| Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools. |
From the Other Side: A European ViewThe United States 1965 Immigration Act, effectively a substitution of skill discrimination for racial discrimination, although morally superior to the former Act, may have bad side-effects. In the nineteenth century, large-scale movements of labor force from overpopulated countries to areas where labor was scarce benefited both the sending and the receiving countries. The modern pattern, however, shows a reversal of the flow—skilled labor and scientific personnel are moving from the less prosperous countries to the four richest nations in the world, and especially to the United States. Europe and Asia are both affected by this "brain drain" of many persons whose training was financed by their respective native governments. The reverse flow of experts and technical assistance from the rich to the underdeveloped countries is an imperfect substitute for the cumulative benefits of indigenous research. When a country absorbs migrants educated at public expense abroad, there is no reason why they should not be considered items in a capital balance of payments. If physical capital must be paid for, why should publicly financed human capital be received free? Other ways to overcome the imbalance might be less emphasis on student migration in technical assistance or an obligation on students receiving public grants to remain in or return to their own countries.—Ed.
The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 367, No. 1,
63-72 (1966) |
|||
 |
|
|
 |
|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
