6 ms·

There is not a global competition for talent. How many people on here can truly say that they were considering between two different countries. That doesn’t ha

There is not a global competition for talent. How many people on here can truly say that they were considering between two different countries. That doesn’t happen at scale. There is a global competition for coming to Western Europe, Canada, and the US

Seanambers 1y ago
Exactly, and especially SV and the US has seemingly been almost entirely locked down by Indians.
AceJohnny2 1y ago
> How many people on here can truly say that they were considering between two different countries Hi! I know I'm just a datum, but I gotta represent myself.
- Fordec 1y ago
  Same, three actually, none of which the US. A closer representation for the US brain may be who is considering between different states? Here is the thing, other countries do not necessarily work exactly the same way as the US or individually have large enough local markets to contain all aspects of the overall tech industry, just locally.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
epistasis 1y ago
Not yet. The slate of policy choices in the US is removing it from that list of countries, and will strengthen those countries' labor forces. Right now SV salaries command a huge premium, because all of SV is predicated on increasing productivity, increasing the economic pie, and rewarding those who do so with a fraction of that gain in GDP. Treating SV labor like plumbing or construction labor fundamentally misunderstands the dynamics and the creation of wealth.
- ahmeneeroe-v2 1y ago
  Removing demand doesn’t create more competition, the opposite in fact. SV labor is largely not different than a skilled trade, except at the higher levels.
  - epistasis 1y ago
    The whole system of SV is exceptionally different, it's all about expanding productivity and GDP. That's where the massive salaries come from, that massive wealth creation. It's not just taking larger chunks of a fixed size pie.
    - ahmeneeroe-v2 1y ago
      What do you think an electrician is doing? Sure some electrical capacity goes to non-productive uses, but much of it is also spent doing things like enabling widespread computer usage. SV labor is downstream of skilled trades.
      - epistasis 1y ago
        Keeping the lights on is an absolutely essential societal function, and for keeping an economy running. But expanding the technological capacity of the US is what made us so much wealthier than any other country in the world. And expanding that technological capacity faster than the rest of the world comes from attracting the best technological innovators from the rest of the world. However, with China's and India's size, it's likely that they will now be able to overtake us without relying on much immigration.
  - 0xWTF 1y ago
    I was about to ridicule this, but then I thought about it. My wife is in a skilled trade in SV, and that actually sounds about right. She has nothing to do with software, but probably earns, dollar/hour, about the same as a mid-tier L6 SWE at Google. I do R&D program management, government though, so the conversion to quality of life is kinda weird. Most people would see our house and assume I'm a director.
barrkel 1y ago
I had to choose between California and Germany. It is a thing.
- toomuchtodo 1y ago
  Interestingly, Germany is the third, and California the fourth, largest economies in the world.
- goykasi 1y ago
  Did you have to choose? Or did you have the option? I would wager to bet that a significant amount of people in the US cant afford to move to another state.
  - epistasis 1y ago
    Can you distinguish option and needing to choose here? Having an option would necessarily cause a need to choose.
    - goykasi 1y ago
      I can confidently say yes. Choosing between working in two different countries separated by an entire ocean is an option. Moving to a different state is expensive for many, but moving to another continent is only afforded to a privileged minority.
      - freetime2 1y ago
        Why is it relevant, though?
        epistasis 1y ago
        That is my underlying question, by trying to find out what the difference is in the posters mind.
Swizec 1y ago
> How many people on here can truly say that they were considering between two different countries. That doesn’t happen at scale. /me I started in Slovenia, considered London, actually got an offer in Canada, but ultimately chose San Francisco. Figured that if I’m going to the trouble of moving abroad, I might as well go to the center of the industry. Got lots of friends who chose various EU companies based on desired lifestyle/work/partner balance. You have lots of options as a good engineer. Especially before the last 3 years of market shenanigans.
- ahmeneeroe-v2 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - Swizec 1y ago
    > Idk, it sounds like you and your talented friends worked hard to get into Western Europe/US/Canada Yes. Up and left -> You’re an immigrant Down and right -> You’re an expat
  - freetime2 1y ago
    They had a choice. Whether intentional or not, London, Canada, and the US were competing based on which country could offer the best lifestyle. If the US becomes hostile to immigrants, then people with a choice (who are typically the most talented candidates) may choose to live elsewhere.
    - ahmeneeroe-v2 1y ago
      Those countries were not competing for high skilled immigrants. They built themselves into places that high skill immigrants seek, but that is more of a side effect than a competition. The leaders/parties supporting immigration in those countries are ambivalent to receiving high skill immigrants or refugees.
      - freetime2 1y ago
        > Those countries were not keeping for high skilled immigrants. The US, UK, and Canada all have special provisions in their immigration programs aimed at attracting and prioritizing highly-skilled workers. Both the UK [1] and Canada [2] both use a points-based ranking system that prioritizes highly-skilled immigrants. The UK system is clear in its goals: > introduce an Immigration Bill to bring in a firm and fair points-based system that will attract the high-skilled workers we need to contribute to our economy, our communities and our public services. And while the US H1-B program is lottery-based, 20,000 slots are reserved for people who hold a master's degree from a U.S. institution. Proposals have also been made recently to change to a points-based system. [3] > They built themselves into places that high skill immigrants seek, but that is more of a side effect than a competition Wherever there is choice, there is competition. 55% of billion dollar startups in the US have immigrant founders, employing an average of 1,200 employees each [4]. If these people don't come to the US and start companies, the US will feel the effects - even if they were just "side effects". [1] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-uks-points-based-immigration-system-policy-statement/the-uks-points-based-immigration-system-policy-statement https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-uks-points-ba... [2] https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/immigrate-canada/express-entry/check-score/crs-criteria.html https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/se... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAISE_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAISE_Act [4] https://www.fosterglobal.com/blog/55-of-americas-billion-dollar-startups-have-an-immigrant-founder/ https://www.fosterglobal.com/blog/55-of-americas-billion-dol...
estebarb 1y ago
A common problem in latam and other geos is brain drain. Most of their best minds simply leave the country looking for better opportunities. That is impactful for the countries economies, the country invest a lot in people,but others see the benefits. During last century, USA has been the most benefited from that kind of immigration. Personally I think that this is a very short sighted decision by USA administration. But overall, I think that this will benefit the rest of the world. Maybe in a few years even USA will start exporting their best minds abroad!
- rayiner 1y ago
  > During last century, USA has been the most benefited from that kind of immigration This is inaccurate. The U.S. had a highly restrictionist immigration system from 1921-1965. The foreign born population dropped from almost 15% to under 5% by 1970. During that time, the U.S. had a small number of highly skilled immigrants, such as German scientists fleeing the Nazi regime. You’re talking about a very small number of truly exceptional people. A $100k/year fee is not going to shut down this kind of immigration.
  - estebarb 1y ago
    Between 1921 and 1965, about 9.6 million people were admitted as lawful permanent residents. That's not what I'd call a "very small" or "highly restricted" inflow. Source: DHS Yearbook, https://ohss.dhs.gov/topics/immigration/yearbook/2019/table1#table-data-heading https://ohss.dhs.gov/topics/immigration/yearbook/2019/table1...
    - rayiner 1y ago
      You can see the restriction easily on a chart: https://www.migrationpolicy.org/programs/data-hub/charts/annual-number-of-us-legal-permanent-residents https://www.migrationpolicy.org/programs/data-hub/charts/ann... We have been around 1 million per year for decades. If we still had that policy, adjusted for population you’re talking about cutting legal immigration by one-third to one-half. And that’s not counting a large increase in “gray market” legal immigration (TPS, asylum, etc.)
ekm2 1y ago
How many people on here can truly say that they were considering between two different countries. That doesn’t happen at scale. Mmmh...How about four countries?US,UK,Canada &South Africa. As a student,though
rinon 1y ago
Because of our historical strength. If we drive people away, that just makes room for other contenders. How is that smart?
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
jacquesm 1y ago
Only two?
victor106 1y ago
>There is a global competition for coming to Western Europe, Canada, and the US. As someone who lived in all three geographies and interacted with immigrants who lived in there, here is my raw take:- Western Europe:- Love it and people are so nice but they are also (I am sorry to say) racist. Proof:- How many immigrant CEO's do you see from companies based in Western Europe? The top 4 largest tech companies in the US have two indian CEO's for more than 10 years now. Canada:- Super nice and immigrant friendly more than the US, but the size of the country (approx 10% of the US) doesn't have the financial/economic/social infrastructure that is needed to support a large number of immigrants. Also tech salaries are miserable compared to the US US:- For all its faults, US is truly the only country where immigrants looking for a better future can immigrate and assimilate into. For how long this lasts remains to be seen but I don't think that is going to change anytime soon.
- decremental 1y ago
  [dead]
vvrm 1y ago
For FAANG engineers this will likely mean moving to Vancouver, Zurich or Singapore with their job, salary, rsus and taxes.

Seanambers 1y ago

Exactly, and especially SV and the US has seemingly been almost entirely locked down by Indians.

AceJohnny2 1y ago

> How many people on here can truly say that they were considering between two different countries Hi! I know I'm just a datum, but I gotta represent myself.

Fordec 1y ago
Same, three actually, none of which the US. A closer representation for the US brain may be who is considering between different states? Here is the thing, other countries do not necessarily work exactly the same way as the US or individually have large enough local markets to contain all aspects of the overall tech industry, just locally.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

epistasis 1y ago

Not yet. The slate of policy choices in the US is removing it from that list of countries, and will strengthen those countries' labor forces. Right now SV salaries command a huge premium, because all of SV is predicated on increasing productivity, increasing the economic pie, and rewarding those who do so with a fraction of that gain in GDP. Treating SV labor like plumbing or construction labor fundamentally misunderstands the dynamics and the creation of wealth.

ahmeneeroe-v2 1y ago
Removing demand doesn’t create more competition, the opposite in fact. SV labor is largely not different than a skilled trade, except at the higher levels.
- epistasis 1y ago
  The whole system of SV is exceptionally different, it's all about expanding productivity and GDP. That's where the massive salaries come from, that massive wealth creation. It's not just taking larger chunks of a fixed size pie.
  - ahmeneeroe-v2 1y ago
    What do you think an electrician is doing? Sure some electrical capacity goes to non-productive uses, but much of it is also spent doing things like enabling widespread computer usage. SV labor is downstream of skilled trades.
    - epistasis 1y ago
      Keeping the lights on is an absolutely essential societal function, and for keeping an economy running. But expanding the technological capacity of the US is what made us so much wealthier than any other country in the world. And expanding that technological capacity faster than the rest of the world comes from attracting the best technological innovators from the rest of the world. However, with China's and India's size, it's likely that they will now be able to overtake us without relying on much immigration.
- 0xWTF 1y ago
  I was about to ridicule this, but then I thought about it. My wife is in a skilled trade in SV, and that actually sounds about right. She has nothing to do with software, but probably earns, dollar/hour, about the same as a mid-tier L6 SWE at Google. I do R&D program management, government though, so the conversion to quality of life is kinda weird. Most people would see our house and assume I'm a director.

barrkel 1y ago

I had to choose between California and Germany. It is a thing.

toomuchtodo 1y ago
Interestingly, Germany is the third, and California the fourth, largest economies in the world.
goykasi 1y ago
Did you have to choose? Or did you have the option? I would wager to bet that a significant amount of people in the US cant afford to move to another state.
- epistasis 1y ago
  Can you distinguish option and needing to choose here? Having an option would necessarily cause a need to choose.
  - goykasi 1y ago
    I can confidently say yes. Choosing between working in two different countries separated by an entire ocean is an option. Moving to a different state is expensive for many, but moving to another continent is only afforded to a privileged minority.
    - freetime2 1y ago
      Why is it relevant, though?
      - epistasis 1y ago
        That is my underlying question, by trying to find out what the difference is in the posters mind.

Swizec 1y ago

> How many people on here can truly say that they were considering between two different countries. That doesn’t happen at scale. /me I started in Slovenia, considered London, actually got an offer in Canada, but ultimately chose San Francisco. Figured that if I’m going to the trouble of moving abroad, I might as well go to the center of the industry. Got lots of friends who chose various EU companies based on desired lifestyle/work/partner balance. You have lots of options as a good engineer. Especially before the last 3 years of market shenanigans.

ahmeneeroe-v2 1y ago
[flagged]
- Swizec 1y ago
  > Idk, it sounds like you and your talented friends worked hard to get into Western Europe/US/Canada Yes. Up and left -> You’re an immigrant Down and right -> You’re an expat
- freetime2 1y ago
  They had a choice. Whether intentional or not, London, Canada, and the US were competing based on which country could offer the best lifestyle. If the US becomes hostile to immigrants, then people with a choice (who are typically the most talented candidates) may choose to live elsewhere.
  - ahmeneeroe-v2 1y ago
    Those countries were not competing for high skilled immigrants. They built themselves into places that high skill immigrants seek, but that is more of a side effect than a competition. The leaders/parties supporting immigration in those countries are ambivalent to receiving high skill immigrants or refugees.
    - freetime2 1y ago
      > Those countries were not keeping for high skilled immigrants. The US, UK, and Canada all have special provisions in their immigration programs aimed at attracting and prioritizing highly-skilled workers. Both the UK [1] and Canada [2] both use a points-based ranking system that prioritizes highly-skilled immigrants. The UK system is clear in its goals: > introduce an Immigration Bill to bring in a firm and fair points-based system that will attract the high-skilled workers we need to contribute to our economy, our communities and our public services. And while the US H1-B program is lottery-based, 20,000 slots are reserved for people who hold a master's degree from a U.S. institution. Proposals have also been made recently to change to a points-based system. [3] > They built themselves into places that high skill immigrants seek, but that is more of a side effect than a competition Wherever there is choice, there is competition. 55% of billion dollar startups in the US have immigrant founders, employing an average of 1,200 employees each [4]. If these people don't come to the US and start companies, the US will feel the effects - even if they were just "side effects". [1] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-uks-points-based-immigration-system-policy-statement/the-uks-points-based-immigration-system-policy-statement https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-uks-points-ba... [2] https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/immigrate-canada/express-entry/check-score/crs-criteria.html https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/se... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAISE_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAISE_Act [4] https://www.fosterglobal.com/blog/55-of-americas-billion-dollar-startups-have-an-immigrant-founder/ https://www.fosterglobal.com/blog/55-of-americas-billion-dol...

estebarb 1y ago

A common problem in latam and other geos is brain drain. Most of their best minds simply leave the country looking for better opportunities. That is impactful for the countries economies, the country invest a lot in people,but others see the benefits. During last century, USA has been the most benefited from that kind of immigration. Personally I think that this is a very short sighted decision by USA administration. But overall, I think that this will benefit the rest of the world. Maybe in a few years even USA will start exporting their best minds abroad!

rayiner 1y ago
> During last century, USA has been the most benefited from that kind of immigration This is inaccurate. The U.S. had a highly restrictionist immigration system from 1921-1965. The foreign born population dropped from almost 15% to under 5% by 1970. During that time, the U.S. had a small number of highly skilled immigrants, such as German scientists fleeing the Nazi regime. You’re talking about a very small number of truly exceptional people. A $100k/year fee is not going to shut down this kind of immigration.
- estebarb 1y ago
  Between 1921 and 1965, about 9.6 million people were admitted as lawful permanent residents. That's not what I'd call a "very small" or "highly restricted" inflow. Source: DHS Yearbook, https://ohss.dhs.gov/topics/immigration/yearbook/2019/table1#table-data-heading https://ohss.dhs.gov/topics/immigration/yearbook/2019/table1...
  - rayiner 1y ago
    You can see the restriction easily on a chart: https://www.migrationpolicy.org/programs/data-hub/charts/annual-number-of-us-legal-permanent-residents https://www.migrationpolicy.org/programs/data-hub/charts/ann... We have been around 1 million per year for decades. If we still had that policy, adjusted for population you’re talking about cutting legal immigration by one-third to one-half. And that’s not counting a large increase in “gray market” legal immigration (TPS, asylum, etc.)

ekm2 1y ago

How many people on here can truly say that they were considering between two different countries. That doesn’t happen at scale. Mmmh...How about four countries?US,UK,Canada &South Africa. As a student,though

rinon 1y ago

Because of our historical strength. If we drive people away, that just makes room for other contenders. How is that smart?

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

jacquesm 1y ago

Only two?

victor106 1y ago

>There is a global competition for coming to Western Europe, Canada, and the US. As someone who lived in all three geographies and interacted with immigrants who lived in there, here is my raw take:- Western Europe:- Love it and people are so nice but they are also (I am sorry to say) racist. Proof:- How many immigrant CEO's do you see from companies based in Western Europe? The top 4 largest tech companies in the US have two indian CEO's for more than 10 years now. Canada:- Super nice and immigrant friendly more than the US, but the size of the country (approx 10% of the US) doesn't have the financial/economic/social infrastructure that is needed to support a large number of immigrants. Also tech salaries are miserable compared to the US US:- For all its faults, US is truly the only country where immigrants looking for a better future can immigrate and assimilate into. For how long this lasts remains to be seen but I don't think that is going to change anytime soon.

decremental 1y ago
[dead]

vvrm 1y ago

For FAANG engineers this will likely mean moving to Vancouver, Zurich or Singapore with their job, salary, rsus and taxes.