Economist Tyler Cowen Makes a Good Point:
“Consider the fears that foreign competition, offshoring and immigration have destroyed large numbers of American jobs. In reality, more workers have probably been displaced by machines — as happens every time computer software eliminates a task formerly performed by a clerical worker. Yet we know that machines and computers do the economy far more good than harm and that they create more jobs than they destroy”.
Also, see this interesting piece from the Economist:
http://www.economist.com/node/17366155/print
My Take:
For long, the US has had the advantage of being essentially the sole magnet for the "best and the brightest" from around the world. During the late 1930s and during World War II, America benefited from being the primary destination for highly motivated and intellectually oriented emigres from continental Europe (It is worth noting that US based residents didn't win a whole lot of Nobel Prizes prior to WW II). More recently, especially since the 1970s, the US has benefited tremendously from attracting top talent from Asia. However, there appears to be a sense of complacency that going forward the US will remain the de facto destination for the brightest from around the world. Anybody who pays close attention to trends, and the concerns among foreign-born graduates from top US universities, will be aware that there is a sea change in the expectations amongst the "best and the brightest". Not only are other advanced countries (Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, Hong Kong, to name a few), making a beeline to attract the best graduates (international students) from top US universities, but rapidly growing emerging markets are finally showing enough promise to begin to turn upside down the notion of brain drain. Additionally the numerous hurdles being put in place by the US is likely to make it difficult in the future to retain top talent. There is far too much emphasis on illegal immigration (largely driven by low-skilled workers - which could be dealt with by instituting a guest worker program with Mexico) and very little attention paid to the concern of high-skilled immigrants. It is important for American policymakers to separate the two issues.
Here is an example of the push to reverse the brain drain:
Also, see this interesting piece from the Economist:
http://www.economist.com/node/17366155/print
My Take:
For long, the US has had the advantage of being essentially the sole magnet for the "best and the brightest" from around the world. During the late 1930s and during World War II, America benefited from being the primary destination for highly motivated and intellectually oriented emigres from continental Europe (It is worth noting that US based residents didn't win a whole lot of Nobel Prizes prior to WW II). More recently, especially since the 1970s, the US has benefited tremendously from attracting top talent from Asia. However, there appears to be a sense of complacency that going forward the US will remain the de facto destination for the brightest from around the world. Anybody who pays close attention to trends, and the concerns among foreign-born graduates from top US universities, will be aware that there is a sea change in the expectations amongst the "best and the brightest". Not only are other advanced countries (Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, Hong Kong, to name a few), making a beeline to attract the best graduates (international students) from top US universities, but rapidly growing emerging markets are finally showing enough promise to begin to turn upside down the notion of brain drain. Additionally the numerous hurdles being put in place by the US is likely to make it difficult in the future to retain top talent. There is far too much emphasis on illegal immigration (largely driven by low-skilled workers - which could be dealt with by instituting a guest worker program with Mexico) and very little attention paid to the concern of high-skilled immigrants. It is important for American policymakers to separate the two issues.
Here is an example of the push to reverse the brain drain:
“Ambitious governments all over the world have been trying to attract the most resourceful scientists to their countries. South Korea and China have been at the forefront of this drive. They do their best to attract the best talent within their country to do science research. “China pays scientists whatever they ask,” says Inder Verma, professor at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies in California. “India is well behind in these efforts, but the situation is improving.” China also has exceptionally high rewards for scientific achievement in the country, while India is slowly beginning to catch up, with the private sector also pitching in.
In the past two years, the government has instituted several fellowships to encourage those who do outstanding research. The Ramanujan Fellowship provides Rs 75,000 a month — in addition to the salary — to outstanding researchers who return to India from abroad. The JC Bose Fellowship gives an extra Rs 25,000 a month and other generous grants for five years”.