Skip to main content

Moguls agree: EB-5 should be expanded (but reformed) because people "create jobs"; also, potential to trade visas for house investment

A 7/10/14 New York Times op-ed, Break the Immigration Impasse: Sheldon Adelson, Warren Buffett and Bill Gates on Immigration Reform, featured the august personages of Microsoft founder Gates, legendary investor Buffett, and casino mogul Adelson, telling us, among other things, that the EB-5 immigrant investment program is mostly peachy--and could get even better:
We also believe that America’s self-interest should be reflected in our immigration policy. For example, the EB-5 “immigrant investor program,” created by Congress in 1990, was intended to allow a limited number of foreigners with financial resources or unique abilities to move to our country, bringing with them substantial and enduring purchasing power. Reports of fraud have surfaced with this program, and we believe it should be reformed to prevent abuse but also expanded to become more effective. People willing to invest in America and create jobs deserve the opportunity to do so.
Ah, the old "reform but expand" argument. The problem is that the program itself is inherently flawed. The immigrants aren't aiming to create jobs. They're aiming to get green cards for themselves and their families, and want to sign up for a project that has been calculated to create ten jobs per investor.

But those jobs need not be validated by head count, just a paid economist's report. In many cases, the immigrant investor funds, at very low interest rate, simply substitute for higher-interest capital rather than serve as the seed money without which a project wouldn't start. That's simply margin for the developer.

Worse, the immigrant investors get job-creation credit for the entire investment, not merely their portion. In other words, investors in the Atlantic Yards-related EB-5 project got the benefits of jobs calculated based on the combination of their investment and public subsidies, among other sources.

Expanding EB-5?

The moguls continue:
Their citizenship could be provisional — dependent, for example, on their making investments of a certain size in new businesses or homes. Expanded investments of that kind would help us jolt the demand side of our economy. These immigrants would impose minimal social costs on the United States, compared with the resources they would contribute. New citizens like these would make hefty deposits in our economy, not withdrawals.
Note the subtle proposal to expand EB-5 by proving visas for buying houses--even less of a connection to job creation. 

Yes, the typical social costs associated with poor immigrants would not be present, but what's the social cost of an inherently dishonest program?

Another justification

The moguls write:
We believe it borders on insanity to train intelligent and motivated people in our universities — often subsidizing their education — and then to deport them when they graduate. Many of these people, of course, want to return to their home country — and that’s fine. But for those who wish to stay and work in computer science or technology, fields badly in need of their services, let’s roll out the welcome mat.
A “talented graduate” reform was included in a bill that the Senate approved last year by a 68-to-32 vote. It would remove the worldwide cap on the number of visas that could be awarded to legal immigrants who had earned a graduate degree in science, technology, engineering or mathematics from an accredited institution of higher education in the United States, provided they had an offer of employment. The bill also included a sensible plan that would have allowed illegal residents to obtain citizenship, though only after they had earned the right to do so.
As commenters pointed out, those who come for education are not so much "deported" but see their limited visas expire.

Some comments from the Times

99Percent NJ 2 days ago
The three authors do not represent widespread opinion, nor expert opinion, nor even partisan opinion. They're just so rich that their names alone get them into the NY Times. The peculiar mix of recommendations in their essay suits them, not us.
How about a bill that prevents, not encourages, rich foreigners from buying citizenship? The benefits they bring with them are dubious at best ("job creators," the authors suggest).

DeanB Amherst, MA 2 days ago
The authors failed to cover an important topic: the areas of immigration reform on which they disagree, and what compromise they came to regarding those. As far as I can see they can only agree on two measures that would be good for business. If they want to insist that Congress should compromise, their argument would be far more effective if they provided a compelling example.

Guy Fawkes New York 2 days ago
A billionaire triumvirate proposes fixing immigration with more visas for tech grads and the rich (including those who merely buy a home, not invest in job-creating business), and allowing illegals to obtain citizenship. They promote a larger cheaper labor pool for the businesses that underpin their own wealth. They are disconnected from the communities at the sharp end of illegal migration that bear the immense financial and social costs: schools overwhelmed by non-English speakers; education systems skewed to the demands of illegals rather than citizens; overburdened healthcare systems; lower & middle class jobs lost to illegals…these core stresses are breaking the backs of American communities.
Yes, many of our forebears made it to this soil, mostly legally. In any case, that was then, this is now. The present reality is that the US simply does not have the financial or social resources to bestow upon millions of illegals whatever their sorry circumstances. We have 2nd+ generation citizens who need help all across the country; unlike billionaires and urban liberals, their jobs, communities and their kids' education are daily directly eroded by illegals.
We first need determined enforcement of immigration law. Compassionate and overwhelmed Americans are being taken for a ride by illegals. Start with more detentions and accelerated deportations; hefty fines and temporary shutdowns of employers. No amnesty, no benefits, secure the borders.

Mike Brooks Eugene, Oregon 2 days ago
What these robber barons are united behind, is more cheap labor. " immigration reform", and please read the legislation, is about more H1-B and other guest worker visas. Right this minute, there two two unemployed US hi-tech workers for *every* hi-tech job in the country. 20% of US nursing school graduates are without jobs, and "immigration reform" has meant millions of less qualified foreign nursing taking their jobs. Take a look at Microsoft, under bill Gates. He got batches of 5000 guest worker visas and fired US workers from their jobs, replacing them with those foreign workers. Furthermore, those guest workers are almost always less qualified, their single distinguishing characteristic being that they work for less than half of their American counterparts. Look at the ads for hi tech contract work. They are filled with H1-b workers, laid off after the expiration of their visas, wiling to take contract work for $10 or less per hour, most of them not paying one dime in income tax for that contract work. THAT is what this is all about, cheap labor, the destruction of the American middle class, all in the cause of even more obscene profits. We need to be taking, as a nation, about completely ending guest worker visas, not dishonestly referring to this firm of corporate welfare as "immigration reform". Shame on Gates, Buffet, Adelson, and the other like monsters.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Forest City acknowledges unspecified delays in Pacific Park, cites $300 million "impairment" in project value; what about affordable housing pledge?

Updated Monday Nov. 7 am: Note follow-up coverage of stock price drop and investor conference call and pending questions.

Pacific Park Brooklyn is seriously delayed, Forest City Realty Trust said yesterday in a news release, which further acknowledged that the project has caused a $300 million impairment, or write-down of the asset, as the expected revenues no longer exceed the carrying cost.

The Cleveland-based developer, parent of Brooklyn-based Forest City Ratner, which is a 30% investor in Pacific Park along with 70% partner/overseer Greenland USA, blamed the "significant impairment" on an oversupply of market-rate apartments, the uncertain fate of the 421-a tax break, and a continued increase in construction costs.

While the delay essentially confirms the obvious, given that two major buildings have not launched despite plans to do so, it raises significant questions about the future of the project, including:
if market-rate construction is delayed, will the affordable h…

Revising official figures, new report reveals Nets averaged just 11,622 home fans last season, Islanders drew 11,200 (and have option to leave in 2018)

The Brooklyn Nets drew an average of only 11,622 fans per home game in their most recent (and lousy) season, more than 23% below the announced official attendance figure, and little more than 65% of the Barclays Center's capacity.

The New York Islanders also drew some 19.4% below announced attendance, or 11,200 fans per home game.

The surprising numbers were disclosed in a consultant's report attached to the Preliminary Official Statement for the refinancing of some $462 million in tax-exempt bonds for the Barclays Center (plus another $20 million in taxable bonds). The refinancing should lower costs to Mikhail Prokhorov, owner of the arena operating company, by and average of $3.4 million a year through 2044 in paying off arena construction.

According to official figures, the Brooklyn Nets attendance averaged 17,187 in the debut season, 2012-13, 17,251 in 2013-14, 17,037 in 2014-15, and 15,125 in the most recent season, 2015-16. For hoops, the arena holds 17,732.

But official…

Is Barclays Center dumping the Islanders, or are they renegotiating? Evidence varies (bond doc, cash receipts); NHL attendance biggest variable

The Internet has been abuzz since Bloomberg's Scott Soshnick reported 1/30/17, using an overly conclusory headline, that Brooklyn’s Barclays Center Is Dumping the Islanders.

That would end an unusual arrangement in which the arena agrees to pay the team a fixed sum (minus certain expenses), in exchange for keeping tickets, suite, and sponsorship revenue.

The arena would earn more without the hockey team, according to Bloomberg, which cited “a financial projection shared with potential investors showed the Islanders won’t contribute any revenue after the 2018-19 season--a clear signal that the team won’t play there, the people said."

That "signal," however, is hardly definitive, as are the media leaks about a prospective new arena in Queens, as shown in the screenshot below from Newsday. Both sides are surely pushing for advantage, if not bluffing.

Consider: the arena and the Islanders can't even formally begin their opt-out talks until after this season. The disc…

Skanska says it "expected to assemble a properly designed modular building, not engage in an iterative R&D experiment"

On 12/10/16, I noted that FastCo.Design's Prefab's Moment of Reckoning article dialed back the gush on the 461 Dean modular tower compared to the publication's previous coverage.

Still, I noted that the article relied on developer Forest City Ratner and architect SHoP to put the best possible spin on what was clearly a failure. From the article: At the project's outset, it took the factory (managed by Skanska at the time) two to three weeks to build a module. By the end, under FCRC's management, the builders cut that down to six days. "The project took a little longer than expected and cost a little bit more than expected because we started the project with the wrong contractor," [Forest City's Adam] Greene says.Skanska jabs back
Well, Forest City's estranged partner Skanska later weighed in--not sure whether they weren't asked or just missed a deadline--and their article was updated 12/13/16. Here's Skanska's statement, which shows th…

Not just logistics: bypassing Brooklyn for DNC 2016 also saved on optics (role of Russian oligarch, Shanghai government)

Surely the logistical challenges of holding a national presidential nominating convention in Brooklyn were the main (and stated) reasons for the Democratic National Committee's choice of Philadelphia.

And, as I wrote in NY Slant, the huge security cordon in Philadelphia would have been impossible in Brooklyn.

But consider also the optics. As I wrote in my 1/21/15 op-ed in the Times arguing that the choice of Brooklyn was a bad idea:
The arena also raises ethically sticky questions for the Democrats. While the Barclays Center is owned primarily by Forest City Ratner, 45 percent of it is owned by the Russian billionaire Mikhail D. Prokhorov (who also owns 80 percent of the Brooklyn Nets). Mr. Prokhorov has a necessarily cordial relationship with Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin — though he has been critical of Mr. Putin in the past, last year, at the Russian president’s request, he tried to transfer ownership of the Nets to one of his Moscow-based companies. An oligarch-owned a…

Former ESDC CEO Lago returns to NYC to head City Planning Commission

Carl Weisbrod, Mayor Bill de Blasio's City Planning Commission Chairman and Director of the Department of City Planning, is resigning,

And he's being replaced by Marisa Lago, currently a federal official, but who Atlantic Yards-ologists remember as the short-term Empire State Development Corporation CEO who, in an impolitic but candid 2009 statement, acknowledged that the project would take "decades."

Still, Lago not long after that played the good soldier at a May 2009 Senate oversight hearing, justifying changes in the project but claiming the public benefits remained the same.

By returning to City Planning, Lago will join former ESDC General Counsel Anita Laremont, who after retiring from the state (and taking a pension) got the job with the city.

Back at planning

Lago, a lawyer, in 1983 began work as an aide to City Planning Chairman Herb Sturz, and later served as the General Counsel to the president of the NYC Economic Development Corporation, Weisbrod himself.