spurring demand for tech workers. The net effect of this is upwards pressure on wages if anything.
More generally, if another country became the global nexus for top tech talent, capital would eventually follow there, and the long term effect on US tech salaries would be negative.
The $4 baseball cap isn't bad :) Darn Tough socks are also arguably also pretty cheap over a lifetime of use since the company mails you a free replacement pair if you wear one out