LinkedIn Study: US Attracting Fewer Educated, Highly Skilled Migrants 338
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.
America's loss is Africa's gain (Score:2)
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 (Score:4, Insightful)
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... [wikipedia.org]
I would expect quite a bit to come from there in the coming decades.
Re: (Score:2)
They're certainly trying to, yes [washingtonpost.com].
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
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 [tecoloco.com] (which was a high-tech startup itself).
Interesting (Score:2)
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.
See what you did Slashdot? (Score:2)
Now because of your whiny "teamstering" here on Slashdot, the visa numbers wil probably go down, hurting US business.
And cheaper, right? (Score:4, Insightful)
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: (Score:2, Interesting)
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 suppl
This is obviously Slashdot's fault (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
H1B Abuse (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:2)
Solid research there (Score:5, Insightful)
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: (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
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 immi
Re: (Score:3)
"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: (Score:2)
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.
Why is this modded insightful? (Score:3)
You get what you pay for (Score:2)
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 pap
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
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 wor
Duh (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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 [wikipedia.org], 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
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Oh, we ATTRACT them alright... (Score:2)
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.
Novel method indeed (Score:2)
It's obvious (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Perspective (Score:5, Informative)
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: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not a "1%er"
I have a high six-figure income
Which one of these two statements is a lie?
Re: (Score:2)
top 1% AGI is $388,905 (in 2011, the most recent year for which the IRS has final data, reference [taxfoundation.org]).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
top 1% AGI is $388,905 (in 2011, the most recent year for which the IRS has final data, reference [taxfoundation.org]).
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: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
To me, "high six-figure income" implies more than $500K.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
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 [wikipedia.org], as passed in the GP's country, would have done a better job than the law in question.
Lack of opportunity in general? (Score:3)
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.
linked in? (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
"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 w
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Good, more opportunity for citizens. (Score:2)
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 so
Re: (Score:2)
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?
Expecting this for a long time... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
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. annexat
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I apologise. I posted before I'd read your other posts here and realized you were just trolling.
Re: Unsurprising if you think about it (Score:4, Insightful)
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: (Score:2)
Also run the stats over the entire 20th century and include the shootings by out of control government.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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-Wi
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:3)
"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: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
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, n
Re: (Score:2)
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. I
Re: (Score:3)
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
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:3)
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: (Score:3)
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
Re: (Score:2)
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 (Score:5, Insightful)
Offshore Management (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
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 mo
Re: (Score:2)
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 agai
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:3)
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 [wikipedia.org]. 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: (Score:2)
"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 th
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:3)
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: (Score:3)
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 produc
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Same here. Not that I would want to go to the US though, for a number of other reasons.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We need to educate the people without jobs to fill the ones that exist
You can't educate people beyond their intelligence.
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
Indeed.