ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page


Immigration Daily

Archives

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board

Resources

Blogs

Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation

Attorney2Attorney

CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network

EB-5

移民日报

About ILW.COM

Connect to us

Make us Homepage

Questions/Comments


SUBSCRIBE

Immigration Daily


Chinese Immig. Daily




The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of
free information!
Copyright
1995-
ILW.COM,
American
Immigration LLC.

View RSS Feed

Greg Siskind on Immigration Law and Policy

THE BRAIN DRAIN RECONSIDERED

Rate this Entry

The brain drain argument that President Carter raised in his response to my July 31st USA Today opinion article is not new. In fact, the term was coined five decades ago when professionals began to join the ranks of migrating worker ranks.



The issues involved with the brain drain argument are complex. Is the brain drain real? Which countries are affected more? What are the "push" and "pull" factors causing workers to migrate from developing countries to developed countries? The International Declaration on Human Rights states that everyone has the freedom to migrate and that no country can force its citizens to stay. But how do you counter the impact of this right's costs on the developing country?



And if you do decide that you want to factor the "brain drain" into your immigration policy, how do you do it in a way that truly helps the countries that want the help and not hurt the countries that view emigration as a part of their economic develop plans. Case in point - the Philippines. That country has a very deliberate policy of training nurses with migration factored in right from the start. The nurses send billions back to that country. Amy Schnidman's great article on the brain drain in the Georgetown Journal of Health Sciences discusses the impact of changes in US immigration policy on the impact of an entire nation:

The Philippines is the prime example of a
        country that specifically trains nurses for the purpose of sending them
        abroad (Buchan & Calman, 2004).
        Therefore, the export of nurses is one of the country's innovative
        ways of supporting its economy. In the Philippines, it is customary for
        nurses that
        leave to work overseas to send money home, thereby strengthening the
        local economy. Recently, the Philippines has been feeling the affects
        of other nations
        addressing the brain drain. For instance, both the United States and
        the United Kingdom have enacted stricter immigration laws, decreasing
        the number of Philippines
        nurses allowed to work in their countries. In turn, this is affecting
        their economic stability due to a decreased amount of money that is being
        sent back
        home (Buchan & Calman, 2004).

According to Schnidman's research, the amount of these remittances now exceeds the amount of global foreign aid sent by wealthy countries to poorer nations. And that raises further difficult questions. Maybe countries like the US and the UK should be investing in training more health care workers in poorer countries experiencing problems in their health care system attributable to migration. Or if there is finite money to spend, maybe these countries should be using the money to train more of their own workers. Of course, part of the problem in the developed countries may simply be too few people going in to the professions to offset the numbers retiring. That's precisely what is happening in the US. Will pushing more people in to nursing, for example, mean we make the teacher shortage worse? If we train more doctors, will that result in too few engineers later on?



Of course, many of you will remember the silly song "Blame Canada" from the South Park Movie (the song actually got an Academy Award nomination). Maybe we should change the title to "Blame England? After all, according to the Schnidman piece, 65% of the UK's health care work force is comprised of foreign nationals and a lot of them are from the African countries that President Carter was talking about. If fewer than 5% of the foreign health care workers in the US are from Africa, maybe we should just punt and tell the UK to deal with any mess that's been created by them?

Submit "THE BRAIN DRAIN RECONSIDERED" to Facebook Submit "THE BRAIN DRAIN RECONSIDERED" to Twitter Submit "THE BRAIN DRAIN RECONSIDERED" to Google Submit "THE BRAIN DRAIN RECONSIDERED" to StumbleUpon Submit "THE BRAIN DRAIN RECONSIDERED" to Reddit Submit "THE BRAIN DRAIN RECONSIDERED" to Digg Submit "THE BRAIN DRAIN RECONSIDERED" to del.icio.us

Tags: None Add / Edit Tags

Comments

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
  1. USC's Avatar
    "That's precisely what is happening in the US. Will pushing more people in to nursing, for example, mean we make the teacher shortage worse? If we train more doctors, will that result in too few engineers later on?"

    As our population has grown from around 200 Million in the 1970s to around 300 Million today of course the need for for various professions has increased. IOW, we need more immigration, not less. That is the only way people can receive adequate services.

    The antis are a slippery bunch. Their arguments are along these lines:

    (a) We are opposed to illegal immigration, the right way is okay.
    (b) We are opposed to FB immigration (their term chain migration is repugnant and I will not use it in the future) because we should give more numbers to the EB categories
    (c) We are opposed to H1b instead these exploited souls should get a GC
    (d) We are opposed to granting citizenship to children of foreign parents even if they are born in the US. Only children whose parents are American should have that right.
    (e) We are opposed to EB immigration because the employers abuse the LC process.
    (f) We are opposed to the point system/EB because this constitutes a brain drain.

    So, the questions are do they favor any immigration? Or are they simply racists? If they put forth the above arguments coupled with their use of repugnant dehumanizing terms such as "chain migration", "anchor baby", "jackpot baby" would seem to indicate that simply and bluntly put any person adopting all of the above arguments is a racist.
  2. Dennis Spence (British Ex-Pat)'s Avatar
    A new work permit system has sparked an "exodus" of Filipino workers from British care homes, threatening a staffing crisis in the sector
    .
    Under the newly introduced points-based system, it has become more difficult for workers from outside the European Union to obtain permission to work in Britain unless they have high levels of skills.

    Many Filipinos working in care homes - particularly those employed as senior carers - have been told that their work permits will not be renewed, as their posts can be filled by EU nationals, said Conservative opposition Member of Parliament Mark Pritchard.

    He said that hundreds of Filipinos were expected to have to leave the country next month, causing a "skills shortage and staffing crisis" in care homes.

    About 25,000 Filipinos are thought to be employed in British care homes, many of them arriving since 1998 to plug staff shortages in the sector.

    Care homes frequently have problems recruiting British nationals to the jobs done by Filipinos because of low pay rates, and there have been complaints that workers from the new EU states in Eastern Europe are not always as suited to the posts because many do not speak English.

    "Filipinos are usually very hard-working, speak excellent English, are very caring, are well qualified, and integrate very well into local communities," he said.

    "Their contribution to the care sector and to the National Health Service is enormous. The Government have not thought through the consequences of this policy on care homes throughout the country - as the mass exodus of senior care workers begins."

    Mr Pritchard said the changes could cost the Philippines a large slice of the ?200 million a year sent back to the country from expatriates working in Britain and questioned the logic of removing that source of income from a country, which receives aid from Britain.

    A spokeswoman for Britain's Border and Immigration Agency said: "Decisions on work permit applications are made on a case-by-case basis, using all the knowledge we have available to us at the time of assessing the application. The Border and Immigration Agency has a legal obligation to ensure that the work permit criteria are applied correctly."

    The news comes only weeks after President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo voiced concerns over the new British immigration points system which would mean only top grade Filipino nurses being accepted in the country to work.

    The drawbridge has been pulled up effectively blocking thousands of non-EU nationals except those with high levels of skills.
  3. Greg Siskind's Avatar
    Thanks Dennis - Hard to see how anyone wins in that deal.
  4. 's Avatar
    You won't resolve the long term nursing shortage by importing workers who will drive wages down through simple laws of supply and demand. Instead, you will ultimately make it worse. Attract more nurses by making this a better profession.
  5. paskal's Avatar
    "You won't resolve the long term nursing shortage by importing workers who will drive wages down through simple laws of supply and demand. Instead, you will ultimately make it worse. Attract more nurses by making this a better profession."

    this is short sighted.
    supply and demand suggest that supply is poor, salaries for nurses have been going up continuously and hiring is hard. importing labor may not be a long term solution, sure. but it takes years to build facilities and train new nurses assuming home grown nurses leave their high paying work and become educators. what happens in the meanwhile? is it ok to have a short term shortage? how does it worsen the situation if demand is >>>>> supply already?

  6. paskal's Avatar

    and now a game for virtual immigrants
    what a joke :-)

    http://infotech.indiatimes.com/articleshow/2253143.cms
  7. USC hates immigrants's Avatar
    Supporting indentured servitude / corporate sponsorship is a crime. You must really have it in for immigrants.

    Paskal, what is short sighted is making an occupation less attractive. You must really want cheap labor. Tell the truth, why are you siding with corporations here?
  8. paskal's Avatar
    "Paskal, what is short sighted is making an occupation less attractive. You must really want cheap labor. Tell the truth, why are you siding with corporations here?"

    As an indefinitely waiting immigrant, the chance of me having it "in for immigrants" or "supporting corporations" that worsen work conditions is about nil. zip, zilch nada. Can't understand where you got that in my post. Unless your conclusion is already drawn and everything is fitted to suit that conclusion. It's very simple. There is a current shortage and it's severe, and it's worsening. For now, if foreign workers are not allowed in, the "consumer" in this case- good USC's like you, will suffer. In the long term, it's essential to address the reason for the shortages. That may involve more domestic training or better work conditions or both or whatever else. Can't happen though till the current shortage is addressed. Nursing schools are short of educators today, how exactly will they expand?
    Of course if the final conclusion you wish to draw is that no foreign workers should be allowed in, and/or shortages are good because it's shooting salaries sky high and domestic RN's have their run of the turf...then fine, your views are aligned with your objective. From the point of view of the "health" of the health care system (of which I'm a part but I'm NOT A NURSE) and of it's customers (like you maybe one day) its a disaster.
    Just fyi foreign nurses enter with green cards unlike everyone else and have the ability to switch jobs, so exploitation is not quite that simple. So much for the indentured labor argument. I'm happy to discuss this, I wish though that your lovely innuendo were at least supported with some research in the matter.
    Do read the post by USC below and see the sequence of reasons for opposing immigration...where are you in that cascade?
  9. paskal's Avatar
    "I am alarmed that racists supporting temporary visas instead of green cards, like USC, does so without an eyebrow being raised. You obviously want to continue the exploitation of people for profit if you agree with USC."

    interesting diversion. you seem to have run away from the original issue completely. first you diverted by blaming corporations for "poor working conditions" suggesting somehow that a mother lode of nurses was just waiting to work if ...yeah if what?? was made better. when it was pointed out that the shortage is real and cannot be addressed suddenly without an influx of workers you start race baiting. USC's point was precisely this: for one reason or the other you will oppose immigration. legal or illegal. skilled or unskilled. mexican or not. matters little. the arguments are convenient and made to order. i do not remember seeing anything in that post that was ethnocentric or racist. it was just a little expose of the kinds of arguments that are used to oppose ALL immigration.

    "I am alarmed that racists supporting temporary visas instead of green cards, like USC, does so without an eyebrow being raised. You obviously want to continue the exploitation of people for profit if you agree with USC."

    did you not read carefully or is my english not good enough maybe? nurses come here on green cards, this whole discussion has been primarily on nurses. you oppose that. you also oppose temporary visas..because they are temporary. what's left?
    and what's racist about nurses immigration...unless you are roy lawson determined to call every argument racist to make some really weird point that nobody is getting frankly.
    if you are roy lawson, you were doing a better job when debating with your own name and not using racist as your life line for every argument.
  10. 's Avatar
    "interesting diversion. you seem to have run away from the original issue completely. ... you start race baiting."

    Sounds like a familiar tactic - where would one learn that? Hmmmm.

    Next time you cry "anti-immigrant" when someone doesn't agree with you on matters related to immigration, remember this experience. That goes for anyone reading this.

    If you want to "anti-immigrant bait" (akin to "race baiting") be prepared because two can play that game. Just like race baiting, "anti-immigrant baiting" is a tactic that seeks to avoid debate and instead attack a person's character. Hopefully that point was demonstrated adequately here.

    I used that tactic to demonstrate a point here. Some people on this blog have used that same tactic routinely against anyone who opposes some forms of immigration. And like I said before, I am not Roy but I do know him and he is who sent me the link to this blog. I knew about some of the dishonest tactics used against him before hand.

    I have decided to take the gloves off against anyone who tosses around the anti-immigrant card without just cause. That means pulling out all the stops.
  11. USC's Avatar
    "Do read the post by USC below and see the sequence of reasons for opposing immigration...where are you in that cascade?"

    Yes, what is your position on a thru f. Which do you support? Which do you oppose?

    "am alarmed that racists supporting temporary visas instead of green cards, like USC, does so without an eyebrow being raised. You obviously want to continue the exploitation of people for profit if you agree with USC."

    Let's see if your concerns on temporary visas cannot be addressed. See below.

    "if you are roy lawson,"

    Assuming arguendo , that you are either Roy Lawson or his clone and accepting at face value your statement that you oppose temporary visa but instead favor GCs, let's see if your concerns can be addressed.

    Consider the following scenario:

    Alternative 1

    (a) H1b is sunset
    (b) The 65,000 numbers are given to a new GC program with no per country limits. Let's call it FCFS (First Come First Serve) category
    (c) People who have an application pending under EB1, EB2, EB3, EB4 & EB5 cannot apply under FCFS unless they withdraw their application
    (d) Employers must file an I140 on October 1 and if more than 65,000 applications are received then the winners will be determined by a drawing of lots.

    Alternative 2
    a, b & c as above
    (d) Employers must file an I140 on October 1 and if more than 65,000 applications are received then the winners will be determined by the salaries offered. That is, the minimum salary needed to allocate all 65,000 visas. So, if $60,000 is the cut-off salary all whose employers offered a salary greater than $60,000 would receive a GC and those below would not. Thus tax revenue to the govie would be maximized and salaries of local workers would be protected.

    Alternative 3
    a, b & c as above
    (d) The GCs would be allocated by employer size. (number of employees and revenue). Smaller employers with would get preference.

    Alternative 4.
    Alternative 1 would be given 22,000 numbers
    Alternative 2 would be given 22,000 numbers
    Alternative 3 would be given 21,000 numbers

    Can you support any of the above? If not, what are your objections this time.
  12. paskal's Avatar
    well whoever you are,
    your point is not taken.
    if you think that tactic is no good, what good are you doing?
    if every post is to be answered with rubbish even unrelated rubbish, you will just end up ignored. as i said in my post( having recognized this silly tactic) the weird point you are trying to make is not getting through to anyone. you race bait yourself (read your post again) and accuse others of being racist in the same post? and that makes your point? when the discussion is about nurses?
    i would really have expected better arguments and facts. this is just disruptive tactics. when i see those, personally, it makes me think there are no good arguments left to be made.
    there are plenty of good arguments to make a rational immigration system that measures the needs of the country better. i don't hear them though. partly because they would first need to admit that immigration is necessary to begin with. so you think the pro immigrant side is bad when it comes to name calling? maybe you need to troll some anti immigrant site anonymously and post rational pro-legal-skilled-immigrant arguments there. i've seen it being tried. it's not pretty.

    "I have decided to take the gloves off against anyone who tosses around the anti-immigrant card without just cause. That means pulling out all the stops."

    did not see any tossing. and have not heard where you stand etc what's the point of just taking gloves off- we don't even know whose fighting and for what?

    not interested in this any more. roy needs to speak for himself. personally i thought he was quite capable of standing up for himself and at least he offered his stand on issues. unlike his new bodyguard.
  13. ANONYMOUS's Avatar
    I am not going to reveal my identity. So please, let's move on.

    "Can you support any of the above? If not, what are your objections this time."

    Yes - I'll address each point.

    (a) H1b is sunset

    Support sun-setting the H-1b.

    (b) The 65,000 numbers are given to a new GC program with no per country limits. Let's call it FCFS (First Come First Serve) category.

    Support shifting the 65,000 towards a GC program with no per country limits. Oppose first come first serve. Selection should be based upon the best applicant - not who managed to get their application in first.

    (c) People who have an application pending under EB1, EB2, EB3, EB4 & EB5 cannot apply under FCFS unless they withdraw their application

    Unsure. What is your thinking behind this? I would change FCFS to BQF which stands for best qualified first.

    (d) Employers must file an I140 on October 1 and if more than 65,000 applications are received then the winners will be determined by a drawing of lots."

    Oppose arbitrary selection. It should be based upon the notion of the best qualified.

    Alternative 2
    a, b & c as above
    (d) Employers must file an I140 on October 1 and if more than 65,000 applications are received then the winners will be determined by the salaries offered. That is, the minimum salary needed to allocate all 65,000 visas. So, if $60,000 is the cut-off salary all whose employers offered a salary greater than $60,000 would receive a GC and those below would not. Thus tax revenue to the govie would be maximized and salaries of local workers would be protected.

    Support. Salary is probably the best measure I can think of when it comes to "BQF".

    Alternative 3
    a, b & c as above
    (d) The GCs would be allocated by employer size. (number of employees and revenue). Smaller employers with would get preference.

    Oppose. Prefer salary over company size.

    Alternative 4.
    Alternative 1 would be given 22,000 numbers
    Alternative 2 would be given 22,000 numbers
    Alternative 3 would be given 21,000 numbers

    Oppose. This is a cop out - meaning we can't agree upon a solution.
  14. paskal's Avatar
    I am not going to reveal my identity.

    just fyi:
    not interested in the least in your identity
    just your views. and your ability to support them factually and logically. for all i know you are roy. and i care less.
    i can only speak for myself but i doubt you'll here different from others.
  15. paskal's Avatar

    1. 65,000 H1b is not the correct number
    117,000 were issued last year. H1B includes 65,000 universal + 20,000 masters + non profit/research
    if you sunset all should be transfered.

    2. 117,000 H1b do not include family members
    when transferred to the GC system they would automatically be reduced to an effective 60% 0r so. if you support a direct transfer the number needs further adjustment.

    delighted you agree with the idea that country quotas have no place in a merit system. there is a place for "diversity", and it's not a skill based system.

  16. paskal's Avatar

    different professions have different mean salaries
    if an absolute wage cut off was set- teachers could never qualify and investment bankers always would. fair?
  17. 's Avatar
    1. 65,000 H1b is not the correct number
    117,000 were issued last year. H1B includes 65,000 universal + 20,000 masters + non profit/research
    if you sunset all should be transfered.

    No. If we start talking more visas, we need safeguards in place to protect the labor market. I don't think 65,000 is enough to harm the domestic labor market, but more could without safeguards. In short, we need a pause during tough economic times. An example would be between 2002 and 2003 for the IT industry.

    2. 117,000 H1b do not include family members
    when transferred to the GC system they would automatically be reduced to an effective 60% 0r so. if you support a direct transfer the number needs further adjustment.

    I support the notion that families would be welcome and they would NOT count towards the 65,000 cap. That doesn't mean extended families - just children, elderly parents, and spouse. If spouses work - and they should be able to, that in effect puts the number higher instead of lower.
  18. 's Avatar
    "if an absolute wage cut off was set- teachers could never qualify and investment bankers always would. fair?"

    Isn't the true problem here that teachers aren't paid enough? Maybe society will put their money where there mouths are. We say that teachers are some of the most important contributers to our society, yet we pay them near poverty wages. These are all college graduates mind you. They deserve to be paid fairly.

    How are we going to attract good teachers from our universities if graduates can make much more money in the private sector? The love of teaching isn't always enough when there is such a huge gap in pay.

    We don't have a shortage of people willing to be teachers. We have a shortage of people willing to work for very low pay when they already have massive student loans. These days, student loans can grow to 6 figures. Perhaps student-loan forgiveness would encourage more people to become teachers.
  19. USC's Avatar
    Paskal/anonymous:

    Excellent discussion. Of course, this needs to be fine-tuned. I will post responses later today/tomorrow.
  20. USC's Avatar
    "Unsure. What is your thinking behind this?"

    My intention was not to indulge in CIR but to try and address some of the criticisms, valid or invalid, made by the opponents of H1b. Thus under Alternative 1 all elements of the H1b would remain as is except for the fact that instead of receiving a H1b visa the beneficiary would receive a GC. However, the needs of the employer (thus the US economy and thus the National Interest) have to be kept in mind. This category would have no backlog. So, the unsuccessful applicants would have to re-apply next year. The restriction would prevent the EB backlogged cases from applying under the new category. This would enable a US employer from getting a potential employee into the country without being stuck in the backlog.

    "Support. Salary is probably the best measure I can think of when it comes to "BQF"."

    That's good. At least we are making progress. Perhaps, your friend Roy and the Programmer's Guild could also endorse this? I hope you realize that this offers excellent wage protection to US workers, much more so than the current H1b program.

    "Oppose. Prefer salary over company size."

    The reason I suggested this was that innovative start-ups might need talent and absent such a category they would be unable to compete with the likes of Microsoft, Sloan-Kettering Hospital or Goldman Sachs.

    "Oppose. This is a cop out - meaning we can't agree upon a solution."

    Not really. This would give help everyone out. US workers would have protection due to the salary selection method, it would help out the teachers and prevent the Investment Bankers from monopolizing the category and help out the same companies.
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Put Free Immigration Law Headlines On Your Website

Immigration Daily: the news source for legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers Enter your email address here: