Scott Jensen <RecreationalPoker@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
> On Jul 6, 8:33 pm, "Mark T.B. Carroll" <m...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> Scott Jensen <RecreationalPo...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
(snip)
> I know you think you're im****tant and that us Americans should be
> thankful that you're here
Well you'd be wrong. Im****ting skilled immigrants is helpful and useful
to stimulate innovation in the US, but it isn't the whole solution, I
expect to be employing fewer Americans in a few years' time, and helping
the US isn't why I'm here. I have a lot of affection for the US and I
think it has a lot of good qualities but I'm no member of an
international economic rescue party!
> I have heard so many foreigners like you over-inflate your im****tance
> while at the same time putting us Americans down. You're just like any
> other immigrant.
I don't think the problem's with Americans per se, nor do I think it's
deeply part of American character - I think it's a problem that's only
appeared in recent decades and I'm not sure why. Things like
http://www.math-tips-for-parents.com/press/wsj1204.pdf
can't help,
though - "Fifteen-year-olds in the US rank near the bottom of
industrialized countries in math skills". I sure don't blame the
/students/ for that. But something's sure wrong. One of my fears is that
a problem - perhaps caused somewhat by local taxes being so im****tant in
funding local schools - is that not enough money reaches the schools
that really need it. But maybe the answer's something completely
different, I don't know. (I got that partly by talking to a native-born
US educational consultant - it's not any of this immigrant propaganda
I'm starting to wonder if you think we all come with.) I suspect it's
something maybe-political to do with how earlier education is set up,
though.
> This country offers a better op****tunity than what you had at home and
> you took it.
Er, no, I didn't come for economic reasons, I came to the US to be with
my wife, and I lost out economically by doing so. I had a better job
with fantastically better benefits in Europe and I would be back there
now (or in Australia or Mauritius) if she didn't want to live in the US.
I asked her just a few months ago if she'd be okay with moving back but
she still wants to stay for now. (And it's sure not for the job
op****tunities - she's been unemployed for a while - it's more because
she wants to be nearer her mom.)
> they thought they were better than them.
You're putting words in my mouth again. (And, hell, I'm only saying
anything because somebody asked!)
I hope you don't mind my saying so, but it seems to me that you need to
calm down and think and actually read what I said instead of reacting
emotionally and attacking strawman caricatures. I'd certainly admit I
have American partners and employees who know a whole lot more about
some technical things than I do. I also know I have great failings in
some business-related areas - I've said as much on this group before,
not so long ago.
(snip)
> Why people think Bill Gates can talk about ANYTHING is what is
> amazing. If you want a good laugh, google his predictions of the
> future.
Did you happen to notice his citations to actual studies that weren't
all funded by special-interest groups (unless you count things like the
NSF as such)?
(snip)
>> Americans are falling further behind on
>> graduating with science and engineering degrees - for some time now
>> around half, maybe more, of the science PhDs in American universities
>> are foreign students, and very many of them stay afterward.
>
> Right. And such college education is funded by our government. Any
> foreign student that is right now studying in a US college lab is
> doing so at the expense of American taxpayers. The university itself
> was made possible with American taxes, tax exempt status, land grants,
> and so forth. Additionally, the grant that lab got and which it is
> using to pay for that foreign graduate student to be a grad lad for
> seven years comes from us Americans. Sure, they cannot get
> scholar****ps or grants, but most get their tuition covered plus get a
> stipend and can receive college housing. In other words, they get a
> free graduate education.
Yes, indeed, that's often the case.
> You should be thanking us for educating you foreigners, especially
> those of you that then return home.
I don't have any US degrees.
> Thus it is the US that is making the world a better place, NOT the
> other way around. We take raw talent from everywhere and not just own
> soil. We then educate, shape and refine it for YEARS.
Yes. And the US benefits from doing that. But note that, in the citation
I gave you last, it mentions that only half of the immigant founders of
US companies got their highest degree in the US. Your story of things
applies to some cases, but not all of them by a long way.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/cea/cea_immigration_062007.pdf
makes it quite
clear that, "On average, US natives benefit from immigration". I never
said that the US wasn't making the world a better place, I just said the
world was helping to make the US a better place - with special reference
to innovation - and you weren't giving it credit for that! (Though I'll
happily admit that it's very plausible that illegal/unskilled
immigration is a net loss to the US.)
> That we don't then require foreigners to become US citizens so this
> country can benefit from the investment we made into them is what is
> amazing.
That's exactly part of my point: the harsher immigration and
anti-terrorism stuff is making more of them leave, and that's not a good
thing for the US.
> That the vast majority want to become US citizen is great but hasn't
> been a requirement for them to get into our universities.
They'd never get there at all then under current rules.
>> (One might reasonably guess that ability to do advanced original
>> research in technical fields is linked with ability to do technical
>> innovation.)
>
> No, not really. It is actually the engineers that bring about
> technical innovation, not the scientists.
Okay. Though, the page I pointed you to before mentions that, "Our
research confirms that advanced education in science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics is correlated with high rates of
entrepreneur****p and innovation."
> Scientists do a LOT of research that has little to do with anything
> that is applicable to life. It is the engineers that look over what
> the scientists have done and then devise ways of applying it to life
> and industry.
Okay, then take a look at, say,
http://www.american.com/archive/2008/july-august-magazine-contents/america2019s-other-immigration-crisis
"In 2006, foreign nationals residing in the United States were named as
inventors or co-inventors in an astounding 26 percent of patent
applications filed in the United States. This increased from 8 percent
in 1998." ... Over 40 percent of the international patent applications
filed by the U.S. government had foreign authors."
> Oh, and it is us marketers that actually enable such innovations to
> become successes. Engineers believe in the myth that if you build a
> better mousetrap, the world will beat a path to your door. Sorry, but
> it is us marketers that gets the world to beat a path to anyone's
> door. And you don't even need the best "mousetrap" to succeed. You
> just need a product that meets the needs of the target market and then
> a good marketer to make those customers aware of it.
I know it all too well. That's partly why I have to put up with so much
crap when I know that something much better is technically possible! (-:
Superior technical solutions fail to become the entrenched competitor
for all manner of market reasons.
> The biggest factor is the US kicking your ass back home. Just because
> you got yourself a student visa doesn't mean you will get citizen****p
> here. Even getting a green card is hard. I know many foreign
> graduate students that want to remain but the US won't let them.
> Unfortunately, it is hard to become a US citizen these days and is
> only getting harder.
Absolutely.
> Also, if a research position has any connection to DoE or DoD then
> being a U.S. citizen may be a requirement (along with a security
> clearance if DoD). This especially so since 9/11.
Also true.
>> A whole bunch of innovative American companies have non-natives
>> as im****tant technical co-founders, that then go on to create jobs for
>> Americans.
>
> Now if you could back up your "whole bunch" with actual numbers that
> are truly significant, you might win this point.
Why not actually look at some of the things I already cited? For
instance, I'd already clearly pointed to something that mentions that,
"31% of startups in tech centers had an immigrant key founder, more than
that in places like Silicon Valley (52.4%), NYC and Chicago."
But let's have another. How about
http://www.rediff.com/cms/print.jsp?docpath=//money/2006/nov/16spec.htm
which cites Yahoo! -
"The study also found that immigrant founders are responsible for
building a high percentage of the most innovative American companies,
with 87 per cent operating in sectors such as high-tech manufacturing,
information technology and life sciences."
"the authors surveyed more than 340 venture-backed start-ups and found
nearly half (47 per cent) were founded by one or more immigrants."
As well as Yahoo!, I'd add Intel, Sun, eBay and Google. We can go to
http://www.nvca.org/pdf/AmericanMade_study.pdf
and note that, "over the
past 15 years, immigrants have started 25% of US public companies that
were venture-backed" and that they are "... concentrated in cutting-edge
sectors". Also, "Immigrant-founded venture-backed public companies today
employ an estimated 220,000 people in the United States" - so that's
/excluding/ companies that are non-public or non-venture-funded!
>> You can kind of see where this is going. (I can probably find citations
>> for specific points that you doubt.)
>
> Go for it.
Which do you doubt? Or do I have to dig up a citation for everything I
say while you just sit and exude unsup****ted criticism? I've already
provided some pointers and I've added some more in this article. Let me
know if there are specific extra points you want to see justified that
I've not now covered.
Though, it sounds like you disagree with my personal experience of
Americans which appears to have been remarkably different to yours.
That's something I can't explain.
>> I'm an immigrant co-founder of an innovative business that employs
>> only Americans
>
> In America. You can thank us Americans now for letting you do so. I
> know you think the ledger balance in in your favor, but it isn't.
Why? I'd probably have done better if I'd stayed in Europe, if nothing
else because I have much better understanding of culture there, business
and otherwise. The US doesn't have a monopoly on entrepreneur****p and
innovation. That's one of the reasons that India are China will be very
worth watching - India's had a strong domestic entrepreneur****p
tradition for years and now we may be seeing an skilled innovation surge
in China if you look at measures like drug patent applications.
>> ...that grew out of a US university laboratory headed by an Indian
>> guy.
>
> Paid for by us American taxpayers.
Indeed, very much so.
> Now I know you think us Americans are too dumb to fill all those
> student spots and faculty openings, but you would be wrong.
No, I don't think it's that they're too dumb, I think that they've been
failed somewhat by earlier school - or maybe it's more that there's some
current cultural bias against technical stuff or something. I really
don't know. But the intelligence of Americans is pretty normal among
First World countries.
> Actually, we're a lot smarter than you
I'd love to see you provide evidence for /that/. Seeing as you cited
Nature as somewhat preeminent academically I should mention
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v297/n5863/abs/297222a0.html
(-:
> and just have better job op****tunities than you did in your home
> country.
Actually I think I have better job op****tunities back in Europe - though
that might be partly due to my personal cir***stances. I gave up a great
job to come here and I regret doing that. I also already knew a lot
about running small businesses in the UK - coming here, I had a lot to
learn.
> Universities commonly bemoan that they cannot interest enough
> Americans to enter graduate school, but that isn't an indictment of
> American students but the lousy job universities do to recruit
> Americans to attend graduate school and the not-so-hot prospects of
> actually being a scientist.
Absolutely.
> Graduate school means more years in college and either putting more
> financial strain on their parents and/or going deeper and deeper into
> debt.
Or competing for the same paid graduate research associate or teaching
associate jobs that are going to so many immigrants?
> College debt that you then have to pay back once you're out of
> college and paid out of the career that degree got you.
Right. The cost of college, and of college debt, is a big inhibitor. I
could do my degree much more cheaply in Britain - in fact, at the time I
did, the government paid for so much I graduated with hardly any debt -
and the debt I did have accrued interest that matched inflation but no
more than that. That I'm very grateful for, but it's not thanks to the
US. Instead, the UK paid for my education, and the US benefited from the
tax I'm paying and jobs I helped to create with it. (And, no, I'm not
asking for thanks. (-:) But that factor in Britain helped make a science
degree attractive to me to take.
> If the job is high paying (thus worth the investment of time and
> money), Americans eagerly go into it. For example, this country is
> overflowing with law school graduates.
True, though there's a big demand for them too!
Your characterization of a scientist's life look reasonably on-target to
me. I decided not to do a PhD after coming to the US because of that
sort of thing - among others, which I'll refrain from getting into
unless they become relevant to other points you make!
> Given all the above, the Americans that become scientists become
> scientists because they want to become scientists. Unlike foreigners,
> they're not becoming it because it represents a path to a better
> life. It is more like a hobby to Americans.
In Britain the pay gap between science and say, other white-collar work,
is even larger, though. I could afford to be a scientist in the US but
it would be rather harder in the UK and I feel bad for the academic
post-doctoral friends I have there who try. (They could move to the US
but don't want to.) You sure don't become a scientist in Britain because
you want a nicer life, you become a doctor or a lawyer or a business
consultant or something.
I suspect you're probably correct about, say, India or China, though -
sorry to hear your wife went all those years doing something she hated.
> And she the rule and not the exception. All the foreign students and
> post-docs in that major lab (actually several labs under one "roof")
> viewed America as a goal in and of itself. All told me about how it
> was through education that they could get a better life than what was
> available back in their home countries. They had endless discussions
> on how to get a green card. And these weren't just those from China,
> India, and Russia but also Germany, Australia, and even a couple
> (husband and wife) from UK.
That's interesting. I've noticed a different pattern where they arrive
in the US intending to return to their home country in the end, but over
their years of education in the US they change their mind and decide to
stay. I haven't talked to many, though.
>> Being educated in Britain meant that before I even started college I
>> had had [listing of secondary education]
>
> And you think none of us Americans receive the same or better. You
> just keep thinking that and you'll remain happy.
Not `none' but no American I've talked to so far about it heard of or
got anything like it - in talking informally about high school, in
trying to learn about culture here, and in talking to students when I
was around the university, and also in interviewing applicants for
technical positions. I'm not developing these opinions in a conceited
vacuum, but more in an ac***ulation of surprise and disappointment
having lived in the US for a decade and having kids in school here.
There are Americans realizing the same thing - for instance, see the "2
Million Minutes" do***entary mentioned at
http://storybank.stanford.edu/story.detail.php?contentID=151
(snip)
>> Ha, I don't have time to hunt now - I actually just shed most of my
>> library, [snip] I'm not an anthropologist, I'm afraid. (-:
>
> In other words, you don't have the evidence to back such a politically-
> correct claim.
Hey, I gave you a couple of pointers, I've pointed you to much more
evidence than you've pointed me at for your views, and I was clear
up-front that, "I'm not posting the above with the intent to persuade
anyone of my views, nor even with the expectation that I especially have
the time to defend them". I was extremely clear early on in this thread
that what I wrote was my two cent opinion that I only provided because
it was asked for. You think that I am living among Americans and posting
in an American-dominated forum things that could be construed as
criticisms of the US and that I'm worried about political correctness?!?
Google a bit and you'll also find me doing things like publicly posting
extensive criticism of US foreign policy over the last century. I don't
give a damn if I'm taking unpopular positions or not. If you think I'm
sucking up to Native American affairs then I'll tell you right now that
I find it a very bad sign that they get an NPR news program to
themselves and it's completely dominated by two sorts of issues:
ancestors' remains, and casino licenses. I may be irrational or wrong or
out of touch with reality, but I am sure not politically correct. (-:
I also don't automatically criticize everything American. For instance,
while I may not be impressed with say, health care here, nor, as I
mentioned previously, automotive stuff, I have to admit that public
trans****t's actually been better than I expected, and city libraries and
online goverment have been much better than I ever enjoyed in Europe.
Mark
|
