Smart Immigrants Going Home 770
olddotter writes "A 24-page paper on a reverse brain drain from the US back to home countries (PDF) is getting news coverage. Quoting: 'Our new paper, "America's Loss Is the World's Gain," finds that the vast majority of these returnees were relatively young. The average age was 30 for Indian returnees, and 33 for Chinese. They were highly educated, with degrees in management, technology, or science. Fifty-one percent of the Chinese held master's degrees and 41% had PhDs. Sixty-six percent of the Indians held a master's and 12.1% had PhDs. They were at very top of the educational distribution for these highly educated immigrant groups — precisely the kind of people who make the greatest contribution to the US economy and to business and job growth." Adding to the brain drain is a problem with slow US visa processing, since last November or so, that has been driving desirable students and scientists out of the country.
Can you blame them? (Score:5, Insightful)
The American dream used to be a house in the country. Now it's a house in another country.
There's plenty of room. (Score:4, Insightful)
The fact of the matter is that intelligent foreigners exist. They can work here, or they can work there. The question, then, is it better if they work here or there?
The answer is obvious - we want them here.
As for 'room' for American citizens, if you can't compete with a guy who was born in India, with all your American-born advantages, he's either just plain smarter than you, or just plain works harder than you. Either way, he deserves your job, and the American company hiring him shouldn't be saddled with your either less-intelligent or less-driven self just because the more qualified candidate was born in the wrong spot.
Re:Can you blame them? (Score:4, Insightful)
Fixed that for you.
Re:visa's (Score:5, Insightful)
There's also the fact that many of them get scholarships/fellowships/teaching assistantships from US universities. Essentially, American taxpayer money has gone into funding their education, and because of idiotic political reasons they are going back. Of course the layman just sees them as taking up a job, and won't see the fact that
a) They could create more jobs
b) A US-educated immigrant going back is a net loss (in terms of taxpayer money) for the country.
Nice -- more of what we already knew (Score:5, Insightful)
I just have to wonder how much more of this erosion of the U.S. the U.S. is willing to accept and permit? H1-Bs and lowering of wages, offshoring and outsourcing services are all great ways for companies to increase their bottom lines. But when EVERYONE is doing it, these companies ultimately create poor and unemployed customers! This is not sustainable.
People constantly ask "so protectionism is the answer?" Right now, yes it is!
It seems that everyone and every entity is seeming short, fast turn-around and ever-increasing bottom lines using "growth percentage" as a metric for success and viability. (Reality check! In no part of the universe is growth a sustainable metric!!)
Tipping point (Score:5, Insightful)
This is the end ....
my feeling, in 30 years this moment will be viewed as the tipping point, the moment in which america stopped being the siphon of the worlds best minds.
For the first time in history the melting pot hasn't managed to retain the best.
Those people will bring a BIG BOOST in their respoective countries ruling intellighentia.
lots of sour grapes here, but have no one else to blame ....
Re:I guess they ran out (Score:5, Insightful)
I guess they ran out of secret documents and technology to steal
Yep, they've just found out that they can themselves engineer better stuff than they can steal from the U.S. today.
Anti Achievement mentality being fostered (Score:5, Insightful)
simply tells smart immigrants to wait for a real change before coming back or planning to stay.
I work with 1 H1B and a few naturalized immigrants who all are very well educated (masters for two of them) and their drive is well beyond what the average "American" I see today. They still want it all. The difference is that they are willing to sacrifice and work for it.
When schools allow dummies to pass because it isn't fair to hold them back, when schools don't celebrate their brightest because it offends, when doing grunt work on your path through the job market is for losers, what can you expect? Fortunately there are still more of us than them. The problem is that very little is being done to encourage more of those yearning for success who will work for it instead we are now seeing more who expect everything to be done or handed to them.
Reverse brain drain? It will get worse as some of OUR brightest go overseas to excel.
This is bad strategy. (Score:5, Insightful)
I think a lot of Americans don't realize why America became the superpower it is.
For thousands and thousands of years, the way to increase your nation's power was to go and invade the other nation, subjugate them, and take their stuff.
The problem is that's a pretty expensive way of going about things. The answer?
Immigration!
Why fight through the world subjugating people when you can just open up the gates of immigration and the best, brightest and hardest working of the other nation's populace will voluntarily and at their own expense subjugate themselves?
Much cheaper and more effective than invasion!
Re:There's plenty of room. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:This is good news, folks! (Score:3, Insightful)
American jobs should be going to AMERICANS, not foreigners.
You miss the point. Those people wanted to become Americans. Now they do not want to, anymore. Wonder why is that?
Re:There's plenty of room. (Score:5, Insightful)
Precisely. I can compete with Indians that live around the corner. They have to pay the same taxes (mostly), and they have comparable expenses. If technology continues to shift from the United States to India, however, American technology workers are screwed.
As long as all of the truly bright people in the world come to the U.S. to work then the U.S. will continue to have a long-lasting advantage over the rest of the world. When that stops happening, then the U.S. economy is really headed for trouble.
Re:visa's (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Nice -- more of what we already knew (Score:2, Insightful)
Your whole post just seems like a random rant not terribly relevant to the article.
If anything what the article does say that a fifth of the Chinese and nearly half the Indians that left actually entered on temporary visas (such as H1-Bs).
It's these people that help add value to the economy by developing technology, starting companies and driving innovation thus creating jobs. So they are a necessary part of the solution to increasing American competitiveness in the 21st century.
Can you blame them? (Score:5, Insightful)
1) Given the current recession, the number of jobs have fallen off. That and there is pressure to hire an American over someone on a visa. Plus, maybe the foreigners don't want to pay our debt due to all of the bailouts and "Economic stimulus".
2) Xenophobia is alive and well. Even if there were no 9/11, there was a fear of foreigners in the US. Be it left over hostiles from the Cold War, hatred towards Mexicans and South Americans for taking "good jobs" from Americans, Native Americans wanting their land back, or African-Americans wanting a piece of the American Dream and compensation from slavery, there are build up resentments which have been under the surface.
Whenever you evaluate a strategic game or a problem, you can see it by seeing it from the opponents point of view.
Re:Nice -- more of what we already knew (Score:5, Insightful)
It seems that everyone and every entity is seeming short, fast turn-around and ever-increasing bottom lines using "growth percentage" as a metric for success and viability.
This kind of thinking is a systemic problem and not just in the job market.
Consider the mortgage foreclosure issue. For a single bank making a foreclosure decision, it makes perfect sense to foreclose a bad loan, realize the loss, and then recover the value by selling the property. This is even okay to happen "regularly" as long as it's a relatively minor level of activity. But once you reach (as another posted pointed out) a "tipping point", this behavior that's good for an individual suddenly becomes extremely detrimental to everyone.
This was magnified by an unwillingness by the banks to re-negotiate the raise in rates on adjustable rate loans. Again, on a case by case basis, it makes sense for the bank to "stick to their guns" and force the consumer to pay the higher rate. But doing this to too many people will cause a large number of them to foreclose. That just refers back to the previous paragraph.
With too many homes in foreclosure, values of entire neighborhoods drop and people are stuck with homes that aren't worth what they owe. Many walk away leaving the banks with properties they can't sell in neighborhoods that are devalued.
The short-term case of chasing the profit prevented the longer term view of seeing that what they were doing was destroying the market. And now, after so much damage, they're being forced to do the very things they should have been doing in the first place - negotiating rates to help keep homeowners in their homes.
Immigration/Emigration problem (Score:5, Insightful)
The next time you complain about immigration into the USA, consider how much worse things will be when people no longer even want to come here. Worse, that American citizens start leaving for greener pastures. That day may be coming.
If we have an "immigration problem", it's generally a sign of a healthy economy. It's when we have an "emigration problem", that you know things will be really rough.
Re:There's plenty of room. (Score:5, Insightful)
For anyone who complains about competition from foreign workers for US jobs, consider if they go home, they will be assisting or starting competing companies there. Then it's just *your personal* job that has competition, its the *entire company*, and if the foreign company wins out, *all* the jobs get laid off.
It is by far in our best interest to try to keep all the best and brightest here in our country... we should only be so lucky to have such a draw...
Re:Anti Achievement mentality being fostered (Score:5, Insightful)
And with the H1-B, we show them the door instead of welcoming them to stay. These are the people that we should be encouraging to naturalize... hell, we should scrap H1-Bs completely, IMO, but raise the immigration cap for those wishing to naturalize.
The US's great economy in the past was built on the shoulders of risk-taking, hard-working immigrants, and now we want to shut the door to protect "our" jobs? That's a recipe for economic stagnation.
If the playing field were level, ... (Score:5, Insightful)
As it is, the H1B program has merely managed to feed the "fat cats" without improving the lot of US citizens.
By all means, encourage immigration of hard-working, talented, intelligent people.
But allow them to control their own destinies and compete without handicapping them or US citizens by institutionalizing a system that unfairly depresses wages for all.
Maybe we've just reached a sort of equilibrium here, where US wages have stagnated while the rest of world's has grown.
Re:There's plenty of room. (Score:5, Insightful)
Except that you ignore the fact that the H1-B's arent' competing with you on the open market. The h1-b must work there, or leave the country within 10 days if they can't find a new position.
So the H1-B's are working here with a neck in the guillotine - work hard, accept the conditions, and take the pay they are given or go home. They don't have a choice of finding another job they may be highly qualified for without having to get a sponsor.
So employers fill these slots with employees who will work longer and work cheaper in order to stay in the US. Does that really sound like you have a fair shot of getting that job just because you're more qualified.
Re:I can't for the life of me work out what would (Score:5, Insightful)
...have made them want to leave..
I've worked in the US twice, the first time in the early '90's in southern California, the second more recently in New England. Both times I felt like kissing the soil of my native country upon return.
Individual Americans are some of the most decent people I've met. Collectively, though, you people scare me.
The change between the early '90's and post-9/11 was striking, from the crazy stuff on TV (Glenn Beck pronouncing that 'security' is the most important thing to any American, when once upon a time it would have been something called 'liberty'), fast-food places with signs announcing that they only hired legal American citizens, and of course the Military Commissions Act of 2006, which temporarily stripped people like me from having access to Habeas Corpus protections.
On the surface, everything was the same. Underneath, the picture was not pretty.
The team I worked with was mostly non-Americans, from both the Far East and Europe, and most of them were highly educated and wanted to stay, but I could never figure out why.
On the good side, like Churchill said, Americans will always find the solution to the problem... after they've tried everything else.
Re:This is bad strategy. (Score:5, Insightful)
The issue in the US though is instead of going into development of high-tech fields, Americans have been going into management of those fields. In my biased opinion in general becoming a generic MBA is easier than engineering/science so if eng/sci is being filled by immigrants, natives will go the other route. When the immigrants leave with all our IP all we are left with is paper pushers.
We (meaning America) needs to start churning out more home-grown techies. We still want to encourage immigration though.
H1B's leaving (Score:5, Insightful)
Barriers to entry never help anybody. Uncle Sam, tear down this wall.
Re:There's plenty of room. (Score:5, Insightful)
As for 'room' for American citizens, if you can't compete with a guy who was born in India, with all your American-born advantages, he's either just plain smarter than you, or just plain works harder than you.
Oh my God, you're such an insulting ass. And you got modded +5 for it! Unbelievable.
Even if H-1B workers are good for the U.S., which is debatable, it doesn't matter in the long run, because American companies will continue to offshore work because of the cost of living in the U.S.
It simply does not matter if an American is equal to, or better than, a foreign counterpart, because the American has an insanely high cost of living and cannot hope to compete wage-wise with someone that lives in a country with a low cost of living.
The H-1B debate is pointless. Americans are too expensive, even H-1B's living in America are too expensive. The trend will be to continue to offshore the work in order to leverage lower costs of living elsewhere.
Re:Nice -- more of what we already knew (Score:5, Insightful)
First, there is nothing wrong with outsourcing. Hell, I outsource my lawncare to a neighborhood kid. You do know that outsourcing is substantively different than offshoring, right?
You're right it's not sustainable; eventually those unemployed people find jobs that are either more productive and valuable to society, or they find employment doing something else... at a price more in line with what the work is worth. There is no inherent reason an artificial restriction on labor (tight immigration policy) should be allowed to prop up wages... in the long run, this results in a smaller market for goods.
In re: offshoring, I'm sure we completely disagree, but from a humanitarian perspective, it's far better to lift some people out of abject poverty in developing nations than it is to slightly increase someone's already-high standard of living in the US.
Yes, we have a surplus of labor right now. And that's painful for some. But protectionism is not the answer. It lengthened and deepened the great depression, and it will do the same thing now. Those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it.
Except, perhaps, the universe as a whole. Joking aside, why should economic growth not be sustainable long-term? Seriously? It's not like it's constrained by physical goods or anything... it's an intellectual construct that doesn't have absolute limits. I fully agree that "short-termism" is a flawed way to assess economic vitality of a company, and country, or an economy. But I disagree that growth is not sustainable. Consider that every trade transaction, in theory, represents economic growth (economics is not zero-sum, in case you have no knowledge of economics).
At any rate, protectionism is not the answer, now or ever. It only serves to reduce economic vitality... and this is especially so if other nations retaliate (which they surely would). If you had your way, we'd lose the benefit that all these immigrants, etc, would bring to our future economy. You want to talk about being motivated by short-term profits? You sir, with your talk of protectionism, are doing exactly that.
Claiming racism and laziness is a cheap shot (Score:5, Insightful)
No, for the billionth time, we don't mind competing on quality. No, for the billionth time, we're not racist. No, for the billionth time, we don't mind the competition. On the contrary, my heart goes out to the H1-Bs I work with because I know they don't have any good choices.
In the most brutal stark terms, H1-Bs are hired specifically because they don't enjoy the same political and legal protection that native workers do. They get paid less, worked like indentured servants, and disposed of like kleenex. I've actually heard one manager scream at the H1-B team he employed "If you're awake, you're working for me!"
This is why you don't see the IT market flooded with French, Canadian or Australian workers, but rather see the market flooded with people from countries struggling with poverty and political horrors.
These poor people are exploited here precisely because the conditions in their home country are so horrific. My heart goes out to the women H1-Bs I've worked with, because I've seen the haunted look in their eye when they speak of home. I once cornered another H1-B over a hideously unethical stunt he pulled to shift the blame away from his own screwup to another, more junior engineer. He robbed my righteous thunder when he got a desperate look in his eyes and pleaded with me, "Look, if he gets fired he can just get another job. If I get fired, they'd make me go back..."
For the billionth time, if we need this talent, then let's do the right thing by these people and offer them citizenship. If we're not prepared to do the right thing, then we shouldn't be using them as scabs to break the back of American labor.
Re:Nice -- more of what we already knew (Score:3, Insightful)
First they enter the U.S. and depress wages. Then they leave the depressed wages in their wake. Meanwhile, the U.S. has fewer "smart" people getting such degrees and training and will take some time before a bounce back can occur.
Re:and why do we care? (Score:5, Insightful)
Honestly we, Canada, are quite content with the fact that you preach such crazy patriotism to your kids at a young age and we don't have any worries.
We're taught more to come up with our own views and opinions of the world and the country itself (through school and society). And from looking around, myself, I feel that I live in a country that is much less off-the-wall (so to speak) than the rest of the world. I was not told through school and/or society that I need to worship Canada like it's a second/first religion, however I would put my life up for this country in a heart-beat if it were ever threatened.
You can't force anyone to love a country, but you can let them.
Colleges are getting gutted as well (Score:3, Insightful)
It is also important to note that for many colleges and universities, foreign nationals make up a large portion of the student body _and_ the faculty in several departments. As these highly talented folks go back, they leave big holes in the departments they leave behind. I think that if all the FNs left our petroleum engineering, for example, department the place would be a ghost town.
Re:There's plenty of room. (Score:1, Insightful)
help considerably in improving the standard of living for everyone.
The wealth of a few hundred million Americans spread among the billions of the rest of the world will buy everyone an extra bowl of rice for dinner tonight. The world thanks you.
Re:Anti Achievement mentality being fostered (Score:3, Insightful)
Slavery aside, which is mostly a straw man to my argument...
Cheap labor has been crucial to economic growth in the US. Typically this was immigrant labor in the past. Now we've reduced the flow of cheap labor to a trickle, and it's killing our economy.
We should welcome hard-working and bright immigrants with open arms... not bar the gates against them simply because they are foreign or different. Competition for jobs will improve the US workforce. It will free up labor to do more valuable jobs.
I agree offshoring is a problem for the US economy, but it's a complex issue, and the reasons I think it's a problem are not because it causes some Americans to lose jobs. That's simply an effect of the overpricing of US labor.
The problem with offshoring is that we don't export much to developing nations. If we had a manufacturing base (impossible with our high labor costs, though environmental restrictions are another problem[1]) then creating jobs and wealth in developing nations would be a good thing. But since the only thing we export really significantly is entertainment, we're shit outta luck.
The answer to this is not protectionism. It's the opposite -- reduce our labor costs so we can export to the countries we offshore to. Then we both benefit.
[1] I don't advocate reducing environmental restrictions. Instead we need to make sure our trading partners have equivalent restrictions, so we're all on an even playing field.
Re:There's plenty of room. (Score:5, Insightful)
Have you ever actually worked with creating software? Lower cost developers equals far worse code equals shitter software equals products that end up not being able to compete. That means you have to shut down.
Want an example? Look at some of the projects Motorola closed recently. Wanna know why it was closed down? They added a lot of "cheap" workers that produced code that honestly was offensive to anyone with a proper education / proper knowledge of software.
Lowering costs often means something gotta give, only when you can produce with the same quality but at a lower price can you continue to compete.
It should be a two-way street (Score:4, Insightful)
As a basic matter of fairness, if Indian and Chinese citizens are going to be free to work in the United States, then US citizens should be free to work in India and China.
The problem is they're not. Some out-of-work disgruntled geek published an article looking into this a while back. The Indian consulate just laughed at him when he inquired about being allowed to work in India, while the Chinese representatives haughtily told him that Chinese jobs were for Chinese citizens.
They can't have it both ways. The Indians and the Chinese cannot argue that their citizens should be allowed to compete world-wide, but that jobs inside their own borders are only open to native citizens.
It's not just faulty logic. It's raging hypocrisy.
Re:There's plenty of room. (Score:2, Insightful)
Then give them Green Cards so they can work freely for any employer, and let a real market set the wage, not the bogus Department of Labor "prevailing wage" number that's required for the H-1B. Give 'em green cards so that they can stay (and continue to pay taxes) here, rather than threatening to kick 'em out after 3 or 6 years.
I want to compete on an equal footing. But if the US would prefer to concentrate on accomodating the needs of companies who hire low-skilled agriculltural workers, so be it. If the US would really rather get the income taxes from people who make $12K/year rather than $120K/year, so be it. If the US really wants its high-tech immigrants to GTFO, then fine, we'll go back home, and take our minds - and what they produce - with us. Who is John Galt?
Re:Much ado about nothing... (Score:5, Insightful)
All this says is that the H1-B visa program is working as advertised.
And it shows just how stupidly designed the H1-B visa program was in the first place. These people are precisely the types we want as citizens. It should never have been temporary in the first place. It should have been designed to be a fast track to a green card. Instead it was designed as a way to put artificial leverage on these people to keep them under the thumbs of their corporate employers - in direct contradiction of traditional american values like being the "land of the free."
Re:There's plenty of room. (Score:5, Insightful)
And so what's the answer? We have several possible ways to fix this, which do you prefer?
-Reduce the American standard of living via increased immigration to correct the high cost of labor?
-Increase the global standard of living via offshoring to correct their low cost of labor?
-Cause stagnation via protectionist policies, then wait for other nations to pass us by on their way to a higher standard of livin and eocnomic vitality?
In all seriousness, if we open the gates to immigration, we'll reduce the cost of American labor and thus be more competitive from a labor standpoint... and if we do it via naturalization instead of stupid H1-B and other temporary visas, we'll get to *keep* the best and brightest here. If we continue to offshore jobs that we cannot compete with on labor costs, we'll raise the standard of living overseas and help level the playing field.
The truth of the matter is that the US standard of living is unsustainable, we've only kept it high so long by leveraging limited natural resources (like fossil fuels) and borrowing.
An adjustment will happen, and the US standard of living will become more like the rest of the world's... but the question is if we can help ensure that this is by elevating the SoL outside the US, or if it will be simply a reduction in the SoL in the US. I know which I'd prefer (both for selfish and humanitarian reasons).
Re:and why do we care? (Score:2, Insightful)
... As to why the visa system is clogged... Maybe the economic hard times have hit government offices partially responsible for it as well? Oh, what sweet revenge. -_-
I know you are kidding, but the visa system has always been clogged. So I would say the government continues to operate at the same level of efficiency as before. :-)
Re:There's plenty of room. (Score:4, Insightful)
If someone is willing to do your job for less than you are, or is able to do a better job at the same rate, then they should get the job over you.
I'll accept that once I can do the same thing to a guy in switzerland.
Re:This is bad strategy. (Score:3, Insightful)
all the while you are watering down your own culture and what made the nation great. If US immigration policy was based purely on skills and letting in the "best & brightest", that wouldn't be as big of a problem. Unfortunately, US immigration policy is based more on importing mass poverty than it is brainpower. We don't need to import some uneducated Saharan refugee to slice up cattle at 1/3 the old market rate and then allow him to bring his entire family over later on under a 'family visa'. We have enough shmucks that can do that. Unfortunately for the employers, they're not dumb enough to work at bargain basement prices.
Re:There's plenty of room. (Score:4, Insightful)
Another good question is why we aren't putting the money we put into these people into our own citizens; citizens who will be much less likely to sneak off and leave the hand that fed them out to dry.
Ohh... Poor Uncle Sam.
Let's say a guy gets his education in his home country. It was paid somehow, perhaps the local government paid for him, or perhaps he's indebted. In either case, it's not a trivial amount of money.
Then the guy goes to the U.S. to work. The U.S. did not pay a dime for his education, nor any other expenses he/his_parents/his_country had with him during his whole life. The U.S. did not invest in him, he came ready and is immediately productive.
Will the U.S. take the less qualified people and educate them? Sorry, no. Instead the U.S. cherry picks the best, for free, at the expense of the rest of the World.
And what if he never returns, what about his home country losing a highly qualified person? Well, that's just too bad.
And the U.S. won't be giving anything for free. No way, the guy's going to work his ass off (or else), he'll pay the same taxes as the locals but will have less rights.
If there's a parasite in this history, it's not the foreign guy.
Re:Nice -- more of what we already knew (Score:3, Insightful)
If profits were being driven down by competition that would be fine. The real problem is the wealth created by these improvements in labor allocation are going to a small percentage of the population. A large economy needs a lot of people creating and consuming. When wealth becomes too concentrated, you get a small number of people consuming and a large number creating. The large numbers creating quickly run out of things to create because the few with all of the money can't consume enough. That causes part of the economy to die (people dropping out of participation in the economy) and shrink.
Re:H1B's leaving (Score:2, Insightful)
You know, one thing that no one ever bothered to mention is that they might be leaving BECAUSE they can't find good jobs here. A lot of the kids at the university I went to had to go back to their own countries after graduation, not because they wanted to, they love America. They can't find an employer willing to put up with all the BS that uncle sam requires so they can become citizens. Barriers to entry never help anybody. Uncle Sam, tear down this wall.
I guess you feel like the 4 or 6 years they spent in the university were too much trouble then, too? Or should we just hand out degrees to anyone who wants them? Of course not. It's the same deal with citizenship. The US doesn't just "hand it over" because it MEANS something. Just like it takes time and energy to get a degree, I think it's reasonable to expect something from those who want to be a part of the most powerful nation in the world.
Re:Nice -- more of what we already knew (Score:5, Insightful)
Why are you limiting the discussion to specific markets, first of all? Why not general economic activity? Saturation of capital in a market (like the securities market) can be bled off if other markets are more profitable... this is the basis of almost all investment. The securities problem of mortgage-based assets was not due to saturation, it was due to improper valuation of those securites, making them more attractive than other investment alternatives.
Furthermore, saturation of supply in a market is simply a supply issue... this doesn't mean that the market can't continue to grow.
Agreed. And this is because it is too expensive to produce goods here, because labor is too expensive. More on this below.
Agricultural production -- we're still one of the strongest, if not the strongest, in the world. Agricultural products remain one of our biggest exports. Manufacturing -- this industry has died because labor is too expensive here. Technological development -- this is dependent on 'innovative spirit' and cheap labor, both of which are stimulated by immigration -- immigrants tend to be risk-takers, which innovators by nature also are.
Yes. But protectionism feeds into this. There is no middle class because there aren't good jobs. There aren't good jobs because labor is too expensive. Labor is too expensive because the cost of living is too high. The cost of living is too high because we've leveraged unsustainable resources (natural resources and credit, to be specific) to inflate the standard of living. Solution: Reduce the standard of living so US labor is competitive, either by attrition (which protectionism will cause) or via immigration (which will create a larger market for US goods).
The problem with protectionism is that while it may maintain our standard of living as long as we have lots of natural resources and credit from other nations, it's not sustainable. We'll only be able to correct the trade imbalance if we all become poor (and thus globally competitive).
If we open the immigration doors, we increase the availability of cheap labor, which benefits most of us. Sure, it'll be painful until we're able to develop competitive local manufacturing, and until the waves of immigrants are economically strong enough to function as a market for our goods... but the alternative is to slowly stagnate while the rest of the world passus us by. Protectionism left China in the dust for decade after decade... only a loosening of that protectionism allowed them to raise their standard of living. Let's not follow the same path.
Re:Much ado about nothing... (Score:5, Insightful)
Why don't we ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Add to that the fact that most grant funding agencies only give grants to citizens, and it isn't hard to figure out why so many people who come here for their PhD from other countries end up leaving afterwards - they finished their PhD and then ran straight into a career roadblock of no fault their own.
Re:visa's (Score:1, Insightful)
Sometimes its a loss, sometimes it isn't.
Sometimes it isn't a loss because sometimes the person leaving is a moron.
Examples of a non-lossy emigration:
Darl McBride emigrates from the U.S. to anywhere that is not the U.S.
Jack Thompson emigrates from the U.S. to anywhere that is not the U.S.
There are countless other examples of non-lossy emigration, but I feel these two suffice to make the point.
Re:This is bad strategy. (Score:5, Insightful)
Gee, I don't know... maybe instead we could encourage them to stay? That way, *they* become Americans, and suddenly, we don't have a shortage of Americans with eng/sci backgrounds.
Re:Claiming racism and laziness is a cheap shot (Score:3, Insightful)
It's easy to behave ethically when your ass isn't on the line.
Re:Nice -- more of what we already knew (Score:5, Insightful)
Um, the CRA is a red herring.
The loans covered by CRA tended to have the same risk profile as other bank loans.
"liar loans", "no income, no assets loans", etc. almost entirely came from institutions not covered by CRA.
The rest of your list is not any better.
You completely missed Christopher Cox's incompetent regulation of financial institutions at the SEC, Alan Greenspan's ill-advised attempt to keep spending up by keeping interest rates near zero for most of a decade, Bush begging Americans to "keep spending" after 9/11, and the real original seed of the current disaster, which was a series of moves to deregulate banks that occurred during Bush I and Clinton leading to the creation of credit default swaps, the securitization of debt, and all sorts of other really bad ideas.
But it was nice of you to try to make Bush look a little less incompetent. The worst president in history still needs a kind word every once in a while.
Re:There's plenty of room. (Score:4, Insightful)
Why couldn't you?
Re:Nice -- more of what we already knew (Score:2, Insightful)
I just have to wonder how much more of this erosion of the U.S. the U.S. is willing to accept and permit? H1-Bs and lowering of wages,
US real total compensation per hour [blogspot.com] has doubled since 1970. Real hourly earnings [econbrowser.com] aren't up much over that time, but that is because our additional compensation is going into 401k plans, health insurance, and more paid sick time. It is going there because tax policy makes it preferable for your employer to pay that compensation rather than paying you wages, having your wages taxed, and then you pay for them.
Note that real disposable income [bea.gov] actually rose the last four months.
People constantly ask "so protectionism is the answer?" Right now, yes it is!
Protectionism is a false promise, it supports unsustainable and inefficient businesses at the expense of consumers. I work for a US company in an industry that earns 1/3 of its revenue (that's $10 billion dollars) in exports. So go ahead, put me out of a job!
Re:H1B's leaving (Score:1, Insightful)
They would not find jobs there either. But bigger opportunities to start up, yes.
Re:Tipping point (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, this has probably not so much to do with the US itself, and more with the countries many of you immigrants come from.
I'm Swedish, and for various reasons a disproportionate number of Swedes tend to move abroad; not just academics and other highly skilled people, but "ordinary" people too. There is very little debate about it, and no screaming about "brain drain". The reason is that the vast majority eventually return. It may take three, or five, or ten years, but most come back and bringing with them more skills and experience, making it a net win for the country.
Similarly, as large countries like China and India become places where a middle-class life is attainable and normal, so will more people return home eventually where they would have settled abroad permanently before. It's not that the US has become less attractive, but that people's own home countries have become more so.
The US can and should adapt to this in two ways: first, recognize that a temporary immigrant is still valuable for the country even if they leave after some years. Second, encourage more of their own citizens to likewise move abroad for some period in order to build their skills and benefit in the same way that other countries do. While Swedes are disproportionately likely to live abroad, US citizens seem anecdotally disproportionately unlikely to do so. You seem to have a whole slew of arbitrary barriers, like the double income taxation when living abroad, that conspire to keep normal people from relocating for a few years.
Re:The Truth Behind the Trolling (Score:5, Insightful)
Alaren, you are absolutely correct. I'm a former academic who still has many connections and the biggest group that seems to be leaving are recently minted MBAs and B-school grads. Those are fields that just aren't doing well in an economic downturn.
My wife of 21 years was a PhD student in Math and an immigrant from Eastern Europe when we met. Her experience opened my eyes to a population and situation that I barely knew existed. So many Americans believe that immigrants "just take a test" and they're instant citizens. Many more believe all the racial and ethnic stereotypes about intelligence and science and math skills (or lack thereof). Too many believe they take more than they give.
I can barely imagine what it's like for a young person with talent who comes to America to try to better herself. I've walked with such a person for a couple of decades now. My grandparents were also such people, coming from war-torn (WWI) Italy to be shepherds and steelworkers and shirt-makers and railroad workers. Their sons fought in WWII. All their sons and daughters became proud and successful Americans and thanks to the Labor Unions that are now under attack from American "conservatives", became productive members of the US middle class.
I was one of those "liberal arts students who scored higher on verbal and lower on math" that Alaren mentioned. My wife is a mathematician in a field I can hardly understand, and my daughter, now an undergrad who gets her looks from her Mom (thank god) is pretty well-rounded. She wants to be either a mathematician or a novelist. It would not suprise me if she became both.
I get a sick feeling when I hear Americans talk down immigrants, legal and otherwise. They are as important to the formation and future of our country as the Founding Fathers.
We have to remember, the Pilgrims (you know, the guys with the funny hats and buckled shoes from Thanksgiving) were immigrants, every one.
Problem is loss of people, skills - not loss of IP (Score:5, Insightful)
The value of so-called IP is nothing beside the value of the skills, human relationships etc. for creating and developing ideas. Those who think innovation means resting on the creativity of 10, 20, life plus 70 years ago are doomed from the start. Creativity and innovation are activities, not artifacts. A focus on the frozen ideas of "IP" diverts attention from the real issues. The problem is not that the smart immigrants are taking American ideas away: it is that they are taking themselves.
Re:Can you blame them? (Score:3, Insightful)
If not for my friends and family (primarily the former) I'd already be in Canada or Ireland.
I hear this a lot, and I always feel compelled to ask: why do you think Canada would want you? I have no idea how Ireland feels about immigrants from the US, but I know for a fact that Canada does not have a big sign at the border that says "Come on in and take jobs from Canadians".
Re:Can you blame them? (Score:2, Insightful)
The Canadian economy is heavily linked to the US. Being a USian living in Canada, I see Canadian officials on the news constantly saying how the affect of the US economy is at fault for Canada's economic woes and explaining why economic bailouts for Canada won't work work unless the US also bails out their banks (before the US bailout). When the Canadian dollar hit above par with the US dollar, they were explaining how it could not last, because it was caused by the US dollar falling, and the Canadian dollar would not stay above the USD for long and was destined to come down as well (and eventually so it did) because of the respective and connected economies of the two countries. If you think coming to Canada will save you from the possibility of a failed US economy, I think the Canadian govt. would disagree with you.
Re:it's pretty much common knowledge (Score:3, Insightful)
+1 for Trepidity.
I'm a Ph.D. student in Computer Science. I have been fully funded all through my academic career here in the US at Georgia Tech and Virginia Tech. The same is the case with many (but not 100%) students getting Masters and Ph.D.s in Computer Science that I know of. There usually are a few paid assistantship positions that require security clearance, but most basic and applied research is not confidential.
The funding isn't just a giveaway, of course -- I have to work for it and show results in return for the money from the NSF. As a symbiotic advantage, I get an advanced degree in the process.
Empirical evidence, though, and I don't know where I might find a citation for you.
Re:H1B's leaving (Score:5, Insightful)
We're talking about employers here. They're often not willing to spend years and tens of thousands of dollars working on getting their employees green cards. The US system requires extensive work by the employer, not just the individual.
And frankly, US citizenship is not so valuable that it should be dramatically harder to obtain than an EU, UK, or Australian citizenship. But it is.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:If the playing field were level, ... (Score:5, Insightful)
By law, an employer is required to pay H1-B at least as much or more than the US market average for the given position.
are you just stating the law or do you really BELIEVE this is how the real world works?
I can assure you, the two are disjoint in almost all h1b salaries.
do you ever wonder WHY HR wants to keep salaries secret?
well, sometimes its not always a secret and the truth does get out.
foreign workers are underpaid BY PLAN. not by mistake or by accident.
Re:H1B's leaving (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:There's plenty of room. (Score:3, Insightful)
See: thedailywtf.com, and Monster cables
It is a shame... (Score:5, Insightful)
We can't seem to keep the LEGAL immigrants we want...the educated ones, that followed the laws, and contribute to the system. Instead, we are stuck with the ILLEGAL ones, that...well......generally are the opposite of the aforementioned legal ones.
*sigh*
Re:H1B's leaving (Score:3, Insightful)
Or it's the ones who are forced to take the risk because more stable employment isn't interested in them as candidates...
Re:This is bad strategy. (Score:2, Insightful)
I think a lot of Americans don't realize why America became the superpower it is.
You skipped the part where we landed in a relatively uninhabited continent and exploited its natural resources for 200 years.
NYT: India's protectionism is a great success (Score:4, Insightful)
Kinda funny, I think. We are so constantly lectured that the US should not have any "protectionist" policies against India, because protectionism never works.
March 1, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/02/business/worldbusiness/02rupee.html?_r=1&ref=world [nytimes.com]
Re:This is bad strategy. (Score:4, Insightful)
most of the Indians I have worked with lately have exaggerated (read:lied about) their work and education levels.
Allow me to wreck my karma: You got modded down but I completely agree because I live this hell every day. We do a lot of outsourcing and have had many immigrant coders here on visas. To look at these guys on paper you'd think they were the second coming of Turing. In actual productivity and lines of useable code, it's been a cruel joke.
Damn right they lied on their resumes and education. What's the worth of an Indian degree? No doubt there must be some jewels that come from those institutions somewhere. Someday I may meet one.
Immigrant brain drain ? Puleeeze. We are quite fond of saying 90% of developers suck. Well, that applies to immigrants, too. I don't see this supposed exodus as a reason for concern. If anything we may reach a point where companies start to invest closer to home again........nah, that ship sailed years ago.
Re:H1B's leaving (Score:2, Insightful)
I wish I had karma points. Excellent post.
US tech was stronger before the flood of h1bs (Score:3, Insightful)
The US tech industry was built, and grew explosively, before the flood of h1bs. Now we are supposed to believe that only Indians are capable of understanding technology.
Is there any real evidence to prove that h1bs have been all that helpful to US technology? When did msft start all hiring so many h1bs? Right after XP and before Vista wasn't it? Banks have been hiring tons of h1bs, and they are all just doing great aren't they?
There are plenty of highly qualified US tech workers, many of whom are unemployed, why is so critical to keep flooding the market with h1bs?
Re:It is a shame... (Score:5, Insightful)
It probably has something to do with the fact that after 9/11 the USA has become increasingly police state-like.
Before 9/11 happened I was looking forward to go back to the US and see NYC (I liked Massachusetts). Then the planes hit and the towers fell, and after the initial scare passed your country went irrationally paranoid about security.
I decided not to set foot on the US again until your government came back to its senses. You know, I don't like to be treated as a criminal by default when visiting a foreign country. I assume this is part of the reason why those people are leaving.
It seems that now things might start to change (hopefully for good).
Re:Tipping point (Score:3, Insightful)
Or it could just be a made-up story on a slow news day, which is usually what these "brain drain" stories are. They take 6 months worth of statistics, and extend it out 50 years from now to come up with these "scary" conclusions.
In any case, I doubt the hyperbole is called for, eh? It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.
Re:This is good news, folks! (Score:4, Insightful)
Gee, you'd think those slimy foreigners could love us for something besides our money, eh? Damn those socialists, and give my regards to your wife. Maybe she loved you for something besides your money, eh? We can always hope.
Yes, that's an insult, but I can't yet decide how stupid you are. Would you be worth having as a /. foe?
Just in case you aren't an idiot, I'm curious why you are so desperate for money? I currently earn about three times my expenses, and I've become rather spendthrift these years. I really can't imagine what I'd do with more money, and I don't think I would work any harder or better if I was making somewhat more or less money. Now when you get up to the level around $1 million/year, it just seems ridiculous to me. I actually think most people would find that downright demotivating and just quit working.
Or maybe the key factor ("problem" from your perspective?) is that I enjoy my work and I'm in no hurry to retire, even though I can see that age coming up pretty quickly...
True, but... (Score:3, Insightful)
No, it would increase the supply of skilled labor, thus reducing cost of labor across he board for those skilled positions. The immigrants would get paid less, and non-immigrant (native/already naturalized labor) would also get paid less.
Thus decreasing the economic advantage of pursuing science or engineering as a career, especially relative to law, management, or finance.
Thus leading to fewer US natives pursuing an education in these fields...
Which is fine, more or less, I suppose. Deciding to import your technical talent is one way to do things, as long as you have more money than everybody else.
The problem is what happens when these other places can afford to keep their talent at home... while, in the meanwhile, we've let the cultivation of domestic talent languish.
Re:Nice -- more of what we already knew (Score:5, Insightful)
What a joke that first link is. Truly. Some vague hand waving, a distortion of numbers and a couple of meaningless graphs can convince some people of anything. It (intentionally I'll assume given the source) also misses the obvious, if it's going to include "benefits" it'd better include the enormously inflated cost of health care! Oh it doesn't? Then it's less than meaningless, it's misleading.
In 1970 my father, a lowly mechanic purchased a nice house (on 70% of his wage), supported a wife and raised three children in a solid middle class household.
39 years later his son, a white collar computer programmer raising three children and supporting a wife can't afford to buy a house on 100% of his wage in ANY POPULATION CENTRE. Functionally lower-middle class, one car not two, not to mention working twice as many hours and getting half the benefits!
And yet ivory tower pseudo-intellectuals such as yourself will assume to lecture to us with the help of awful graphs and twisted and distorted 'truths' that we work less for more than people did thirty years ago.
What a joke.
And why would tariffs put you out of a job? Tariffs affect imports not exports.
And holy shit of course 'real disposable income' increased in the last four months, half a million people are losing their jobs a month, people aren't buying things so prices on luxuries MUST come down. It's called a recession! You seem to have a flimsy grasp on real economics. Or an agenda to drive. Gee I wonder which.
Ideological fanatics such as yourself, who don't have a firm hand on reality, just the dogma in your minds are selling your own countries out for no reason what so ever. And China and India and other developing countries will *happily* allow that to happen, then see if they're so ready to be so open with their borders when they finally hold the upper hand.
You people are little more than an updated version of the 20th centuries Useful Idiots. How the Chinese must laugh at the west.
Re:This is bad strategy. (Score:2, Insightful)
Businesses always need cheap labour, to reduce cost and therefore maximizing profit or at least competitiveness. If Americans were willing to reduce their pampered exhorbiant standard of living, and work for less, the american economy would stand a chance. Especially since America was the one going around forcing globalisation down the throat of these very same countries. Now that the mass global market is a reality, you literally have a tiger by its tail. Obviously any such suggestions of perhaps lowering the over-bloated standard of living, would be met with shocked cries of "You just want to make us ALL poor, you damned communist!".
Thing is, the American standard of living ensured that the prices for even basic things like food, that cost mere cents in other parts of the world would cost Americans more, since they would be subjected to much higher quality control. Every one wants a gas-guzzling car, instead of using mass-transport. And it is simply unthinkable for Americans to let go of these addictions, to the extent that they cannot even consider surviving on a lower salary(perhaps the system they have set up will not even allow them to), and thus cannot compete in the global market. Only one phrase comes to mind.
Adapt or die.
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:The Truth Behind the Trolling (Score:5, Insightful)
With my condolences to the Monty Python:
Damn right. Besides weekends, what has organized labor done for us?
OK, OK...
Besides weekends AND vacations, what has organized labor done for us?
Hum, what... OK
Besides weekends, vacations AND paid leave, what has organized labor done for us?
Really? No kidding... OK
Besides weekend, vacation, paid leave AND fair salaries, what has organized labor done for us?
For real?
Besides weekends, vacation, paid leave, fair salaries AND safe working conditions, what has organized labor done for us?
What? Really... OK OK
Besides weekends, vacations, paid leave, fair salaries, safe working conditions AND retirements, what has organized labor done for us?
Huh? come on... OK OK
Besides weekends, vacations, paid leave, fair salaries, safe working conditions, retirement, AND medical coverage, what has organized labor done for us?
Yeah... what a bunch of dicks!
Re:H1B's leaving (Score:2, Insightful)
Has it occurred to you that some people don't care much for nationalities at all? That for them, it is basically administrative hassle you go through?
And that doesn't make them bad people, on the contrary: they probably just don't believe there is much of a link between geology and human qualities...
Re:NYT: India's protectionism is a great success (Score:3, Insightful)
But yet, that's just a facade to hide the fact that India has these gigantic problems:
Overpopulation--India has 1.1 billion people, just too much for a country of that size.
Disparity between rich and poor--there are gigantic slums in almost every major city in India, where people live in extreme squalor and the potential for a huge number of deaths from disease is very real.
Pollution--because of all this high-density human activity, pollution in various forms is still a very serious problem.
Cultural strife--because of the gigantic number of cultures on the Indian subcontinent, cultural strife is a very serious problem. (We forget only Pakistan and Indonesia have more Muslims than India, despite the 80% Hindu majority.)
India will have to come to grips with all four of these problems if they are to be a major partner with the rest of the world.
Re:H1B's leaving (Score:2, Insightful)
Citizenship != Permanent Residency
And are you suggesting that the "diversity visa lottery" [state.gov] expects something from the people who win visas? </heavy sarcasm>
How about we instead give those highly trained individuals who have completed advanced degrees here the ability to stick around and work so that they have the opportunity to contribute to the USA?
PS - if you were trolling, good job. You got me.
PPS - if you really believe this, . . . you may not have personal experience with this issue. Or you're a jerk.
Re:There's plenty of room. (Score:1, Insightful)
Maybe its the socialist in me that finds this funny - The gap between your cost of living and average minimum wage is so vast that its now effecting everyone from the middle class and down (as opposed to just the bottom of the barrel) - so now you want to up the min wage, or bring in protectionism or generally just take back everything thats ever been said about free markets - because finally its your fat butts on the line as well!! Finally you realise that there are actual barriers to wealth and its not just a matter of how hard you work...
Its sodding hilarious from my point of view (where I've learned how to live happily on a £16k salary )- please keep this up :)
Re:H1B's leaving (Score:5, Insightful)
I am not an American, and I wasn't referring to any kind of superiority or fear of terrorism. This is about risk. Risk increases with uncertainty.
An infant has a probability distribution equal to infants of American parents, because it just came into being. Adult immigrants have motives and all kinds of selection pressures, even if their home country is better than America. (Of course, unscrupulous prospective immigrants might take advantage of their infant, but that's another issue.)
For example (and I am NOT saying this is reality), immigrants may be more likely to be losers because being unable to make a living in your own country is a strong motive to move abroad. On the other hand, skilled people may want to move to America to get better salaries.
Immigration policies must be based on an honest study of the motives of all types of prospective immigrants. This also doesn't mean that the current policy is perfect, but simply opening up all borders in the name of some ideal could be disastrous. Making naturalization hard is a legitimate idea for finding the most motivated people.
Notice that open borders wouldn't really be good for the countries you think I look down on either. Every person who could leave would do so, leaving the least capable parts of society in their home country. The third world would never recover. The best way to help those countries is to give the smart people a reason to build up their own country instead of escaping to industrialized nations that already have environmentally unsustainable populations.
In the mean time, I think your country (assuming you're American) has every right to pick and choose those it lets in.
Re:H1B's leaving (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, but how many of these 20 million people are as highly educated and motivated as the poster above? Not very many.
People like this Anonymous Coward are going to get a job. They are very employable. The question is whether they are going to work in the U.S. and pay U.S. taxes (and mortgages), or if they are going to take their expertise elsewhere and compete against Americans somewhere where the cost of living is much lower.
The real problem that the U.S. has with outsourcing is that several countries have built up enough expertise in their own countries that they can actually compete with the U.S. I can compete with Indians and Chinese if they have to come to America to get the really good jobs. If the good jobs move overseas, however, because we won't let these highly educated people come here, then we are truly screwed.
Re:There's plenty of room. (Score:3, Insightful)
You know what I think? By any standards, Americans have it too easy: houses are too big (compare them to any European), cars waste too much fuel, credit is too easy, etc.
Think about it: anybody who's got to compete with you has to at least bilingual, be up-to-date with everything you know (that is, read your books, read your papers), spend shitloads of money doing it that, etc.
I've heard US American presidents for decades preach about the free market. Well, there's free market and globalization for you - you get to rub elbows with Indians, etc. You don't like it? Tough it out.
But what I really expect your government to do is just to trample on the WTO [wto.org]'s rules of trade and put forward a protectionist program, that is: to really come across once again as the jingoist nation full of B.S. that you are, one in which the rules apply to everyone else (for instance, the rule of international law), but not to you.
You guys have it easy. Stop complaining.