To me, and a lot of people, the problem isn't free markets or movement so much as the distortion of markets that occurs under very uneven regulation. What I th

To me, and a lot of people, the problem isn't free markets or movement so much as the distortion of markets that occurs under very uneven regulation. What I think has happened here is that the government got out a bullhorn, pointed it overseas, and said "if you study engineering or computer science, we will give you a path toward citizenship and/or residency in a lucrative market through specialized tech visas that will not be available to general would-be immigrants." It then turned around with that bullhorn toward the United States and said "if you go to law, medical, dentistry, or even nursing school, we will protect your jobs through government backed professional associations and unions, and even in the absence of special protections, most fields and trades will require existing right to live and work in the US. Oh, and also, there's a shortage of Americans going into STEM." Here's the thing, if make it much easier, through regulation, for immigrants or foreign consulting companies to enter the tech market than the legal, medical, or other markets, you should understand you've created an incentive for foreign workers and companies to focus on tech, and US citizens to avoid it. Think of it this way - lemons and avocados are grown in similar conditions. People can't buy lemons for what they used to pay, so the government declares a shortage of lemons. From now on, lemons will be exempt from the 20% tariff that is placed on avocados, and the government will grant a temporary residency visa to any farmer who wishes to immigrate, provided he agrees to grow lemons only (if he stops growing lemons and tries to grow avocados, he will be deported). You would expect people who already hold US residency rights to move into avocados, and away from lemons, right? But this isn't the result of markets, it's a market response to severe distortion created by US government policy. I think we've done something much like this in high tech and science/engineering. The "shortage" of US citizens going into these fields is a rational response to uneven government regulation. This is why I'm ok with general immigration, but generally opposed to targeted visa programs designed to cure specific "shortages". I think that they are almost always used to suppress the wage growth that would draw people into the field and reach market equilibrium. There is data to back this up - the RAND institute, historically a very pro-immigrant think tank, reached the conclusion that US citizens avoid Science and Engineering graduate programs because they are not competitive with the other fields that are available to high achieving students. But here's the thing, those fields are only available to people who already have citizenship! http://www.rand.org/pubs/issue_papers/IP241.html http://www.rand.org/pubs/issue_papers/IP241.html