5 ms·

Yeah I mean, the problem is that we can't afford to "let them all in", so how do you decide who to let in? An immigration policy that is held be numerous other

by muninn_ 10y ago

Yeah I mean, the problem is that we can't afford to "let them all in", so how do you decide who to let in? An immigration policy that is held be numerous other countries that favors skilled immigrants seems to be reasonable. On the other hand, brain drain. How will those countries continue to get better and enjoy a modern standard of living if all the smart people leave?

oh_sigh 10y ago
Perhaps nations will be incentivized to fix the underlying causes of their brain drain if they perceive it as a big problem.
- rdl 10y ago
  Also there is value in "go to US/SV, work there, return home with knowledge of how better systems work, establish in your home country", although there are probably scale effects so it's best for humanity overall for the best people to be concentrated. (I'm not sure about the merits of immigration, naturalization, and then return to/interface with birth country, vs. a non-immigrant status. There is probably a good case to be made that having people gain US citizenship is overall better, and it provides optionality. With global taxation it is a clear net win for the US, too.)
  - muninn_ 10y ago
    I agree, but how many people come here from, say, India or wherever, work in IT in somewhere like SF and say ok I've had enough training, time to go make my country a better place? None. I don't blame them either.
    - rdl 10y ago
      Actually there are a LOT of Chinese and Indian entrepreneurs I know who moved to the US, worked here, and especially back in India are now building SV-style companies there. Or are putting parts of their global businesses there -- given how expensive labor is in the US and especially SV, it's a huge competitive advantage to be from, say, Ukraine and be able to set up a great engineering organization there. I agree it makes less sense for an individual worker to move back (unless there are family or other concerns).
    - tehlike 10y ago
      It depends on person, as usual. For many, the US residency is a blessing. Things are nice here, compared to where they come from. The quality of life is much nicer, and this is something i'd most definitely want for my kids. However, there is also a greater advantage to going back home: Those markets usually lack the capital and the knowledge, and it's relatively easy to copy startups from here and implement them in their home countries.
    - pm90 10y ago
      That is most certainly not the case. While there are many who stay, there are also a sizeable number who go back to their home countries.
- deegles 10y ago
  Aren't the "brains" the ones most suited to fix those problems in the first place?
  - Arizhel 10y ago
    No, not if they're not good at national politics, or don't have the right connections to be effective there.
erispoe 10y ago
> the problem is that we can't afford to "let them all in" Why is that? I'm genuinely curious. Are you making an economic or a cultural argument? On the economic side, there's no evidence that immigration, even mass immigration, has any negative consequences, apart from some more competition at the very low end of salaries, which should obviously be addressed. By and large, immigrants are net contributors to the economy. > On the other hand, brain drain. We can hypothesis that tight immigration policy actually creates more brain drain. It's so difficult to come to the US that you're not likely to go back, even for a few years, once you're here. If you can easily move between your country of origin and your country of immigration, you can probably alleviate the brain drain somewhat. Easy come, easy go.
- nilkn 10y ago
  > there's no evidence that immigration, even mass immigration, has any negative consequences, apart from some more competition at the very low end of salaries So, in other words, there is evidence that it does have negative consequences? I myself don't know either way. I just think that, if what you write is true, an impact at the low end of the salary spectrum isn't something to brush off as if it's nothing and doesn't count.
  - elif 10y ago
    that effect is only negative from the specific perspective of low end salary holders. that effect is positive for businesses and consumers.
    - nilkn 10y ago
      Well, first of all, many consumers are also low-end salary earners. Second and perhaps more importantly, the more salaries are driven down, the less money those earners have to spend, which means businesses will see less potential revenue.
      - pm90 10y ago
        You are assuming a zero sum market. Generally, when the market changes, the labor force changes as well (skills retraining etc.). It might be inelastic (i.e. changes in labor takes more time to adjust to new markets) but it does eventually happen. This is how the US workforce made the jump from agrarian to industrial to service economy.
bayesian_horse 10y ago
Smart people migrate somewhere else because they are more productive there. Usually they even send back more money than they would earn in their home country.

by muninn_ 10y ago

oh_sigh 10y ago

Perhaps nations will be incentivized to fix the underlying causes of their brain drain if they perceive it as a big problem.

rdl 10y ago
Also there is value in "go to US/SV, work there, return home with knowledge of how better systems work, establish in your home country", although there are probably scale effects so it's best for humanity overall for the best people to be concentrated. (I'm not sure about the merits of immigration, naturalization, and then return to/interface with birth country, vs. a non-immigrant status. There is probably a good case to be made that having people gain US citizenship is overall better, and it provides optionality. With global taxation it is a clear net win for the US, too.)
- muninn_ 10y ago
  I agree, but how many people come here from, say, India or wherever, work in IT in somewhere like SF and say ok I've had enough training, time to go make my country a better place? None. I don't blame them either.
  - rdl 10y ago
    Actually there are a LOT of Chinese and Indian entrepreneurs I know who moved to the US, worked here, and especially back in India are now building SV-style companies there. Or are putting parts of their global businesses there -- given how expensive labor is in the US and especially SV, it's a huge competitive advantage to be from, say, Ukraine and be able to set up a great engineering organization there. I agree it makes less sense for an individual worker to move back (unless there are family or other concerns).
  - tehlike 10y ago
    It depends on person, as usual. For many, the US residency is a blessing. Things are nice here, compared to where they come from. The quality of life is much nicer, and this is something i'd most definitely want for my kids. However, there is also a greater advantage to going back home: Those markets usually lack the capital and the knowledge, and it's relatively easy to copy startups from here and implement them in their home countries.
  - pm90 10y ago
    That is most certainly not the case. While there are many who stay, there are also a sizeable number who go back to their home countries.
deegles 10y ago
Aren't the "brains" the ones most suited to fix those problems in the first place?
- Arizhel 10y ago
  No, not if they're not good at national politics, or don't have the right connections to be effective there.

erispoe 10y ago

> the problem is that we can't afford to "let them all in" Why is that? I'm genuinely curious. Are you making an economic or a cultural argument? On the economic side, there's no evidence that immigration, even mass immigration, has any negative consequences, apart from some more competition at the very low end of salaries, which should obviously be addressed. By and large, immigrants are net contributors to the economy. > On the other hand, brain drain. We can hypothesis that tight immigration policy actually creates more brain drain. It's so difficult to come to the US that you're not likely to go back, even for a few years, once you're here. If you can easily move between your country of origin and your country of immigration, you can probably alleviate the brain drain somewhat. Easy come, easy go.

nilkn 10y ago
> there's no evidence that immigration, even mass immigration, has any negative consequences, apart from some more competition at the very low end of salaries So, in other words, there is evidence that it does have negative consequences? I myself don't know either way. I just think that, if what you write is true, an impact at the low end of the salary spectrum isn't something to brush off as if it's nothing and doesn't count.
- elif 10y ago
  that effect is only negative from the specific perspective of low end salary holders. that effect is positive for businesses and consumers.
  - nilkn 10y ago
    Well, first of all, many consumers are also low-end salary earners. Second and perhaps more importantly, the more salaries are driven down, the less money those earners have to spend, which means businesses will see less potential revenue.
    - pm90 10y ago
      You are assuming a zero sum market. Generally, when the market changes, the labor force changes as well (skills retraining etc.). It might be inelastic (i.e. changes in labor takes more time to adjust to new markets) but it does eventually happen. This is how the US workforce made the jump from agrarian to industrial to service economy.

bayesian_horse 10y ago

Smart people migrate somewhere else because they are more productive there. Usually they even send back more money than they would earn in their home country.