LinkedIn Study: US Attracting Fewer Educated, Highly Skilled Migrants

vinces99 writes The U.S. economy has long been powered in part by the nation's ability to attract the world's most educated and skilled people to its shores. But a new study of the worldwide migration of professionals to the U.S. shows a sharp drop-off in its proportional share of those workers – raising the question of whether the nation will remain competitive in attracting top talent in an increasingly globalized economy. The study, which used a novel method of tracking people through data from the social media site LinkedIn, is believed to be the first to monitor global migrations of professionals to the U.S., said co-author Emilio Zagheni, a University of Washington assistant professor of sociology and fellow of the UW eScience Institute. Among other things, the study, presented recently in Barcelona, Spain, found that just 13 percent of migrating professionals in the sample group chose the U.S. as a destination in 2012, down from 27 percent in 2000.

Comments

Well of course

[Anonymous Coward]

As long as the US workers has accepted the bullshit about their jobs being outsourced if they don't accept pay-cuts, the income levels in the US haven't kept up with the rest of the world. We would get a lower income now by moving to the US, where in the 80s and 90s it was the opposite.

Re:Well of course

[khallow]

It's not bullshit, but a fact of life. A lot of people have jobs which can be done elsewhere. This entitlement you exhibit doesn't make you any more valuable or make employers pay you more.

Re:Well of course

[Gr8Apes]

Everyone has jobs that can be done elsewhere. Just don't allow them to sell their output here for subsidized prices. That means tax imports, all imports, with a flat tax. (That side steps all trade agreement issues, as it's across the board).

Re:Well of course

[jythie]

While it may be a fact of life, entitlement is only part of the equation. The other is pure economic pragmatism, such patterns can only work so long before you cut off your feet. They tend to make a few people richer in the short term but as more and more companies/industries do it they start finding their customer base evaporating too, at which point earnings get eaten from the bottom up. It is a classic game theory problem, the economy is strongest with well paying jobs kept local, but any single company gets and advantage by getting rid of its well paid jobs while other companies still have them, so companies that have behaviors that are healthy for the overall economy (including themselves) are economically punished.

Re:Well of course

[Anonymous Coward]

Eat a bowl of dicks. Corporations have been selling out the future of this country for personal profit for decades. Wages have been stagnant or in decline for two generations. It's bullshit, and your knob-gobbling of whatever exec is paying you to shill for the system doesn't make you a worthwhile human being, you festering pile of cow vomit.

Re:Well of course

[lgw]

The economy is not a zero-sum game. This is not a race to the bottom. As low cost-of-living places get more and more jobs, their standard of living rises and costs go up accordingly.

If your job doesn't require an in-person presence, then you're competing on a global market. Best get used to that fact - it's not going away, and isolationism spells certain death for modern economies.

And don't overlook the key fact that more people buy a given product than work to make it. If lower pay means lower costs, net advantage is had to the economy: that's been studied for e.g. Walmart selling lots of stuff made in China. The total amount saved by all Americans in buying these products is several times larger than the total lost wages. For business-to-business products, maybe it doesn't work that way, I don't know, but I wouldn't just assume it's bad for the economy.

Re:Well of course

[Anonymous Coward]

Not sure where you get some of your stats -- e.g.: Walmart cost/benefit analysis is still being hotly debated, given the value of products, damage to local businesses, and impact on the average American's health. You don't get to come down on somebody for ignoring variables while brushing several under the rug, yourself.

Re:Well of course

[ShanghaiBill]

That means tax imports, all imports, with a flat tax.

Last time we tried that we got the Great Depression, and World War II. The problem with tariffs is that when we impose them on others, they retaliate, and impose them on our goods and services. So trade stops. Countries use their labor forces to do things that are more productively done elsewhere. Everyone loses. This has been well understood since at least the time of Adam Smith, and there are plenty of historical evidence that protectionism is really really stupid. But there are always plenty of morons looking for simplistic answers, especially when they can blame "foreigners" for their problems.

Re:Well of course

[Sri Ramkrishna]

I await when CEO jobs can also be outsourced 'elsewhere' since I'm sure they can be paid a lot less for their leadership skills than they can in the U.S. Funny, outsourcing is only for the lower ranks but not in higher management. Are you saying that someone from these other countries can't do as good a job as a U.S. corporate management team?

Re:Well of course

[Sri Ramkrishna]

Gosh, I must have ended up in the abuse department..

Re:Well of course

[khallow]

The other is pure economic pragmatism, such patterns can only work so long before you cut off your feet. They tend to make a few people richer in the short term but as more and more companies/industries do it they start finding their customer base evaporating too, at which point earnings get eaten from the bottom up.

There are two things to note here. First, developed world labor is going to experience that competition no matter what is done. Second, customer base isn't evaporating in the developing world. Those economies are doing just fine.

Re:Well of course

[gweihir]

Same here. Not that I would want to go to the US though, for a number of other reasons.

Re:Well of course

[Anonymous Coward]

The great depression was caused by a stock market and real estate bubble which triggered a massive recession, not by tariffs. Actually with higher tariffs probably it wouldn't have spread abroad so much. And the crisis itself, which started in the most efficient markets possible (the stock exchanges) also proves that adam smith's theories are purely delirious. Not that anybody could expect much more from an obese, alcoholic, scottish cretin who saw "invisible hands" around himself.

And WWII was caused by a german guy who wanted to expand the territory of its country a little bit too much, not by tariffs. You might open an history book at least once in your life, the one from the elementary school is enough.

Finally, no, there is no evidence at all that protectionism damages an economy, actually there's plenty of evidence of the opposite. Norway is the third richest country in the world by per-capita GDP, it's highly protectionist and most of its biggest enterprises are even state-owned. Socialist and protectionist: adam smith would throw up a bottle of whisky. And they don't allow any delirious neoliberal idea to spread inside their rich country.

Summing up, there's one thing you're right about: we shouldn't blame foreigners for everything. Neoliberal americans are much worse.

Re: Well of course

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly this. The U.S. stopped being competetive when we started outsourcing and dumping millions of billions of dollars into foreign education systems.

Re:Well of course

[Gr8Apes]

Tariffs are entirely different than a flat tax. It appears that your references were true tariffs and the Great Depression was already underway. They did lead to retaliatory tariffs from our trading partners, and trade dropped by half in both directions. Currently, that would more than halve our trade deficit, not a terrible thing, however, applying it as a flat tax across the board for imports in most cases would only be evening up the playing field.

But you're right - I prefer a flat sales tax, with the border also being a point of sale. Instead of a VAT, this is just a simple flat tax model. Imports get taxed twice under this proposal. Replacing the current morass of tax law could only make this country better.

Re:Well of course

[AutodidactLabrat]

The great depression was caused by a stock market and real estate bubble which triggered a massive recession, not by tariffs. Actually with higher tariffs probably it wouldn't have spread abroad so much. And the crisis itself, which started in the most efficient markets possible (the stock exchanges) also proves that adam smith's theories are purely delirious....

OMFUG! An economic LITERATE amongst the Randian clueless clones.
When did the web start growing up?
I mean, idiots are still calling for lower taxes, like 34 years of 78% lower taxes on the top 10% somehow created a lasting peace time boom (not).

Re:Well of course

[AutodidactLabrat]

Of course it is a zero sum game.
you cannot profit unless someone else LOSES that profit to you
It is possible to 'grow the pie', but not by eliminating customers

Re:Well of course

[tnk1]

There is evidence that Smoot-Hawley Tariff at least made the Great Depression worse. Particularly due to the retaliation tariffs around the world. If Norway is doing all right, it is more due to the fact that its market share of the market isn't huge, and the rest of the world is not retaliating. The US maintains a free trade policy, which if it changed, due to the size of the US market, might well cause a large ripple effect everywhere else, including Norway.

However, since the US is not retaliating against Norway, Norway gets its cake and eats it too. Because they can protect, their workers do well. Because the US is not protecting, Norway can still export their own goods without tariff barriers in US markets (or other free markets). Again, that only works because the balance of the world market isn't following the same policy as Norway. Norway, and the Scandinavian countries in general are edge cases that are often injected into arguments but using them in counterpoint to say, the US, is not an apples to apples comparison.

In any case, tariffs were not the single reason for the Great Depression, nor was the Stock Market crash or the financial policies. As with any disaster that could be called "Great", a lot needed to go wrong at the same time, and it did. Otherwise, you just get a much more minor event.

Re:Well of course

[lgw]

It is possible to 'grow the pie', but not by eliminating customers

That's exactly it. You grow the pie enormously, as China, India, and Brazil rise to "developed economy" standards of living (this has arguably already happened for S Korea). More than doubling the number of consumers is a massive gain for all of us, but most of all for all the people joining us at our standard of living!
 

Re:Well of course

[puzzled_decoy]

You do not account for effort, talent, permanence, etc.

For instance, let's say you have three violin makers: one with a some wood little skill, another with some wood and some skill, and a third with some wood and a lot of skill.

Let's say the value of the wood by itself is $150. The value of our little economy is, therefore, $450.

Now each violin maker makes a violin.
The first person makes a violin worth $300.
The second person makes a violin worth $700.
The third person makes a violin worth $1500.

The value of that economy is now $2500- a massive increase over the starting $450. Not only that, but the value has gone up until those objects are destroyed.

That is why it's not a zero-sum game- that is also why inflation is not necessarily a bad thing. In order for the value of a currency to remain stable, it must accurately reflect the value within an economy. As things are produced, money should be printed proportionally.

If you still think it is a zero sum game, ask yourself the following: if that were true, how would we have so much infrastructure that didn't exist 100 years ago? Is the city of New York more valuable today than it was in 1914?

Re:Well of course

[ShanghaiBill]

Norway is the third richest country in the world by per-capita GDP, it's highly protectionist

Norway has been a member of the WTO since 1995, and is a member of the EFTA. It is one of the least protectionist nations. Most of its imports are completely tariff free. But comparisons with Norway prove little, other than it is a REALLY good idea to find massive offshore oil deposits in your territorial waters.

Re:Well of course

[Ralph Wiggam]

There is evidence that Smoot-Hawley Tariff at least made the Great Depression worse.

Something we all should have learned from Ben Stein in Ferris Bueller's Day Off.

Re:Well of course

[RabidReindeer]

The great depression was caused by a stock market and real estate bubble which triggered a massive recession, not by tariffs. Actually with higher tariffs probably it wouldn't have spread abroad so much. And the crisis itself, which started in the most efficient markets possible (the stock exchanges) also proves that adam smith's theories are purely delirious....

OMFUG! An economic LITERATE amongst the Randian clueless clones.
When did the web start growing up?
I mean, idiots are still calling for lower taxes, like 34 years of 78% lower taxes on the top 10% somehow created a lasting peace time boom (not).

It didn't grow up much, I think. Looks like they modded you down.

I'm still waiting for that trickle-down prosperity myself. So far all the gold coming down smells like ammonia or something.

But I'm sure if we keep doing it over and over again, eventually it will all work.

Re:Well of course

[Anonymous Coward]

EFTA cuts red tape, not tariffs. You're confusing the EFTA with the EU. The EU itself has quite a different opinion about Norway's trade policy, go there and tell them that they are wrong:

EU blasts Norway's Protectionism http://www.newsinenglish.no/20...

I'm sorry if the richest country in the west blatantly ridicules the vodoo economics that you've believed in so far, but that's not a good excuse to make up facts and data.

Re:Well of course

[RabidReindeer]

The economy is not a zero-sum game. This is not a race to the bottom. As low cost-of-living places get more and more jobs, their standard of living rises and costs go up accordingly.

If your job doesn't require an in-person presence, then you're competing on a global market. Best get used to that fact - it's not going away, and isolationism spells certain death for modern economies.

And don't overlook the key fact that more people buy a given product than work to make it. If lower pay means lower costs, net advantage is had to the economy: that's been studied for e.g. Walmart selling lots of stuff made in China. The total amount saved by all Americans in buying these products is several times larger than the total lost wages. For business-to-business products, maybe it doesn't work that way, I don't know, but I wouldn't just assume it's bad for the economy.

You're missing a couple of key items.

When we started shipping those white-collar jobs that were supposed to replace the blue-collar ones that we automated out overseas, they went to people whose cost of living was ONE-TENTH of what ours is. We could literally starve competing against that kind of arbitrage.

It's true. They did get more prosperous, and they did demand more. Last time I computed, the arbitrage had shrunk from 10-to-1 to 8-to-1. Maybe more now, but not enough that bean counters care much yet. It's going to be many a long year before we all approach parity at this rate.

Because of this massive differential, we don't have a "global" enconomy, we have an outsourced economy. It's well that we've been at relative peace for the last several decades because I'm not sure where the US military gets their computer display screens if they don't get them from Communist China like the rest of us do.

There's another problem there. When you make 1/10th - or even 1/8th what the people you displace did, you're not going to be buying some of the things that those people bought. Because the global absolute price of a PC or an automobile is about the same anywhere. You're also shipping a lot of tax revenue over to someone else's tax authority so that local infrastucture has less income to pay for it. When the goverment is already in the hands of a crazed bunch of tax-cut-and-spend politicians, it isn't just the boondoggles that get hit - it's roads and schools and other stuff.

Re:Well of course

[lgw]

Every job I've had for at least 10 years is in competition with people in low cost of living areas. Even so, I remain employed, and well paid. There's value in working local, and there's value in being good at what you do, so there's some premium to be had vs the cheapest place available.

Meanwhile, home prices in Bangalore are higher than rural America now - I would expect other factors of cost of living to follow.

You can certainly compete in a global market, if you're talented. If, however, you're doing some mindless job that anyone who can fog a mirror can do equally well, from any place in the world, then there's just no valid moral reason for the job to stay here. Further, it's only a matter of time before no one, will have that job. Technology means automation, and automation is why technology improves everyone's standard of living. The future is bleak for unskilled labor, worldwide, but that's not an outsourcing issue.

Re:Well of course

[turbidostato]

"And WWII was caused by a german guy who wanted to expand the territory of its country a little bit too much, not by tariffs."

Humm... no, big no. No man could start a world war back then. WWII started because that German guy was supported by quite a lot other German guys and even a higher number of Germans and other Europeans that did nothing to stop the avalanche at its beginings.

And once you start studying why it was so, you'll find tariffs playing quite a strong role in the whole equation.

"Norway is the third richest country in the world by per-capita GDP, it's highly protectionist and most of its biggest enterprises are even state-owned."

Norway is the way it is because of a temporal chance not to last long. Firstly, we are here talking about tariffs, not state ownership (which would lead to a very interesting conversation, given USA common points of views about it, but a different one). Secondly, Norway, while quite strong on their borders by current standards is far from a closed border, being an EFTA member. Thirdly, they are lucky in that they are oil rich and their tariff policies are assymetric (they close their borders but their business counterparts do not), but this will sooner than later change, since EU is starting to be fed up about that.

Re:Well of course

[turbidostato]

"The economy is not a zero-sum game. This is not a race to the bottom. As low cost-of-living places get more and more jobs, their standard of living rises and costs go up accordingly."

No, it is not a zero sum game, it is more like a steam engine: it requieres a hot (cheap producers) and a cold spot (rich consumers) to work.

Now, the game big corps are trying to play is to find if they are able to jump from hot spot to hot spot and the world will be big enough so by the time the travel it around (from Japan to Korea, from there to China, India and Philippines, from there to Brazil and Latin America, from there to Africa) old hot spots are already cold again (...and once Africa becomes hot enogh, back to, say, India, which by that time is again as poor as it was in the begining).

"And don't overlook the key fact that more people buy a given product than work to make it."

Just like in the steam engine example, you won't be able to extract more energy (wealth) than you put in. It is not a zero-sum game but it still is a closed-system one. More people buy a given product than it takes to produce it... provided they have the money to buy it, which comes in turn from the money those other people have earned by doing things that other people can and want to buy (which ones? the first ones? no, they don't have the money because all they have is just the portion the second group already gave him, which must be less than their own surplus, or else they'd be producing that themselves at an advantage).

"Walmart selling lots of stuff made in China. The total amount saved by all Americans in buying these products is several times larger than the total lost wages."

For one, it's not clear for that to be the case. For another, it is only savings if they were in the need of buying that even at a higher price, which for the most part is not the case. I'd call that the "promotional sale" fallacy.

Re:Well of course

[Anonymous Coward]

The Smoot-Hawley tariff was approved in june 1930. The stock market crash which triggered the GD had happened 8 months before. So it definitely cannot be a cause. It made the crisis worse? That's just philosophy, not science. We cannot turn back time and verify. Furthermore, the lower the tariffs, the higher the economic interconnection between different countries. Maybe if there had been higher tariffs BEFORE 1929, the crisis wouldn't have spread so much around the world.

Finally, millions of former US factory workers, and those who still work in factories but with lower real salaries and worse conditions than before, are still waiting for those imaginary high-level intellectual jobs that they were promised in the '90s by the mobsters who supported the economic globalisation (bilderberg guys, banksters, freemasons, etc...).

Re:Well of course

[russotto]

The economy is not a zero-sum game. This is not a race to the bottom. As low cost-of-living places get more and more jobs, their standard of living rises and costs go up accordingly.

It may not be a race to the bottom, but it sure appears to be a race to somewhere much closer to the Third World mean than the First World one.

Re:Well of course

[turbidostato]

"Let's say the value of the wood by itself is $150. The value of our little economy is, therefore, $450.

Now each violin maker makes a violin.
The first person makes a violin worth $300.
The second person makes a violin worth $700.
The third person makes a violin worth $1500.

The value of that economy is now $2500- a massive increase over the starting $450. Not only that, but the value has gone up until those objects are destroyed."

You still didn't explain who has both the $2500 and the will to buy those violins. Without this pesky detail no, there's no more wealth than at the begining.

Re: Well of course

[Anonymous Coward]

There are loads of crazy tarrifs on global commerce what the fuck are you talking about. Ya it works out much better when exploitation of global labor resources is dominated by a narrow class of powerful elite.

Re: Well of course

[Anonymous Coward]

Lol keep going in your uselessly theoretical armchair economics. No worse than yhe make believe professionals

Re:Well of course

[Anonymous Coward]

Very interesting historical revisionism. I've never heard anyone saying that the germans voted Hitler for trade policy reasons. I've always read that the reasons were the loss of WWI, the unfair Versailles treaty, the massive war damages and the subsequent poverty and hyperinflation in the Weimar Republic. Now the mistery has been revealed: germans just didn't want to pay the import tariff on their iPhones !

Re:Well of course

[Anonymous Coward]

The government stole and sold all the gold. Sorry.

Re:Well of course

[Anonymous Coward]

They already are being outsourced. That happens when top companies are increasingly found overseas instead of here because of the business-hostile environment.

Re:Well of course

[turbidostato]

"I've always read that the reasons were the loss of WWI, the unfair Versailles treaty"

And you are, of course, right. But then, please, review the Versailles treaty. It basically holds down to "no tariffs will be allowed to Allies on German territory while German goods can and will be heavily tariffed on our borders".

"the massive war damages"

Yes, of course. And those damages and the hefty war repairings were being sustained with money borrowed from USA which all of a sudden stopped coming and debt reclaimed after 29' crash while, at the same time, basically no more imports were accepted by USA from Germany after the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act.

"Now the mistery has been revealed: germans just didn't want to pay the import tariff on their iPhones!"

Not exactly that but almost, only up-down: Germans couldn't buy enough iron to build their Mercedes because impossed import tariffs and then, they couldn't sell the little numbers of Mercedes they could produce because Smoot-Hawley Act would tax them 50% at USA borders.

All these led to poverty and hyperinflation, which led to discontent, which led to a crazy leader gaining power, which eventually led to a world war.

Re:Well of course

[rubycodez]

I'm two generations old and my wages have been climbing my whole life. Get some skills, you fucking hippie loser

Re:Well of course

[Anonymous Coward]

The solution to your economy is this.

The lumberjack buys the $300 dollar violin from the first guy, and keeps the $100 dollars as profit.

The second person is in debt after trying to sell his violin worth $700, eventually settles on selling it to the first guy for $200, he pays his $150 debt, and eats dogfood he can buy for $50.
The third person with his $1500 violin is too slow to discount it (because it's worth more than $300 ... and more than $200 the second guy accepted...) and thus can no longer sell it to anyone for even $150. He declares bankruptcy and defaults on his loan. The bank confiscates his violin. He now has no money, and has to beg for food.

The first guy; who sold his violin for $300, and bought the second guys violin for $200, now has $100. He is the richest man in the game. he has both a violin, AND $100 for food. He takes out a loan secured against his $700 violin (that he got for a bargain!) pays off his previous loan, and begins the cycle anew. (Except this time he is the only violin maker), since #2 is too poor to buy wood, and #3 is homeless.

So, the lumberjack eats.
The first guy eats (and earns assets!)
The second guy eats (poorly)
The third guy goes bankrupt.

This is all powered by Cheap credit!

Now play out this situation where the lumberjack was from India, and doesn't want your shitty american violins since they cost so damned much (he can get cheap indian $30 violins).
Now you have 3 $150 pieces of wood that look like violins, and no one has any money to buy them with, because you outsourced all your non-violin (lumberjack) jobs to India.

Re:Well of course

[Anonymous Coward]

The fox who longed for grapes, beholds with pain
The tempting clusters were too high to gain;
Grieved in his heart he forced a careless smile,
And cried ,‘They’re sharp and hardly worth my while

Re:Well of course

[lgw]

Have you noticed the thing about technology? It improves your standard of living. And no, "technology" doesn't mean iPhones, it means more efficient ways to produce everyday goods, cheaper in terms of labor, energy, and raw materials.

For 150 years now people have been complaining about how technology will make all the jobs go away and everyone will starve. Not so much, as it turns out. Making stuff cheaper always creates new job making more stuff, so the first world benefits, and the economies of India, China, and Brazil keeps growing (although China has it's own bubble to work through these days), and the middle class in each nation keeps expanding.

Again, it's not a zero-sum game. You want the course that makes the pie grow the fastest over time, rather than squabbling over who gets what slice. Exponential gains always trump linear gains over time.

Re:Well of course

[ArmoredDragon]

The flaw in that plan is that domestic production and imports are known to rise and fall with one another. Anything that dampens imports in any way likely results in domestic job losses. The Smoot-Hawley act proved that pretty decisively.

Likewise, tariffs, and indeed any taxation on foreign goods just for the sake of being foreign, are an incredibly stupid idea. The great depression wouldn't have occurred if there was no such thing as mercantilism. We've seen worse stock market crashes than what preceded the depression, and none of the "protections" added after the fact were even needed to prevent economic collapse. If you look at the unemployment statistics for that period, you actually see it stable for some time after the market crash, (it was about the same as the numbers that we saw in 2008) but it doesn't tank until just after Smoot-Hawley passes.

Re:Well of course

[ArmoredDragon]

OMFUG! An economic LITERATE amongst the Randian clueless clones.
When did the web start growing up?
I mean, idiots are still calling for lower taxes, like 34 years of 78% lower taxes on the top 10% somehow created a lasting peace time boom (not).

You and AC are both wrong. Tariffs indeed caused it. Look at the unemployment rate for a good six months after the stock market crash. It was basically the same as what we saw in 2008. Not good, but not particularly bad. The depression didn't begin until Smoot-Hawley passed. Imports and domestic production rise and fall with one another. This is something even the most liberal economists agree with. So if you squelch imports, guess what happens to unemployment?

Re:Well of course

[ArmoredDragon]

Look at the period between the market crash and Smoot-Hawley. It's relatively stable. Basically what we had during that period is comparatively the same as what we had in 2008. The jobless rate didn't really increase until after it passed.

Re: Well of course

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you been to norway? I have, many times.
A pear in the supermarket costs 5 bucks.
What are they protecting?

It's weird, things are either totally free(like energy) or insanely expensive

Re:Well of course

[ArmoredDragon]

Currently, that would more than halve our trade deficit, not a terrible thing,

It would also cut our GDP in half.

History has always shown that if you kneecap imports in *any* way, you also do the same to domestic production. It doesn't matter if the other trade partners retaliate or not; the whole purpose of imports is to acquire goods that can't be acquired domestically (either they flat out aren't available, or the domestic knowledge and/or infrastructure isn't present, so the foreign companies can create it cheaper.) These imported goods are then used as capital for domestic production.

If that wasn't true, it wouldn't ever be economical to import; we'd just rely entirely on domestic production.

Re:Well of course

[ArmoredDragon]

Of course it is a zero sum game.
you cannot profit unless someone else LOSES that profit to you
It is possible to 'grow the pie', but not by eliminating customers

If you can grow the pie, then by definition it is NOT zero-sum. I don't mean to ad-hom, but what you said is just insanely stupid.

Re:Well of course

[ArmoredDragon]

You still didn't explain who has both the $2500 and the will to buy those violins. Without this pesky detail no, there's no more wealth than at the begining.

It's simple, actually: The person who buys those violins created that value they used to purchase it elsewhere. Money is just a store of value used for trade, but in and of itself isn't valuable, and in fact is only worth whatever you think its worth.

Replicate the same analogy as GP did, only with somebody who makes shoes. That person who makes shoes buys a violin. Effectively he traded several pairs of shoes for a violin.

Re:Well of course

[tnk1]

June 1930 was pretty close to the 1929 crash. Remember, we are looking for what made the Great Depression into what it was. Would the stock market crash have caused a recession? Sure, possibly even a depression, maybe. But the Great Depression lasted basically until WWII. The New Deal helped with morale, but the economic conditions of the depression only really ended with the war.

Something that happened in 1930 was well placed to help convert a downturn into a global disaster.

Re:Well of course

[yacc143]

Well, if Norway is protectionist, that's really new to me.

Norway, while not politically member of the EU is member of the European Economic Area, meaning that for all practical purposes (beside sending representatives to the European Parliament, Commission, and so on), it's member of the EU.

As such it's clearly in the free trade camp.

OTOH, as Americans might mix it up, yes they have a more communal society, which is a common for Scandinavian countries. But at the same time it's clearly free trade oriented. The fascinating part here is naturally, because they have a high technology industry, some natural resources and so on, so yes they can make the great benefits work, because overall their products remain competitive on the global market.

Hint: Even US companies tend to treat certain employees well (e.g. the ones that produces revenue, are hard to replace, ...).

The problematic employees are the one that are easy to replace, don't produce a great deal of money => these tend to end up outsourced. The big issue here is that there is no solution for these parts of the population, Norway seems to handle this with trying to maximize their human capital (Hint: Scandinavian schools, despite tiring sometimes with their continuous quest for improvement [I have a colleague there with kids], tend to be good, and not good just for a tiny slice of the pupils), and allowing the not so productive part of the population a somewhat dignified life.

Btw, while the free trade argument that every body does what he can do most effectively is usually accepted, free trade DOES have a number of issues that are starting to pop up in literature, e.g. Free Trade does not work for developing countries (probably mostly because of the same reason why it does not work for easy-to-replace workers), and then there are these ecological costs (transport costs are currently artificially kept low, as being taxed lower or completely exempt).

Re:Well of course

[yacc143]

Please check your data, Norway is no way protectionist.

Re:Well of course

[yacc143]

Well, the problem is that most jobs don't require an on-site presence. (Cynically put, a doctor remotely on-demand plus a nurse practitioner can handle most doctor's work. Most trade can be delivered remotely. Administration can done easily enough from everywhere as long as your internet connectivity is good enough, and don't start me on IT.)

Re:Well of course

[Anonymous Coward]

Look at the period between the market crash and Smoot-Hawley. It's relatively stable.

Looking at stock data, it doesn't seem stable. At all. Actually it's a pretty sick roller coaster. DJIA grows until late march 1930, and then it starts crashing again, 2 months before the Smoot-Hawley tariff:

http://www.online-stock-tradin...

Sorry, your hypothesis has now been definitely disproved.

Re:Well of course

[Anonymous Coward]

You know, if millions of people lose their savings (even those who didn't invest in stocks, many banks simply went bankrupt) and their pension funds evaporate, they suddenly stop spending. It's not rocket science. It doesn't last few months, but several years. And it has really nothing to do with tariffs.

Re:Well of course

[Anonymous Coward]

You keep asking others to look at data, except that data confirm that you're completely wrong. Firstly about the stock market, now even about the unemployment rate, which obviously started skyrocketing at the end of 1929, and not after the Smoot-Hawley tariff:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/w...

Sorry, the economic religion you believe in is just delirious.

Re:Well of course

[Anonymous Coward]

Norway, while not politically member of the EU is member of the European Economic Area, meaning that for all practical purposes (beside sending representatives to the European Parliament, Commission, and so on), it's member of the EU.

Actually it means that you simply dont' have any idea about the difference between the EU and the EFTA. And this is what the EU thinks about Norway's trade policies:

MEPs urge Norway to lift protectionist duties on EU farm produce
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/...

Maybe you should warn the european MPs that they are wrong. Or, in alternative, you might avoid discussing topics that you clearly know nothing about.

Re:Well of course

[Anonymous Coward]

"no tariffs will be allowed to Allies on German territory while German goods can and will be heavily tariffed on our borders"

You might search for the (long) texts of the documents of the Versailles treaty and prove your hilarious statement. Nobody has ever pointed out that it was actually a free trade agreement instead of a peace treaty, but if you can prove it you're going to win a Nobel peace prize.

Re: Well of course

[Anonymous Coward]

It's weird, things are either totally free(like energy) or insanely expensive

Which is exactly what you should expect from a big oil producer with several state-owned companies (especially in the energy sector) that also enforces protectionist measures on other products. Which perfectly confirms what the AC was saying.

And norwegian people are perfectly fine with that, since they are the third richest people in the world by per-capita GDP, the first excluding small fiscal heavens like Luxembourg. Which blatantly ridicules all neoliberal "invisible hand" economic theories from adam smith's onwards, that have more to do with porn and vodoo rather than rationality.

Re:Well of course

[Anonymous Coward]

History has always shown...

... that you are wrong, as this discussion thread further proves.

 

Re:Well of course

[Anonymous Coward]

Pretty much every economist in the world thinks you're an idiot: http://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/21615589-throughout-rich-world-wages-are-stuck-big-freeze. I suppose you think Global Warming is a hoax because it's cold where you live, too? Get some schooling, you fucking waste of oxygen.

Re:Well of course

[Anonymous Coward]

Roses are red
Violets are blue
I forget the rest
Fuck you.

Re:Well of course

[russotto]

Making stuff cheaper always creates new job making more stuff, so the first world benefits, and the economies of India, China, and Brazil keeps growing (although China has it's own bubble to work through these days), and the middle class in each nation keeps expanding.

Meanwhile the middle class in the United States contracts, and much of Europe is actually regressing. And there's still plenty of dirt-poor nations (including most of India and China) to drag everyone down.

Re:Well of course

[turbidostato]

"Nobody has ever pointed out that it was actually a free trade agreement instead of a peace treaty"

You talked about that "unfair Versailles treaty". How, exactly do you think Germans found it to be unfair? "You should not engage in war against France" "Mein Gott! That's absolutly unfair!" Is that what you think?

"You might search for the (long) texts of the documents of the Versailles treaty and prove your hilarious statement."

I might...

Peace Treaty of Versailles

Articles 321-386
Ports, Waterways and Railways

ARTICLE 323.
[...]
Germany particularly undertakes not to establish against the ports and vessels of any of the Allied and Associated Powers any surtax or any direct or indirect bounty for export, or import by German ports or vessels, or by those of another Power, for example by means of combined tariffs. She further undertakes that persons or goods passing through a port or using a vessel of any of the Allied and Associated Powers shall not be subjected to any formality or delay whatever to which such persons or goods would not be subjected if they passed through a German port or a port of any other Power, or used a German vessel or a vessel of any other Power.

ARTICLE 330.

Import duties may be levied on goods leaving the free zone for consumption in the country on the territory of which the port is situated. Conversely, export duties may be levied on goods coming from such country and brought into the free zone. These import and export duties shall be levied on the same basis and at the same rates as similar duties levied at the other Customs frontiers of the country concerned. On the other hand, Germany shall not levy, under any denomination, any import, export or transit duty on goods carried by land or water across her territory to or from the free zone from or to any other State.

ARTICLE 365.

Goods coming from the territories of the Allied and Associated Powers, and going to Germany, or in transit through Germany from or to the territories of the Allied and Associated Powers, shall enjoy on the German railways as regards charges to be collected (rebates and drawbacks being taken into account), facilities, and all other matters, the most favourable treatment applied to goods of the same kind carried on any German lines, either in internal traffic, or for export, import or in transit, under similar conditions of transport, for example as regards length of route. The same rule shall be applied, on the request of one or more of the Allied and Associated Powers, to goods specially designated by such Power or Powers coming from Germany and going to their territories.

International tariffs established in accordance with the rates referred to in the preceding paragraph and involving through waybills shall be established when one of the Allied and Associated Powers shall require it from Germany.

[...]

et caetera.

Re:Well of course

[lgw]

People in "dirt poor nations" are just as much "people" as here, and just as deserving of jobs. No moral wrong happens when a job moves from here to there - arguably the reverse given the safety net in each nation. But anyway, the point is that it's only short-term turbulence: China and India will eventually buy a lot more stuff than the US and EU, and will drive vastly more modern jobs worldwide as a result.

Re:Well of course

[russotto]

People in "dirt poor nations" are just as much "people" as here, and just as deserving of jobs.

Yes, people in dirt poor nations are people. But if its them or me, I choose me every time.

No moral wrong happens when a job moves from here to there - arguably the reverse given the safety net in each nation.

So jobs for them and welfare for me? Except of course there's not actually a safety net for non-elderly people with no children. You're not making this any more attractive.

But anyway, the point is that it's only short-term turbulence: China and India will eventually buy a lot more stuff than the US and EU, and will drive vastly more modern jobs worldwide as a result.

Before the short-term is over, I could be dead.

Re:Well of course

[lgw]

While I appreciate your greed and approve, if you're a software developer, or have some other highly skilled job as most /.ers do, it's not like you're at risk here. The jobs that have been scarce here because of outsourcing are in general low-skill jobs, from manufacturing to call centers, that are swiftly being replaced by robots anyhow.

Re:Well of course

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually you just proved exactly the OPPOSITE of what you had said before. During the discussion you maintained that protectionism led to WWII. However, those articles of the Versailles treaty show that germans might have actually been angry for exactly the opposite reason: they were NOT allowed to impose tariffs and duties, hence the could NOT protect their industry from foreign competition. We might easily conclude that without those articles, hence with MORE protectionism, Hitler wouldn't have won the elections.

Not that I think that those articles are particularly significant in the whole treaty (that's why they are number 321, 330, etc...), and obviously the main issues were the reparations (roughly equivalent to today's $ 50 bln), the french occupation of the rhineland and several territorial losses towards bordering countries, but I find it funny that the result of your search has been to disprove your own hypothesis.

Re:Well of course

[rubycodez]

economists have to figure in the kind of low life that are rioting in Ferguson at the death of a thug; I don't, they don't count

Re:Well of course

[turbidostato]

"Actually you just proved exactly the OPPOSITE of what you had said before."

Exactly what I said was: "once you start studying why it was so, you'll find tariffs playing quite a strong role in the whole equation."

And you said: no, they don't.

And then I said: "the Versailles treaty. It basically holds down to "no tariffs will be allowed to Allies on German territory while German goods can and will be heavily tariffed on our borders"."

And you said: no, it doesn't.

And then I showed some articles stating the above.

So yes, you are right: it is not a True Scotchsman.

Re:Well of course

[AutodidactLabrat]

You cannot "grow the pie". You can only take from someone else.
Found more gold? Price of someone else's gold drops
Replace secretaries? Even you can figure that one out
Add cellphones? Where did the Landlines go?
There is NO 'grow the pie' outside of speculation and that always empties someone's pockets.

Re:Well of course

[AutodidactLabrat]

Lie, Lie, Lie. The crash AND ALL THE LOST CAPITAL came from Speculators.
The Depression began 8 years before the 29 crash, that is where all those Oakies came from
I suggest you read an actual history for once. The BOTTOM of the Depression occurred in 1933. The collapse of the market happened three years earlier!

Re:Well of course

[AutodidactLabrat]

Like I said, Economic literates among the idiots!

Re:Well of course

[AutodidactLabrat]

Ahh, no. Actually, Bundled Mortgage Instruments stole 12.3 T of that gold. And Deriviatives under Boeskey and Miliken took 4.9 T of the gold.
In fact, it all went to private SPECULATORS who gave no value in return.

Re:Well of course

[AutodidactLabrat]

And, since the market for Violins is under the control of a Commodities Broker, every last one of the makers gets $18.00 - costs.

Re:Well of course

[AutodidactLabrat]

Propitio Principii (begging the question), neither the will to buy nor the money to do the buying is in the hands of consumers thanks to the Speculators who produce nothing.

Re:Well of course

[AutodidactLabrat]

I think I found a reader here!!

Re:Well of course

[AutodidactLabrat]

WRONG, wrong, wrong, as the starving-to-death masses in India prove (Circa 12000 per DAY). China let's its poorest work for food inside barbed wire, and Brazilian shop owners PAY TO KILL homeless starving children.
THAT is why there is no net gain and why examples prove unrestricted Capitalism is unrestricted murder for profit.

Re:Well of course

[AutodidactLabrat]

O.M.F.U.G. OCTOBER 29, 1929 was all of 2 months and 2 days before 1930.
What made the great depression WORSE after the crash was the same thing that made 2009 worse than 2008
It takes TIME for the loss of buying power to spread!
Economic ILLETERATES on the right!!
Oh, and Ben Stein? The idiot who said "With science you get to killing people (as opposed myth based thinking)"? THAT is your source?

Re:Well of course

[AutodidactLabrat]

Actually, "studies" say exactly the opposite, that the loss of dollars in circulation came FIRST.

Time for the H1-B program to die

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't see anybody lining up to get into China or India.

Re:Time for the H1-B program to die

[0123456]

I don't see anybody lining up to get into China or India.

As I understand it, foreigners can work in China much more easily than they can work in America, and some people I know have done so. The Chinese actually seem to want to attract the 'best of the best' to benefit their economy, rather than millions of unskilled illegals.

Of coure they'll probably kick most of those foreigners out when their own people can do the jobs just as well. But it's still probably less risky than an H1B.

Re:Time for the H1-B program to die

[Anonymous Coward]

H1B average education is that of an USA associate degree - light years away from being the "best of the best".

China relies on indirect racism rather than laws to keep others away from the good jobs.

Re:Time for the H1-B program to die

[Anonymous Coward]

They're already full.

Re:Time for the H1-B program to die

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, I know a lot of engineers that are doing startups in Hong Kong or Shenzhen. Burn rate is lower, PCB turnaround times are same-day, and you can browse the largest component markets in the world where single units cost less than just the shipping would to the US. The Great Firewall is a pain, though.

I'll admit, I haven't heard of many doing that in India.

Re:Time for the H1-B program to die

[magarity]

North Koreans are lined up to get into China. The only problem is the risk of getting lined up for having tried to get into China.

Re:Time for the H1-B program to die

[Anonymous Coward]

I know many people working out of Hong Kong.

Huge prospects for well trained people to get paid heaps.

(I am from Australia, where it is quite common for people to go and work in China for a couple years to make heaps of cash).

Re:Time for the H1-B program to die

[jandersen]

I personally know one American who works in China. Not for a Chinese company, though; he set up a software development business in the Midwest, bought something like a Skype call-in number (not Skype, but same thing), so his customers can call a local number and he can receive it anywhere in the world. Then he moved to Beijing, bought an apartment just before the prices sky-rocketed, and works nights. Makes a lot of sense to me.

Re:Time for the H1-B program to die

[TheRaven64]

Of course they're not - China doesn't make them wait in line. It says 'welcome, here are where you can find people to work at your company, we'll put you in touch with local suppliers, do you need any more investors?'

Re:Time for the H1-B program to die

[macson_g]

Except Nepali, Buthani, Mongolians, Sri-Lankans...

America's loss is Africa's gain

[Spy Handler]

Africa and Latin America also saw an uptick in their share of the worldâ(TM)s professional migration flows.

If this is true, will we be seeing more high-tech startups opening shop in Africa and Central America?

Re:America's loss is Africa's gain

[wierd_w]

Yes. There are many established players setting up shop in Africa.
Gaborone, a major african city, has complexes for many tech and industrial giants.

Check out the wikipedia article.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

I would expect quite a bit to come from there in the coming decades.

Re:America's loss is Africa's gain

[i kan reed]

They're certainly trying to, yes.

Re:America's loss is Africa's gain

[poetmatt]

They've been setting up to do so for years, ago yes. We're not giving them any reason to desire to be in the US, so this shouldn't be too surprising.

Re:America's loss is Africa's gain

[Anonymous Coward]

Great. Now all my software is going to come with a side of ebola

Re:America's loss is Africa's gain

[xaotikdesigns]

All those princes trying to wire money out of the country need some kind of IT support, so of course they'll get some high tech start ups there.

Re:America's loss is Africa's gain

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes. There are many established players setting up shop in Africa.

Most Americans will never comprehend this reality. This is the same mental block that prevents their parents from comprehending that Europeans have built superior internet and phone services. The same thing prevented their parents from realizing that the Japanese were making far superior cars.

Re:America's loss is Africa's gain

[Anonymous Coward]

or firms like this one: http://nearsoft.com/about/

Re: America's loss is Africa's gain

[Anonymous Coward]

Slide of ebola*

Re:America's loss is Africa's gain

[kaiidth]

Gaborone is in Botswana. Botswana is on the pointy bit of Africa, next to South Africa, Namibia and Zimbabwe. Ebola is (mostly) about eight thousand kilometres away by car. If you count the smaller recent outbreak of Ebola in the Congo, Botswana is still a two thousand kilometre road trip away from the nearest outbreak.

By all accounts Gaborone is a fairly nice place, if not the most cosmopolitan or exciting city on Earth. Excepting HIV, about the worst health risk you're likely to encounter in Gaborone is cholesterol poisoning from too many Family Feast Buckets at the KFC in Main Mall.

Re:America's loss is Africa's gain

[TheSync]

will we be seeing more high-tech startups opening shop in Africa and Central America?

If you want a tech job in Central America, check out Tecoloco (which was a high-tech startup itself).

Re:America's loss is Africa's gain

[Jane Q. Public]

Most Americans will never comprehend this reality. This is the same mental block that prevents their parents from comprehending that Europeans have built superior internet and phone services. The same thing prevented their parents from realizing that the Japanese were making far superior cars.

You have a point but it is grossly over-stated. First, it is very clear why the U.S. telephone and internet infrastructure currently suck: incompetent (or in some cases corrupt) regulation. When ISPs and phone service providers are allowed to act as oligopolies, they just pocket their money and run, rather than properly investing in better infrastructure. Because they can.

However, there is another issue that is mostly unrelated: the U.S. is less densely populated than most "Western" countries, and the cost of infrastructure for providing comparable service is provably higher. That doesn't excuse the monopolists and incompetent bureaucrats, still it is true. And the U.S. government's attempt to fix the rural infrastructure problem was a comedy of errors, literally ridiculous cost overruns, and incompetence.

So you can lay the blame for a lot of this -- perhaps most of it -- directly at the feet of the U.S. government.

Back when we had a telephone system that was a properly regulated utility, it was demonstrably better than in the vast majority of Europe. Many European countries still had competing land-line services that were wholly incompatible with one another.

Also: in the beginning, the Japanese were not making cars that were "far superior" to those built in the U.S.. What they were making were cars that got better mileage and were inexpensive. The quality left a hell of a lot to be desired. So that statement is just plain wrong.

Over time, the quality got better and the U.S. manufacturers (also effectively an oligopoly, or so they thought) did not keep up. So much is undeniable.

Re:America's loss is Africa's gain

[Jane Q. Public]

Thanks, Obama.

Re:America's loss is Africa's gain

[dave420]

The population density argument simply doesn't hold water, as otherwise all US cities would have far better internet than all of Europe, which is laughable. Just stop using this canard as it reflects very poorly on the person using it, as it shows they either have a very poor grasp of the subject at hand, or are being intentionally dishonest. There is no way to use that pathetic excuse and come away clean.

Re:America's loss is Africa's gain

[Anonymous Coward]

However, there is another issue that is mostly unrelated: the U.S. is less densely populated than most "Western" countries, and the cost of infrastructure for providing comparable service is provably higher.

While this is certainly true in general, the Nordic countries actually have a lower population density than the U.S. and they still have a vastly superior telecoms infrastructure. The regulations and lack of competition are the big problems in the U.S.

Also: in the beginning, the Japanese were not making cars that were "far superior" to those built in the U.S.. What they were making were cars that got better mileage and were inexpensive. The quality left a hell of a lot to be desired.

They might not have been advertised for quality, but they were never as bad as American cars of the same era.

Re:America's loss is Africa's gain

[TheRaven64]

However, there is another issue that is mostly unrelated: the U.S. is less densely populated than most "Western" countries, and the cost of infrastructure for providing comparable service is provably higher

And that's exactly the sort of thing that the grandparent is talking about. The vast majority of the US population lives on the coasts near the big cities, where the population density is significantly higher than most of Europe, yet the telephone networks are inferior. If you look at the population density of the USA, the nationwide statistics are skewed by the enormous areas where basically no one lives. If you focus on the areas where 95% of the population lives, the US and most of the EU have quite similar population density. Both can suck for Internet access if you're in the 5%, but the US also doesn't do a very good job for the 95%.

Re:America's loss is Africa's gain

[Jane Q. Public]

The population density argument simply doesn't hold water, as otherwise all US cities would have far better internet than all of Europe, which is laughable.

No, you have it backward. The FIRST problem is that the Internet companies are badly (and inadequately) regulated. That's what causes internet to be worse there. The density problem in rural areas just makes it WORSE.

Interesting

[AvitarX]

I have highly educated friends that are getting kicked out of the country after losing the H1-B lotto, I don't think it's an issue with not being able to attract people.

Re:Interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

Could the drop off be connected to the double/triple increase in cost of getting a bachelor's or master's degrees at US universities?

Re:Interesting

[AvitarX]

Considering everyone I'm referencing has a Masters or PhD, that's not the problem I was referencing.

Hardly surprising

[Anonymous Coward]

You have an excellent standard of living if you can afford it but there is a cultural bias that is very distrusting and against 'smart' people.

Re:Hardly surprising

[Anonymous Coward]

but there is a cultural bias that is very distrusting and against 'smart' people.

no, only the condescending assholes.

Re:Hardly surprising

[Anonymous Coward]

Nah. There is a streak of anti-intellectualism a mile wide. And it is terrible. Book learnin' nancy boys in their ivory towers.

Re:Hardly surprising

[gweihir]

Indeed.

Re:Hardly surprising

[Anonymous Coward]

I think this depends on where you are. I emigrated from the UK to Utah four years ago and have found that, for the most part, I'm well regarded for being a knowledge worker. I'm also impressed that there seems to be a high regard for good academic performance in schools here, something that was certainly not the case in my country of origin.

Re:Hardly surprising

[Anonymous Coward]

The politics does have some anti-intellectualism, but you can go lots of places where that isn't anything other than a news story where you shake your head at the people living in the sticks.

If you live any any major metropolitan area, it is the anti-intellectuals who stand out, not you. It really doesn't have much of a bearing on your daily life unless you like going out into the rural areas and hanging at the honkey tonks.

See what you did Slashdot?

[bazmail]

In my experience (as a dev team lead and interviewer) foreign workers are generally more educated, more productive and more willing to got the extra mile than the local self-entitled bunch.
Now because of your whiny "teamstering" here on Slashdot, the visa numbers wil probably go down, hurting US business.

Re:See what you did Slashdot?

[Anonymous Coward]

hurting US business

Similar to Mrs. Sherkin of Facebook victimhood, I'm going to attempt to have sympathy for US business and their awful hiring plight. One moment please.

Darn. I failed again. I have no sympathy for the difficulties of US businesses wishing to hire indentured servants to do their bidding without question for paltry compensation.

Re:See what you did Slashdot?

[Anonymous Coward]

"more willing to got the extra mile"

Yeah, because they didn't want to be deported. Funny how the slaves work harder for you than people with other options!

Re:See what you did Slashdot?

[blackomegax]

Good, more jobs for the skilled locals that won't bend over and take a low wage in the ass for highly technical work.

Re:See what you did Slashdot?

[umghhh]

As for the reasons why you may think foreigners are more skilled than locals there is this explanation that fits best into your use case: if you look at immigrants in context of their source society you will see, that they are either over- or undereducated. The ones in the middle usually have more to lose and less to gain from immigrating. Low skilled have very little to lose and very skilled usually migrate because they have better options in other countries and not only financially. In other words, if you were looking you would have found locals of the same skill level as immigrants are but immigrants asking for a job in IT are usually filtered by the migration effort that is huge and has to pay off so mostly well skilled take that risk. This is a simplification of real process but as long as people do not try to flee natural disaster of Pol Pot proportions they usually form the diamond shape when put on mass/skill diagram.

As for lowering of numbers of skilled workers there are many reasons I would think. USA was once major magnet because the rest of the world was so underdeveloped. This has changed. Then more restrictive environment means that to get in, you have to do more or get there illegally - such conditions are putting skilled ones off naturally as it increases risk without increasing of pay off. But there are other reasons too. US society is better known to people now and not from better side. If decision to immigrate is based on information and calculation instead of myths and herd instincts, then there is ever less incentive: US society is more and more seen in perspective of great divide between have and havenots, there are riots, militarized police seems to be shooting people at random and people are shooting other people, tensions in society seem to be fixed so people in say Fergusson buy guns instead of trying to address the problems, add to this war on drugs, massive prison population and what is important for people like me who would immigrate with family: basic social safety nets are somewhat lacking. There is also another aspect - US is not seen as a good country anymore or not by majority. Take Germany - conquered by (among others) US military power and turned into ashes in a process yet people loved US after a while. This has stopped and now they are more critical but there are plenty of places in the world where people see US as only good to get some goodies AND a great danger to own society too. I do not know how many people use such arguments not to migrate to US but I would imagine the number became significant of late.

Plus today there are more jobs which you can do from home. You can do some of those jobs from home - income may be lower but risk is lower too.

As for your /. argument - I think you exaggerate hugely the influence this site has on anything. I know maybe 2 or 3 guys who know /.
If this site had any influence on general population anywhere we would see libertarian economic policy at least in US, energy needs covered by 4th generation of nuclear reactors and NSA and religion banned from the system their proponents sent to re-education camps in Syberia. maybe even some good examples could have been found of such geek based society but we would not know because this is not happening.

Re:See what you did Slashdot?

[RockDoctor]

the visa numbers wil probably go down, hurting US business.

And the problem is?

In my experience (as a dev team lead and interviewer) foreign workers are generally more educated, more productive and more willing to got the extra mile than the local self-entitled bunch

Sounds like you've got the skill set to be a significant player in, say, the Indian IT business. So, move there where your skills are desired, and your pay check will probably go considerably further.

OK, you'd have to learn several more languages, but that's not exactly a problem. The reduced taxes from getting out of the clutches of the US tax people may be welcome too.

obviously

[Anonymous Coward]

That's because firms just hire them to work remotely from their own country, thus having to pay them less money.

But who's going to support the welfare state?

[Anonymous Coward]

The USA is no longer the land of the free.

It's the land of "you got it, I want it".

Who wants to volunteer to be a beast of burden for a nation of mediocre people?

Clever people are more appreciated elsewhere.

The only people being welcomed to the USA are those that are going to continue to support an expanding welfare state.

Re:But who's going to support the welfare state?

[Anonymous Coward]

Nailed it. The land of the free has become the land of the free stuff.

Re:But who's going to support the welfare state?

[jeffmflanagan]

>Nailed it. The land of the free has become the land of the free stuff.

No it hasn't, but the far-right-wing asshats that drove all the smart people out of the Republican party keep marginalizing themselves by making this claim. Keep it up idiots, your driving the Republican party off the deep end is going to make room for a new second party.

Re:But who's going to support the welfare state?

[0123456]

Keep it up idiots, your driving the Republican party off the deep end is going to make room for a new second party.

Oh, yes please. Replacing the Democrat-Lite party with a right-wing party is one of the best things that could happen to America.

Re:But who's going to support the welfare state?

[peragrin]

The USA has always been about beating and stealing from other people to sell to some else. If you believe otherwise I have a bridge in San fransicso I can sell.

Or do the names Rockefeller Vanderbilt or Carnegie mean nothing to you.

Re:But who's going to support the welfare state?

[Anonymous Coward]

It already happened. Democrats are only slightly less right-wing than the Republicans.

Re:But who's going to support the welfare state?

[TheSync]

John D. Rockefeller basally created the modern petroleum industry, dramatically advancing technology, and reducing the price of oil for customers.

Cornelius Vanderbilt was an early steamboat and shipping entrepreneur, and dramatically improved the operation of railroad lines into New York City.

Andrew Carnegie greatly enlarged the US steel industry, including the first serious of the Bessemer process. Personally, Carnegie was a leader in the American Anti-Imperialist League, in opposition to the U.S. annexation of the Philippines. He also gave away 90% of his wealth to philanthropies.

All three of these men created companies that enhanced the lives of consumers.

Re:But who's going to support the welfare state?

[jeffmflanagan]

Are you high? The Democrats may be described as Republicans-light because they're also right-wing, but not extremists. The Republicans may be Stormfront-light, but that's about all they're less extreme than. How could you possibly think a party that replaces the Republicans because they're off the deep end right-wing lunatics would be more right-wing?

Re:But who's going to support the welfare state?

[Anonymous Coward]

They were also all three still ruthless industrialists, and while at least somewhat beloved by the populace or holding a good reputation in those manners, they were anathema to other industrial entrepreneurs and forefathers of the big corporate systems we have today.

Re:But who's going to support the welfare state?

[0123456]

I apologise. I posted before I'd read your other posts here and realized you were just trolling.

Re:But who's going to support the welfare state?

[Anonymous Coward]

It is absolutely true. We already have millions who won't work and live off of taxpayers. Why would we want millions more just like them?

Millions have come from Latin America simply for the welfare benefits. Sure they'll work some underpaid job, but they'll mooch off the taxpayers for the rest.

Re:But who's going to support the welfare state?

[Anonymous Coward]

And thank God for them.

Maybe they are educated enough to not use linkedin

[Anonymous Coward]

there is no reason to use facebook or linkedin... assuming that everyone uses them is a grave mistake.

fundamentally flawed science is not science... it's marketing.

H1B Abuse

[TWX]

Considering that companies have been abusing the H1B process for some time now, perhaps we're just seeing a correction in-part inspired by greater success in potential migrants' home countries.

Salary is a supply/demand characteristic. The more people capable of doing a job, generally the less it pays. This holds true across the entire spectrum of employment until one reaches those that control the market in which they are paid from (ie, corporate executives). Desirability of a job is often not much of a deciding factor in the worth of that job either; janitorial services employees have awful jobs sometimes, but nearly every able-bodied worker could do those jobs, so the wages are particularly low because no individual worker is much in-demand.

This applies to H1B skilled-worker visas since more techncial workers means less demand per-worker, so wages fall. It's further excerbated by the H1B worker not being as free to exercise the free-market due to a real risk of deportation, so they can be paid less than the market average, which further helps to pull down the market average.

I expect the situation isn't as dire as the article makes it out to be.

Re:H1B Abuse

[tompaulco]

The people for which the H1B program were created no longer find it worthwhile to come here under that program. We used to pay competitive wages for the best of the best from other countries. Now we pay slave wages to whomever applies. Why should the best of the best come over here for slave wages? Fix the H1B program so that it pays industry standard wages for a select few individuals, perhaps a few thousand per year, and soon enough we will be attracting the best and brightest again. The best and brightest can't even get there foot in the door when the H1B specialization firms are grabbing up all available visas within a couple of days every year and supplying us with commodity unskilled labor that hundreds of thousands of people already in the U.S. are perfectly capable of doing.

Re:H1B Abuse

[Anonymous Coward]

Amen to this. I advised my brother, whom I consider to be a pretty talented hacker, to not bother with an H1B setup that his current employer has. They'd be paying him the prevailing H1B slave wages, and lock him in with some non-compete agreement that probably won't even hold up in courts here.
However, as others have mentioned, many IT consulting body shops just need a warm body to fill, so they don't have a dearth of folks lined up.

Needless to say, he's looking for other jobs already.

Re:H1B Abuse

[Anonymous Coward]

You would better check USCIS site before complaining.
What you want are E-1 (extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics as demonstrated by sustained national or international acclaim and recognized achievements in the field of expertise. ) and E-2 (Advanced Degree Professional or Exceptional Ability) immigrant and O-1A (Extraordinary Ability and Achievement) non-immigrant visas.
Yes, H1-Bs are for cheap labor of somewhat limited qualification. It always was so. And abuse focus has shifted from H1B to L-1 long time ago.

They seem to be asking the wrong people...

[Desirsar]

Pick any random university and go ask its foreign students how hard it is to get a green card. We don't just have skilled workers wanting in, they're already here and were trained here, and we send them back. It's really not worth the concession for access to their schools for our students (the government where the students are from want them to come home and "impart their knowledge to their countrymen"), the end result is that their best students come here and stay, and our best students stay here too.

Re:They seem to be asking the wrong people...

[DoofusOfDeath]

Pick any random university and go ask its foreign students how hard it is to get a green card.

I'm reasonable sure Obama just emphasized that green cards aren't important. It's having puppy-dog eyes that matters.

Re:They seem to be asking the wrong people...

[Anonymous Coward]

Apparently grammar isn't important either.

Re:They seem to be asking the wrong people...

[Anonymous Coward]

No actually, you're wrong. It's pretty difficult and time consuming to get a green card.
As compared with, e.g. Canada or Australia where you get permanent residence right off the bat.
In the US you have to work like a slave for some company and *hope* they deign to sponsor you to get a green card and then *maybe* if you're lucky you will get one of the green cards after say 7 or 10 years...

Meanwhile, your wife and kids can't work and you can't start a business on the side.

I was offered an H1B once. I laughed.

Re:They seem to be asking the wrong people...

[Anonymous Coward]

I knew it was Obama's fault!

Unsurprising if you think about it

[Anonymous Coward]

Who in their right mind would move to the country that elected Bush?

Re:Unsurprising if you think about it

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you mis-typed and spelled Obama wrong. Who wants to leave one socialist country to come to another? No longer the land of the free...

Re: Unsurprising if you think about it

[prefec2]

Here is a list of reasons why many Europeans won't come. You are not one of those socialist European countries with a public healthcare system. You have 12 times more people shot per year and per inhabitant then any EU country. There is a lot of racism in the US. Your immigration procedures and your fear of terrorism.
All in all your image sucks. You are no t the country of the free and brave. You are quite the opposite. There is also a lot if violence in your country. All causes not to come. And for EU citizens the lack of a welfare state shocks us even more than the high rate of gun possessions.

Re:Unsurprising if you think about it

[jeffmflanagan]

Only deeply stupid people who've internalized wingnut propaganda call Obama a "socialist." I can see why you derped as an AC.

Re: Unsurprising if you think about it

[HornWumpus]

Also run the stats over the entire 20th century and include the shootings by out of control government.

Re:Unsurprising if you think about it

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you mis-typed and spelled Obama wrong.

Ask -any foreigner- their opinion of Bush vs. Obama. Remember, TFA is about how -foreigners- feel, not racist and stupid Internet trolls.

Who wants to leave one socialist country to come to another?

People who supported socialist policies in the first place. FYI, the first recorded use of the word "socialist" was in American Congress, describing abolition. The USA was the first socialist country, so if you don't like it, move.

Re:Unsurprising if you think about it

[Sri Ramkrishna]

Indeed. Obama is more of an old time republican (which is fine, the whole country moved right) and not any kind of socialist. People just use that label to mean "bad", it literally has no meaning anymore. It doesn't refer to socialism at all because people don't really know what socialism is or what it stands for. Hell, I doubt they even know what capitalism is.

Re: Unsurprising if you think about it

[Hognoxious]

You have 12 times more people shot per year and per inhabitant then any EU country./blockquote>Of course, if you compare a single EU country to the entire United States he US will always have more.

Try again. Pay particular attention to the words "per inhabitant".

Re:Unsurprising if you think about it

[Phrogman]

Pretty much anyone who is calling Obama a "socialist" doesn't understand what Socialism means, doesn't understand just how skewed to the political right the US is politically, and doesn't understand that for a lot of us in the rest of the world, being at least a bit Socialist is a *good* thing. I am in Canada and we are sadly heading further to the right than we have been in the past and its proving to only be a bad thing for the country IMHO. As a Canadian, I view Obama as being pretty definitely Right-Wing in almost all regards. The Republicans qualify as "Batshit insane Right Wing" on the other hand :)

Re: Unsurprising if you think about it

[Anonymous Coward]

What part of "per inhabitant" don't you understand?

Re:Unsurprising if you think about it

[aaaaaaargh!]

Nah, I can guarantee you that the reason is Bush and his regime. I'm an example myself, I was planning for a long time to apply at a US university and move to your lovely country, but Bush and his gang really did spoil the party.

I know some of you guys think differently, but across the pond Obama is more or less recognized like an overall very reasonable, if not a bit pale and too timid politician. Like, say, Jimmy Carter.

Re: Unsurprising if you think about it

[Anonymous Coward]

Most of those statistics are the result of inner city gang warfare where they shoot each other.

If you're a European and stay out of the projects, you're in as much real danger of being shot as you would be in Europe. I can't think of the last time I was at all concerned about being shot. I'm more likely to die of being hit in a crosswalk.

Re:Unsurprising if you think about it

[Sri Ramkrishna]

That's because you guys managed to get Harper re-elected again.. You need to make sure he is gone next election.

Re: Unsurprising if you think about it

[turbidostato]

"I'm more likely to die of being hit in a crosswalk."

Yes, you are right. Car accident rates are also that much higher than in Europe.

Re:Unsurprising if you think about it

[turbidostato]

"Who wants to leave one socialist country to come to another?"

You can bet basically nobody from a properly run "socialist" (by your standards) country (i.e. Northern Europe) would want to go to what USA has become in the last 30 years.

And no, neither Obama nor USA is in danger of being anywhere near to be considered socialist.

"Socialist", despite of what you think, is not a swear word.

Re: Unsurprising if you think about it

[Anonymous Coward]

Ooooh, so they are shooting people in the inner cities! that makes it ok then!

This country is totally safe!

Re:Unsurprising if you think about it

[Anonymous Coward]

A description of a 'socialist' would be someone who is trying to move the country in a more socialist direction. Obama inarguably is.

"LinkedIn Study"

[Anonymous Coward]

LinkedIn Study: US Attracting Fewer Educated, Highly Skilled Migrants

LinkedIn Study: US Attracting Fewer Educated

LinkedIn Study:

LinkedIn Study

LinkedIn Study

LinkedIn Study

Seems legit. The levels of rigor, objectivity, and scientificness of this study are bound to be off the charts!

Solid research there

[NotDrWho]

The study, which used a novel method of tracking people through data from the social media site LinkedIn

found that just 13 percent of migrating professionals in the sample group chose the U.S. as a destination in 2012, down from 27 percent in 2000.

Pretty impressive finding results from LinkedIn back in 2000, considering it didn't launch until 2003.

Re:Solid research there

[rwa2]

Pretty impressive finding results from LinkedIn back in 2000, considering it didn't launch until 2003.

Heh, if you were really Dr. Who, you could find a way to make that happen :D

To be fair, LinkedIn has appeared to reach critical mass just within the past year or two (at least my account is finally exploding with people I've worked with in the past, similar to when I begrudgingly realized that people actually use Facebook way back when).

Also, if you RTFS, they address that in their research bias section. And if you're a LinkedIn luser, you might realize that eventually they goad you into uploading most of your employment history, so that's what they're probably digging into to get pre-2003 data.

Re:Solid research there

[sconeu]

Must have been damned early in 2003. I got laid off in Feb 2003, and one of the managers recommended LinkedIn as part of the job search.

Re:Solid research there

[crackspackle]

Also, if you RTFS, they address that in their research bias section.

Yeah, they're using Linked-in for the data on people resumes, but if you also read the study, they have come up with some new category of “Employment-based migration” under the guise this provides as this givens a better idea of STEM transfers opposed to actual immigration, while completely ignoring things like Eurozone immigrations changes that made stuff like employment based migration possible on a large scale. At least their kind enough to point out the U.S. is still the top country for immigration, probably assuming we’ll all think they’re illegals.

The fact is, very few people leave the U.S. for jobs overseas and relatively few come here legally for jobs because it’s so damn difficult. That’s the reason these types numbers are low. I guarantee if we opened the borders for STEM grads only, we’d be overwhelmed. Many in the U.S.A fail to recognize the incredible gift they have living in this country but most outsiders would be happy to swap places with them. There’s really no place on earth as relatively free of the problems that dog all civilizations - crime, corruption, pollution, overpopulation, disease and really only one that also offers vast economic opportunities and the ability to change who you overnight.

Re:Solid research there

[turbidostato]

"Thereâ(TM)s really no place on earth as relatively free of the problems that dog all civilizations - crime, corruption, pollution, overpopulation, disease"

Yeah. Except for basically every other first-world country.

"and really only one that also offers vast economic opportunities and the ability to change who you overnight."

Yes. For the good. And also for the bad.

Re:Solid research there

[crackspackle]

Yeah. Except for basically every other first-world country.

Name one country that exceeds the U.S.A. in all those categories? You can't can you? Canada may be closest but it really doesn't have anywhere near the same economic opportunities. Some country part of the Eurozone? Yeah, they've got all these wonder social safety nets that insure you won't go homeless but also insure it's practically impossible to change the socioeconomic status under which you were born because of all the taxes, rules and regulations that go with it.

"and really only one that also offers vast economic opportunities and the ability to change who you overnight."

Yes. For the good. And also for the bad.

No doubt you can go straight to your ass here if you want, but you'll notice that's mostly a complaint coming from third generation or older citizens who think they are supposed to be handed everything on a silver platter. New immigrants don't have this problem and are busy making money and building business while they complain.

Re:Solid research there

[Anonymous Coward]

Heh, if you were really Dr. Who, you could find a way to make that happen :D

You may want to re-read the parent's handle. :D

Re:Solid research there

[Anonymous Coward]

The american dream, you too can become a millionaire in the land of plenty!

Bullshit. I wish you guys would stop pretending that it isn't a fucking lottery. It is why you guys are so resistant to taxing super high incomes, Eat your dog-food benny, our luck is going to change tomorrow and we'll be RICH!!

Re:Solid research there

[rubycodez]

Launched May 2003 according to wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...

you were a pioneer!

Re: Solid research there

[Anonymous Coward]

Go back to R.I.F, stop spouting the dog food you've been eating and look at the facts. We are are still the world's largest economy, nevermind that we are only a tiny percentage of the world's population and we are not dumping millions of gallons of toxic waste into the soil or building empty cities to do it. And, yes, social programs exceed those in the states and they work very well at maintaing the status qou for everybody but if you want a way out or a way up, you come here. That above all is the main reason people immigrate, but if you don't believe me, just ask a recent immigrant, or read the real facts for yourself.

Re:Solid research there

[Anonymous Coward]

Let me guess, you have never been outside the USA?

Re:Solid research there

[crackspackle]

I've been all over and worked overseas in several countries for extended periods and that has absolutely nothing to do with it. I am not arguing that the U.S. is better than other countries except in so much as it affords opportunities for both new immigrants and the old. If you know of a better country, please tell me.

No surprise here

[kgroombr]

What do you expect when the tax system punishes performance and rewards failure.

Re:No surprise here

[jeffmflanagan]

No it doesn't. That's an ignorant conservative belief, often repeated by people who have been propagandized by wingnut media. You guys just can't engage with the real world anymore because you have so many absurd, totally toxic beliefs fed to you by hate-radio, fake news, and the wingnut-o-sphere regarding America and Americans. Your complete lack of critical thinking skills has made you one of the dead-enders that has nothing to contribute to society. I hope you grow up one day.

Re:No surprise here

[kgroombr]

Your statement contains no facts. I can call you ugly all day long, but unless I substantiate it, it means nothing. Here are some facts for you: http://taxfoundation.org/artic... http://www.ntu.org/foundation/... I supose I am a racist too since that is typically the last resort of somebody that can't think.

Re:No surprise here

[TheDarkMaster]

Very well said.

Re:No surprise here

[Anonymous Coward]

That is also true for (almost) all of the countries that compete with the U.S. to attract migrants.

Re:No surprise here

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice rant, but what grandparent writes is factually true, regardless of whether you consider that right or wrong. The more succes one enjoys, the more tax one has to pay and the fewer benefits one qualifies for.

Re:No surprise here

[crunchygranola]

Neither link supports the claim you made. You will have to add that special sauce of wing-nut interpretation to make your case. Your turn.

Re:No surprise here

[jeffmflanagan]

This is how wingnuts view the world, but it's just not true that one has less when one is more successful. Successful people are simply expected to pull more weight because they benefit more from America. It's not at all complicated, but greedy people always want more to the point that they'll pretend to envy the poor.

Re:No surprise here

[Anonymous Coward]

his is how wingnuts view the world, but it's just not true that one has less when one is more successful.

Nice strawman, but nobody claimed that. The claim was that more succesful people are punished (by having to pay more tax), which is correct.

It's not at all complicated, but greedy people always want more.

Most people are greedy, regardless of income or wealth.

Re:No surprise here

[umghhh]

If they grow up they buy a gun or get elected or some other terrible thing happens. Better shoot them straight or in case your religion or ethics prevent you from doing that: hope for your preferred deity or force of nature to take care of the problem, preferably within our lifetime.

Re:No surprise here

[turbidostato]

"The more succes one enjoys, the more tax one has to pay"

Well, not exactly true since the "more" in "more tax" is actually shorter than the "more" in "more success": double your fortune and you won't double your taxes. Multiply x1000 your fortune and you probably will pay less taxes than your assistant.

Re:No surprise here

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, you're passionate, and that partly makes up for the irrationality.

Re:No surprise here

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, not exactly true since the "more" in "more tax" is actually shorter than the "more" in "more success": double your fortune and you won't double your taxes

In most countries, at least up to a point, the total tax paid is more than doubled when income is doubled. At best, it is exactly doubled. I am farfrom an expert on U.S. taxes, but the U.S. would be a very special exception if it were otherwise in that country.

Multiply x1000 your fortune and you probably will pay less taxes than your assistant.

Really? How does that work? Is the top tax bracket negative in the U.S.?

You get what you pay for

[wierd_w]

This is not at all surprising to me.

Straight up, off the top-- we have a major sector of the US job market (which long ago moved away from manufacturing based jobs to services and technical skills based jobs) that seeks absurd paper requirements, and prices itself out of the domestic labor market, seeking to satisfy its absurd tastes in workers using H1B laborers, creating a market for H1B laborers.

This new market creates very lucrative opportunities in other countries to get desperate people suitably papered up, and foisted into very poisonous employment contracts, even when they really arent able to do the jobs their paperwork says they can.

Add to this that at least one of the countries implicated in industrialized H1B applicant farming also has notoriously bad problems with institutionalized cheating in university settings (coupled with straight up bribery for credentials)-- Seriously, did ANYONE expect ANYTHING OTHER than this?

That's just the tech side of the coin-- There's also the "Immigrant laborers are doing jobs americans dont want to do!" rhetoric. (The statement closer to the truth is that they are doing jobs at pay rates that americans cannot afford to take; The pay rate is below poverty line, and often below legally permitted wages when done above-board with legal citizen workers. This is again, little more than industrialized labor farming for the lowest pricepoint possible. That does NOT attract the "best and brightest".)

But hey-- What do I know. I'm just some guy, not a multi-billion dollar mega conglomerate seeking to continue financial growth in a world economy that cant grow because pay scales have not scaled with inflation. What do I know about the reason detre behind these phenomena!

Seriously.

Re:You get what you pay for

[nine-times]

There's also the "Immigrant laborers are doing jobs americans dont want to do!" rhetoric...That does NOT attract the "best and brightest".

For the jobs you're talking about, it's not clear to me that they intend to attract the "best and brightest". They're willing to settle for, "Will work long hours picking fruit for almost no money, and will be too afraid to report me if I break labor laws."

Re:You get what you pay for

[wierd_w]

Exactly. You get what you pay for.

There is immense job market demand for compliant wage-slaves. Coupled with the institutionalized bald-faced-lies in the H1B sector, you have 2 major employment sectors promoting a glut of lacklustre or low skill level immigrants to come to the country.

The cumulative effects of this bring down otherwise high paying wages in the rest of the economy, making the US less and less attractive to actually highly-valued immigrants with highly sought-after skill sets-- It is not worth their while to move here for lower pay.

Duh

[damn_registrars]

Well, we treat them like crap. On top of that they come here and find that they have very few opportunities to advance any more. Why would they want to come here? They'd be better off going to a civilized first-world country rather than the third-world construct we are trying so hard to make the US into.

Re:Maybe they are educated enough to not use linke

[Anonymous Coward]

fundamentally flawed science is not science... it's marketing.

Tell that to the AGW crowd.

Oh, we ATTRACT them alright...

[mi]

US Attracting Fewer Educated, Highly Skilled Migrants

Oh, I'm quite sure, we attract plenty. We just would not allow their education and other qualifications to help them gain entrance. Other countries use "points" systems to filter better candidates through, but the US deems the method discriminatory.

Meanwhile, the unwashed wogs keep getting through the open border — selected based on the lucky geography, rather than education or anything useful — and accommodating them takes all our energies.

And cheaper, right?

[khasim]

In my experience (as a dev team lead and interviewer) foreign workers are generally more educated, more productive and more willing to got the extra mile than the local self-entitled bunch.

Well, unless you secretly work for Google or some such, this is not about you. They're the ones who can afford to attract the best people from around the world.

The other people claiming to be in tech usually mean H-1B visa recipients. And the real reasons to hire them are:

1. They're cheaper than hiring US citizens.

2. They cannot change jobs as easily as US citizens. No matter how many hours you demand that they work.

3. They're easier to dispose of. You just send them back home. No need to worry about wrongful termination suits or such.

If you cannot afford to hire the people with the training necessary then you need to look at your business plan.

Complaining that the local people who will take the job at the pay you're offering lack the education necessary says more about your pay than about the skills of the local people.

Re:And cheaper, right?

[Anonymous Coward]

2. They cannot change jobs as easily as US citizens. No matter how many hours you demand that they work.

Then reform immigration law such that they can get green cards/permanent residency (thereby giving them the rights that American workers enjoy) and the option for citizenship.

As it stands, there is very little that the US has to offer an educated immigrant. Creationists are taken seriously by half of Congress. The other half agrees with the first half that everyone gets their balls felt up, their fingerprints taken, and their phones tapped even if all you want to do is attend a conference and visit Disneyland. The United States is less welcoming than East Germany, and that's just looking at it for tourism, never mind actual immigration. And that's our fault, as an electorate.

Re:And cheaper, right?

[asdfj]

Very little to offer an educated immigrant? What about the fact that all global industries are run from here, and that America is the closest thing the world has to a reigning empire right now? America is also indisputably the heaviest hitter when it comes to innovation in all industries, regardless that it's not a fair fight since really the USA should be compared to the entire EU population/gdp-wise. Any kind of role that benefits from being closer to the action, benefits from being based in NY/DC/SF/LA/etc. You'll never find a managing director at an investment bank or a board member of a big corporation willingly relocate to another country unless their specific role demands that location. And the vast majority of Americans would never want to move their life to another country to start a family there.

Re:And cheaper, right?

[Anonymous Coward]

H1B here. Let me correct some of the most common misconceptions...
1. They're cheaper than hiring US citizens.
Not always. Unlike common misconception people in H1B can change jobs and if I'm not getting what I'm worth, I will switch my job! Now, it requires some paper work where your new employer has to file for your H1B transfer but this is daily routine for them, nothing unusual.
What you probably meant to say is that H1Bs lower the average wages. I'll give you that. It's simply a matter of demand and supply. If there is a bigger pool of employees, wages will go up at a slower pace (if at all).

2. They cannot change jobs as easily as US citizens. No matter how many hours you demand that they work.
Of course not. H1Bs can change jobs. There is additional paper work to be done (as explained above). But not as difficult as you are making it to be.
However, there is a time when we apply for a green card we cannot change jobs for about 1-2 years. Yes, if we change jobs in the middle of this, we have to restart the green card process from scratch. But after this process is completed, we can change jobs just as before.

3. They're easier to dispose of. You just send them back home. No need to worry about wrongful termination suits or such.
We're just as easy to dispose as any other US citizen. No one can just send me back home. They have to give me a notice (my observation: varies between 2 weeks and 2 months) that I am being laid off or fired. If I find another job in that time frame, I do not have to leave the country. I can just start working for the new employer. You are right about I cannot stay jobless in the country. However, if I did manage to find another job (thus, continue my legal status in US), I can file a wrongful termination suit (if something inappropriate happened). This is also the reason why none of my H1B friends who have been laid-off/fired, have never faced wrongful termination (never personally experienced this, so I don't have first hand knowledge). They were given a good package (2-6 months salary depending on their experience) and decent notice of termination (2-6 weeks). Yes, they all found new jobs which paid even higher salaries than they were getting before.

Overall, I understand why there are those misconceptions because for nearly every point of yours I debunked there was an exception or a qualifier that I had to mention. Obama's recently announced executive order should make life easier for H1Bs too (though the media was only talking about illegals). This should help H1Bs to become bolder and make the marketplace more competitive.

Re:And cheaper, right?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds like a good policy prescription is to allow suitably educated, employed people over here to be able to retain/renew their H1-B status if they should lose their job under most circumstances. Giving them more mobility makes it harder to exploit them or distort the labor market. That basically gets rid of your list of complaints.

As for Chem E's from Chechnya, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia, no, we don't need them that bad.

Re: And cheaper, right?

[Anonymous Coward]

The US was near the bottom of the list when I was deciding where to go. Canada, Australia and some EU countries easily beat it out.

For me, there were several factors that ruled out living in America and none of your points touch on any of it. Safety, social stability, justice system, health care, education, infrastructure - the US does poorly in all of these compared to other countries that are happy to have me.

Right or wrong, the perception of America outside the US is not good anymore.

Re:And cheaper, right?

[Ryanrule]

yes, the far and middle east, and africa. paradise.

Re:And cheaper, right?

[Anonymous Coward]

Cheaper is right. Almost one in four Americans is now permanently out of work, and out of the workforce. They can't ALL be useless ! Many of those people must have SOME skills, or be easily re-trainable. But we're importing "cheap labor", increasing the suffering of our own citizens. This is reminiscent of the 1970's, when all the "sharp" economist types were insisting that we HAD to buy oil from the Middle East, because "it was so cheap!". That "cheap foreign oil" turned out be damned expensive...just ask any dead American soldier. "Cheap foreign labor" will turn out to be very expensive, too.

Re:And cheaper, right?

[yacc143]

Well, and after how many days as unemployed do you get deported. Don't know about H1B in detail, but e.g. the preferential work visas for Aussies mean that you have to leave the country after being 7 days unemployed.

And your comment about "2 weeks and 2 months" is not a very correct observation, California is like most US states a at-will state. That means, if your employer does not like you, http://www.business.ca.gov/Sta... you are gone today. And the legal thing to do at this moment is not look for new work, it's looking for a ticket and moving your home back to a country where you are allowed to stay.

Re: And cheaper, right?

[asdfj]

Those issues certainly exist, as they also exist to an equal or greater extent in every other region of the world with more than 10 million people or so. (Although they're really only issues for the lower middle class and below, as those with means can easily procure top-quality services for all those things in any non-rural area.) The difference is that there is no ceiling for success or quality of life in America, but in every other country you'll eventually run against a limit to your power growth because this is the most powerful place in the world. The power/fulfillment that even a relatively unimportant role in America can yield, like a congressman or board member in a big corporation, dwarfs even the primary leadership roles of a country like Italy or France. I'd take a big role at a fortune 500 company any day over being the nobody prime minister of Germanaviastan. England and some other semi-powers can come close, but they all eventually kowtow to the power of American business and influence. So for those of us who strive to big achievements, America is the place to do it. If you just want to have a decent safe career and breed, and live vicariously through your hopes for the accomplishments of your spawn, then yeah of course there's dozens of regions all over the world where you can do that. But if not, we've only got one life, so why set limits for yourself by where you live? I don't mind external perceptions of America - if anything a negative view from the world's unwashed proles is a positive thing for those of us who are already comfortable here. We've got enough of a population problem as it is. But we'll keep churning all the global money here regardless; the global economy still depends very very heavily on American services, and that won't change in our lifetime. The mobs can whine about social services if they want, me and my brood are still sitting pretty and I don't mind a little entertainment.

Re:And cheaper, right?

[Anonymous Coward]

Also an H-1b by the way, just randomly stumbled upon this post. There is no legal grace period of unemployment for H-1b, but in practice USCIS usually allows a period of a few days to weeks. No guarantee though.

The "you are fired now!" has never happened to me or those around me. If you were fired as a low performer, you would get plenty of notice beforehand. In the case of a sudden layoff, the severance package could usually be converted into extra time of employment. Surely we are all legally at-will, but I won't be paranoid about losing my job the next minute. Especially in CA, it's just difficult to find any programmer of any skill level unemployed.

Republicans : So, what problem again? Fewer?

[Anonymous Coward]

That just means American-born white people will have more opportunities with fewer oppressive educated migrant workers around, right? I assume that's what's been holding them back all this time, thanks to Obama's disastrous unimplemented immigration plan...

Novel method indeed

[punkr0x]

The headline is one conclusion. The other is that workers looking to migrate to the US find LinkedIn less valuable compared to workers migrating to other countries. I'm sure there are numerous other conclusions you could draw from such a novel method.

It's obvious

[surfdaddy]

It has been obvious for some time that the US is on the decline. As a worker in the late stages of my career, I find that saddening but I don't know what we can do about it. In the 60's it was all about technology and progress and science. Kennedy made a speech where he asked where the US would get all the Engineers that would be needed for the future. Nowadays it is all about financial instruments and inventing ways to manipulate the numbers to look like you have more money than you do. And it is also about rejecting science when it doesn't agree with your religious leanings (sort of sounds like some other religions in other parts of the world, doesn't it?). I don't personally see the will in this country to continue the leadership into the future. It will probably take a generation or two, but then we will be another Spain or UK which was once a dominant world power. Let's just hope that the next big power is benevolent, or it is likely not to be very pretty.

Re:It's obvious

[nine-times]

I'm not sure how it relates to the conversation, but the US still does have a lot of engineers. Unfortunately, a lot of them are scrambling in competition to build a half-assed mobile app that they can sell to Google for a billion dollars. That's the American dream these days: make a half-assed company that I can sell for a lot of money before people realize it's useless and the whole thing implodes.

Re:It's obvious

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, with regard to the mobile app stuff, I wonder what will actually happen when this bubble pops. If I remember correctly, the housing and finance boom was the previous thing siphoning off the engineers and mathematicians.

Re:It's obvious

[Anonymous Coward]

It will probably take a generation or two, but then we will be another Spain or UK which was once a dominant world power.

another Spain or UK

Can't bring yourself to imagine the USA turning into France, huh? :p

Re:It's obvious

[Anonymous Coward]

Worse.

The brightest minds in the world are being recruited to engineer systems for HFT stock scamming. The very fastest and bleeding edge computer tech is being used for what is essentially and elaborate game of 3 card monty.

Lets not bullshit here. The financial services industry today is largely a vehicle to widen the wealth gap and nothing else. And it will get much much worse before it gets better.

Re:It's obvious

[Anonymous Coward]

"Benevolent"... lol, like the US?

Did you know the US killed 25% of North Korea's population... and now taunts it calling it the Hermit Kingdom for not wanting anything to do with a world that treated it like that.

I can't think of a country that the US hasn't gone to war with.

I will tell you why the US is in decline, it has nothing to do with will (it still wants to be #1 as you can see from the other robot-wars story): it is because evil destroys itself.

Re:It's obvious

[Anonymous Coward]

Income inequality related perhaps? If the money is at the top the way to get rich is to service them. In this case it is by making some piece of crap that they buy up because they think it will be the next Facebook and make up for all that they wasted. Really we need more of those businesses to put money back into the economy.

And so it begins

[AutodidactLabrat]

As racism and homophobia, xenophobia and religious bigotry spread across America thanks to Faux News, the empire crumbles, unable to attract top talent.
Reagan made us a debtor nation, Bush destroyed our claim to moral superiority, our 1% stripmined the mortgage business, clearing 2 trillion in net profits from OUR work
and now, the best and brightest are staying in Europe to study high energy physics, in China to study materials science and civil engineering and in Germany to study manufacturing process
Get ready for poverty, as the wages of low tax, no public investment and provocative faux news become destitution of the American people.
"The Republic, gentlemen, if you can keep it!"

Re:And so it begins

[smooth wombat]

While I would agree on some of your early points, have you seen the xenophobia in Japan? A white person who speaks the language fluently can't even rent a place.

Re:And so it begins

[xaotikdesigns]

Because there is not racism, xenophobia, bigotry, etc, in Europe, Asia, or anywhere else in the world...

Re:And so it begins

[Anonymous Coward]

Not to the same extent as in the U.S.

Re:And so it begins

[Anonymous Coward]

There's a name for that logical fallacy, but I have a life and won't look it up for you

Re:And so it begins

[Anonymous Coward]

spread across? those are the foundations the US was built on

Re:And so it begins

[AutodidactLabrat]

Certainly not including Policemen who perjure themselves after assaulting an 'inferior citizen' and show off their little pencil point red spot as the excuse for murdering the citizen who was struck by the policeman with his car door.

Re:And so it begins

[AutodidactLabrat]

And how fast is Japanese GDP growing again? Actually, you kind of prove my point.
The Japanese have followed the same path as American Republicanism has enshrined as the Reagan Doctrine
All it got them is a 40 year depression that just started up again.

Re:Republicans : So, what problem again? Fewer?

[AutodidactLabrat]

Ten points!

Perspective

[Space cowboy]

I'm one of said H1B visas, now with a green card. Been here almost exactly 10 years now, after Apple bought my company. I came here for the money and the weather, not for anything else. Frankly I don't think the US society is as "free" as people here seem to believe.

I've mentioned this here before, and (understandably, no-one likes bad news) I tend to get down voted for it, but the simple honest truth of the matter is that the USA isn't geared for looking after people, it's geared towards controlling people. There's things I like about it (the job is great, the weather is excellent, the people (as individuals who I meet day-to-day) are generally wonderful unless driving, the money is still good, I like my house and I met my wife here - my son is dual American/British).

There's things I don't like too, (the militarisation of the police, the lack of any reasonable healthcare, the "I'm alright Jack, screw you" attitude of a *lot* of people - weirdly enough those who often really *aren't* alright, the schooling system, and for lack of any better term, the country's soul). As time passes, and I get older, these seem to be more important. I can't see myself retiring here, and in fact I can't see myself here in another 10 years. That's not the attitude I came to the US with, it's something I've developed while I've been here.

Let's be frank here, I'm not trying to boast, but I'm one of the 'have's - I have a million dollar house (which sounds a lot more impressive than it really is in this neighbourhood) which is almost paid off, I have a high six-figure income, and I've money in the bank. I'm not a "1%er" but I'm up there with the rest... however, even with all of this, I'm not happy with the way the country is going. There's little-to-no safety net for joe public, and seemingly (*both* houses Republican, seriously ?) no desire for that. I think the USA is far closer to oligarchy than democracy, and the long-term trend just looks like it gets worse from here on out.

[sigh]

Simon.

Re:Perspective

[Anonymous Coward]

This

Re:Perspective

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't worry, we're trying to do for healthcare what we've done with education.

Re:Perspective

[Anonymous Coward]

I was with you on the US not being as free as people believe right up until you said you're British. Sadly, both the US and UK seem to be headed towards becoming third world police states,but so far the US seems to be trailing the UK by a small margin.

Re:Perspective

[blackomegax]

"freedom" in the US is just a Stockholm syndrome illusion that everybody consensually hallucinates about constantly.

Re:Perspective

[g4sy]

i could say everything (yes everything) that you said and i did the opposite move. maybe things are just clamping down on both sides of the pond? i think its the increase in the power of the state, but i'd like to be wrong (because that would be hard to fix: they hace the guns and will soon have the press). am i wrong?

Re:Perspective

[Anonymous Coward]

Please, never vote. You spend one parenthetical complaining about things which have been primarily Democrat run since decades before your arrival, then another parenthetical being shocked and amazed that anyone would dare disagree with the Democrat way of running things.

Judging by your observations and brag-paragraph, I'd estimate a 75% chance you live (or at least work) in New York City. A metropolis that has been under Democrat and near-Democrat governance for much longer than you've been alive. Try going somewhere civilized and see how that treats you.

Re:Perspective

[DNS-and-BIND]

I hear ya buddy. We've got a President who doesn't want to do things democratically and we had a major, society-altering law passed whose authors have nothing but contempt for us, the American people. It doesn't look like it's going to get better anytime soon, either. These contemptuous attitudes are deeply ingrained in our elites and our universities do nothing but promote bitter divisiveness. I'm glad you've done well in such an oppressive society.

Re:Perspective

[danbob999]

I'm not a "1%er"

I have a high six-figure income

Which one of these two statements is a lie?

Re:Perspective

[TheSync]

top 1% AGI is $388,905 (in 2011, the most recent year for which the IRS has final data, reference).

Re:Perspective

[Anonymous Coward]

He's not a citizen, he can't vote you fucking nimrod. How about you don't vote until you figure out basic civics.

Re:Perspective

[martas]

the US seems to be trailing the UK by a small margin.

Eh, only in some ways. The UK might have more surveillance cameras and official domestic spying, but the US has probably more unofficial domestic spying, and, from what I've heard, generally in the UK your hair don't stand on end when you're near a cop.

Re:Perspective

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem is that the Democrats and the Republicans both suck and they don't differ all that much. Common sense and new ideas seem to be either missing in both parties or impossible to accomplish. While no system is perfect, two-party systems really suck and the U.S. is suffering from some of the worst results.

Re:Perspective

[Anonymous Coward]

No kidding about the lack of a safety net for most people.

I would propose a negative income tax as mentioned in my other post: http://games.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=6124961&cid=48438773

Re:Perspective

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's be frank here, I'm not trying to boast, but I'm one of the 'have's - I have a million dollar house (which sounds a lot more impressive than it really is in this neighbourhood) which is almost paid off, I have a high six-figure income, and I've money in the bank. I'm not a "1%er" but I'm up there with the rest... however, even with all of this, I'm not happy with the way the country is going.

Of course you aren't happy...you are a 5%er. Your vingtile is getting hammered. You know enough 1%ers to see that you are getting left behind. Your million-dollar house isn't really what you imagined. You don't have enough wealth to ignore rising tuition costs, but you have enough experience to see the value in sending your kids to an elite university, no matter what it will cost you. You are troubled by the fact that the semi-rich stratum you occupy is vanishing entirely. Your kids will regress to the middle class because you can't buy their ticket into the 1%.

Every time someone calls you rich, you have a retort. You're just as tethered to a steady paycheck as everyone else down the ladder. You feel like you should enjoy the financial independence of the 1%ers you are friends with, but realize there is nothing you can do to cross that outrageous wealth gap. You didn't win the sperm lottery and didn't win the business lottery, but you managed to land pretty close to the mark. You don't feel secure among the gentry because your kids have no future there.

Unless we all rise up and throw those rich bums out!...but you are also afraid of being mistaken for one of the bums.

Re:Perspective

[Gr8Apes]

Well, I learned something today, the top 1% starts at 380K or so according to quite a few different sites via Google. Way different (lower) than what Intuit stated when filing my return, IIRC. Maybe he meant high 5 figure income? High 6 figure, his house should be paid off in a few years or he should be ready for retirement already, or we might all just have to be envious of his lifestyle....

Re:Perspective

[Anonymous Coward]

But he wasn't commenting on Britain. It is not an exclusive or condition - You can both be right.

Re:Perspective

[danbob999]

And that's in the US only. Worldwide it is about 32k$

Re:Perspective

[Anonymous Coward]

Learn

Re:Perspective

[Anonymous Coward]

Good riddance.

Re:Perspective

[crunchygranola]

top 1% AGI is $388,905 (in 2011, the most recent year for which the IRS has final data, reference).

If he makes $300,000 and he considers that a high six figure, then he is not lying at all. Note that $100,000 is a "six figure income", and these days not at all high in the scheme of things. So his statement may just be drawing the distinction of someone making a multiple of "six figure" (three in this case) as opposed to barely breaking that antiquated inflation-devalued benchmark.

Re:Perspective

[Guy Harris]

I hear ya buddy. We've got a President who doesn't want to do things democratically and we had a major, society-altering law passed whose authors have nothing but contempt for us, the American people.

Yes, a law such as this one, as passed in the GP's country, would have done a better job than the law in question.

Re:Perspective

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

Most people consider 250K as high six figure income. (meaning high income + six figure income). It would not be 1% but still up there with the rest.

Re:Perspective

[Anonymous Coward]

Most migrant workers come from other countries, well bellow UK. By comparison, USA, even in it's current form, is pure paradise. Complain about police? Well, trust me, you don't want to see them poorly equiped/trained.

As for driving ... you've never really driven in Europe, or anywhere else, have you?

For the people's attitude, there's an old saying. Capitalists say "In the good all days ..." and communists say "In the future ..."

Re:Perspective

[misexistentialist]

the "I'm alright Jack, screw you" attitude of a *lot* of people - weirdly enough those who often really *aren't* alright,

You hear this line from many comfortable people, who being set for life, are eager to screw over everyone else with high taxes and regulations to make themselves feel even more superior. If you think you have too much sell your house and give the money to charity. Nah, your humanitarianism will look more like imposing a 25% VAT on toilet paper and doubling the price of gas for the good of the little people. Businesses cut back on hiring, can't afford anything extra in life after taxes to support government bureaucrats making 300% the average income, but thanks for the free healthcare, almost as good as they get in prison!

Re:Perspective

[danbob999]

"High six figure" sounds above $388,000 to me. Otherwise what would be "low six figure"?

Re:Perspective

[danbob999]

By "still up there with the rest" you mean top 2%?

Re:Perspective

[LordNimon]

To me, "high six-figure income" implies more than $500K.

Re:Perspective

[Kjella]

I have a high six-figure income, and I've money in the bank. I'm not a "1%er" but I'm up there with the rest...

If I recall correctly, any six-figure salary makes you a 0,1%er globally. It doesn't really show until you travel but then it's just weird, like people making less in a year than you make in a week. It's no wonder they like tourists or our money anyway, to them it seems we have insane amounts and because it's relatively cheap we're inclined to spend it more loosely as well. But if they ever came to visit me, they'd think paying >$10000/m^2 for an apartment is absurdity itself.

Re:Perspective

[turbidostato]

"i could say everything (yes everything) that you said and i did the opposite move."

I claim bullshit on that!

You can't seriously say you moved from Cupertino, CA to Manchester because of the weather!

Grunt!!!

Re:Perspective

[turbidostato]

"Judging by your observations and brag-paragraph, I'd estimate a 75% chance you live (or at least work) in New York City"

Yes, since he moved from UK to USA because (among other things) of the weather, when his company got acquired by Apple. Is Cupertino, CA anywhere near New York City nowadays?

There it goes your average republican's acumen.

Re:Perspective

[turbidostato]

"As for driving ... you've never really driven in Europe, or anywhere else, have you?"

Well, that only can mean European people drive much better than American since, implied in your account, Europeans drive more dangerously but still they manage to kill each other when driving less than Americans.

Re:Perspective

[Anonymous Coward]

top 1% AGI is $388,905 (in 2011, the most recent year for which the IRS has final data, reference).

Generally, 'high six-figure income' is meant to mean higher than $500,000.00. So danbob999 is correct - one of the statements is a lie as high sic-figures automatically makes for a 1%er.

Re:Perspective

[Anonymous Coward]

High might just be describing the income, not its six-figure status. Six-figure itself is considered high to most people.

Re:Perspective

[Anonymous Coward]

And healthcare.

When you look at a poor guy in the US, you think "Shit, he probably can't even afford to go to the doctor".

In the UK, you know "well, he may be poor, but at least he ain't going to die from it"

Re:Perspective

[Space cowboy]

OP here, way too late to matter, but still. It was poorly phrased. I missed the comma between high and six-figure. Where I come from, *any* 6-figure income would be considered high...

Simon.

Re:Perspective

[Ryanrule]

high six figure would be well into the 1%

Re:Perspective

[quax]

Beats walking behind a ox in a rice paddy, don't it?

So did you miss the fact that he's from the UK, or just suffer from US public school education?

Re:Perspective

[Anonymous Coward]

Or he missed a comma and intended "a high, six figure income"

Re:Perspective

[RyoShin]

the USA isn't geared for looking after people, it's geared towards profit-making

FTFY. The Dollar is our holy god in America (which is why we have "In God We Trust" on it, so we could pay lip service to religion while worshiping it). Controlling people is just the easiest way for the government to ensure that profit in a selection of private industries, namely military contractors.

We have a history of being "cowboys" (even if the stereotype only largely existed in movies) and still hold to our rugged individualism and the notion that everyone who has "made it" did so on their own laurels. It doesn't matter that such cases are the rare exception rather than the status quo, the general American public will look to those and say "see, they didn't need help from the government, so no one should." And the elite (both rich and elected officials) will happily maintain this illusion, as it allows them to consolidate their own power. They've tricked much of the American public into fighting against higher taxes for the rich (even if those high taxes only affect, say, income after the first $1M) by making Joe Sixpack think that they're just one or two good events away from being in that tax bracket, and how would Joe feel if he had to pay these onerous taxes on his current salary?

Our country may be controlled by a small number of moneyed interests, but it's the American people who handed them the reigns.

Re:Perspective

[volmtech]

We have a saying in the South, "So long, don't let the screen door hit you in the butt on the way out".

Re:Perspective

[LessThanObvious]

Everything you said is true. The U.S. ideals still exist though and there are plenty of us fighting to restore some decency in our care for others. The Republicans have long had a mind control lock on those you say "often really *aren't* alright" despite having the "I'm alright Jack, screw you" attitude. If the Fox News crowd ever wakes up to the facts of their own constant manipulation it could change quite a bit, but I think that will take a generation to weed out. Ultimately Americans love our country and even if we see it through the lens of reality mixed with hopes and ideals, there will never be another place that feels like home. I've traveled, but I could never really feel like I belong anywhere else. I hope America renews it's freedoms, becomes more progressive and inclusive and that in time becomes a place more Europeans could feel at home.

Lack of opportunity in general?

[ErichTheRed]

In the IT sector, I can see a few things driving this:
- Infrastructure and dev jobs are increasingly being farmed out to cloud providers and outsourcers, meaning fewer on site jobs are needed, at least at the low end. (Which is a pity, because you don't get good high-end people if they can't start out at the low end like they used to.)
- In general, economic growth is still slow in most sectors, so a lot of the traditional demand for IT isn't there.
- Tech Bubble 2.0 is increasingly eating up resources building web-based services and phone apps. Startups want young hungry coders who are exactly like the founders, which may lead to fewer foreigners being employed.
- The US isn't exactly welcoming to foreigners these days, given the debate on immigration. Even if someone is the best and brightest, it's possible they would feel lumped in with everyone else.

In STEM, it's bigger trends that are probably driving it:
- Other countries are more science friendly -- they fund it well and there's less of a cultural bias against "smart people".
- Science in general is a bad career prospect given the imbalance of graduates and permanent research positions. Most big corporate labs are shells of what they once were, and academic institutions seem to want to keep everyone on permanent postdoc status. I would have to have a total passion for my work to accept tenuous circumstances like that, and would probably be nearly broke for most of my life.

This, plus the abuse of the H1-B program by IT companies, is probably a good starter list of reasons. For every great H1-B hire, there are many stories of junior guys with questionable skills and credentials being run through a large technology company's meat grinder churning out code or performing low end tasks. It's definitely a misuse of the program in this case, since it was designed to correct a critical skills imbalance.

One thing that might reverse the trend is the fact that fewer domestic people are going into STEM fields, given the cost and the fact that it's no longer a guarantee of gainful employment. It's counter intuitive given how well _successful_ STEM graduates do compared to the general population, but once a precedent is set, it's hard to change people's minds. Think about how many IT people you know who actively say they're telling their children to avoid following in their footsteps.

Flawed data.

[Anonymous Coward]

This is done by scraping LinkedIn data. Therefore it's completely fucking meaningless because virtually every single person with any respectable skills and intelligence does not use LinkedIn for getting jobs. Most of us don't like having our info harvested and sold to annoying shitty recruiters and advertisers when we get nothing back from the system, which is exactly the case with LinkedIn.

Re:Flawed data.

[rubycodez]

Nonsense, users of linkedin do get something back from that system. Plenty of people who are more successful than you use it.

Re:Quantity over quality

[Anonymous Coward]

Consider suicide. We'd all be better off without racist pieces of crap like you, so it's extremely easy for you to make the world a better place by taking yourself out of it.

This is obviously Slashdot's fault

[bigsexyjoe]

It has nothing to do with the US economy taking a hit or the fact that there is now more going on in other parts of the world. It is all because Slashdot complained about an H1B Visa program that exists to supply cheap labor.

Yes, I fed the troll. Sue me.

Re:This is obviously Slashdot's fault

[umghhh]

I thought that is the purpose (i.e. feeding trolls) of this site anyway? I mean intelligent trolling session are difficult to come by. There were good trolling waves here 10ya but not even that is the same as in 'ol good days. The youth of today cannot even troll properly anymore - something that may be associated with the shortened attention spans etc.

Re:Maybe they are educated enough to not use linke

[jeffmflanagan]

And another wingnut has spoken. It's a shame Fox shut down their comments and unleashed you idiots on the rest of the Internet.

As one of those H1B worksters

[Anonymous Coward]

ops I mean slaves I can say that I am not very interested staying here. This country has gone worse with every year I've been here, and it seems that the "American dream" went down the shitter sometime around ..umm. 1986 or something. Where to start - exorbitant prices for a couple of hundred pounds of 2x4 and plywood, houses, that don't cost more than 5-6k in materials, including the wiring, which I can build all by myself if about 3 weeks, even with the concrete slab. Rents getting 15% increase each year. Employers who hire a bund of incompetent folks and a few competent, but a too scared to get rid of all the incompetent guys, and end up dumping all on the competent (regardless of local or H1 status), forcing these competent people to work 16-20 hours a day, without being able to reject working overtime, and when complaining to HR to only get - you are exempt, so just work until works get done in time. Nobody checking if the managers don't commit things for tomorrow which are a weeks work, and expecting that you deliver. HRs that are turning to no more than a disciplinary squad. What else - people avoiding/hiding taxes, so local PDs and FDs are chronically understaffed, crime rates going up, neighborhoods getting worse; food being produced unsustainably, being bad for your health. People getting distant, stuck up, comparing your income with theirs, the clothes you wear, the car you drive, the club you are a member of then then deciding if they want to be your friends. Being unable to start a family or any kind of relationship, or do volunteer work, because your employer keeps you busy for 16 hours a day. Your employer forcing you to take half of your vacation because "company shutdown" then telling you, after you made plans for those days that you have to actually come to work, but they would not adjust your vacation balance, because they make you report your entire month's activity on the 19th. etc. A county so hell bent on surveillance and truing it's citizens into a mindless consumers (original meaning - eating without thinking about/needing it) from young age in school, school rooms without windows.. (brave new world anyone).
Much of those things affect local US workers as much as a foreign H1B worker. But for me the choice is clear, I would rather pack and take my chances in Singapore, Japan, Korea, China, than stay here and watch this once great country go down.

In a word: Good

[Crypto Cavedweller]

We have millions of undermployed citizens and a future where there are not 300 million jobs. The last thing we need is a growing population. We need to educate the people without jobs to fill the ones that exist, not add more to the population for a future where they don't.

linked in?

[Charliemopps]

The study, which used a novel method of tracking people through data from the social media site LinkedIn...

isn't this more a study on global use of the site LinkedIn, than on the migration of workers?

The only people I know that still use LinkedIn are desperate and unemployable. Their service got to be such an annoyance where I work that I personally entered their domain into our blacklist. It's the only domain that's specifically blacklisted. Pornhub and Xtube aren't even blacklisted (though I think they'd trip the TMG servers pretty quickly)

Re:linked in?

[ErichTheRed]

"The only people I know that still use LinkedIn are desperate and unemployable."

I think it's kind of like Facebook. Some people use it 24 hours a day and are addicted, and others use it as a convenient way to share pictures and keep up with extended relations. The recruiter spam is awful, but it's kind of like the ads you're forced to watch to use Facebook. I've found it useful solely to keep track of people I've worked with in the past. Since people increasingly hop from place to place, it's a convenient way to keep up. I found my last job by calling someone I knew and saying, "Hey, my company just made a stupid decision and I want out before things get bad, are you guys hiring?"

Any shred of information you share on LinkedIn will be picked up by recruiter-bots and you will incessantly be contacted. As long as you don't read any of the "sponsored content" or offer up too much information, it has its purpose. That said, I get at least one or two desperate recruiters a week trying to fill some insanely obscure requirement that just happens to be in the middle of nowhere as well. I wonder if the "new" recruiters are given these leads to try to prove their worth. I seriously saw someone posting something for a FoxPro programmer somewhere in Nebraska...and this was in 2012.

Re:linked in?

[__aaclcg7560]

The only people I know that still use LinkedIn are desperate and unemployable.

When I got an iPhone for the first time this year, I was able to merge together my email address from Yahoo Mail and phone numbers on my cellphone. By importing matching profiles from the LinkedIn app into my contacts, I was able to better identify recruiters. My LinkedIn connections went from ~250 to 600+ in a month. I got a new job a month after being out of work for seven months.

Re:linked in?

[Anonymous Coward]

My new employer DEMANDED that I update my LinkedIn profile and put my new job on there. I told them I don't really use it and having had personal info stolen before I'm not big on putting my info everywhere online. I kept resisting until I got tired of the pressure and finally caved. I like working here and didn't want things to get nasty.

Re:linked in?

[Charliemopps]

The only people I know that still use LinkedIn are desperate and unemployable.

When I got an iPhone for the first time this year, I was able to merge together my email address from Yahoo Mail and phone numbers on my cellphone. By importing matching profiles from the LinkedIn app into my contacts, I was able to better identify recruiters. My LinkedIn connections went from ~250 to 600+ in a month. I got a new job a month after being out of work for seven months.

You apprently missed this part of my statement: "The only people I know that still use LinkedIn are desperate"
I'd certainly be desperate if I'd been out of work for 7 months! lol

Re:linked in?

[__aaclcg7560]

This time around I wasn't desperate. Being out of work for two years, underemployed (working 20 hours PER MONTH) for six months, filing for Chapter 7 bankruptcy, and getting a new full-time job on the day after the court finalized my bankruptcy in 2011. Now that's desperate.

Good, more opportunity for citizens.

[sethstorm]

The talent is already here, just that it resides with citizens (full and naturalized) of the United States of America. Where it does not exactly exist, citizens are more likely to start from a competent, trainable background - unlike the majority of guest workers. The only problem is that employers see freedom as a cost when someone else has it as opposed to a benefit when held by an employer.

More good would be done by repealing the 1965 Immigration Act and removing the regulations it enabled. Then if someone is really worth it, they will pursue citizenship. If we're lucky, pass a federal version of Arizona's SB1070 to put some fear into illegals and those who aid/abet/hire/contract them.

Re:Good, more opportunity for citizens.

[shutdown -p now]

More good would be done by repealing the 1965 Immigration Act and removing the regulations it enabled.

It also abolished the National Origins formula - do you want that back, too?

backwater

[AndyKron]

We're becoming a backwater of bible thumping assholes.

Re: backwater

[Anonymous Coward]

Nope, just plain old regular vanilla no-sprinkles assholes.

Re:backwater

[Anonymous Coward]

becoming? that's what you started as

Re:backwater

[rubycodez]

oh, that's much worse than the religious book thumpers in middle east or communist book thumpers in some other countries. oh wait, you're full of shit.

Re:In a word: Good

[PolygamousRanchKid]

We need to educate the people without jobs to fill the ones that exist

You can't educate people beyond their intelligence.

The US already is a civilized First World country.

[sethstorm]

Well, we treat them like crap. On top of that they come here and find that they have very few opportunities to advance any more. Why would they want to come here? They'd be better off going to a civilized first-world country rather than the third-world construct we are trying so hard to make the US into.

It might not be a cultural fit for you, but it is a good fit for over 300m citizens (less amnestied illegals).

Unlike other countries, US property is respected enough to not need legions of gated communities. Other countries have them in quantities large enough to suggest that property is not respected(SE Asia) or to show mass contempt for their citizenry(e.g. Russia).

In addition, citizens enjoy more personal freedoms (despite what some thinktanks would claim) than nearly any other country in the world. For example, self-defense with a firearm is encouraged in many parts of the country(not just Texas), when many parts of the world wish to restrict it. In addition, speaking up against politicians is not followed by a disappearance, house arrest, or defamation charge.

As for the complaints about non-citizens not being treated properly, that comes with any civilized country. Guest workers and illegals are just the next tiers below temporary/contingent/casual employment.

Expecting this for a long time...

[__aaclcg7560]

When I went back to school to learn computer programming after the Dot Com Bust to re-focus my technical career, there were two long-term trends in my favor: baby boomers would retire and China/India would stop exporting workers. Pay for skilled I.T. workers will only increase as demand goes up and supply goes down. Alas, the Great Recession has postponed this by a few years. The great I.T. crunch is nigh!

Re:The US already is a civilized First World count

[ShieldW0lf]

Unlike other countries, US property is respected enough to not need legions of gated communities.

This is your problem. You created a society where everything is so tied up in private property that, in the end, you have a few rich people who live like feudal lords, answerable to no one, and the rest of society live like serfs. And, you outsourced human reproduction to foreign countries so you could put your women to work like serfs too. Now it's all coming home to roost, and you're on a one way ticket to collapse.

Couldn't happen to a nicer group of people though!

Why is this modded insightful?

[langelgjm]

You do realize that people can list their former places of employment and habitation, even prior to the site's founding? To say "I worked at company X in country Y in 2000" does not require that the website you say it on have existed in 2000.

Mmmaaaybe ...

[Anonymous Coward]

They should pretend to be uneducated, slip across the border, and then just request amnesty. Then, when they become a citizen, they can whip out that degree and proclaim, "HA! Fooled you. I went to college. Now, I'm going to be a productive member of society. So, FUUUUCK you! Oh, and I'm going to vote republican. So, DOUBLE fuck you".

Re:Mmmaaaybe ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Thou art not a student of human nature. It is easier to be lazy than to be ambitious. Steal the jobs above you, the jobs below you, then yours when your employer see the advantage.

Global economy to to whites: drop dead
Whites to global economy: BOOOOOM!
168:1

This is a good thing

[Anonymous Coward]

This means the lower skilled immigrants will be cooking us meals, making our beds, and cleaning up our hotel rooms, while leaving the better/higher paying jobs for the locals.. as it should be.

Re:The US already is a civilized First World count

[crunchygranola]

Well, we treat them like crap. On top of that they come here and find that they have very few opportunities to advance any more. Why would they want to come here? They'd be better off going to a civilized first-world country rather than the third-world construct we are trying so hard to make the US into.

It might not be a cultural fit for you, but it is a good fit for over 300m citizens (less amnestied illegals).

Unlike other countries, US property is respected enough to not need legions of gated communities.

And yet, the U.S. has legions of gated communities, despite not "needing" them! From the article: "By 1997, an estimated 20,000 gated communities had been built across the country. Approximately 40% of new homes in California are behind walls. In 1997, estimates of the number of people in gated communities ranged from 4 million in 30,000 communities up to around 8 million, with a ½ million in California alone." These are nearly all wealthy people, why are they seeking hidden enclaves?

Other countries have them in quantities large enough to suggest that property is not respected(SE Asia) or to show mass contempt for their citizenry(e.g. Russia).

Russia is the only country you can come up with by name I notice. Why not try one of the real industrial democracies?

In addition, citizens enjoy more personal freedoms (despite what some thinktanks would claim) than nearly any other country in the world. For example, self-defense with a firearm is encouraged in many parts of the country(not just Texas), when many parts of the world wish to restrict it. In addition, speaking up against politicians is not followed by a disappearance, house arrest, or defamation charge.

Let's unpack this bit. Last going first, in which industrialized democracies does speaking up against politicians cause "disappearance, house arrest, or defamation charge"? Your "Russia" example again?

So we are left with that all-essential freedom of unrestricted gun ownership - the freedom to easily murder others. Very, very few gun deaths each year are due to "self defense" killing: for each justified self-defense killing, there are about 35 fire-arm homicides.

Re:The US already is a civilized First World count

[danbob999]

Unlike other countries, US property is respected enough to not need legions of gated communities

This is a joke right? The US must be the developed country with the highest proportion of gated community residents.

Re:The US already is a civilized First World count

[Anonymous Coward]

It might not be a cultural fit for you, but it is a good fit for over 300m citizens (less amnestied illegals).

Less the brown people who are regularly harassed, even the citizens.

In addition, citizens enjoy more personal freedoms (despite what some thinktanks would claim) than nearly any other country in the world. For example, self-defense with a firearm is encouraged in many parts of the country(not just Texas), when many parts of the world wish to restrict it. In addition, speaking up against politicians is not followed by a disappearance, house arrest, or defamation charge.

In a civilized country one doesn't need a firearm for personal protection. Somolia on the other hand.

In the USA we also have the Patriot Act which allows the arrest and indefinite internment of anybody, including it's citizens. That's real civilized.

As for the complaints about non-citizens not being treated properly, that comes with any civilized country. Guest workers and illegals are just the next tiers below temporary/contingent/casual employment.

That's not part of being a civilized country. A civilized country respects the dignity of all human beings.

In a civilized country money does not equal freedom, justice is applied equally to everyone regardless of ethnicity or socio-economic status.

You sound like just another deluded right-wing sucker who's buying whatever BS Rand Paul and Co. are selling.

Re:Quantity over quality

[Anonymous Coward]

Has a different opinion? Kill him! That'll tolerate him!

Re:In a word: Good

[umghhh]

you have already a capable prison industry so you can employ some and put the rest inside. Problem solved.

Offshore Management

[Vegan Pagan]

I await when CEO jobs can also be outsourced 'elsewhere' since I'm sure they can be paid a lot less for their leadership skills than they can in the U.S. Funny, outsourcing is only for the lower ranks but not in higher management. Are you saying that someone from these other countries can't do as good a job as a U.S. corporate management team?

This happened in the 1980s when Japanese automakers began opening factories in the American midwest. In the 1990s Japanese electronics firms hired a lot of Americans to develop chips and software. Most of these ventures turned out very well for both the Japanese owners/managers and the American workers. China's population and economy are several times the size of Japan's, so maybe in a decade or two Chinese firms will be the largest source of new employment in the US.

Re:Offshore Management

[Sri Ramkrishna]

It won't work out that way in the U.S. Plus central control of the company is still in the hands of the Japanese.. You won't see Sony outsourcing its CEO to an American for instance.

Re: Offshore Management

[Anonymous Coward]

Sony just had an American CEO, so it happened.
Also go look at the statistics for the number of old people in developed and developing countries.
In China there are more people living the workforce than entering. Japan has also crossed the threshold where there are more retired people than working, so there is massive social issue coming.
This means lots of job openings.

9/11 reaction had something to do with it

[davidwr]

After 9/11 America became much less of a free country. True, this started earlier. The ramping up of the "police state" after the terrorism of the 1st Twin Towers bombing and the domestic threat demonstrated by a couple (or three?) kooks in Oklahoma City in 1995 didn't help. Treating strong encryption like munitions in the 1990s almost certainly scared off some scholars and computer professionals from wanting to make their careers in America.

I'm not saying things were better before then - the Red Scare era of the 50s and 60s had a domestic aura of "what is good for the government is good for the country" about it. Vietnam and the rest of the '60s saw that crumble at least in part. From a "you can come to America, research what you want, and not have to worry that the government will try to shut you down by any method other than cutting your government funding" perspective the 70s and 80s and maybe the 90s were probably better than the 21st century and better than the 50s and 60s for anyone working outside areas where the primary application would be military or national-defense.

Nothing to do with the US being nuts, nope.

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's see. Surveillance. Mindless suspiction backed up with secret detetions. Police believe they can kill civilians if *they*, the police, are scared. A mad political party defaming immigrants and shutting down the government for over four years. Racism and hatred on the rise, and adherents voted into office. A "Homeland Security" that aims machine guns at you in the airport and on the borders, ready to kill or capture at any excuse.

No way to live without a car. Housing left to the "free" market. Rents impossible in any nice place to live. No new rental construction. Rentals are now the new housing bubble.

Employers busting everyone down to a contractor or a serf. "Right to Work" laws that let them sack at will. No health insurance. Limited health insurance backed up by an adversarial system designed to not-pay for treatment. No unions allowed. No voice in your workplace. Cheap, REALLY cheap corporations slipping every knife they can into salaries and wages.

Re: Quantity over quality

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's add all of you who vocalize your brain damage

Yeah,

[Anonymous Coward]

...but legions of uneducated, unskilled migrants. This just in....the surge in the flow of poor illegals is increasing yet again....I wonder why....? Better throw more money at our shitty public schools, our various HHS programs, our awesome drug war and prison-industrial complex, and let's not forget our over-burdened justice system. Keep 'em coming! They're our future!

Meanwhile, let's keep listening to those Slashdotters who continously whine about skilled labor from overseas. Just not enough of them hi-tech jobs to go around and too little knowhow because the much-vaunted whiz kids who make the big bucks are too busy posting on Slashdot to do anything demonstrably useful. And mention not manufacturing. Cheap oil and 3D printing hype can only help so much, when mountains of new regulations, ACA requirements, export and import restrictions make competing with the world market impossible.

Re:The US already is a civilized First World count

[Anonymous Coward]

Russia is the only country you can come up with by name I notice. Why not try one of the real industrial democracies?

Because they're not competitive. The EU is still trying to distort its legal environment to thwart the US, Russia, and China.

They're going to lose. Full stop.

Reliable data?

[matbury]

"used a novel method of tracking people through data from the social media site LinkedIn" -- [sarcasm]Yeah, that's really reliable data. Won't have any problems with skewed, self-selected data-sets at all.[/sarcasm]

Re:The US already is a civilized First World count

[turbidostato]

"US property is respected enough to not need legions of gated communities."

Pardon me?

My bet is that USA has the biggest numbers and biggest percentage of population under gated (real or virtual) communities with doors opening both outwards (not to let them in, i.e. Bel Air style) and inwards (not to let them out, i.e. Washington suburbs style) in the whole first world.

Our president ...

[cascadingstylesheet]

... doesn't want educated, highly skilled migrants. He wants millions more of uneducated, unskilled migrants.

At least, that's what the proverbial man from Mars would conclude.

LinkIn Synonymous With Lying Dickheads

[Anonymous Coward]

They emailed me several times claiming a friend of mine had invited me to join. My friend vehemently denied he knew anything about this supposed invite. We later learned Linkin with others like twitter had raided peoples' email accounts and address contact books and fraudulently lied about these invites. Suck my asshole you fucking dickheads.

Re:LinkIn Synonymous With Lying Dickheads

[Anonymous Coward]

In fairness, they asked and your friend gave the ok without thinking about it. It's not particularly nefarious.

Re:Quantity over quality

[Anonymous Coward]

"spic" isn't racist, any of several races can be a spic. There are black spics, white spics, yellow spics, and native american "red" spics.

Spic is a language, a culture, a mindset. And their women can clean your pipe seven ways to Sunday.

Gave back my green card and moved to Canada

[quax]

Make more money here in the GTA and the schools are better. The politics are also far less toxic.

Feels generally more immigrant friendly as well.

Re:Gave back my green card and moved to Canada

[Anonymous Coward]

The police can afford to be less toxic. There can be a generally more immigrant friendly feeling. The schools can be better. All of these can be afforded because Canada is NOT a SUPERPOWER.....EH?

Re:Gave back my green card and moved to Canada

[quax]

Yes, no doubt the budget is much easier to balance. I don't think most Americans have any idea how much of their tax money goes to the DoD.

Was certainly a factor in my decision. I left the US when the Iraq war was still going strong. Didn't like the idea that my tax money was helping to pay for this tragic foolishness.

Duh!

[Anonymous Coward]

With the various agencies of the US Government either:
1. Tracking (NSA, HLS, FBI, CIA)
2. Snooping (HLS, NSA, FBI)
3. Spying (NSA, FBI, NYPD)
4. Taxing (IRS)
5. Destroying Technological Advancement (FAA)
6. Preventing Technological Change (EPA)
7. Suppressing Education (DOEducation)
and others...

I don't think it is an surprise.

Re:In a word: Good

[Anonymous Coward]

No, but we can, and for last couple of thousands years have been dumbing jobs down. That way we as a humanity multiply effective intelligence of the masses. It is akin to effects of cache memory on overall speed of the computer system. We don't need everyone to be highly intelligent, but if we put our most intelligent people to tasks of simplifying problem solving for the rest, we get technological progress. Lately, with inventions of engineering and other applied science disciplines, we managed to dumb down even the job of dumbing jobs down, so theoretically we could assign more intelligent people to hard tasks where they are indispensable. However, the brainpower allocation is today skewed by supply, demand, greed and freedom of choice, so we see talents wasted on non-fundamental activities where less competent material would suffice. I guess intelligence is not everything, just as having very acute vision is orthogonal to understanding the scene, otherwise the intelligent would rule as well as they teach. Someone has to dumb down the job of good ruling.

The Racists Were Right All Along®®

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem is that these when they do start businesses tend to hire only their own kind. This leads to legitimate charges of "No Gora Need Apply". This is only natural when coming from a people wherein every birth is a rebirth and individuality is dismissed as something imposed by colonial masters who believed that "we only go around once" whether it be from an Abrahamic or an Atheist perspective.

Bad Neighborhood

[JimSadler]

The US has gotten a bad image abroad that would make smarter people not want to immigrate here. Wretched social policies, too much poverty, a willingness to torture people, economic downfall and that all to real chance of being gunned down for next to no reason at all by poor people, the mentally ill and drug addicted, all tell a normal person to stay out of the US. European governments have actually had travelers warning zones for cities like Miami, Fl. due to excessive violence.

Re:The US already is a civilized First World count

[Anonymous Coward]

Who are you trying to convince? Because it's not sethstorm.

Re:The US already is a civilized First World count

[ShieldW0lf]

Is your mother dead yet?

WTF???

[sribe]

How do you compare data from your model based on LinkedIn with data from several years before LinkedIn launched? Shouldn't we be comparing either (or both) data using the old methodology against itself, or LinkedIn data against itself?

A LinkedIn study ?

[ToddInSF]

I'd scrutinize very closely anything LinkedIn is pushing.

Can't attract skilled immigrants. Wonder why?

[Anonymous Coward]

a) Public school education below par with other G7 countries (I think you are dead last b) High level of guns and crime! (We want our kids to grow to adults, and not get killed or falsely imprisoned along the way. c) Health Insurance and cost of university education. d) Only OK if you have a Doctorate in your field. e) Global warming. Bottled water is too expensive

So see it from my point of view

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd like to move to the US. I don't have a visa. If I've understood correctly, to move to the US I need to find an employer willing to jump through the H1B hoops and then wait something like six months to a year to actually get me. Maybe the employer gets cheaper labor, but if the pay is much below par I have to suppose that once in the US the employee will immediately begin looking around for better.

Now, since I'm highly educated and highly skilled I actually have a job already (surprise!!), so I'm not desperate, and I can't afford to be immediately available even if H1B provided any way to reply to those "immediate need" ads. The best way would be to go to work for a global company (mine ins't one) with an agreement that after a year they'd move me to the US with an L visa. It would be interesting if LinkedIn could make stats on which percentage of highly educated/skilled labor comes in on H1B visas vs. L visas.

And all that to get an at-will job in a country where the IRS confiscates legally earned money and police officers regularly shoot innocent people, whether in their stairwells, or in their playgrounds . . . The American Dream isn't one for everyone, it seems, more like a nightmare, but I don't feel like going back to edit my first sentence.

US is alienating the rest of the world, duh!

[Anonymous Coward]

US is alienating the rest of the world and it's shitting in its own bed economically. At the same time Asia is the industrial center of the economic world and especially of high tech, while at the same time the US has declined radically since 1990 (Silicon Valley makes preciously little "silicon" anymore), which means the dominant demographic of advanced STEM students in the US and overseas (hint: Asian) no longer have any need to put up with the racist garbage of US culture generally and especially of the WoT racial profiling imposed on them, so going home after university is a trivial and far more profitable choice than staying in the US. Avoiding the US when it comes to immigrant but also shunning the US in terms of high tech professional conferences has now become the norm - i.e. the people doing the innovation often are insisting that conference not be held in the US but instead are held overseas. The US is often being cut-off from this because these overseas researchers are numerically dominant.

It's surprising that people haven't been noticing this over the last 10 years - it's been going on since 9-11.

Anecdote

[zuel]

I'm aware this is anecdotal, but I and many of my friends and colleagues would qualify as the kind of "highly skilled migrants" that once would have placed the US as a top working destination. But not so much any more.

I do have a few friends who have ventured to the US for postgraduate study, and a few who have stayed or moved there to take academic positions, but only a handful who have moved for work, and most have come back within a few years. Most are happy just to stay here in Australia, or if they do move overseas long term, it's more likely to Asia (Singapore, Hong Kong, China are popular) or Europe.

My impression is it's not just the economy that has turned us away. It's a combination of things, including the culture.

First, on the economy, being in Australia, our economy is already strong, and we enjoy many benefits and protections you don't get in the US, like high quality and free or inexpensive health care, and a decent welfare safety net in case things go bad (and a sensible minimum wage if starting out, eg if you bring your kids), and high quality and relatively inexpensive education (although sadly our government is trying to change that). I'd speculate that the relative difference in economies between countries like Australia and the US in the 20th century might have inspired more to migrate, but that pull has ebbed.

Secondly, standard of living. You'll likely get paid more for the same job in the US, but you'll have to work longer hours with less holidays (i.e. vacations), and so less time to actually enjoy your salary. Perhaps it's my Australian values talking, but I work to live, not the other way around. And I can live pretty well here with the work I can get.

Third, the culture. I'm not sure if many Americans realise that a lot of the news that escapes their borders is pretty ugly. Political deadlocks and extremists like the Tea Party, mass shootings (and a baffling obsession with guns), religious quackery and anti-science, a tsunami of obesity and lifestyle diseases... it doesn't sound like a very attractive place a lot of the time. It's subjective, I know, but the guns thing has been enough to dissuade me from exploring work options in the US.

The world has changed a lot in the past century from when my father, born in England before WWII, was thrilled to have the opportunity to escape the post-war doldrums in Europe and move to the US. It's not only that the rest of the world has now caught up, but the US has by its own decisions lagged behind on social, governmental and cultural measures. There are still good reasons to live and work in the US, but just less of them.

Re:Anecdote

[rinka]

Hmmmm... Interesting.
here's an Indian (entrepreneural) perspective.

Let me start with a few stories:
The founder of Snapdeal http://www.snapdeal.com/ (an India focused ecommerce company) wanted to do a startup in the Valley but didn't get a visa. So he decided to stay back and do his startup in Bangalore. Snapdeal is now valued at ~$10B and is challenging both Amazon & Flipkart here. Their YoY growth is 6x.

Zomato http://www.zomato.com/ started of by consolidating its presence in India and has now gone multi-national (15 countries and expanding). They haven't gone to the US yet.

There are quite a few startups happening here that are focused on India, the rest of AsiaPac & EU regions and a lot of these have just begun to scale. These startups have started taking the cream of the Engg folks who would have otherwise gone to Infosys, Wipro and from there on to the US.

In fact, I know of a couple of headhunters who place US engineers with Indian startups in India. It is a trickle now and I think it would be good to cherry pick the better ones from out there. There are lots of seriously good engineers who we can use.

As an entrepreneur/co-founder myself (of an early stage in the enterprise space), it makes a lot of sense for us to be India and AsiaPac focused - We have a large market that we would convert first. First of all it is so much easier for us to sell in my backyard and then I honestly don't have the time to wade through all the Visa & other issues that the US would throw at us.

The only reason I would consider the US is the size of the market which will be important to me once I've consolidated and have become profitable. The market that is right in front of me (India and then China) is large enough for me to grow to be a fairly large entity.

Re:Anecdote

[rinka]

Here's the trend from '90s to today. Courtesy @Vivek Wadhwa: http://venturebeat.com/2014/11...

map of worldâ(TM)s most racially tolerant cou

[NewYork]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

Petition Obama regime

[NewYork]

http://wh.gov/iCfVS

why should I come?

[wokie78]

I am Mexican expat. no I don't pick fruits. My background is IT but switched careers and now I work in Finance. yes joined the dark side i guess. Worked in the UAE for about 4 yrs, and now been in Switzerland for the last 2. In both these places you gett 30 days holidays, plus about 5 sick days. and in Switzerland it is mandated by law that I am able to take at least 2 weeks straight. employment laws were more flexible in the UAE than in the US, and in Switzerland are far more flexible than in the rest of Europe which means I can be hired/fired way easier, but notification is 3 months. so not pum! you are fired, security will escort you out of the building now, like it can happen in the US. Income tax was 0 in the UAE and in Switzerland it's very low. In both countries you are obliged by law to pay for private health insurance, which is very expensive when compared to the rest of europe, but not outrageous like in the US either and with good coverage. The education system in the UAE isn't that great, and certainly expensive, but in Switzerland, the public education system is excellent big focus on STEM, and even the tough of bringing "creationism" somewhere into the curriculum would get you laughed out of whatever room you are at. yes that would probably include a room in a lot of churches. (no school shootings here either) Crime is extremely low in both of these countries, as in practically nil, certainly violent crime. but probably the UAE even slightly safer. i've never felt safer in my life, yes that's in the middle east. (no asset forefeiture by the PO-lice in any of these countries btw) my commute here is about 25 min long (considered long) on a train that is very comfortable, clean, etc, that arrives ALWAYS on time... ok, ít's late every now and then by about 4 or 5 min. I like cars and driving, but here i don't own a car because i just don't need one. (and gas is taxed heavily to curb down greenhouse gases) I have a ride share for when i do need one or take uber. Because of my industry it would not be weird that one of my next career steps would take me to the US. which i'm not against, but it would have to make a lot of sense, but it could also take me to London, Singapur, maybe the UAE again or perhaps a developing market (and i would totally consider Africa). if I did go to the US I would not be comfortable with an H1-B visa as it basically ties me to that company and it makes my wife's job search extremely difficult (also a working professional, who earns slightly more than I do). so perhaps a green card, which I would probably give up, the MINUTE, I move out, and then it means I would still have to report to the IRS for several years even if i am no longer living there (nor would i aim to become an us citizen, which is a tax disaster if you are an expat) and most banks in developed countries would probably refuse to open a bank account because of the very tough and difficult IRS FATCA regulations... no country is perfect, of the ones i lived in, there are tons of things i like and tons I don't, and there's plenty of stuff i love about the US.(I studied a master's degre over there). but no, i'm not dying to go there, I would consider it, but it's not number one on my list. (the holiday and the likely long commute are probably my biggest turn offs) and I know plenty of expats who feel the same way about it. so that's my 2 cents.

Re:The US already is a civilized First World count

[Anonymous Coward]

I tried that when I was fifteen. It didn't work then, either. Of course, I was fifteen. What's your excuse?

Re:map of worldâ(TM)s most racially tolerant

[prefec2]

Interesting link. Thanks. However, the question here is the image of the US which I tried to describe. So it is not necessarily necessary that all hold. Anyway, the bureaucratic mayhem which is involved when trying to get to the US is real (and it has nothing to do with the US citizens at all).