1) What the hell is a brainbox?
2) What does the death of a colleague have to do with innovation?
3) Can you really measure innovation with "# of patents"? By that measure, Panasonic is the most innovative company in the world.
Losing a coworker, particularly at a small company, is also quite traumatic. After losing a key member of a team, perhaps the survivors find they have other priorities in life than trying to file for lots of patents. This seems like a rather obvious confounding factor.
Exactly, seems pretty disingenuous to measure grieving people's productivity and compare based on whether they're grieving the death of a native or immigrant.
2) His death also meant the death of his creativity in his team. It also means that no one else could replicate it at that level? [That they couldn't find a replacement for him quick enough]
3) By how well it is received by an organization and real world customers.
Would you say that Steve Jobs brought life into an otherwise dull company called Apple? Not saying that immigrants are like him, but just throwing some light on your questions.
One patent can be more "innovative" than 10,000 patents. For example, 10,000 patents on horse carriage designs/parts compared to one patent for a Model T car.
Yes there is and always will be a need for skilled people from other Countries. But in the US, many High School grads need to be re-taught some basic high-school level courses as freshmen.
This started in the 80s. I remember a couple of profs telling me this.
But many US communities cannot afford to provide a good education for various reasons. To me, the largest reason is no one wants to pay taxes.
Spending on education is at fairly high levels (for example, some major cities spend over $20,000 per student per year), with surprisingly little impact on results versus districts that spend a lot less. I would say that the public as a whole is willing to spend on taxes for schools, too. I see tax increases for schools generally passing at the local level plus more spending at both the state and federal level going through. There may be a lot of room for discussion about /how/ that money is being spent.
Hence my willingness to float private tuition on top of taxes.
I don't care to have them grow up confused regarding the basics.
Correct. Contrary to what is often said, there is no shortage whatsoever of funding for public schools in urban areas. New York City spends more per student than anywhere else in the US. <https://www.silive.com/news/2019/06/how-much-does-new-york-c...> Baltimore, an incredibly poor and run-down city, spends the third most. #4-6 and #8 are all wealthy suburbs of Washington DC, but their schools are all far better than those of Baltimore or NYC on average, despite Baltimore spending slightly more per student and NYC spending 60-70% more.
>and results are extremely poor, especially on a spending basis.
Perhaps the latter is true, but the former is not. <https://x.com/cremieuxrecueil/status/1732478253225443777>
Basically, every US ethnic group does better than their countries of origin.
You do understand you don’t get to choose to pay taxes, right? Federal income tax is certainly immoral, and no one wants to pay it, but for most they cannot be bothered to fight it in some way. They take the tax credits they’re given and pay the rest out of pocket. And that’s assuming it isn’t already taken out before they even get the check.
The true problem is that the American government at various levels pockets a lot of it, and what they don’t pocket is spent on things such as funding unnecessary wars, subsidizing European healthcare via military assistance, and restricting American rights. And after all of that, by the time the school is involved it’s filled with a standardized curriculum that’s built on memorization and not genuine education.
Which pales in comparison to the English education immigrants need but never receive.
???
So people can travel half the world and fill all the paperwork to immigrate to the US but somehow then can't register to a language class? At some point we should stop blaming society for laziness of individuals. It never has been that easy to learn languages (esp. English) and for free thanks to the internet.
When my parents were in school.. their description (at an Ivy League-tier school) was of basically inedible food in the cafeteria, and the food being particularly bad on certain days, and no air conditioning (in a hot, muggy part of the south). Their other set of memories was of complete academic excellence where nearly everyone was driven to be their best at whatever they did. My dad paid for it with a job working in a steel mill during the summer. They were both first-generation college students.
Normally then you're able to get a "highly skilled migrant" permit (with less restrictive criteria than had you not studied in NL) which is renewable, then eventually after passing some language and integration tests and sufficient time you're eligible for long-term permanent residence (or even citizenship).
It's a refreshingly sane approach compared to the US.
Dangling green cards in front of the most motivated people from other countries is not better than actually working to develop our own talent, which we're doing an awful job at. Think of how things would be if school funding was something being demanded by industry to develop the best candidates. Instead we have the lucky few and a bunch of people who feel very rightly left behind.
These are people we are talking about, with agency, capable of making their own choices in life, not some inanimate "resource". If they want to come to the US, I'm a "grow the pie" guy.
It would be pretty much the same because you can lead a horse to water but you can't make them drink.
[1] https://xquant.substack.com/p/where-have-the-international-m...
EDIT: I'm out of posts for the day, here's my reply.
I mean people being able to communicate and empathize with eachother.
No one works
No one can get jobs (all the fake job postings and applications)
No one is dating
etc etc. These are all fundamentally the result of the destruction of social cohesion. This is a well known cyclical phenomenon and immigration is absolutely the opposite thing you should be doing in this phase of the cycle.
EDIT2: You can have large portions of the population unemployed and unemployment at historic lows if enough people have dropped out of the work force. According to the BLS that appears to be exactly what has happened in the US and is consistent with what I'm arguing.
This is discussing recent comment made by Donald Trump: “You graduate from a college, I think you should get, automatically as part of your diploma, a green card [permanent residence in the United States].” and wondering why United States doesn't do this compared to many other countries who have similar programs.
On one hand, United States educates a ton of foreigners, some of them with extremely advanced Degrees, then kicks them out of the country. This seems counterproductive to growing US economy.
On other hand, many in Tech Sector have seen recent layoffs, H-1B hiring to replace workers and offshore outsourcing and see such a proposal as a threat to their livelihood. Tech is still good sector to make a decent living in despite many companies' desperate attempts to reduce the cost.
As US Tech Worker, I think I would oppose such systems where "Visa handed to all graduate degree holders" since I think schools would just create graduate programs to increase enrollment regardless of if those programs actually contributed great candidates or not.
Source: years of volunteer work.
Who has surlier? I'm always appalled at the US border attitude. You can perform all the same actions with a professional or friendly demeanor.
There are annual H1B lotteries (with a small chance of winning). There are L1's requiring you to work abroad in an American company for at least a year before applying. And none of those visas get you residency — it is a wholly separate process taking many years and a huge amount of paperwork, during which you live in a constant fear of losing your job and subsequent deportation if you can't find a new employer ready to sponsor your visa immediately. And for L1 you can't even switch employers which leads to a possible exploitation of a worker.
There are often huge wait times in U.S. embassies, you can't just go there and get a visa in a week or so — often you need to wait for many months for your interview.
And a cherry on top — specifically for technology workers, there is an "administrative processing" step in obtaining a visa. Basically, if you have a STEM degree, it triggers an additional security check (U.S. will automatically imply that you're a spy). It is a check that has no SLA on completion time — I know people who waited for many years (!) for that "administrative processing" to finish. What employer will wait for multiple years until every three-letter agency approves your case? It is madness, yet, it is the norm.
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technology_Alert_List
And yet, the U.S. lets millions of people across the border with absolutely no paperwork, no security checks — it is actually 10x easier to just walk through the border than try to get to the U.S. legally even if you're a high-profile engineer or a scientist. It's a clown show.
30 years ago, this was a popular path for people from Australia who wanted to get to America, using Canada as a stepping stone.
Wow! Thanks again, Harvard, you truly are pushing on the boundaries of human knowledge over there.
- country stability, in term of internal and external projection (I would not look for a country about to go to war or suffer a civil war if I can) witch migh be counterbalanced by...
- ...country population, a population I trust or not, detached or not form the country ruling cohort, meaning mean corruption, attitude toward others, conformism etc;
- current fiscal policies, a high heritage tax for instance is a very BAD point, I can accept only if I know how to escape;
- climate status and possible evolution, orography, food production potential to nourish citizens in case of deep crisis etc;
- scholar system, a free one vs a paid one, an open one vs a casts based one;
- a balance of forces between the public and private sector, when one of both prevail the eventual current stability will not last longer;
USA for me might be partially attractive:
- in climate, orography, food production potential, they are safe;
- in terms of overall stability they are not so much stable, even though not more unstable than many others;
BUT:
- the fiscal system is very oppressive to my eyes;
- the private sector essentially is the State;
- the scholar system have some positive points, like a presence of talents, even if they are declining, but it's largely a cast bases system, and overall not attractive at all;
- the health system is good enough to be annihilated in a thermonuclear heat;
As an western European what can I get from USA? Some beautiful nature, but a byzantine bureaucracy, a very bad health system, a bad scholar system, a private sector more and more similar to a corporatocracy where the "American Dream" was a distant memory.
Trying to imaging a Chinese talent why exchange a growing, technically, industrially active country for the USA? Oh sure China future due to their demographic imbalance is essentially doomed, but not tomorrow morning. It's a bit like Nazi German of the '30s compared to the USA '29s disaster. Very similar for many aspects, but in a totally different shape.
Trying to imaging a Japanese I think Japan is doomed for many reasons but still being from Japan I can hope for better chance than facing a big switch to a totally different country with a similar corporate sector imbalance.
Maybe an Indian might decide to go for mere climatic reasons and chaotic, corruption level of the country itself.
I can keep going but the whole point is that USA was attractive because they was very active and they pay well (this is still valid today, but less than the past), now they a are a giant finance machine still with natural resources about to go to war to save a financial system that can't stand. Of course a vast country is many things, but that means at least civil war or significant risk of it. Not interesting for a life choice in a turbulent time.
IF the public came back to the cold war model of public funded research lead by researchers not by managers pretending to design the research itself and the researchers are just another kind of Ford model workers or while they have many interesting aspects those are not enough.
