...the U.S. Senate unfortunately voted on Feb. 6 to restrict banks and other financial institutions that receive taxpayer bailout money from hiring high-skilled immigrants on temporary work permits known as H-1B visas.
There is simply no reason for this. LEGAL, PRUDENT immigration is a vital aspect to attracting people who can create wealth and opportunities for themselves, others, and America as a whole. After all, someone has to pay taxes. To support this point, the article continues:
Why are Americas unions, lobbyists, and so many Democrats afraid of competition?According to research by Vivek Wadhwa, a senior research associate at the Labor and Worklife Program at Harvard Law School, more than half of Silicon Valley start-ups were founded by immigrants over the last decade. These immigrant-founded tech companies employed 450,000 workers and had sales of $52 billion in 2005, said Wadhwa in an essay published this week on BusinessWeek.com.
He also cited a recent study by William R. Kerr of Harvard Business School and William F. Lincoln of the University of Michigan that “found that in periods when H-1B visa numbers went down, so did patent applications filed by immigrants [in the U.S.]. And when H-1B visa numbers went up, patent applications followed suit.”
As a tangent (after all this blog is for me to explore my opinions), I do want to stress the conditions of LEGAL and PRUDENT in immigration policy. I believe we should dramatically ramp up immigration under those two conditions. I don't think LEGAL needs much explanation, but I stress its importance as without legal immigration, the only immigrants we get are those who have already shown their willingness to break the law. That is not how I would like someone to begin their life in this country. Unfortunately, politicians ignored the labor laws of supply and demand, and illegals naturally filled that void.
The PRUDENT condition is a little trickier to define, because to some it may make me look like a monster. Still, as I have stated previously, I see no proof of natural equality in humans. I have to be prudent in hiring decisions to weed out the bad apples, and so should the US with immigration. Again, I want more immigration, but consideration should be given to how the immigrant's abilities, education, culture, and religion will impact America's future and safety. Criminals, Islamic extremists, and those that would likely be further burden to our welfare system should be kept out.
Back to the article, I liked this from Thomas:
In an age when attracting the first-round intellectual draft choices from around the world is the most important competitive advantage a knowledge economy can have, why would we add barriers against such brainpower — anywhere? That’s called “Old Europe.” That’s spelled: S-T-U-P-I-D.
Hat tip to Matty J. for e-mailing me the article.
3 comments:
Tom Friedman long ago became a caricature of his public persona. PUT. DOWN. THE. NEW. YORK. TIMES.
http://tinyurl.com/b72nav
http://tinyurl.com/5fkla4
http://tinyurl.com/9kjgog
Thanks for the links - I have said before on this blog that I think Friedman is a decent fact gatherer, but that his political conclusions usually go in the exact opposite direction from where I would go with the same set of facts.
Don't worry Jason, I like to read both NYT and WSJ editorials for fun, but I don't use either one to form my opinions. And you know what they say about blind squirrels...
Setting aside personal issues with the author, Friedman is right as rain on this point.
I saw it when I worked at BigCorp. The head hunters brought in the best talent from around the globe and our office was as diverse as it was innovative. Not that doesn't insulate you from the business cycle, but it puts you in the strongest position to maximize the benefit when things are cooking.
Post a Comment