American immigration policies after World War II were designed largely to help people get out of Communist countries and other authoritarian nations and into the United States. In addition to seeming like simply the right thing to do, it benefited the U.S. by allowing people from those countries to come here and then send word back to their friends and families about how good life was in a democratic society. Once some members of a family came to the U.S. their family members back home would have priority for immigration, the goal being to keep families together as much as possible and enhance the public diplomacy value of immigration.
Keeping families together is a worthy goal, and helping people out of bad situations and bringing them to better ones certainly has morality on its side. But should either of those currently be the main focus of our nation’s immigration policies? Given that the Cold War ended nearly 20 years ago, and a new knowledge economy has erupted in which companies benefit from having a variety of perspectives and backgrounds, wouldn’t it make sense to have immigration policies that support bringing talented workers into American companies? There are lots of ways in which opening up employment to more foreign Creatives is good for both your company and the nation’s workforce as a whole.
First, employers benefit from having more potential employees from which to choose. Limiting the firm to only Americans means that to fill all your spots you may have to take people with lesser skills than you would get if you had a broader pool of recruits. Having more choice helps you get what you want.
And, given the cross-border nature of many creative industries, having an international perspective makes you more competitive. Whether you need to understand other cultures because you have clients there, or simply want multiple perspectives shaping your product, you will benefit a lot from the new ideas your foreign Creatives can bring you.
This attitude helps the U.S. workforce in the end. Many people will say “why hire foreign Creatives when you have Americans looking for work?” But protecting American workers from foreign competition for jobs removes some of the motivation for excellence. Having competition leads you to work harder, and the American Creative workforce as a whole could benefit from that if immigration policies made it easier to bring foreign workers into your firm.
Much of my interest is driven by personal and professional relationships. I have a good friend from Vietnam who has been here for his senior year of high school, his bachelor’s degree, and his master’s. After 7 years of American education, why wouldn’t we make it easy for him to stay instead of putting so many obstacles in his path? There’s an English teacher I know who’s from Taiwan, and got his master’s in the U.S., and he’s likely to have to head back home after 5 years of working here. Two Singaporeans I know have been to school here and are doing cancer research and software development, but if they want to stay on permanently we make it difficult. Why, why, why would we send such individuals away if they can make strong contributions to our society?
I would like the U.S. to continue to be the strongest economic powerhouse in the world, and so I would rather see these talented individuals contributing to U.S. companies and the U.S. economy rather than working somewhere else. Why do we continue to turn away or send back talented and ambitious people, who in many cases have already taken advantage of an American education and who could fit right into our society as contributing members? While other nations actively recruit foreign talent -- including, it should be noted, adventurous and ambitious American Creatives who are actively seeking new challenges -- does it make sense for us to be going in the opposite direction?
0 comments:
Post a Comment