4 ms·

That’s the cynical perspective. The flip side is that the US has traditionally attracted the best talent in the world. This class has gone on to win the most N

That’s the cynical perspective. The flip side is that the US has traditionally attracted the best talent in the world. This class has gone on to win the most Nobel prizes and create the most valuable companies in the world. Focusing on a real negative externality (labor arbitrage) fails to recognize the immense benefits skilled immigrants bring to this country. I’m a son if one of them. My dad came this country in the 60s to get his masters in math at BYU. Probably the only South Asian in the entire class. He overcame extreme poverty,(half of his siblings died in childhood), disabilities to go on and achieve so much. I benefit from his achievements and being a US citizen. That being said, we’re losing our preeminence due to growing xenophobia and a strident “might is right” worldview. But it doesn’t have to be this way - we can embrace our shared humanity while still competing on the global stage for talent.

blfr 6y ago
The real innovation largely stopped soon after your dad came to the US (although it probably wasn't his fault!) and in the time of massive, society-changing levels of immigration, not seen since the 1920s. The model of immigrants causing innovation and xenophobia holding it back simply doesn't match observation. Something interesting happened in the early '70s and it deserves a much better explanation https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/ https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/
- gen220 6y ago
  FWIW, I could write the same comment as the GP. My dad even shared an office building with the person who’s the topic of this thread, for a time. Quibbling over the definition of “innovation” aside, this country was built by immigrants because America itself is a country of composed predominantly of immigrants. As for 1971, my explanation is that this was the point of no return for the various great society programs that we benefit from today (Medicare medicaid and social security). It was a point at which keeping a full-time w-2 employee on payroll leaped involuntarily. It made American labor safer and also more expensive, and encouraged capitalists to seek out cheaper labor in the “developing world”. It also created a lot of bureaucracy around managing the new tax dollars. I don’t think it has anything significant to do with immigration. Although the “problem” presented by those charts is so vague that people can see in them whatever they like, I suppose.
Balgair 6y ago
> That’s the cynical perspective. Google under Eric Schmidt literally colluded with other large SV companies to depress wages. There was a court case, it was a big deal, ~$400M was paid out over it. ""I believe we have a policy of no recruiting from Apple and this is a direct inbound request. Can you get this stopped and let me know why this is happening? I will need to send a response back to Apple quickly so please let me know as soon as you can. Thanks Eric". Schmidt's email led to a recruiter for Google being "terminated within the hour" for not having adhered to the illegal scheme." It's not cynical, it's true. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Schmidt#Role_in_illegal_non-recruiting_agreements https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Schmidt#Role_in_illegal_n...

blfr 6y ago

The real innovation largely stopped soon after your dad came to the US (although it probably wasn't his fault!) and in the time of massive, society-changing levels of immigration, not seen since the 1920s. The model of immigrants causing innovation and xenophobia holding it back simply doesn't match observation. Something interesting happened in the early '70s and it deserves a much better explanation https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/ https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/

gen220 6y ago
FWIW, I could write the same comment as the GP. My dad even shared an office building with the person who’s the topic of this thread, for a time. Quibbling over the definition of “innovation” aside, this country was built by immigrants because America itself is a country of composed predominantly of immigrants. As for 1971, my explanation is that this was the point of no return for the various great society programs that we benefit from today (Medicare medicaid and social security). It was a point at which keeping a full-time w-2 employee on payroll leaped involuntarily. It made American labor safer and also more expensive, and encouraged capitalists to seek out cheaper labor in the “developing world”. It also created a lot of bureaucracy around managing the new tax dollars. I don’t think it has anything significant to do with immigration. Although the “problem” presented by those charts is so vague that people can see in them whatever they like, I suppose.

Balgair 6y ago

> That’s the cynical perspective. Google under Eric Schmidt literally colluded with other large SV companies to depress wages. There was a court case, it was a big deal, ~$400M was paid out over it. ""I believe we have a policy of no recruiting from Apple and this is a direct inbound request. Can you get this stopped and let me know why this is happening? I will need to send a response back to Apple quickly so please let me know as soon as you can. Thanks Eric". Schmidt's email led to a recruiter for Google being "terminated within the hour" for not having adhered to the illegal scheme." It's not cynical, it's true. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Schmidt#Role_in_illegal_non-recruiting_agreements https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Schmidt#Role_in_illegal_n...