3 ms·

I totally agree. As a company, we lost two of our best engineers who emigrated to the US in the past year. And no, it was not because of the pay or working cond

by rushabh 10y ago

I totally agree. As a company, we lost two of our best engineers who emigrated to the US in the past year. And no, it was not because of the pay or working conditions or no equity. People have been sold the "American Dream" to people outside America over the decades. Young people have seen their relatives from previous generations live much better lives in the US over India. Bringing people back will take time and I think once the infrastructure is fixed (which is very fixable in the next 10-15 years), most people will not think of emigrating. Having lived in the US and India, I think the society in India is as free as in the US, without the anxiety of "fitting in" and leaving your family behind. Also today you have access to the best products, technology and knowledge being in India so other than the physical infrastructure (housing, travel, cleanliness) the gap is much reduced. I sincerely hope the immigration laws get tighter in the US so that we can build great companies, create wealth for the society, create jobs and remove hardship and poverty in India.

ArkyBeagle 10y ago
As an American, I hope so too - there's a real cost to emigrating and I would think that home is always home and people should have the option of being there. I'd like to be able to buy cool things no matter where they are made. In principle, I'm also for pretty much unrestricted immigration but that's politically ... difficult. It may also be practically difficult.
- DVassallo 10y ago
  "people should have the option of being there" != people's only option is to stay there
DVassallo 10y ago
You should never hope for less freedom of movement. You can never know what lies ahead in the future of your country, and the freedom to move elsewhere could be your only option to protect your safety and inalienable rights.
booleandilemma 10y ago
Your comment is a little off-putting. It would be like me writing "I sincerely hope India doesn't fix its infrastructure so their best and brightest decide to come work in the US".
- vikiomega9 10y ago
  Would you still feel it off-putting if you accepted there isn't any inherent morality to either statement?
- Jugurtha 10y ago
  If you're an employer then, from a pure cold calculating stand-point, nobody would blame you for having that thought for you wouldn't say it out loud. If your country is the destination of choice of many talented people, you'd have access to a larger pool and an advantage over other employers in countries that are less attractive. Also, none of your tax dollars went to educating and training these prospects. Think about the influence the exodus of the Soviet Union's best and brightest had on the U.S. The influx of that massive brain power had tangible consequences. It wasn't the first time this had happened: many of very bright scientist and engineers fled (or were "paperclipped") to the U.S. during/at the end of WWII. For the U.S. in general, this was a windfall and it was a direct consequence of dire conditions in Europe. The newcomers crushed anyone not at the same level who was getting by fine hitherto, many of whom quit academia altogether. Think about all the people trained for free as M.D's or engineers in other countries who are not able to find jobs for lack of degree recognition in the U.S. and are forced to work as nurses or paramedics or jobs for which they are overqualified which effectively raises the bar. The U.S. and several countries are getting talent that was subsidized by other states. But it also works, slightly differently, within the same country. If unemployment is high, many qualified people are forced to take menial jobs. For employers, this is a windfall. There was a manager in Courchevel on TV that could hardly hide his joy about the economic conjecture. He was showing the news crew the résumés of people applying for unqualified jobs. People with college degrees in STEM, speaking many languages. For a place at a high-end resort like that, snatching people like that with the same pay an average person would get is a very good deal. It hurts people who are not yet established in their careers, and some people who are but are unwilling to evolve. Recent graduates must hit the ground running jumping from a truck going a 100mph.

by rushabh 10y ago

ArkyBeagle 10y ago

As an American, I hope so too - there's a real cost to emigrating and I would think that home is always home and people should have the option of being there. I'd like to be able to buy cool things no matter where they are made. In principle, I'm also for pretty much unrestricted immigration but that's politically ... difficult. It may also be practically difficult.

DVassallo 10y ago
"people should have the option of being there" != people's only option is to stay there

DVassallo 10y ago

You should never hope for less freedom of movement. You can never know what lies ahead in the future of your country, and the freedom to move elsewhere could be your only option to protect your safety and inalienable rights.

booleandilemma 10y ago

Your comment is a little off-putting. It would be like me writing "I sincerely hope India doesn't fix its infrastructure so their best and brightest decide to come work in the US".

vikiomega9 10y ago
Would you still feel it off-putting if you accepted there isn't any inherent morality to either statement?
Jugurtha 10y ago
If you're an employer then, from a pure cold calculating stand-point, nobody would blame you for having that thought for you wouldn't say it out loud. If your country is the destination of choice of many talented people, you'd have access to a larger pool and an advantage over other employers in countries that are less attractive. Also, none of your tax dollars went to educating and training these prospects. Think about the influence the exodus of the Soviet Union's best and brightest had on the U.S. The influx of that massive brain power had tangible consequences. It wasn't the first time this had happened: many of very bright scientist and engineers fled (or were "paperclipped") to the U.S. during/at the end of WWII. For the U.S. in general, this was a windfall and it was a direct consequence of dire conditions in Europe. The newcomers crushed anyone not at the same level who was getting by fine hitherto, many of whom quit academia altogether. Think about all the people trained for free as M.D's or engineers in other countries who are not able to find jobs for lack of degree recognition in the U.S. and are forced to work as nurses or paramedics or jobs for which they are overqualified which effectively raises the bar. The U.S. and several countries are getting talent that was subsidized by other states. But it also works, slightly differently, within the same country. If unemployment is high, many qualified people are forced to take menial jobs. For employers, this is a windfall. There was a manager in Courchevel on TV that could hardly hide his joy about the economic conjecture. He was showing the news crew the résumés of people applying for unqualified jobs. People with college degrees in STEM, speaking many languages. For a place at a high-end resort like that, snatching people like that with the same pay an average person would get is a very good deal. It hurts people who are not yet established in their careers, and some people who are but are unwilling to evolve. Recent graduates must hit the ground running jumping from a truck going a 100mph.