I don't disagree, getting smart and ambitious people to move to your country is a really good policy overall. It is just worth weighing it against the opportunity cost for the citizens of the country.
I certainly don't blame anyone for wanting to move to improve their situation (I did it too!) but I wonder if developing countries would have caught up to the West decades ago if this brain drain wasn't going on.
Immigrants have made the country rich enough to give everyone ubi free housing and free healthcare. But Then Billionaires.
#immigrants-are-the-new-jews #stop-blaming-the-hand-that-feeds
( Of course, it's not billionaires per se, but Greed. Eg in countries like singapore, the Politicians are the problem. )
For a living example, take a look at UAE, although I'd say they could have treated immigrants a bit better.
In America we built companies art and music out of our garages just for the love of it... not because "that's where the compensation was."
Meanwhile where there is food there is no need to move.
Meanwhile where there is food there is no need to move.
Because if not, then investments to Nigeria past $x will grant it the upperhand since all that money can get you another doctor and more.
You cannot expect an article to tell you these things.
Whether they work in Nigeria or not is not the issue. The issue is that they are doing it without compensating the country. Worse, they clearly don't intend to come back again (so you don't Ever get compensated at all, not just suffering time value of money) otherwise there's no need for a 5 year penalty. which is relatively huge compared to what the other countries are doing.
I guess sending money back home is not big in Nigeria culturally like it is in Mexico? Welp, I can't enforce you to send money back but guess what, I can enforce you to not leave at all.
It absolutely is the issue, because Nigeria has a shortage of doctors. It has nothing to do with whether or not Nigerian doctors send money back home. If they send lots of money back home, they still aren't in Nigeria practicing medicine, which is what Nigeria actually wants.
If this was about money then there'd be no reason to make a law specific to doctors, as many other Nigerians emigrate for better economic prospects elsewhere.
> actually wants
Declared by who? And that politically correct statement is believed by who? [other than you]
> no reason to..
no reason??? Doctor training is one of the Top heavily subsidized by the state. (As with weapons. but none is chanting "Weapons Weapons" but "Doctors Doctors Doctors" because PC, as zelensky the clown has found out the hard way even for a christian country.) Sure, it's expensive to subsidize the capital for a literature major sitting in a beautiful airconditioned classroom with a courtyard and maybe swimming pool.. at least until you find out the annual mortgage of a PBT facility.
Tldr use common sense. If every doctor I export out of the country gets me 4.48b cf js.do/code/740428 (prepaid btw, for the correct interest rate to charge does not make any sense considering the country may not be around for another 99y), then I only need to export 100 per year [out of 220M] to twice my gdp; heck you'd do it all day long every single day.
Yet people built it and made it that way.
Nothing is static people csn change anything
These people need to do that in their own countries.
The company remained for many generations but most (not all) individual British people stationed themselves in India and retired 'home' to England where to whence the money flowed.
Many European countries regarded their "colonies" as places to exploit for resources, places to be travelled to for work for many years, places they didn't regard as 'home'.
There's more to "colonisation" than just simple migration.
Even in Australia the early colonisation was by settler families that were part of larger stay at home families, the black sheep, wayward sons, and fortune seeking adventurers .. in Australia convicts and servant families remained, ultimately a good proportion of the underwritten (from home) settlers stayed .. but initially at least many heads of these families "returned home" to England.
In a similar manner modern USofA has many institutional "colonies" around the globe, bases they've established and never left, these rarely have permanently settled multi generational families.
they are typically the top performing GDP countries of their region with some of the best quality of life for their citizens
That's false. By definition none would have come if there wasn't opportunity. You don't need to be a geography student to see that it wasn't just irreligious opportunity.
Gold rush and stuff is just a bonus, the big money is in cattle and agriculture.