4 ms·

Perhaps I'm too optimistic, but I think everything America needs to succeed and grow can be found right here in America. The problem is that it's sometimes chea

Perhaps I'm too optimistic, but I think everything America needs to succeed and grow can be found right here in America. The problem is that it's sometimes cheaper to import foreign labor, or export domestic production.

robotresearcher 9y ago
Einstein, von Braun, Musk, Brin. Immigrants are more than cheap labor. edit just for a bit more diversity: Madeleine Albright, Schwarzenegger, Ang Lee, Tesla, Fermi, Audrey Hepburn, Sataya Nadella, Jerry Yang, Cary Grant... edit 2, correction: Ang Lee's Wikipedia page says he's a resident and not a US citizen. Another alien undercutting US labour like James Cameron and Ridley Scott.
- zo1 9y ago
  Citing examples doesn't really convince anyone intellectually curious, determined or with momentum in the opposite idea. What you need to do to definitely drive the point is to compare "rock star per group". Then just compare the two values, and see which group has a higher "rock star" ratio, or whatever you want to call them. Pretty obvious, right? Then you have go on and prove that for every one of those imported "rock stars", you wouldn't have gotten an equally great person from the local group. It's not immediately obvious that those things wouldn't have sprung up without that external "rock star" being brought in. We're often told that people aren't islands, so it may very well be that the local environment/culture is the one that helps create these "rock stars", and they just happen to be in the right place / right time. I use "rock-star" because I have no idea what else to call them. Leaders, high-achievers, smart-people, role models?
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
- HillaryBriss 9y ago
  the standard, American theoretical response to an individual with a low standard of living is: "lack of talent is not the problem. lack of education is. these individuals simply need more education in order to access better opportunities." one might argue, on a national level, that because lack of education -- not talent -- is the true limiting factor, there are plenty of existing US residents who are capable of filling these jobs. the US can simply train from within and promote from within. at the same time, the standard American theoretical response for the lack of expertise and trained labor required to grow the companies is: "we can't find anyone here who can do the job. period. we absolutely have to import people from foreign countries." one might argue, on a national level, that there's no point in spending government money to further the education of US residents. they'll never be able to do the work anyway. instead, America might as well write these people off and import different people who already have the talent, expertise, training, education. don't these ideas contradict each other? which theory is right?
  - logfromblammo 9y ago
    Now, see, there's your problem right there. Americans don't worry about whether a theory is correct. We worry about how much money can be made by believing in it.
- rpiguy 9y ago
  Bad examples. Legal immigrants are different from "cheap labor" (H-1B and seasonal/temporary workers for example) which does depress wages. Once you have a green card you can demand higher wages and threaten to pack up and move to the competition. I don't want to start an immigration argument, but the skills based system that has been proposed and was in place in Canada would have let Einstein, von Braun, Brin, Fermi, Yang, Albright, etc. into the country.
  - robotresearcher 9y ago
    You seem to be arguing something completely different to the grandparent comment.
    - rpiguy 9y ago
      Just pointing out that cheap labor and immigrants are not synonymous.
- Spooky23 9y ago
  For every person you can cherry pick, I can name you 50 names of cannon fodder that nobody ever heard of. For most of my career, I've watched as shitty body shops stuff unqualified candidates at low rates to "farm" them into more valuable workers. They don't hire onshore workers because they lose the visa leverage and hose many of them with "company town" style bullshit like corporate housing. I'd love to have the opportunity to pull in some equally unqualified urban and rural high school students whose only prospects are Walmart, truck driving or the army and give them the same opportunity. Many would suck, but many others would flourish and build meaningful careers.
- eli_gottlieb 9y ago
  >Immigrants are more than cheap labor. Great, but not the important question. The important question is: are citizens more than cheap labor?
ianai 9y ago
I think that's a simplistic view. For one, it can't be cheaper to import than to train/educate locally. But that doesn't stop the local culture from being detrimental to higher learning.
stillhere 9y ago
We did it during the moon landing so I agree with you. The opinion that we must bring in foreign workers to survive is just silly. It's not that I think we shouldn't import them, but we should have very high restrictions on the company to prove that there is not a single US worker who can do the same job.
forapurpose 9y ago
> everything America needs to succeed and grow can be found right here in America This is clearly not true. If you look around you, much of what you own, use, etc. comes from other countries, including the ideas, science, and technology behind them. Just off the top of my head, in one industry: The web, Linux ... why would we think for a moment that Americans have superior ideas to everyone else? Also, if the U.S. doesn't buy goods, services, labor, etc. from other countries, then they won't buy them from the U.S. The U.S. is only 5% of the world's population and maybe 20% of the world's market (due to the wealth of its citizens). A U.S. 'Brexit' from the world would be an economic disaster.

robotresearcher 9y ago

Einstein, von Braun, Musk, Brin. Immigrants are more than cheap labor. edit just for a bit more diversity: Madeleine Albright, Schwarzenegger, Ang Lee, Tesla, Fermi, Audrey Hepburn, Sataya Nadella, Jerry Yang, Cary Grant... edit 2, correction: Ang Lee's Wikipedia page says he's a resident and not a US citizen. Another alien undercutting US labour like James Cameron and Ridley Scott.

zo1 9y ago
Citing examples doesn't really convince anyone intellectually curious, determined or with momentum in the opposite idea. What you need to do to definitely drive the point is to compare "rock star per group". Then just compare the two values, and see which group has a higher "rock star" ratio, or whatever you want to call them. Pretty obvious, right? Then you have go on and prove that for every one of those imported "rock stars", you wouldn't have gotten an equally great person from the local group. It's not immediately obvious that those things wouldn't have sprung up without that external "rock star" being brought in. We're often told that people aren't islands, so it may very well be that the local environment/culture is the one that helps create these "rock stars", and they just happen to be in the right place / right time. I use "rock-star" because I have no idea what else to call them. Leaders, high-achievers, smart-people, role models?
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
HillaryBriss 9y ago
the standard, American theoretical response to an individual with a low standard of living is: "lack of talent is not the problem. lack of education is. these individuals simply need more education in order to access better opportunities." one might argue, on a national level, that because lack of education -- not talent -- is the true limiting factor, there are plenty of existing US residents who are capable of filling these jobs. the US can simply train from within and promote from within. at the same time, the standard American theoretical response for the lack of expertise and trained labor required to grow the companies is: "we can't find anyone here who can do the job. period. we absolutely have to import people from foreign countries." one might argue, on a national level, that there's no point in spending government money to further the education of US residents. they'll never be able to do the work anyway. instead, America might as well write these people off and import different people who already have the talent, expertise, training, education. don't these ideas contradict each other? which theory is right?
- logfromblammo 9y ago
  Now, see, there's your problem right there. Americans don't worry about whether a theory is correct. We worry about how much money can be made by believing in it.
rpiguy 9y ago
Bad examples. Legal immigrants are different from "cheap labor" (H-1B and seasonal/temporary workers for example) which does depress wages. Once you have a green card you can demand higher wages and threaten to pack up and move to the competition. I don't want to start an immigration argument, but the skills based system that has been proposed and was in place in Canada would have let Einstein, von Braun, Brin, Fermi, Yang, Albright, etc. into the country.
- robotresearcher 9y ago
  You seem to be arguing something completely different to the grandparent comment.
  - rpiguy 9y ago
    Just pointing out that cheap labor and immigrants are not synonymous.
Spooky23 9y ago
For every person you can cherry pick, I can name you 50 names of cannon fodder that nobody ever heard of. For most of my career, I've watched as shitty body shops stuff unqualified candidates at low rates to "farm" them into more valuable workers. They don't hire onshore workers because they lose the visa leverage and hose many of them with "company town" style bullshit like corporate housing. I'd love to have the opportunity to pull in some equally unqualified urban and rural high school students whose only prospects are Walmart, truck driving or the army and give them the same opportunity. Many would suck, but many others would flourish and build meaningful careers.
eli_gottlieb 9y ago
>Immigrants are more than cheap labor. Great, but not the important question. The important question is: are citizens more than cheap labor?

ianai 9y ago

I think that's a simplistic view. For one, it can't be cheaper to import than to train/educate locally. But that doesn't stop the local culture from being detrimental to higher learning.

stillhere 9y ago

We did it during the moon landing so I agree with you. The opinion that we must bring in foreign workers to survive is just silly. It's not that I think we shouldn't import them, but we should have very high restrictions on the company to prove that there is not a single US worker who can do the same job.

forapurpose 9y ago

> everything America needs to succeed and grow can be found right here in America This is clearly not true. If you look around you, much of what you own, use, etc. comes from other countries, including the ideas, science, and technology behind them. Just off the top of my head, in one industry: The web, Linux ... why would we think for a moment that Americans have superior ideas to everyone else? Also, if the U.S. doesn't buy goods, services, labor, etc. from other countries, then they won't buy them from the U.S. The U.S. is only 5% of the world's population and maybe 20% of the world's market (due to the wealth of its citizens). A U.S. 'Brexit' from the world would be an economic disaster.