4 ms·

I recently read an article about visas for foreign nurses on businessweek. President Obama is quoted: " "The notion that we would have to import nurses makes a

by geebee 17y ago

I recently read an article about visas for foreign nurses on businessweek. President Obama is quoted: " "The notion that we would have to import nurses makes absolutely no sense," Obama said at a health-care forum in March. "There are a lot of people [in the U.S.] who would love to be in that helping profession, and yet we just aren't providing the resources to get them trained—that's something we've got to fix." " (the link is http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/jun2009/db20090619_970033.htm http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/jun2009/...) It's interesting that our president, who supports an increase in H1Bs for the high tech industry, would take this position where it comes to nursing. It's made me very cynical. Ultimately, this all comes down to power. Nurses have a shared experience (a specific education requirement), as well as a specific licensing procedure that can be used as a gateway. They also don't compete with each other the way programmers do (yes, programmers share knowledge, but a nurse a kaiser clearly isn't competing with a nurse at beth israel the way a programmer at google competes with one at microsoft). Nurses also have a very, very powerful union, and society pretty much backs them up, as the profession is held in high esteem. If a hospital tried to bring in foreign nurses, engage in "knowledge transfer", and then fire the older americans with higher salaries, the union would vote to strike, the hospital would cease to operate, the public would back the nurses, and management would completely capitulate. I don't even know if Obama sees the potential inconsistency. That's what power does. People often don't see themselves as "capitulating" to power. Instead, they respect power, and negotiate accordingly. I used to be much more in favor of "free markets". I still am in theory - what I say is "I'm all in favor of free markets - if you find one, please let me know, I'd love to participate". But at this point in my live, I've concluded that working in a "free market" is like wandering around the wild west without a gun. Sure, it'd be nice if we all put down our arms, but if you're the only one who does this, you're just a chump. To me, that's what free markets are - a chump's game. I applaud Prof Matloff for fighting this. People who have read my posts probably know that I'm in favor of a small number of visas for very talented people (in any field), but I think we're unintentionally eradicating our home-grown STEM (science technology engineering mathematics) workforce. The last line is especially chilling - parents in Silicon Valley know what's going on, and they no longer encourage their children to pursue the field. I actually think that this, in the long run, will severely hurt the US economy, and we're doing it to ourselves. Yes, allow talented workers to come here. No, don't issue so many visas that young Americans are rightly deterred from entering the field.

deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
TriinT 17y ago
You might want to try to make your point in a more succinct manner next time...
tc 17y ago
I was with you until the last two paragraphs. After that point, you got it all backwards. Let's see: that's what free markets are - a chump's game You're blaming the wrong thing. I believe you mean to say, "pretending that the markets we have now are free is a chump's game." Is this the sort of hypothetical story that you have in mind: "Joe the programmer has gotten laid off from three companies that ended up going out of business while watching insurance giants and bankers get bailed out by the government, seeing people in licensed professions (lawyers, doctors, nurses) remain secure in their lucrative jobs, and observing that government employees never get fired, have great benefits, high pay, and low levels of work and stress." If so, you can make a case that Joe is a chump. You could argue that he should be using force to get a better deal at the expense of others rather than naïvely working to increase total wealth. But in any case, the problem has to do with the breakdown of the rule of law, disregard for property rights, and neglecting to observe the hidden costs. Free markets have nothing to do with this. Yes, allow talented workers to come here. No, don't issue so many visas that young Americans are rightly deterred from entering the field. The American economy has grown to its present level because smart, hardworking people built companies in America -- not because people who were Americans at the time of their birth built companies. How would America be any better if Sergey Brin's father had been one of those marginal cases you had decided to keep out? It's easy to forget that if we keep out X Indian individuals, some Y of those individuals might go on to build the next Cisco -- and if they're excluded from America, that company might be built in India. The other governments of the world would love it if we further closed our borders (to any degree).
- geebee 17y ago
  <the problem has to do with the breakdown of the rule of law, disregard for property rights, and neglecting to observe the hidden costs. Free markets have nothing to do with this.> I agree, 100%. I phrased that badly. The chump's game is blithely accepting the markets we have as "free". <it's easy to forget that if we keep out X Indian individuals, some Y of those individuals might go on to build the next Cisco -- and if they're excluded from America, that company might be built in India.> That's true. But the US takes 1.2 million immigrants a year. I consider that to be a high number, but that's really just a matter of opinion. But we (almost) all have our limits. Should we increase it to 2.4 million so we don't lose the marginal cases? Even if we do, there will still be marginal cases. So then should we increase it to 4.8 million/year? I'm sure we could find takers. Eventually, we have to accept that as a practical matter, some of the people who want to come here aren't going to get to - and some of them would have been truly excellent Americans. <The other governments of the world would love it if we further closed our borders (to any degree).> On this one, I completely disagree. Seven of the top 10 users of the H1B visa are actually Indian outsourcing firms. They use the visa to cycle a worker through the US to learn the job, then bring that worker back home to outsource the job. India actually gets quite angry with the US when we talk about limiting H1B visas.

by geebee 17y ago

deleted 17y ago

[deleted]

TriinT 17y ago

You might want to try to make your point in a more succinct manner next time...

tc 17y ago

I was with you until the last two paragraphs. After that point, you got it all backwards. Let's see: that's what free markets are - a chump's game You're blaming the wrong thing. I believe you mean to say, "pretending that the markets we have now are free is a chump's game." Is this the sort of hypothetical story that you have in mind: "Joe the programmer has gotten laid off from three companies that ended up going out of business while watching insurance giants and bankers get bailed out by the government, seeing people in licensed professions (lawyers, doctors, nurses) remain secure in their lucrative jobs, and observing that government employees never get fired, have great benefits, high pay, and low levels of work and stress." If so, you can make a case that Joe is a chump. You could argue that he should be using force to get a better deal at the expense of others rather than naïvely working to increase total wealth. But in any case, the problem has to do with the breakdown of the rule of law, disregard for property rights, and neglecting to observe the hidden costs. Free markets have nothing to do with this. Yes, allow talented workers to come here. No, don't issue so many visas that young Americans are rightly deterred from entering the field. The American economy has grown to its present level because smart, hardworking people built companies in America -- not because people who were Americans at the time of their birth built companies. How would America be any better if Sergey Brin's father had been one of those marginal cases you had decided to keep out? It's easy to forget that if we keep out X Indian individuals, some Y of those individuals might go on to build the next Cisco -- and if they're excluded from America, that company might be built in India. The other governments of the world would love it if we further closed our borders (to any degree).

geebee 17y ago
<the problem has to do with the breakdown of the rule of law, disregard for property rights, and neglecting to observe the hidden costs. Free markets have nothing to do with this.> I agree, 100%. I phrased that badly. The chump's game is blithely accepting the markets we have as "free". <it's easy to forget that if we keep out X Indian individuals, some Y of those individuals might go on to build the next Cisco -- and if they're excluded from America, that company might be built in India.> That's true. But the US takes 1.2 million immigrants a year. I consider that to be a high number, but that's really just a matter of opinion. But we (almost) all have our limits. Should we increase it to 2.4 million so we don't lose the marginal cases? Even if we do, there will still be marginal cases. So then should we increase it to 4.8 million/year? I'm sure we could find takers. Eventually, we have to accept that as a practical matter, some of the people who want to come here aren't going to get to - and some of them would have been truly excellent Americans. <The other governments of the world would love it if we further closed our borders (to any degree).> On this one, I completely disagree. Seven of the top 10 users of the H1B visa are actually Indian outsourcing firms. They use the visa to cycle a worker through the US to learn the job, then bring that worker back home to outsource the job. India actually gets quite angry with the US when we talk about limiting H1B visas.