

The debate about immigration and STEM workers does not add up - jboynyc
http://www.cjr.org/essay/it_doesnt_add_up.php?page=all

======
carlyle4545
Hypothetically speaking, let's say we allowed every STEM-studying individual
to enter the U.S. from abroad. According to the article, this would result in
added competition to the existing STEM workforce whereby depressing wages and
reducing job opportunities for U.S.-born PhD's.

Explain to me how increased competition, (of any kind) has ever been a bad
thing. Generally it leads to lower prices, lower barrier to entry for new
entrants, and higher quality. I'm not exactly opposed to having higher quality
scientific discoveries here in the U.S. with the information gleaned from such
efforts more readily available to the rest of us. How exactly is that a bad
thing?

Furthermore, if we can somehow drain our biggest competitors' of their best
and brightest, isn't that a good thing? In doing so, wouldn't that create an
incentive for their governments to enact legislation to reduce the flow of
STEM workers out of their respective countries, whereby creating a global
economy committed to medical and technological advancement for mankind?

I'm sure this is an over-simplified and maybe slightly pedestrian way of
looking at things, but it just seems like common sense.

~~~
jboynyc
Depressing wages is a good thing -- or seemingly a good thing -- if you're
somebody like Mark Zuckerberg who doesn't depend on wages for income. For
everybody else it means hardship on an individual level, and rising social
unrest on a social level.

Also, lower wage levels lead to reduced domestic demand for goods, which in
turn can lead to a crisis of overproduction, which can even affect wealthy
capitalists in their gated communities, not just workers.

