Thought experiment: suppose the US decided to ban people who aren't permanent residents from working in jobs with minimal potential for creativity, and which ar

Thought experiment: suppose the US decided to ban people who aren't permanent residents from working in jobs with minimal potential for creativity, and which are rote in nature: taxi and bus drivers, delivery people, gardeners, waiters, security guards, cashiers, barbers, people running a restaurant or a barbershop, etc. Simultaneously, jobs with a potential for creativity — tech, artists, entrepreneurs, lawyers, and so on — would have unlimited open borders, perhaps with a minimum salary requirement of $100K, say. If you have a job offer that meets these requirements, a visa can be denied only if the government can provide a reason, like a criminal record or terrorist links or having committed fraud. Otherwise, the US govt would be required to let you in. This will have the effect of safeguarding local jobs where it's hard to imagine creativity or skills making a difference to the outcome, while having an open market in areas where creativity and skills make all the difference. I'm using the US as an example, but the principle would apply to all rich countries, or even all countries, if you consider Bangladeshis moving to India, for example.