The underlying study

http://www.kauffman.org//uploadedFiles/Then_and_now_americas...

is written by Vivek Wadhwa. His pet issue, often discussed here on HN, is policy incentives for increased immigration to the United States by persons he identifies as likely future successful entrepreneus. The key statistic from the report is this: "The proportion of immigrant-founded companies nationwide has dropped from 25.3 percent to 24.3 percent since 2005. While the margins of error of these numbers overlap, they nonetheless indicate that immigrant-founded companies’ dynamic period of expansion has come to an end."

Okay, so the change in percentage is within the standard error of measurement; a percentage change of that kind would be seen even if there were more immigrant-founded companies than ever, as long as more native-born Americans than ever found companies; and there is NO indication that Silicon Valley's flood of innovation has ceased. What is the problem here? Quantitatively, what is the proof that any policy change is needed?

Agree, as real data point here: Indian entrepreneur, with graduate degree from a top US univ, with 6 years experience at a top valley behemoth, working on their core infrastructure. Now raised seed funding for so-far bootstrapped business from a top US VC firm. But due to visa issues, having to move most of the company operations overseas. As a founder, it sucks that there is no visa which I can get to run this startup! My H1 visa prohibits me from running a company where I have significant equity. This is just a f*ing stupid immigration policy !

I don't understand HN sometimes. There is a saying in statistics: if you torture the data long enough, it will admit to anything.

The point being ... if you get a statistically significant result, you're not done. Vice versa, if the data disagrees with your intuition, it doesn't necessarily mean your intuition is wrong.

My theory on this is that entrepreneurship has become more accessible in recent years. This means more Americans are starting companies thus reducing the proportion of startups founded by immigrants. Of course foreigners can do the same from anywhere in the world; a startup based in India can serve US-based customers just as easily.

Many tech startups from the 80s and 90s were started by founders with advanced engineering degrees, many of whom were foreign-born. But times have changed and now you can found a tech startup right after high school.

Tech startups are also not as risky as they used to be, and they've become more glamorous and fashionable in recent times. I've heard the number of American kids enrolling in CS programs has also grown in recent years.

>A new Kauffman Foundation study finds that high-tech, immigrant-founded startups — a critical source of fuel for the U.S. economy

Since when is outside entrepreneurship a "critical" component of any country's economy? It's not as if the economy would fail if we didn't have immigrant workers. As an American, should we not encourage our own country to lead the way in our own economy?

>With funding from the Kauffman Foundation, Wadhwa has launched a website — ImmigrantExodus.com — as a resource for journalists and a voice for immigrant entrepreneurs.

Oh wow, they go so far as to make an entire website dedicated to this faux alarmism.

>To protect the future for American workers, shouldn’t the US immigration policy focus on letting job creators stay in the country

Yes, to protect American workers, we must ensure they are employed by foreigners, LOL.

>Kaufmann Foundation, Goldin Solutions, Levy

Color me surprised, Jews are behind demanding America becoming more "multicultural and diverse", ie less American.

As a white male from the suburbs over the age of 21, I am strongly offended by the racist tone in this article. This author has asserted that people of my generation and people like me are not likely to found successful companies, which is simply not true, as most high-tech startups are founded by people just like me. It talks down to Americans, saying that immigrants are somehow better at business or better at founding companies than we are, which is rude and offensive.

I'm sorry, but I have to take extreme racial offense at the article that was posted.

wink