As Trump Tightens Legal Immigration, Canada Woos Tech Firms: But Canada Is Not Silicon Valley


There Is More To High-Tech Immigration to Canada Than Meets The Eye

My long-time business partner and I, one of us in Canada and the other in Silicon Valley, earlier this year launched a business targeted at bringing immigrant entrepreneurs to Canada, Vendange Partnershttp://www.vendangepartners.com

From our years’of experience in Silicon Valley and with technology entrepreneurship around the World, we knew that many of the best and brightest young entrepreneurs abroad dreamed of bringing their ideas to the United States to forge their skills and their new companies.  But from our discussions both in California and overseas it is clear that Trumpism is having a profoundly negative effect on this flow of talent into the American economy, both individual technical talent and entrepreneurial teams looking to start companies and raise capital.

The Canadian government and some of the provinces, particularly British Columbia, Ontario, Quebec, and to some degree the Maritimes, have done a commendable job of promoting high-tech immigration and entrepreneurship.  The Global Talent Stream visa is an excellent vehicle as described in The New York Times article included in this post. Global Talent Stream attempts to address the need for technical talent for companies already operating in Canada.  The competition for such talent and the salaries offered in the United States are a major problem for Canadian companies, particularly in AI and robotics. Theoretically at least, a Global Talent Stream applicant with an employer lined up can be working in Canada within about two weeks.

The so-called “startup visa” program for founders and already established teams wishing to set up in Canada is more complicated.  The program requires a committed investment from a “designated” Canadian investor and a letter of endorsement among other requirements before the visa is granted. The difficulties of doing this are something of a Catch-22. In practice in the past, endorsement letters were written by government listed “designated” investors without actual investment, but this still did not result in a wave of high-tech startups coming to Canada. The only other option is for entrepreneurs to bring a significant amount of their own capital with them to Canada.  This option has led to abuse. At its original launch under the Harper government, the startup visa program, unfortunately, became a magnet for immigration scams.  Hence, the startup visa program remains over-subscribed with applicants bringing their own capital to qualify for the “startup” visa for up to five founders.

Finally,  There is also simply too little smart Canadian venture capital and too many startups competing for the limited funds. It is also commonly acknowledged that Canada’s investment institutions and the Canadian financial mentality are not well-aligned with the Silicon Valley investment culture. Major U.S. pension funds like the California Public Employees Retirement System (better-known as CalPERS) annually invests 10% of its entire portfolio in venture capital funds. The same cannot be said generally about Canadian pensions funds and investment banks, as one example of the differences. Much lower risk debt capital and convertible debt seem to be more popular products in Canada.  In defense, it is often pointed out that the Canadian economy is roughly one-tenth the size of the United States. Yet, on a relative scale, the Canadian venture capital industry still does not compare well. Add to this the fact that the Canadian government has historically been far behind other OECD industrialized nations in R&D investment in innovation and you have major problems.  Anecdotally, the sheer amount of money and number of available investors in Silicon Valley alone is well-over 5oo compared with a mere handful in Vancouver. When the more than one thousand local indigenous BC startups actively seeking capital are layered onto the available sources of risk capital in Vancouver, there is major local competition before the immigrant entrepreneurs even arrive in Canada. Looking for risk venture capital in Canada, a la Silicon Valley is problematic.

With that candid and sobering analysis of high-tech immigration to Canada, for individuals who have taken the time to do an in-depth analysis of themselves, and the pro’s and con’s of such a major move, Canada may still offer many advantages to entrepreneurs, and those advantages are only likely to improve over time.

Vendange Partners

 

How to write to the Electoral College

Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. Presidential election has evolved into a genuine and unprecedented national crisis. The Electoral College meets December 19th. Over the years, the Electoral College has deteriorated into a quant rubber-stamp of each state’s elector outcome. Some states have even passed laws that prohibit electors from changing their votes. However, this is patently un-Constitutional and not the intent of The Founders. Alexander Hamilton wrote in the Federalist Papers that the intent was for the Electoral College to be a check on exactly the situation we are facing. Meanwhile, a group of electors has demanded that the CIA share its evidence with the Electoral College.


Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. Presidential election has evolved into a genuine and unprecedented national crisis. Over the years, the Electoral College has deteriorated into a quaint rubber-stamp of each state’s elector outcome. Some states have even passed laws that prohibit electors from changing their votes. However, this is patently un-Constitutional and not the intent of The Founders. Alexander Hamilton wrote in the Federalist Papers that the intent was for the Electoral College to be a check on exactly the situation we are facing. Meanwhile,  a group of EC electors has demanded that the CIA share with the Electoral College its evidence of Russian interference in the election.

Christoper Suprun, a Texas elector, a Republican, and a 9/11 first responder, declared in an electrifying editorial in the New York Times last week that he will not vote for Donald Trump.  We all need to read Suprun’s impassioned patriotic words.

Read more:

The CIA revelation on October 7th that the Russian hacking was directed by the Kremlin, has been followed by last week’s confirmation from the CIA that the motive was not only destabilization but to aid the election of Donald Trump. Obama has called for his own Presidential report before January 20th. Many members of Congress have already been shown the CIA evidence. Congress is now in bipartisan agreement that it requires a full-scale investigation. Some are already calling for a national “investigative commission” like those for the Kennedy assassination and the 9/11 attacks.  All of this, and the Electoral College issue, requires our fullest attention.

Watch The Video

The Hamilton Electors: www.hamiltonelectors.org

How to write to the Electoral College

Source: directelection.org – How to write to the Electoral College

Read More:

REBLOGGED FROM DIRECTELECTION.ORG

electoralcollege

WELCOME TO DIRECTELECTION.ORG!

The purpose of this site is to help you send your own signed postal letters to the members of the Electoral College from states won by Donald Trump to ask them, respectfully, not to vote for Trump.

The electors have already received a ton of e-mail and news attention, but a personal letter means a lot more. A single good old-fashioned, voter-to-voter personal letter is probably worth a thousand e-mails.

How realistic is it that we can politely convince enough electors to abandon Trump (and choose the popular-vote winner Hillary Clinton instead)? Admittedly, the chances are slim, but this is our only shot! Nothing else at this point, other than swaying the electors, can stop Trump from becoming president. Let’s not throw away our shot!

 

HOW IT WORKS

I’ve prepared a ready-to-print, customizable mail-merge in Microsoft Word and a set of ready-to-print Avery Standard 5160 labels for envelopes. Just download, add your name and address (customize more if you want), print, sign, put them in envelopes, address the envelopes, apply stamps, and mail.

So far, I have addresses for about 260 Trump-pledged electors. Total cost of postage if you mail them all: $122. Estimated time to print, sign, stamp them all: just under two hours.

If that’s too much for you, fear not. I’ve also broken it down by state. Just download the states whose electors you care the most about and write to those. (May I suggest Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Ohio?)

Click here to see the content of the letter.

That’s it. Each document has an identical instruction sheet for easy execution. And the best thing is, if you don’t like the letter I wrote, you can change it however you like. This is your letter to the electors.

But remember: The Electoral College will cast its official votes on December 19, so we’ve got to act fast. The electors are elected officials. We voted for them when we voted for president in our various states. It is right that they hear from us.

 

ABOUT ME

I’m Jeff Strabone, registered Democrat from New York. I’m a U.S. citizen and voter who is terrified by the prospect of Donald Trump becoming president. He lost the popular vote and is unfit to be our president. If the electors take their responsibility seriously, I believe they’re obligated to block Trump. That is why I’m asking you to join me in sending polite, respectful letters asking them to do so.

Thank you.

Jeff Strabone

Minister of Information

CONTACT

Twitter: @jeffstrabone

E-mail: jeffstrabone@gmail.com

What Happens Now That Julian Assange is Implicated in Russian Espionage?

Lost today in the extraordinary news frenzy surrounding the release of a video tape of Donald Trump making unprecedented lewd and obscene comments about women, was Barak Obama’s announcement that the United States officially and publicly accuses Russia of espionage in the hacking of the Democratic National Committee, and stealing documents, now in the possession of Wikileaks. Some may recall Julian Assange’s video interview with Bill Maher on HBO’s Real Time with Bill Maher about a month ago on this topic. It seems clear from the Bill Maher interview that Assange is on a jihad against the DNC because Clinton wanted to prosecute him. Assange has no altruistic motives — it is personal. We have a foreigner trying to influence U.S elections using documents stolen by Russia.


WASHINGTON — The Obama administration on Friday formally accused the Russian government of stealing and disclosing emails from theDemocratic National Committee and from a range of prominent individuals and institutions, immediately raising the issue of whether President Obama would seek sanctions or other retaliation for the cyberattacks.

In a joint statement from the director of national intelligence, James Clapper Jr., and the Department of Homeland Security, the government said the leaked emails that have appeared on a variety of websites were “intended to interfere with the U.S. election process.” The emails were posted on the WikiLeaks site and newer ones under the namesDCLeaks.com and Guccifer 2.0.

“We believe, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia’s senior-most officials could have authorized these activities,” the statement said. It did not name President Vladimir V. Putin, but that appeared to be the intention.

For weeks, aides to Mr. Obama have been debating a variety of possible responses to the Russia action, including targeted economic sanctions and authorizing covert action against the computer servers in Russia and elsewhere that have been traced as the origin of the attacks.

The statement said that the recent “scanning and probing” of election systems “in most cases originated from servers operated by a Russian company,” but did not say the Russian government was responsible for those probes.

The president’s aides have also been debating whether to publicly attribute the attacks to Russia. Mr. Obama had decided against taking that stance in other cases where cyber techniques were used to steal tens of thousands of emails from the unclassified system of the State Department, the White House and the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

As recently as Wednesday, the director of the National Security Agency, Adm. Michael S. Rogers, refused to accuse the Russians of the cyberattack, even while talking at length about how to secure the American election system from foreign data manipulation and information warfare.

The administration’s announcement came only hours after Secretary of State John Kerry called for the Russian and Syrian governments to face a formal war-crimes investigation for attacking civilians in Aleppo and other parts of Syria. Taken together, the two moves mark a sharp escalation in Washington’s many confrontations with Moscow this year.

With little more than a month to go before the presidential election, Mr. Obama was under pressure to act now on the hacking, according to a senior administration official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal White House deliberations. The timing of Friday’s announcement was decided in part because a declaration closer to Election Day would appear to be political in nature, the official said.

The subject came up in the first presidential debate, with Hillary Clinton, the Democratic nominee and a former Secretary of State, blaming Russia for the attacks. Her Republican rival, Donald J. Trump, said there was no evidence that Russia was responsible, suggesting that the Chinese could be behind it, or it “could be somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds.”

The question now is how Mr. Obama might respond without setting off an escalating cyberconflict. One possibility is that the announcement itself — an effort to “name and shame” — will deter further action.

The identification of Russia was hardly a surprise: In late July, American intelligence officials told The New York Times that they had “high confidence” that the Russian government was behind the hack of the Democratic National Committee.

The hack led to the resignation of Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Democrat of Florida, as chairwoman of the committee, after the leaks suggested the committee had favored Mrs. Clinton in the nominating fight over Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont.