←back to thread

1245 points mriguy | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.621s | source
Show context
roughly ◴[] No.45306289[source]
I think there’s plenty of interesting debates to be had about immigration policy and its effects on the labor market, but one thing worth noting here is that the primary problem that damn near every other country on earth has isn’t immigration, it’s brain drain.

A core strategic strength of the US over the last century has been that everyone with any talent wants to come here to work, and by and large we’ve let them do so. You can argue how well that’s worked out for us - having worked with a great many extremely talented H1bs in an industry largely built by immigrants, I’d consider it pretty positive - but it damn sure hasn’t worked out well for the countries those talented folks came from.

replies(50): >>45306392 #>>45306449 #>>45306451 #>>45306457 #>>45306462 #>>45306472 #>>45306497 #>>45306499 #>>45306504 #>>45306532 #>>45306544 #>>45306577 #>>45306613 #>>45306652 #>>45306655 #>>45306707 #>>45306784 #>>45306794 #>>45306815 #>>45307051 #>>45307170 #>>45307207 #>>45307249 #>>45307273 #>>45307505 #>>45307522 #>>45307842 #>>45307910 #>>45307954 #>>45308178 #>>45308232 #>>45308290 #>>45308308 #>>45308580 #>>45309297 #>>45309977 #>>45310236 #>>45310640 #>>45310668 #>>45311024 #>>45311194 #>>45312042 #>>45312299 #>>45312339 #>>45312360 #>>45312401 #>>45312861 #>>45312907 #>>45313125 #>>45313178 #
asdff ◴[] No.45306449[source]
I don't think it follows that preventing that brain drain would have lead to appreciably better outcomes for those countries. The real sucking factor for the united states is the second to none availability of capital to spend on R & D. If you keep the brains where they were raised, there is no mechanism for them to actually turn their ideas into fruition because there is little funding to support this either in private or public sector. The reason why you hear about research talent going back to China is because they are offered PI positions and generous startup grants or something analogous in most cases, with the government there committed to invest billions in research. You can't really expect that in the global south. You can't even really expect that in Europe in a lot of cases.
replies(3): >>45306557 #>>45306988 #>>45308200 #
derefr ◴[] No.45306557[source]
> If you keep the brains where they were raised, there is no mechanism for them to actually turn their ideas into fruition because there is little funding to support this either in private or public sector.

In such a world, why wouldn't you see 1. foreign R&D companies, 2. indexed into a thriving foreign equities market, 3. gathering the interest of domestic investors who want to diversify beyond domestic investments, by 4. moving their money and/or investing in domestic proxy investments?

I say this as a Canadian whose managed mutual-fund holdings are apparently largely composed of foreign (mostly American) proxy equities — and who has met many Canadian-based VCs who don't do much investment into Canadian companies. If not for talent immigration, the American investment landscape would probably look similar!

replies(2): >>45306741 #>>45306983 #
1. asdff ◴[] No.45306983[source]
The U.S. is where the money is. In canada between public and private sector about 30 billion dollars are spent on research and development. Across the entire EU, this figure is more like 440 billion dollars. In the U.S., the figure is 885 billion dollars.

https://www.conferenceboard.ca/hcp/publicrandd-aspx/

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php...

https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb20246

replies(1): >>45307192 #
2. derefr ◴[] No.45307192[source]
My point was that in this alternate hypothetical world, there likely wouldn't be the large number of US domestic R&D companies to serve as valid targets for such investment, as many of the clever people who start them or staff them wouldn't live in the US. Those people would instead be starting and staffing those companies wherever they did live — or in whatever country they could immigrate to instead of the US, with that country then supplanting the US's role as a global R&D center. Which would put American investors in the same position that other countries' investors are in: having money, but few domestic R&D companies that aren't already plump with cash, while most opportunities are foreign.

(Or, if we really lean into the "alternate history" bit, then the US might not have so many rich investors to begin with, as those investors would have been the ones living in that other global R&D center country, who became ludicrously wealthy when their investments into the domestic R&D companies in that other country bore fruit.)

replies(1): >>45308083 #
3. asdff ◴[] No.45308083[source]
Well, sure, anything could happen hypothetically. The financial environment is ultimately why investment happens in the U.S. and that starts at the top with the way the Fed is set up. Everything else follows.