4 ms·

U.S. trade policies seem designed to put "low-skilled" workers in direct competition with low-wage workers around the world, while protecting "skilled" workers

U.S. trade policies seem designed to put "low-skilled" workers in direct competition with low-wage workers around the world, while protecting "skilled" workers from international competition. For instance, health care costs might be lower if foreign doctors could more easily practice medicine in the United States, and if Americans could more easily seek lower-cost treatment outside the U.S. I don't think I'm going out on a limb to say that skilled workers, who generally are wealthier and better-educated, have greater access to the levers of power and to protectionist tools, than unskilled workers do. Think of the AMA for doctors, the ABA for lawyers, and opinion journals and TV shows for journalists.

geebee 14y ago
I agree in large part - and I actually think this contributes to the low-ish level of interest Americans have for graduate study in science and engineering. The AMA and ABA are definitely cartel-like organizations - and by getting a degree in these fields, and American can (to some extent) gain protection from foreign competition. The opposite is true for engineering - not only is there no protection, but the US actually created a specific visa to bring in higher numbers of engineers that we'd normally get from the standard immigration system. In short, the US has pursued public policy designed (unintentionally, perhaps) to discourage its own citizens from pursuing engineering in favor of other degree paths.
- dventimi 14y ago
  Do you favor more or less protection for engineering workers? If more, would you also favor more protection for lower-skilled and manufacturing workers (many of whom are actually highly-skilled)? Is there any class of worker who doesn't deserve protection?
  - geebee 14y ago
    I don't think the issue is protection so much as whether we should go out of our way to create a specific visa program designed to bring STEM workers to the US. I think this is a very complex issue - the US should make a greater effort to attract highly skilled and educated immigrants. However, I think that focusing too narrowly on one specific segment of the economy can end up stifling wage growth and suppressing the market signals that might have attracted more US citizens to the field.
    - dventimi 14y ago
      Americans already enjoy blanket worker protection, since you can't legally work here without some kind of visa. That's not necessarily a bad thing, and I'm not saying it's different from labor policy in other nations. But it's a fact, and it does prop up U.S. wages. H1B visas do have the effect of eroding that protection and lowering domestic wages. That also may not necessarily be a bad thing, but it's also a fact. One way that it may be a good thing is that it lowers the cost of engineering services for the rest of us, the same way low-wage workers overseas provide us with cheap manufactured goods, and low-wage farm workers provide us with cheap food. If I.T. wage growth exceeds productivity growth in that sector (I'm not saying it does, I'm saying if it does), then we're being overcharged for I.T. services.

geebee 14y ago

I agree in large part - and I actually think this contributes to the low-ish level of interest Americans have for graduate study in science and engineering. The AMA and ABA are definitely cartel-like organizations - and by getting a degree in these fields, and American can (to some extent) gain protection from foreign competition. The opposite is true for engineering - not only is there no protection, but the US actually created a specific visa to bring in higher numbers of engineers that we'd normally get from the standard immigration system. In short, the US has pursued public policy designed (unintentionally, perhaps) to discourage its own citizens from pursuing engineering in favor of other degree paths.

dventimi 14y ago
Do you favor more or less protection for engineering workers? If more, would you also favor more protection for lower-skilled and manufacturing workers (many of whom are actually highly-skilled)? Is there any class of worker who doesn't deserve protection?
- geebee 14y ago
  I don't think the issue is protection so much as whether we should go out of our way to create a specific visa program designed to bring STEM workers to the US. I think this is a very complex issue - the US should make a greater effort to attract highly skilled and educated immigrants. However, I think that focusing too narrowly on one specific segment of the economy can end up stifling wage growth and suppressing the market signals that might have attracted more US citizens to the field.
  - dventimi 14y ago
    Americans already enjoy blanket worker protection, since you can't legally work here without some kind of visa. That's not necessarily a bad thing, and I'm not saying it's different from labor policy in other nations. But it's a fact, and it does prop up U.S. wages. H1B visas do have the effect of eroding that protection and lowering domestic wages. That also may not necessarily be a bad thing, but it's also a fact. One way that it may be a good thing is that it lowers the cost of engineering services for the rest of us, the same way low-wage workers overseas provide us with cheap manufactured goods, and low-wage farm workers provide us with cheap food. If I.T. wage growth exceeds productivity growth in that sector (I'm not saying it does, I'm saying if it does), then we're being overcharged for I.T. services.