Member
EtherealThorn
knuxieh
Bugman
Dane
Obscene Symphony
Lildear18
Scrawl Banditta
Ikan
Haha
princessIf I lived in a land where people regularly chanted Christians to Beruit and Alawites to the grave yard, it probably encourage me to flee too. Intellectual flight is a symptom rather than a cause. Being at the junction of Sunni/Shia spheres of influence and this weird Turkish Irredentism as well as proximity to a failed state with a massive influx of weaponry probably has more to do with it than a lack of people with masters degrees.
That doesn't change the fact that the fleeing of intelligent people is making third/second world places worse, even the ones at peace. Take most of South America as an example. Most of those places don't have active wars, yet the intelligent people flee leaving their home to rot, subsequently making the place they go to have to give out foreign aid, which doesn't help so the cycle continues.
I wouldn't say it's the only reason, but I'd say that it's a significant one. Then again, Africa does have major cities with plenty of modern luxuries, and even it has millions of people moving to other continents.
That's my point. The thing is that I can understand flight from some places where the government tries to forcibly mutilate the genitals of your daughter or something but if you're living in the relatively peaceful area of say Sao Paolo in Brazil you shouldn't really leave to America just for a few more $$$.
I'd say if policies could be implemented to help incentivize people staying, it would definitely put a cork on the flood of immigrants so to say, even if it wouldn't halt it entirely. People aren't too complicated when it comes to where they want to live. Most of the time, it's as long as it's comfortable.
Okay, try and describe said theoretical policy to me.
Every day, migrant working in rich countries send money to their families in the developing world. It’s just a few hundred dollars here, a few hundred dollars there. But last year, these remittances added up to $80 billion, outstripping foreign aid and ranking as one of the biggest sources of foreign exchange for poor countries. Following a boom in the 1990’s, this flow of money is lifting entire countries out of poverty, creating new financial channels, and reshaping international politics.
Sending a few bucks home to your dying granny isn't the same thing as making the country a better place. Sure, you're SLIGHTLY putting money back into the economy but quite little.
There are few militaries in the world that can even begin to field the same type of equipment in the same number as the United States; people tease, mock and belittle the F35, but there's no actual competitor aircraft taking to the skies that can do what it does as good or better, let alone close.
I hate to be that Russki but the Su-57 is going to be better, since it has most of the F-35s stealth systems while having much more maneuberability, speed, lift, fuel efficiency, etc. Not to mention, the stealth systems that the American military rub their diddlies to is going to become outdated with VHF Radars, and once again maneuverability, ruggedness and firepower of an airplane is going to surpass 'stealth.' Even the old peak-Soviet Radars were able to counter most American stealth technology allowing the Serbian military in Yugoslav wars still armed with WW2 weapons to shoot down an American fighter ten years ahead of it's time and twenty years ahead in introduction date of the aforementioned Radar. So, the F-35 will remain useful in fighting say in Africa, or Turkey, or some country which Russia and/or China do not sell arms to, but if you fight an ally of Russia and/or China your F-35 is going to be a waste.