If you want to see America in decline, you'll see it everywhere you look.
The US had it very good in the past. And that helped it retain its top spot. But it also means once you are at the top, if you don't keep going up at the same rate as others, you are going down. And trends of losing steam can sometimes get swept under the rug because of "we are number one" sentiment.
It is true that US immigration is horrible, but that goes for may other countries as well. I don't know what the cause is or whether it is something that you should even want to repair.
If you waited until the day when Americans have to go to China for an education, then the US is longer in a position to deal with the problem as effectively as when it just started losing foreign-born scientists.
The US was built by immigrants. That is the root of its power, a gathering place for talents all over the world. If you still question whether it is of any concern for immigrants, especially high-skilled ones, to feel unwelcomed here, then I afraid I have no arguments that can sway you.
it is a competition, so it doesn't matter if it was china getting better, or the US becoming worse. The end result is the same.
To your point, yes US residents send their kids abroad. From a total of 15k in 2000, up to 34k right before the pandemic.
https://opendoorsdata.org/data/us-study-abroad/all-destinati...
Americans definitely don’t care as much about face as the Chinese do, so it really isn’t that big of a deal. China’s economy was eventually going to stem its emigration, and a lot of rich Chinese send their kids to school the states now with the expectation that they will come back, not as a hedge against the Chinese internal problems.
China could do better with immigration. Like, if you think American immigration is bad, China is worse, permanent residency wasn’t even a thing for non-Chinese until a few years ago, and is still quite rare.
"Face" is a concept about preserving personal honor and appearance regardless of what they actually believe. Slightly different but quite distinct imo.
You decide between you two who's the kettle and who's the pot. We'll be minding or own business in the meantime.
It feels quite dispiriting. I'm not sure I'd go to china as my first choice, especially as I don't speak mandarin or cantonese, but I'd _love_ to leave the USA. There's many great options I'd consider. Maybe in a year or two, I'll be hailing from outside the USA!
Immigration is no small feat and when the US govt throws suspicions at immigrants and makes their life difficult, it becomes an easy choice to call it quit, admit defeat and just go back to a known quantity where you'll be treated better.
I bet you if the US attitude was opposite, the vast majority of these folks wouldn't go back.
Hard to say, PRC generating ~5M STEM per year which is multiple times more than US can generate via domestic education and brain drain. That's the skilled human capita gap where US is losing hard, PRC adding conservatively more than 5x more STEM talent per year, set to pass US total STEM workforce of 35M within next few years (PRC STEM @ ~20M as of 2020), and medium term (2050) PRC on trend have 50-100M STEM. It's not so much US decline as PRC ascend and relative gap massively swinging in PRC favour well past 2050s. Now factor in indigenous PRC academic and S&T industries have increasingly more opportunties retaining more and more tier1 PRC talent, the fact that best PRC talent don't flood into west anymore - this isn't the 00s where PRC best was sent abroad as state policy or natural outflow due to lack of domestic opportunities. Even international students are now mostly B tier talents that couldn't hack it in PRC gaokao but had wealthy enough families to send them abroad. TLDR US can't compete on generating talent vs PRC massive population base effect + human capital production via academic reforms coming to fruition, and US brain drain of PRC talent (itself reducing due to geopolitics as mentioned in this article) can no longer meaningfully inhibit PRC talent pipeline.
Before China's hardcore response the pandemic scared a bunch of people into emigrating, you might have had a point. We will see now that China is opening up again if it goes back to the trend it had in 2019 or not.
Put some numbers on PRC talent outflow, it's insignificant to what stays even post narrative of covid scaring Chinese to leave. And I know many who left, mostly retiring people whose just looking for places to park their money abroad. But talent that moves PRC up strategic values chains in S&T, very few, and as this article points, established strategic talent are moving back in record numbers where there's more upward mobility without red scare. This is without mentioning PRC students to NA has basically halved post covid. Dumb napkin math for illustration: US taking 4/10 PRC talent from before vs 3/100 now. The former subsantially degrades PRC talent pipeline, the latter barely makes a dent. And If US can only add 20 talent per year, then PRC's net 97 is going to matter over time, as in short/medium term time. Maybe talent import is needed after 50 years, at a point it's to sustain a PRC that has 2-3x more skilled workforce than US. But A) that's really not a competition anymore B) long enough time horizon that it's hard to speculate.
Yes US still have access to EU/IN talent, but again politics limit how much they can brain drain / absorb, so net inflow of US talent is no where close to net PRC talent production. Or people from "all over world" is basically ~1B (granted set to grow) English speakers (including non 1st language) or about the pool of Mandarin speakers. Remove PRC talent and US loses a huge chunk of talent access, especially from PRC pipeline with relatively proven ability to generate useful talent. And ultimately this matters because PRC making 50-100M STEM by 2050 while US population only set to expand by 40M is an insurmountable skilled workforce gap. It's not a demographic bomb as unparallel divident. Hence I doubt PRC need to import high end talent 50-100m STEM is stupid amount to make jobs for. Denying US PRC talent isn't about crippling US talent procurement, which US immigration policy does itself. It's about retaining PRC compatible talent - as you say, US can draw from English world, PRC largely rely from drawing from within. US denying itself large segment of talent that only benefits PRC to retain is a relative win. It's like the one area where could US win by default but chooses to cede.
> Denying US PRC talent isn't about crippling US talent procurement, which US immigration policy does itself. It's about retaining PRC compatible talent - as you say, US can draw from English world, PRC largely rely from drawing from within. US denying itself large segment of talent that only benefits PRC to retain is a relative win. It's like the one area where could US win by default but chooses to cede.
I don't know how you can say this with a straight face when PRC immigration policies are much much worse. The USA has a system that is hard to get through, sure, but many many people get through it with permanent residency and citizenship at the end. Very very few get through the PRC's immigration system, even of Chinese descent, as you say all China can do is retain talent.
> It's like the one area where could US win by default but chooses to cede.
Again, the fact that the USA grants 740k green cards a year is not small potatoes, and many of those are in tech, high level STEM positions of talent. When I worked in China, I was the only foreigner in my team, maybe a few foreigners in our entire lab. Now, I'm working at Google in the USA, I can count the born-in-America types on one hand, most of my coworkers are immigrants, a long with a lot of young Chinese new grads. It doesn't feel like much as changed on the ground, but ya, Indian immigrants are gaining lots of ground over Chinese immigrants in leadership positions and such, which is something I wouldn't have predicted 20 years ago (look at the top CEO positions).
US does not produce and brain drain enough talent for her needs. Yes US has one of the more permissive immigration systems in the world, but IT'S NO LONGER ENOUGH relative to PRC indigenous talent pipeline. 3/4 million is small potatoes when you're up against 5M+. US isn't competing against PRC on immigration, it's competing on net workforce improvement. US unlikely to have political space to massively ramp up immigration, maybe can close shortage gap, but increasing by 3-4M to stay at parity with PRC isn't politically happening.
>with a straight face
You're overinterpretting, I'm not saying US is ceding absolute immigration advantage, I'm saying it's ceding it's advantage of being able to brain drain PRC talent via generating bad domestic enviroment for ethnically Chinese talent that is pushing many to leave.
>whole generation of Chinese previous STEM students from top universities are now in upper leadership positions...in the USA
Yes, which I acknowledged. But now they're largely staying in PRC for years (precovid) US isn't braindraining PRC best on scale that can degrade PRC indigenous industries anymore. There is a generational difference talent willing to emmigrate. Hence US ceding her all upside advantage of draining/denying PRC access to her best, and now has to redirect to draining more of (likely) India's best. This is arguably triple win for PRC.
All of which is to say, yes US immigration is still a US strength, but it's advantage is vastly diminished vs PRC building up indigenous talent pipeline over last few decades. That +2 advantage was insurmountable gap when most of world was at +0, or even -1 (brain drain), but now it's up against PRC's+5. And where US could feasibly degrade PRC +5 into +4, it chose not to, instead pushing that -1 onto India.