These articles almost always end with two points. 1) The USA needs to make it very easy for foreign engineerings and scientists to immigrate, and 2) the USA ne

These articles almost always end with two points. 1) The USA needs to make it very easy for foreign engineerings and scientists to immigrate, and 2) the USA needs to improve science and engineering education. These articles seem to assume that if you open your doors, foreign engineers will come, and that if you improve your educational system, your own students will become engineers. Both are probably false in the long run. First, there actually aren't all that many talented engineers overseas. A recent study at Duke completely debunked the notion that China and India are producing massive numbers of talented engineers. This isn't to knock IIT grads, of course - they are a very talented bunch. But 300,000 grads at this level every year? Not even close. Second, improving the US education system in math and science isn't going to create more engineers if law, medicine, and finance remain more attractive. I recently read an article about how Japan is starting to experience engineering shortages. It was the first honest article I'd read in a while: unlike the economist article, this one pointed out that engineering is really, really hard, and doesn't pay as well as other like finance, medicine and law. In other words, there are other paths that are easier, more lucrative, and more stable than engineering. Another problem, of course, is that if foreign engineers enter the US in large numbers while law jobs remain off limits to foreigners, that creates an incentive for US students to avoid engineering and go into law. Even if you don't create special protections for Americans like law and medicine do, you'd still expect people to steer clear of a field targeted for employment-related immigration. In many ways, the US has created the perfect set of conditions to deter Americans from entering the field.