5 ms·

> In the long term, does it make a difference in US if it doesn't bring talent across the world? Of course, it does! The only reason the standard of living in

> In the long term, does it make a difference in US if it doesn't bring talent across the world? Of course, it does! The only reason the standard of living in the US is higher than anywhere else in the world is because the US makes stuff the rest of the world covets. America is the leading economy in the world today not because it has the most number of people, but because it has the best and the brightest, gathered from around the world. We have the smartest people not because the smartest people of the world were all born here, but because smart people born elsewhere have been immigrating to the United States. Stopping this is not the path to creating jobs. US tech exports in 2018 was $338 billion. Tech is our biggest export by far. Think of the US tech industry as a siphon that sucks in wealth from foreign countries. Would you want to make that siphon bigger or smaller? If you want to make that siphon bigger — and more competitive — how would you do it? By limiting the people that can work in tech to whoever you can find locally, or by bringing in the smartest people from around the world? Keep in mind that the money this siphon brings in is not only benefiting tech workers and tech shareholders. When the money is spent it turns the wheels of our economy, which leads to prosperity for all Americans, not just the few that work in tech. Think of the tech industry as a way to suck money from foreign countries and pump it into the economy of our country. The beneficiaries include all Americans, including those who work in restaurants, retail, healthcare, insurance, education, housing, transportation, entertainment and so on. Limiting tech industry to whoever companies can find locally will hurt its global competitiveness. Such a move will not just hurt the few would-be tech immigrants that are prevented from immigrating, but American prosperity in general.

62951413 4y ago
Shouldn't the government do more to promote equality? The current approach makes possible to arbitrage at scale when the government can * bring in a large number of already educated (for free or _much_ cheaper) foreigners * often from an upper middle class background in their home countries * progressively lower the bar on the secondary education for Americans to jeopardize their chances of competing with foreigners for STEM majors and eventually jobs in high-tech. Which hits the disappearing [lower] middle class the hardest. * keep college education significantly more expensive than it is for the very same foreigners
- bobthepanda 4y ago
  * part of the problem is that education is not funded much federally but mostly by cash strapped states and localities, and there are many reasons why politicians and parents may not want local control or funding to be loosened. * part of the problem is that there are huge segments of politicians who are not interested in or do not want equality, and to that end even actively try to destroy education
- slt2021 4y ago
  americans can do the same - move to Europe for college and get higher education for a fraction of cost/almost free. then come back debt free with great education. I dont understand why Americans are not taking advantage of these arbitrage opportunities. You don't need government to do anything for you, just take your destiny in your own hands
ALittleLight 4y ago
I think there are several countries, across North and Western Europe, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, perhaps Singapore and Hong Kong, that could compete with the US for "standard of living". These countries don't have similar immigration policies or histories compared to the US. If you think of a person who builds a unicorn as a national level resource, which makes sense because they create jobs, capabilities, and wealth, then you seem to be saying that it is good for the US to drain the national resources of other, poorer countries. Why isn't a good thing for Indian entrepreneurs to create Indian unicorns in India?
- petilon 4y ago
  Australia takes in twice as many immigrants per year, compared to the US, as a percentage of their population. Canada almost 4 times as many. Singapore, New Zealand and Hong Kong too take in more immigrants than the US.
  - ALittleLight 4y ago
    Canada and Australia both use a points based immigration system. Both countries are isolated from land borders that can be easily crossed. Contrast this with the non-points based immigration system in the US and tens of millions of immigrants from South and Central America. As I wrote - different immigration systems.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
  - midoridensha 4y ago
    >Singapore, New Zealand and Hong Kong too take in more immigrants than the US. Is this still true for Hong Kong after the recent Chinese crackdown? The stuff I've read says HK lost a significant number of people who fled after that.
- FredPret 4y ago
  I'm an engineer that moved to Canada. Let me tell you, I am here because they made it easy (or at least do-able) to come, and the people made it extremely pleasant to stay. In America, you also get the mostly immigrant-friendly culture, but it's orders of magnitude harder and more involved to get there. So it's not even on my radar.
2143 4y ago
> The only reason the standard of living in the US is higher than anywhere else in the world That's not true. Places like Sweden, Luxembourg, Switzerland etc have higher standards of living. US isn't by no means bad when it comes to standard of living, but it definitely isn't "higher than anywhere else in the world".
- midoridensha 4y ago
  >US isn't by no means bad when it comes to standard of living, but it definitely isn't "higher than anywhere else in the world". It depends on how you measure "standard of living", as it's actually pretty subjective. In short, if you're a billionaire, you'll probably get the highest standard of living in America, living in a massive private compound somewhere. You'll have access to whatever food you want, the best medical care, etc. And if you're not a billionaire, you don't matter in America; only the opinions of billionaires matter there.

62951413 4y ago

Shouldn't the government do more to promote equality? The current approach makes possible to arbitrage at scale when the government can * bring in a large number of already educated (for free or _much_ cheaper) foreigners * often from an upper middle class background in their home countries * progressively lower the bar on the secondary education for Americans to jeopardize their chances of competing with foreigners for STEM majors and eventually jobs in high-tech. Which hits the disappearing [lower] middle class the hardest. * keep college education significantly more expensive than it is for the very same foreigners

bobthepanda 4y ago
* part of the problem is that education is not funded much federally but mostly by cash strapped states and localities, and there are many reasons why politicians and parents may not want local control or funding to be loosened. * part of the problem is that there are huge segments of politicians who are not interested in or do not want equality, and to that end even actively try to destroy education
slt2021 4y ago
americans can do the same - move to Europe for college and get higher education for a fraction of cost/almost free. then come back debt free with great education. I dont understand why Americans are not taking advantage of these arbitrage opportunities. You don't need government to do anything for you, just take your destiny in your own hands

ALittleLight 4y ago

I think there are several countries, across North and Western Europe, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, perhaps Singapore and Hong Kong, that could compete with the US for "standard of living". These countries don't have similar immigration policies or histories compared to the US. If you think of a person who builds a unicorn as a national level resource, which makes sense because they create jobs, capabilities, and wealth, then you seem to be saying that it is good for the US to drain the national resources of other, poorer countries. Why isn't a good thing for Indian entrepreneurs to create Indian unicorns in India?

petilon 4y ago
Australia takes in twice as many immigrants per year, compared to the US, as a percentage of their population. Canada almost 4 times as many. Singapore, New Zealand and Hong Kong too take in more immigrants than the US.
- ALittleLight 4y ago
  Canada and Australia both use a points based immigration system. Both countries are isolated from land borders that can be easily crossed. Contrast this with the non-points based immigration system in the US and tens of millions of immigrants from South and Central America. As I wrote - different immigration systems.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- midoridensha 4y ago
  >Singapore, New Zealand and Hong Kong too take in more immigrants than the US. Is this still true for Hong Kong after the recent Chinese crackdown? The stuff I've read says HK lost a significant number of people who fled after that.
FredPret 4y ago
I'm an engineer that moved to Canada. Let me tell you, I am here because they made it easy (or at least do-able) to come, and the people made it extremely pleasant to stay. In America, you also get the mostly immigrant-friendly culture, but it's orders of magnitude harder and more involved to get there. So it's not even on my radar.

2143 4y ago

> The only reason the standard of living in the US is higher than anywhere else in the world That's not true. Places like Sweden, Luxembourg, Switzerland etc have higher standards of living. US isn't by no means bad when it comes to standard of living, but it definitely isn't "higher than anywhere else in the world".

midoridensha 4y ago
>US isn't by no means bad when it comes to standard of living, but it definitely isn't "higher than anywhere else in the world". It depends on how you measure "standard of living", as it's actually pretty subjective. In short, if you're a billionaire, you'll probably get the highest standard of living in America, living in a massive private compound somewhere. You'll have access to whatever food you want, the best medical care, etc. And if you're not a billionaire, you don't matter in America; only the opinions of billionaires matter there.