Native-Immigrant Entrepreneurial Synergies 23
The abstract of a study on NBER: We examine the performance of startups co-founded by immigrant and native teams. Leveraging unique data linking startups to founders' and employees' employment and education histories, we find native-migrant teams outperform native-only and migrant-only teams.
Native-migrant startups have larger employment three years after founding, are more likely to secure funding, access larger funding rounds, and achieve more successful exits. An instrumental variables strategy based on native shares in university-degree programs confirms native-migrant teams are larger and more likely to receive funding. Superior access to diverse labor pools, successful VCs, and expanded product markets are key factors in driving native-migrant outperformance.
Native-migrant startups have larger employment three years after founding, are more likely to secure funding, access larger funding rounds, and achieve more successful exits. An instrumental variables strategy based on native shares in university-degree programs confirms native-migrant teams are larger and more likely to receive funding. Superior access to diverse labor pools, successful VCs, and expanded product markets are key factors in driving native-migrant outperformance.
Did Not Expect That (Score:2, Insightful)
So native founders exploiting cheap immigrant workforces have larger work forces and a greater chance of success? I didn't expect that, this needed a study.
Re: (Score:2)
Who would have thought that combining Capitalism and Imperialism would have been so successful. The approved history books in my charter school never mentioned this exciting innovation.
Re: Did Not Expect That (Score:3)
Exploiting immigrants by founding companies with them?
Uh...ok..... (Score:1)
Fascinating.
Beware the economists (Score:5, Insightful)
I’ve learned to be suspicious whenever I hear an economic argument made in favor of anything at all.
Nobody ever made an economic argument in favor of chocolate ice cream, puppies or Taylor Swift tickets, which seem to be things people actually want. The only time the economic arguments get trotted out is when somebody is trying to lube up a dildo to shove up our asses.
Even the dumbest salesman knows if he wants to make a sale, he has to convince you the product is good for you. When he has to tell you it’s “good for the economy”, he’s acknowledging there’s no way he can convince you it will be good for you, so he’s distracting you by appealing to an abstraction
Re: (Score:3)
Economics is an excellent excuse machine to placate the masses when the rich extract wealth from the retirement accounts of the middle class.
Re: (Score:2)
You're missing the point.
When you're analyzing a market or demographic segment, you can't make a sales pitch for a particular company or product. You don't care about the individual products. It's a bigger question about how the groups, classes, or properties interact and the outcomes of that interaction.
In this particular case, I have questions about the "larger employment". Is it domestic or foreign employment, and how do those jobs compare to the median wages locally?
If that employment is larger domestic
Re: (Score:1)
The only time the economic arguments get trotted out is when somebody is trying to lube up a dildo to shove up our asses.
The shortest and possibly most asinine argument I've heard online to convince the rubes was "it increases the GDP." Some rubes are quite convinced of this and repeat the argument.
Re: (Score:2)
Nobody ever made an economic argument in favor of chocolate ice cream, puppies or Taylor Swift tickets, which seem to be things people actually want.
lol... This is possibly one of the greatest things I have ever read.
Re: (Score:2)
In this case people are complaining that immigrants take "their" jobs and cause economic problems, so refuting that is a direct response to their argument.
It will be interesting to see how farms get on after ICE remove their source of labour. We had food rotting in the fields after Brexit due to lack of migrant workers and the unwillingness of British people to do those seasonal, very hard jobs.
Re: (Score:2)
I’ve learned to be suspicious whenever I hear an economic argument made in favor of anything at all.
Nobody ever made an economic argument in favor of chocolate ice cream, puppies or Taylor Swift tickets, which seem to be things people actually want. The only time the economic arguments get trotted out is when somebody is trying to lube up a dildo to shove up our asses.
Even the dumbest salesman knows if he wants to make a sale, he has to convince you the product is good for you. When he has to tell you it’s “good for the economy”, he’s acknowledging there’s no way he can convince you it will be good for you, so he’s distracting you by appealing to an abstraction
You mean arguments like "the immagrunts are taking our jobs, driving down property prices and stealing our money by not working".
meh (Score:1)
slow news day, but ... (Score:3)
./ makes up for it with high quality comments like this.
Likely method error of some kind (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The full paper is not available, but even summary includes this: "An instrumental variables strategy based on native shares in university-degree programs confirms native-migrant teams are larger and more likely to receive funding. ". So they didn't control for team size?
Click the "download" button on the bottom of the page or https://www.nber.org/system/fi... [nber.org] for the full paper.
Re: (Score:3)
"native-migrant teams are larger and more likely to receive funding."
In this case, team size is an outcome variable. Mixed native-immigrant startups both form larger teams and are more likely to receive funding. They may be more likely to get funding because they have a larger team, but they (presumably) have a larger team because they're mixed native-immigrant.
Their other outcome variables seem strange: "larger employment three years after founding"; "more likely to exit through an IPO". The paper seems to be intended specifically for venture capitalists, who would care a
Re: (Score:2)
In this case, team size is an outcome variable.
This does not make sense to me: "have a larger team because they're mixed native-immigrant". Is that because immigrant labor cheaper and you can afford to hire more?
Meritocracy (Score:4, Insightful)
This would be expected. If you are focused on working with the best people, you're going to naturally have both natives and immigrants because the best are going to come from many places.
More than one third of the people in the world are Asian. You should expect them to come up a lot in any sort of meritocracy.
Natives are going to be more geographically available, so unless you're avoiding native talent, you should expect them to come up a lot too.
poobah (Score:2)
Guy went out seeking a result and got it. Unlikely to be valid or useful.