We have a really talented engineer on our team (in the US), who has a green card and everything. He's taking a job in Brussels, he said very plainly hes not sticking around to find out what happens next. I don't blame him.
If you are able to make it work in Belgium it's a great move. Free education, free healthcare, 20 days PTO minimum, public transport, 15 weeks of maternity leave, labor protections, basically no crime, no guns, no weekly school shootings, total tax rate of at most 60%.
providing healthcare and education are costs easily overlooked by most americans. But the reality is, these are costs borne by americans as well. and likely at a higher rate: americans pay more per capitia on both of those versus most other nations.
I don't want to make an appeal to authority fallacy, but normal human heuristics would be to think that even a hearsay statement about what an immigration attorney said is more meaningful than a random commentor who claims not to see any evidence of something. Particularly where there is no reason to think said commentor would even see that evidence.
I have worked alongside with Iranian and Russian tech workers. I hope they all have a green card by now. Other countries will now benefit from the brain drain instead.
My son-in-law is from Brazil, came to the US for grad school, has an Ph.D. in ML and a good job in the US. He got his green card via marriage a couple of years ago and was planning on probably getting citizenship in the next year or two. He is very worried about what all this might mean for that plan.
In his first term, I anticipated that one day he will wake up and say “any body with a green card, get the F out of the country”. I applied for the citizenship as soon as I was eligible to. I know it’s a matter of time until GC holders are somewhat affected.
The US is no longer the place for anything that's truly worldwide. It's amazing how quickly the country has isolated itself compared to just one year ago.
Exactly, I have multiple relations that are leaders in research of their fields. They all used to work in the US and they have all moved away (except one but in the process).
My wife came here on a K1 visa from one of the countries on that list. We have an appointment for interview next month (which determines whether or not she can remain in the country).
Damn - seeing mathrubhumi.com on HN is quite the surprise, when youre a specific kind of South Indian.
For what it's worth, 15 countries have qualified, 10 countries are still in the running for qualification for the FIFAWC26 on that list of 75 countries.
Does the US currently allow immigrants who are likely to become a "public charge"? The UK has not for a very long time (at least a few decades) and many other countries will not either.
I find it so incredible disappointing that discrimination by citizenship or country of birth is not just alive, but getting worse. I’m afraid if the US is starting with this, it won’t take long for others to catch up.
A lot of countries already do this. You cannot get visas to most developed countries if you are likely to become a "public charge". In general, its a lot easier to get a visa if you are from a rich and stable country (or are rich yourself), and if you look at where countries allow visa free travel to citizens of another country the countries on this list are unlikely to qualify!
In that case, why not have some measurement of what makes a person likely to be a public charge that applies to every country, rather than a blanket ban on everyone from targeted countries?
There are lots of possible reasons. Some good, some bad.
A possible good reason might be that there is a higher level of fraud (e.g. faked financial statements), or a higher level of public charge in applications from some countries - especially if it is a pause while procedures are changed. On the other hand the true motive might be something else.
That said, I have no idea why its this particular list of countries. Why Thailand or Jamaica or Nepal?
That is not the same as this. If you're a multi-PhD holder from Iran who's a world-famous scientist, you can get into e.g. the UK. This would forbid them, purely based on country of origin.
The article says it is a temporary pause. other sources seem to confirm this:
"Immigrant visa processing from these 75 countries will be paused while the State Department reassesses immigration processing procedures to prevent the entry of foreign nationals who would take welfare and public benefits,"
If the world learns anything from the celebration of stupidity that has become the US, I very much hope it’s “whatever they’re doing, we absolutely should not.”
You need to learn your history because one of the first immigration laws this country passed was exclusively banning Chinese people for nearly an entire human lifespan.
Literally every country worldwide does this. The question is simply to what extent and to what countries. The whole difference between being a native an an alien is the rights you get. It's not a human right to be able to freely go into any country you please.
It's interesting you got downvoted, perhaps for the sentence
> The whole difference between being a native an an alien is the rights you get.
A knee jerk and uncharitable reading might make this look bad, but it does require an uncharitable reading. It is clear what you mean.
However, the claim
> It's not a human right to be able to freely go into any country you please.
is not false. The idea that open borders are a good thing is a very odd idea. It seems to grow out of a hyperindividualistic and global capitalist/consumerist culture and mindset that doesn't recognize the reality of societies and cultures. Either that, or it is a rationalization of one's own very domestic and particular choices, for example. In any case, uncontrolled migration is well-understood (and rather obviously!) as something damaging to any society and any culture. In hyperindividualistic countries, this is perhaps less appreciated, because there isn't really an ethnos or cohesive culture or society. In the US, for example, corporate consumerism dominates what passes as "culture" (certainly pop culture), and the culture's liberal individualism is hostile to the formation and persistence of a robust common good as well as a recognition of what constitutes an authentic common good. It is reduced mostly to economic factors, hence globalist capitalism. So, in the extreme, if there are no societies, only atoms and the void, then who cares how to atoms go?
The other problem is that public discourse operates almost entirely within the confines of the false dichotomy of jingoist nationalism on the one hand and hyperindividualist globalism on the other (with the respective variants, like the socialist). There is little recognition of so-called postliberal positions, at least some of which draw on the robust traditional understanding of the common good and the human person, one that both jingoist nationalism and hyperindividualist globalism contradict. When postliberalism is mentioned, it is often smeared with false characterization or falsely lumped in with nihilistic positions like the Yarvin variety...which is not traditional!
Given the ongoing collapse of the liberal order - a process that will take time - these postliberal positions will need to be examined carefully if we are to avoid the hideous options dominating the public square today.
Pardon me if I’m misreading it but this sounds like disinformation. No examples in your example, a lot of abstract reasoning unmoored from facts.
>uncontrolled migration is well-understood (and rather obviously!) as something damaging to any society and any culture.
The US was built on unrestricted immigration for a long time. Was that destructive? I guess so if you count native Americans but not to the nation of USA.
Capitalism wants closed borders to labor and open borders to capital. Thats how they can squeeze labor costs while maximizing profits. The US is highly individualistic but wants closed borders so how does your reasoning align with the news?
While I don't agree with the haphazard and seemingly random policy changes coming from the US lately -- this is a bad take.
You do realize that discrimination by citizenship is conducted by basically every government on earth in the context of visas and tourism and residency?
In fact, what made the US so bizarre up until about 1914 was that they were the only major country that effectively had open borders. There was no welfare state to take advantage of back then, and you literally did have to pull yourself up by your bootstraps.
This only started to shift after the US began constructing its welfare state (welfare state expansion correlates with increasingly closed immigration policy, hence where we find ourselves today).
Well Trump said it: "why it is we only take people from s**hole countries," and "why can't we have some people from Norway, Sweden, just a few? Let's have a few from Denmark."
tl;dr: The full list of countries comprises of Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Antigua and Barbuda, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Bhutan, Bosnia, Brazil, Burma, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Colombia, Cote d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Dominica, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Gambia, Georgia, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Haiti, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Macedonia, Moldova, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Nepal, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Republic of the Congo, Russia, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, Tanzania, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, Uruguay, Uzbekistan and Yemen
Brazil is on the list just because Brazilian justice condemned Bolsonaro for a coup attempt very similar to Jan 6 (it was Jan 8 the following year). The beef has been going for a while, and Lula has been quite combative against Trump.
This is my question. Foreign athletes typically enter the U.S. on a
P-1A visa for internationally recognized athletes or an O-1 visa for those with "extraordinary ability" but they're still Visas. Maybe they'll carve out holdouts for this that the news articles aren't delving into (probably because they haven't been announced).
Many Ethiopian cross-country runners were not able to participate in the recent World Cross Country Running championships in Tallahassee Florida due to rejected visas.
The USA is also supposed to host the World Track & Field Championships for under-20 in Eugene Oregon this summer.
The prior World Cup was held in stadiums built by slave labor in a country that banned beer. I genuinely don't think there's anything, up to and including visa denials for competing teams, that would get FIFA to give up their chance for bribes.
The last World Cup used slave labor to build their stadium in the desert, in a country that banned beer/alcohol consumption - the latter of which was relaxed eventually due to heavy lobbying (and possibly corruption.)
You are conflating legal and illegal immigrants. The visa restrictions are on legal immigrants. And while, as a legal immigrant myself, I would like to think that the vast majority of legal immigrants work hard and contribute positively to the country, it is a fact that certain groups in certain regions have an extremely high usage of social welfare programs (SNAP, Medicaid, etc), sometimes exceeding 80%. This is cause for some concern, IMO as it suggests problems of one sort or another. All that said, I have doubts that the administration's new visa restrictions will have a meaningful impact. Of course, I've been wrong before :shrug:.
Go knock yourself out: social security, health, Medicare, income security, veterans benefits. If you want to exclude veterans benefits that’s fine too. Still 60%
We have a really talented engineer on our team (in the US), who has a green card and everything. He's taking a job in Brussels, he said very plainly hes not sticking around to find out what happens next. I don't blame him.
If you are able to make it work in Belgium it's a great move. Free education, free healthcare, 20 days PTO minimum, public transport, 15 weeks of maternity leave, labor protections, basically no crime, no guns, no weekly school shootings, total tax rate of at most 60%.
60% is a selling point? How high do they go elsewhere?
What I meant to say is that even if you have a very high income you will never pay more than 60% in total tax and social premiums.
On €100,000 a year you pay €57,512 in tax (58% tax). On €60,000 a year it's only €32,405 (54%).
See:
https://be.talent.com/tax-calculator?salary=100000&from=year...
https://be.talent.com/tax-calculator?salary=60000&from=year&...
>even if you have a very high income you will never pay more than 60% in total tax and social premiums.
Are there EU countries where you pay more than 60% for you make the "only 60% tax" sound like such a good deal?
providing healthcare and education are costs easily overlooked by most americans. But the reality is, these are costs borne by americans as well. and likely at a higher rate: americans pay more per capitia on both of those versus most other nations.
Especially if the salary is the same
And world-class beer if you’re into that!
I'm in the process of EB visa prep and spoke with my lawyer today. They told me that it's a temporary pause for immigrations visas only.
Most likely will be unfrozen in couple of weeks. The real question is about new rules and how much harder it will be to get in.
There is no evidence to think it will be unfrozen in a couple weeks.
I don't want to make an appeal to authority fallacy, but normal human heuristics would be to think that even a hearsay statement about what an immigration attorney said is more meaningful than a random commentor who claims not to see any evidence of something. Particularly where there is no reason to think said commentor would even see that evidence.
Why was this flagged? This is important news to the VC and software industry.
I have worked alongside with Iranian and Russian tech workers. I hope they all have a green card by now. Other countries will now benefit from the brain drain instead.
Will having a green card or not even matter though?
https://metro.co.uk/2025/11/28/full-list-nationalities-lose-...
My son-in-law is from Brazil, came to the US for grad school, has an Ph.D. in ML and a good job in the US. He got his green card via marriage a couple of years ago and was planning on probably getting citizenship in the next year or two. He is very worried about what all this might mean for that plan.
In his first term, I anticipated that one day he will wake up and say “any body with a green card, get the F out of the country”. I applied for the citizenship as soon as I was eligible to. I know it’s a matter of time until GC holders are somewhat affected.
Apple should really consider starting to host WWDC outside the US like Canada.
This really cuts into who can attend it.
Though since they no longer do the 5 days thing and just invite people at the office for a couple of days- might not even make sense.
The US is no longer the place for anything that's truly worldwide. It's amazing how quickly the country has isolated itself compared to just one year ago.
Exactly, I have multiple relations that are leaders in research of their fields. They all used to work in the US and they have all moved away (except one but in the process).
My wife came here on a K1 visa from one of the countries on that list. We have an appointment for interview next month (which determines whether or not she can remain in the country).
It's always worrying seeing news like this.
No SNI:
https://web.archive.org/web/20260114174658if_/https://englis...
I think visa processing has had serious issues for quite a while: https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/visa-inf...
This could just be an attempt to frame (what is in effect) a serious customer support failure as a deliberate policy decision.
Damn - seeing mathrubhumi.com on HN is quite the surprise, when youre a specific kind of South Indian.
For what it's worth, 15 countries have qualified, 10 countries are still in the running for qualification for the FIFAWC26 on that list of 75 countries.
what’s the context around the website?
Link in case flagged: https://english.mathrubhumi.com/news/world/us-visa-ban-publi...
What sort of visas? Tourism, work, residence?
Does the US currently allow immigrants who are likely to become a "public charge"? The UK has not for a very long time (at least a few decades) and many other countries will not either.
I find it so incredible disappointing that discrimination by citizenship or country of birth is not just alive, but getting worse. I’m afraid if the US is starting with this, it won’t take long for others to catch up.
A lot of countries already do this. You cannot get visas to most developed countries if you are likely to become a "public charge". In general, its a lot easier to get a visa if you are from a rich and stable country (or are rich yourself), and if you look at where countries allow visa free travel to citizens of another country the countries on this list are unlikely to qualify!
In that case, why not have some measurement of what makes a person likely to be a public charge that applies to every country, rather than a blanket ban on everyone from targeted countries?
[delayed]
There are lots of possible reasons. Some good, some bad.
A possible good reason might be that there is a higher level of fraud (e.g. faked financial statements), or a higher level of public charge in applications from some countries - especially if it is a pause while procedures are changed. On the other hand the true motive might be something else.
That said, I have no idea why its this particular list of countries. Why Thailand or Jamaica or Nepal?
That is not the same as this. If you're a multi-PhD holder from Iran who's a world-famous scientist, you can get into e.g. the UK. This would forbid them, purely based on country of origin.
The article says it is a temporary pause. other sources seem to confirm this:
"Immigrant visa processing from these 75 countries will be paused while the State Department reassesses immigration processing procedures to prevent the entry of foreign nationals who would take welfare and public benefits,"
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-suspend-visa-processing-...
If the world learns anything from the celebration of stupidity that has become the US, I very much hope it’s “whatever they’re doing, we absolutely should not.”
Who doesn't discriminate by citizenship, really?
That’s the “is not just alive” part.
Yeah, but then the "others will catch up" part does not make sense. Other countries don't need the US' example to do that.
You need to learn your history because one of the first immigration laws this country passed was exclusively banning Chinese people for nearly an entire human lifespan.
Literally every country worldwide does this. The question is simply to what extent and to what countries. The whole difference between being a native an an alien is the rights you get. It's not a human right to be able to freely go into any country you please.
It's interesting you got downvoted, perhaps for the sentence
> The whole difference between being a native an an alien is the rights you get.
A knee jerk and uncharitable reading might make this look bad, but it does require an uncharitable reading. It is clear what you mean.
However, the claim
> It's not a human right to be able to freely go into any country you please.
is not false. The idea that open borders are a good thing is a very odd idea. It seems to grow out of a hyperindividualistic and global capitalist/consumerist culture and mindset that doesn't recognize the reality of societies and cultures. Either that, or it is a rationalization of one's own very domestic and particular choices, for example. In any case, uncontrolled migration is well-understood (and rather obviously!) as something damaging to any society and any culture. In hyperindividualistic countries, this is perhaps less appreciated, because there isn't really an ethnos or cohesive culture or society. In the US, for example, corporate consumerism dominates what passes as "culture" (certainly pop culture), and the culture's liberal individualism is hostile to the formation and persistence of a robust common good as well as a recognition of what constitutes an authentic common good. It is reduced mostly to economic factors, hence globalist capitalism. So, in the extreme, if there are no societies, only atoms and the void, then who cares how to atoms go?
The other problem is that public discourse operates almost entirely within the confines of the false dichotomy of jingoist nationalism on the one hand and hyperindividualist globalism on the other (with the respective variants, like the socialist). There is little recognition of so-called postliberal positions, at least some of which draw on the robust traditional understanding of the common good and the human person, one that both jingoist nationalism and hyperindividualist globalism contradict. When postliberalism is mentioned, it is often smeared with false characterization or falsely lumped in with nihilistic positions like the Yarvin variety...which is not traditional!
Given the ongoing collapse of the liberal order - a process that will take time - these postliberal positions will need to be examined carefully if we are to avoid the hideous options dominating the public square today.
Pardon me if I’m misreading it but this sounds like disinformation. No examples in your example, a lot of abstract reasoning unmoored from facts.
>uncontrolled migration is well-understood (and rather obviously!) as something damaging to any society and any culture.
The US was built on unrestricted immigration for a long time. Was that destructive? I guess so if you count native Americans but not to the nation of USA.
Capitalism wants closed borders to labor and open borders to capital. Thats how they can squeeze labor costs while maximizing profits. The US is highly individualistic but wants closed borders so how does your reasoning align with the news?
While I don't agree with the haphazard and seemingly random policy changes coming from the US lately -- this is a bad take.
You do realize that discrimination by citizenship is conducted by basically every government on earth in the context of visas and tourism and residency?
In fact, what made the US so bizarre up until about 1914 was that they were the only major country that effectively had open borders. There was no welfare state to take advantage of back then, and you literally did have to pull yourself up by your bootstraps.
This only started to shift after the US began constructing its welfare state (welfare state expansion correlates with increasingly closed immigration policy, hence where we find ourselves today).
Well Trump said it: "why it is we only take people from s**hole countries," and "why can't we have some people from Norway, Sweden, just a few? Let's have a few from Denmark."
Probably because people from Norway and Sweden aren't interested in moving to a sh...less-developed country.
I guess Denmark is going to be out of the question now.
People from Denmark, Norway, Sweden are smart enough not to come to Trump's America, that'd be the reason, if you're still wondering.
[flagged]
No, it's not. Come visit whenever you want to see :)
tl;dr: The full list of countries comprises of Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Antigua and Barbuda, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Bhutan, Bosnia, Brazil, Burma, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Colombia, Cote d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Dominica, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Gambia, Georgia, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Haiti, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Macedonia, Moldova, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Nepal, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Republic of the Congo, Russia, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, Tanzania, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, Uruguay, Uzbekistan and Yemen
I'll save you the click: India is not affected.
The list includes Russia, Iran, lots of RU-aligned nations, and a bunch that probably have security issues.
The only one that stood out as odd was Thailand.
Brazil is on the list just because Brazilian justice condemned Bolsonaro for a coup attempt very similar to Jan 6 (it was Jan 8 the following year). The beef has been going for a while, and Lula has been quite combative against Trump.
Surprised to see Georgia in the list
Weird that India, who does a lot of business with Russia, was not affected.
I'll save you the downvote; the article title ended with "check whether India is affected".
How on EARTH are we going to host the World Cup this year?
This is my question. Foreign athletes typically enter the U.S. on a P-1A visa for internationally recognized athletes or an O-1 visa for those with "extraordinary ability" but they're still Visas. Maybe they'll carve out holdouts for this that the news articles aren't delving into (probably because they haven't been announced).
Many Ethiopian cross-country runners were not able to participate in the recent World Cross Country Running championships in Tallahassee Florida due to rejected visas.
The USA is also supposed to host the World Track & Field Championships for under-20 in Eugene Oregon this summer.
see https://www.letsrun.com/news/2026/01/world-cross-country-cha...
I think the concern is around fans getting into the country, not players.
Nobody wants to just hear US citizens chanting 'Defence, Defence' all the time.
I need to chug more coffee, you're absolutely right.
Why do people downvote this? Bizarre - and plain stupid. This is a legitimate question and has precedent:
Hugo Calderano, the third best table tennis player in the world, is denied an entry visa to the USA. Thus, the Brazilian misses the prestigious tournament Grand Smash in Las Vegas. https://swedenherald.com/article/hugo-calderano-denied-us-vi...
Ethiopian athletes denied U.S. visas ahead of 2026 World Athletics Cross Country Championships https://amileaminute.com/news/ethiopian-athletes-denied-us-v...
Vancouver Whitecaps split with left back Ali Adnan following extended visa issues https://rdnewsnow.com/2021/07/03/vancouver-whitecaps-split-w...
>Why do people downvote this? Bizarre - and plain stupid.
A sizable chunk of the HN userbase is All-In on the Trump cult. They try to bury anything that questions the infallibility of the administration.
I'm curious what it would take for FIFA, or one of the teams, to reneg.
FIFA has been doing damage containment (everybody is but especially FIFA) ever since the November election.
When the World CUp was assigned to the US during Trump first term one of the implied things was that he'd be long gone in 2026
Nobody could have possibly predicted 12 years of Trumpism and pulling a Grover Clevalend by skipping a term and getting re-elected
The prior World Cup was held in stadiums built by slave labor in a country that banned beer. I genuinely don't think there's anything, up to and including visa denials for competing teams, that would get FIFA to give up their chance for bribes.
Nothing. He could drop a nuclear bomb on Madrid and FIFA would give him a second peace prize.
The last World Cup used slave labor to build their stadium in the desert, in a country that banned beer/alcohol consumption - the latter of which was relaxed eventually due to heavy lobbying (and possibly corruption.)
Relax.
The WC has already been ruined by pausing games for commercial breaks.
the great leap backwards bounds another step int the american century of humiliation
Trump is trashing the economy and the easiest way to pick a scapegoat is to blame foreigners.
[flagged]
What welfare are immigrants "consuming" exactly? Given the millions of them that pay taxes but are unable to receive benefits especially
You are conflating legal and illegal immigrants. The visa restrictions are on legal immigrants. And while, as a legal immigrant myself, I would like to think that the vast majority of legal immigrants work hard and contribute positively to the country, it is a fact that certain groups in certain regions have an extremely high usage of social welfare programs (SNAP, Medicaid, etc), sometimes exceeding 80%. This is cause for some concern, IMO as it suggests problems of one sort or another. All that said, I have doubts that the administration's new visa restrictions will have a meaningful impact. Of course, I've been wrong before :shrug:.
Legal immigrants are entitled to social security, etc. if they meet all other qualifications just like a citizen would.
Illegal immigrants used to be able to draw if they lived outside the US but the rules just changed so that may not be true anymore.
The lump of labor fallacy comes in many forms. All of them equally wrong.
>I doubt the US’s extensive federal welfare state
Citation needed.
The citation is the US federal budget, some 2/3 of which is directly welfare.
https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/feder...
Go knock yourself out: social security, health, Medicare, income security, veterans benefits. If you want to exclude veterans benefits that’s fine too. Still 60%
[flagged]
For those who didn't read the article, it's supposed to be temporary while they reassess the criterias for immigration[0].
Canada has a similar system, that discriminates disabled people for instance and most people are fine with it.[1]
Yes, the inflammatory wording is bad, but a points-based system would be a good improvement over the current situation.
[0] https://www.visaverge.com/news/us-suspends-visa-processing-f...
[1] https://immiquest.ca/how-the-canada-immigration-points-syste...