Marc Grundfest
Is this you? Claim Profile »
5 months ago
in Will Stirs the High-Skilled Hornets Nest on The Technology Liberation Front
Any good libertarian knows that equality beyond legal equality and liberty are mutually exclusive.
"
Which is exactly what I’m advocating: greater legal equality for whose who weren’t fortunate enough to be born in the United States."
I cant resist this one. You are now claiming that Foreign national have rights under US law. Tell me can a Foreign National sue in US courts to become a citizen. If not why not? Are there any limits to the claim the world may make on the US.
Let me guess I am also a fascist now.
"
Which is exactly what I’m advocating: greater legal equality for whose who weren’t fortunate enough to be born in the United States."
I cant resist this one. You are now claiming that Foreign national have rights under US law. Tell me can a Foreign National sue in US courts to become a citizen. If not why not? Are there any limits to the claim the world may make on the US.
Let me guess I am also a fascist now.
5 months ago
in Will Stirs the High-Skilled Hornets Nest on The Technology Liberation Front
I am not going anywhere.
But you still have not answered any of my questions.
Nor have you explained why there should be any immigration at all. Nor have you refuted my claims that h1-b hurts the country of origin and may increase social unrest.
I have been called far worse, but they usually try to answer my points first.
Well good luck to you.
But you still have not answered any of my questions.
Nor have you explained why there should be any immigration at all. Nor have you refuted my claims that h1-b hurts the country of origin and may increase social unrest.
I have been called far worse, but they usually try to answer my points first.
Well good luck to you.
5 months ago
in Will Stirs the High-Skilled Hornets Nest on The Technology Liberation Front
"Backing a policy because it’s fair is not social engineering. Tim Lee and I would lower the limits on free movement of people. "
Why do you believe that the government does not have the right and duty to control its boarders and decide who is and who is not a citizen? This is a called sovereignty,and all other governments have it. Only in the US do we apologize for being sovereign. People are not free to move anywhere they want now or at any time in the past-- try to emigrate abroad if you doubt me-- for that matter try Canada.
The H1b visa is itself an exception to the default rule of entry base on what-- Business likes it as it reduces wage pressure for critial skills -- you seem to like it because it is fair. This is not an economic argument, it is not a legal argument, and if you serious consider the impact of brain drain on the rest of the world it is not even a true statement. Indeed many now make the claim that without h1b high skill labor will stay in there own counties thus making the US less competitive. At least here they are telling the truth-- if we are importing only high skill labor it will infact increase the unfairness you claim it will mitigate and will have a beneficial impact on the US, But if is is fair then we must take all comers and the result will detrimental to the US but will by lowering US wages to match the world it will result in fairness.
It should be noted that many H1b visa are granted on the basis of artificial over credentialing ( ie a DBA does not need an MS) or in many cases dimploma mill certification. I work with many who have purchase degrees from Overseas universities always will to help export its surplus labor overseas to gain hard currency on the return trip. Again events will speak for me in time.
Migration to and from the US is primarily a national defense issue in any case. But those who support it do not general claim it is fair-- they claim that if will benefit the US more than it costs -- funny I do not hear that claim much anymore-- but if true you must conceed that the brain drain will have an impact on the country of origin and thus it will never be fair.
"#6 is the key question. It would take a long time. Most poor people don’t have the wherewithal to move to the United States, and they don’t have the skills and education to take most jobs here. We’re not talking about a jolt, but a long-term adjustment to where people’s skills and the jobs available to them line up better."
There are Billions of people in the world. Moving to the US is not an option no matter what. So they need to grow locally and organically, but we use H1-b and the "American dream to lure there best and brights ( as well as their duds no doubt) so how exaclty is this helping your long term goal of fairness and elevated world standard of living ?
"Why should you act against your interest and accept higher immigration rates, even if they could put you in competion with new workers? Because you believe in justice and fairness. If you think that it’s the government’s job to take from others and give to you, then you’re the socialist."
You have made my point for me. But infact you can be socialist without state coercion. As I said H1b should not exist at all. No special treatment of immigrants based on skill sets that would not be fair to the others left behind and would hurt not help the cause of improving world living standards. It does exist because it proponents ( ie those who unlike the libertarians actually make policy) think it is our national interest to pooch talent from abroad in an effort to increase our technical lead, while keeping wage and price inflation under control.
If H1B work as designed they will increase not decrease world 'unfairness' and you are force to appose them if you think fairness is a goal ,where as they are used at present they are just controlling wage inflation in such high tech areas as customer support rep (which as we all know requires at least a PHD.-- and customer support is so much better now that we can all see the benifits :) )
I look forward to your solution as to turn the entire world into america. Meanwhile event continue to turn America into the rest of the world. But if you are serious about raising world standard of living you need to
1. stop pooching talent
2.demand free and fair elections for all trading partners
3. up root corruption in the counties of origin and the world bank
4. share tecnology
5. Kill off rouge states
None of this will happen of course but number 1. may be a good start and may even lead, as I alluded to in my first post, to reform in the country of origin, but then the US and the people who run it will not infact be able to maintain there hegemony.
And that is how the world really works,and that is why we will have H1-b in the first place to increase not decrease our hegemony
Why do you believe that the government does not have the right and duty to control its boarders and decide who is and who is not a citizen? This is a called sovereignty,and all other governments have it. Only in the US do we apologize for being sovereign. People are not free to move anywhere they want now or at any time in the past-- try to emigrate abroad if you doubt me-- for that matter try Canada.
The H1b visa is itself an exception to the default rule of entry base on what-- Business likes it as it reduces wage pressure for critial skills -- you seem to like it because it is fair. This is not an economic argument, it is not a legal argument, and if you serious consider the impact of brain drain on the rest of the world it is not even a true statement. Indeed many now make the claim that without h1b high skill labor will stay in there own counties thus making the US less competitive. At least here they are telling the truth-- if we are importing only high skill labor it will infact increase the unfairness you claim it will mitigate and will have a beneficial impact on the US, But if is is fair then we must take all comers and the result will detrimental to the US but will by lowering US wages to match the world it will result in fairness.
It should be noted that many H1b visa are granted on the basis of artificial over credentialing ( ie a DBA does not need an MS) or in many cases dimploma mill certification. I work with many who have purchase degrees from Overseas universities always will to help export its surplus labor overseas to gain hard currency on the return trip. Again events will speak for me in time.
Migration to and from the US is primarily a national defense issue in any case. But those who support it do not general claim it is fair-- they claim that if will benefit the US more than it costs -- funny I do not hear that claim much anymore-- but if true you must conceed that the brain drain will have an impact on the country of origin and thus it will never be fair.
"#6 is the key question. It would take a long time. Most poor people don’t have the wherewithal to move to the United States, and they don’t have the skills and education to take most jobs here. We’re not talking about a jolt, but a long-term adjustment to where people’s skills and the jobs available to them line up better."
There are Billions of people in the world. Moving to the US is not an option no matter what. So they need to grow locally and organically, but we use H1-b and the "American dream to lure there best and brights ( as well as their duds no doubt) so how exaclty is this helping your long term goal of fairness and elevated world standard of living ?
"Why should you act against your interest and accept higher immigration rates, even if they could put you in competion with new workers? Because you believe in justice and fairness. If you think that it’s the government’s job to take from others and give to you, then you’re the socialist."
You have made my point for me. But infact you can be socialist without state coercion. As I said H1b should not exist at all. No special treatment of immigrants based on skill sets that would not be fair to the others left behind and would hurt not help the cause of improving world living standards. It does exist because it proponents ( ie those who unlike the libertarians actually make policy) think it is our national interest to pooch talent from abroad in an effort to increase our technical lead, while keeping wage and price inflation under control.
If H1B work as designed they will increase not decrease world 'unfairness' and you are force to appose them if you think fairness is a goal ,where as they are used at present they are just controlling wage inflation in such high tech areas as customer support rep (which as we all know requires at least a PHD.-- and customer support is so much better now that we can all see the benifits :) )
I look forward to your solution as to turn the entire world into america. Meanwhile event continue to turn America into the rest of the world. But if you are serious about raising world standard of living you need to
1. stop pooching talent
2.demand free and fair elections for all trading partners
3. up root corruption in the counties of origin and the world bank
4. share tecnology
5. Kill off rouge states
None of this will happen of course but number 1. may be a good start and may even lead, as I alluded to in my first post, to reform in the country of origin, but then the US and the people who run it will not infact be able to maintain there hegemony.
And that is how the world really works,and that is why we will have H1-b in the first place to increase not decrease our hegemony
5 months ago
in Will Stirs the High-Skilled Hornets Nest on The Technology Liberation Front
"Why should they be? Does our government exist to serve our interest, or the world’s interest?
Furthermore, the excessive concern about income inequality smacks of socialist sentiments, not capitalist ones. Any good libertarian knows that equality beyond legal equality and liberty are mutually exclusive."
Quite so.
Furthermore, the excessive concern about income inequality smacks of socialist sentiments, not capitalist ones. Any good libertarian knows that equality beyond legal equality and liberty are mutually exclusive."
Quite so.
5 months ago
in Will Stirs the High-Skilled Hornets Nest on The Technology Liberation Front
Correction
relatively UNconflicted
Liberian = libertarian
Sorry about that there may be others sorry about them as well :)
relatively UNconflicted
Liberian = libertarian
Sorry about that there may be others sorry about them as well :)
5 months ago
in Will Stirs the High-Skilled Hornets Nest on The Technology Liberation Front
Marc Grundfest is a case in point. He can not even perceive that free trade in labor might improve the circumstances of everyone in the aggregate. Why? Because it would erode a protectionist subsidy to a class he perceives himself to be a member of. And he wraps it up in one of the most brilliant ideological errors I’ve come across: opposing equality and fairness simply because it’s a fondness of the left. Wow.
I do not appose any such thing. I simply point out that if you are backing a policy because you think it is "fair " you are engaging in social engineering so admit it.
Meanwhile there are in fact 5-6 Billion people in the world and the median wage is something like $1000/yr. Even if you believe that free trade increases the average that average will be much lower that first world standard of living.
So ask these questions if you must go down this path.
1. how fast must world gdp grow just to keep up with population growth.
2. How fast must world gdp grow to sustain a median wage of 10k 0r 20k a year
3. Are such growth rates possible?
4. Will the 3rd world grow to reach 1st world standards or will the 1st world fall to meet in the lower middle.
5. Is any of this possible if the US were not providing Policing of the high seas?
6.How long will this take?
7. Is there enough recourses -- fuel steel etc to do any of this?
8. What will happen if the result of all this hypergrowth is really hyperinflation due to loose money.
I could go on but I expect that events will make the point for me. If you really believe that free trade will make all better of on average then at least consider what that average standard of living will be.
Then ask why it is rational for a person to give up his or her privileged position for the greater good if it does not benefit them. Tim implies that "no person is rational when it come to there self interest" but that is not the case it would be irrational to act against ones self interest unless one buys into socialism.
I am unsure what Tim Means by "liberal minded " If he means libertarian then he may have a point -- of course I am a Republican and relatively conflicted by the notion that the government should an must exist and that control of the boarders is a valid power thereof, so you will excuse me if I ask again-- why is it rational to act against my own interest for the perceived common good if I do not accept the socialist agenda?
This does not concede any of the questions raised above about the rates of growth needed to raise world wide living standards, nor the issues raised in my earlier post about the need to secure the high seas and prevent or contain the wars we all know are coming.
Lucky for me I am not a liberal or even it would seem a good libertarian -- in the age of terror I may be able to live with that. Thank you showing the errors of the Liberian path-- until you answer these questions at least.
I do not appose any such thing. I simply point out that if you are backing a policy because you think it is "fair " you are engaging in social engineering so admit it.
Meanwhile there are in fact 5-6 Billion people in the world and the median wage is something like $1000/yr. Even if you believe that free trade increases the average that average will be much lower that first world standard of living.
So ask these questions if you must go down this path.
1. how fast must world gdp grow just to keep up with population growth.
2. How fast must world gdp grow to sustain a median wage of 10k 0r 20k a year
3. Are such growth rates possible?
4. Will the 3rd world grow to reach 1st world standards or will the 1st world fall to meet in the lower middle.
5. Is any of this possible if the US were not providing Policing of the high seas?
6.How long will this take?
7. Is there enough recourses -- fuel steel etc to do any of this?
8. What will happen if the result of all this hypergrowth is really hyperinflation due to loose money.
I could go on but I expect that events will make the point for me. If you really believe that free trade will make all better of on average then at least consider what that average standard of living will be.
Then ask why it is rational for a person to give up his or her privileged position for the greater good if it does not benefit them. Tim implies that "no person is rational when it come to there self interest" but that is not the case it would be irrational to act against ones self interest unless one buys into socialism.
I am unsure what Tim Means by "liberal minded " If he means libertarian then he may have a point -- of course I am a Republican and relatively conflicted by the notion that the government should an must exist and that control of the boarders is a valid power thereof, so you will excuse me if I ask again-- why is it rational to act against my own interest for the perceived common good if I do not accept the socialist agenda?
This does not concede any of the questions raised above about the rates of growth needed to raise world wide living standards, nor the issues raised in my earlier post about the need to secure the high seas and prevent or contain the wars we all know are coming.
Lucky for me I am not a liberal or even it would seem a good libertarian -- in the age of terror I may be able to live with that. Thank you showing the errors of the Liberian path-- until you answer these questions at least.
5 months ago
in The Technology Liberation Front » Archive » Patent Sharks on The Technology Liberation Front
I look forward to reading this paper. Meanwhile I note that the US Constitution Article 1 section 8 limit the power of congress to grant such patent monopolies for limited times and to useful arts.
This suggests that the advance must be useful not just minor variations on a know theme, and the they must also be limited in time- that is no patent should outlast the useful life of the invention. Given the advance of technical progress it is likely the current patent period is effectively infinite,and thus eclipses the power of congress to grant.
Given that patents generally require the holder to take enforcement action they are useless to most small inventors, for whom such a patent fight would be pointless (note the case of STac electronics v Microsoft ) and thus patents are not even remotely associated with protecting inventors, but rather the Corporation, likely in exchange for campaign funds. In short no challenge to patents is likely to be successful if it relies on appeals to "promoting Science and the useful arts" as it is clear to me that modern patent law has no such purpose in mind, but it may be possible to accelerate the expiration of such patents to be more constant with the pace of change technology.
Other important questions include the issue of the scope of patents over an entire class of inventions -- such patents are rarely enforced but they make great fodder for greenmail. If we do not reform our patent system inventors will be forced to take refuge overseas.
This suggests that the advance must be useful not just minor variations on a know theme, and the they must also be limited in time- that is no patent should outlast the useful life of the invention. Given the advance of technical progress it is likely the current patent period is effectively infinite,and thus eclipses the power of congress to grant.
Given that patents generally require the holder to take enforcement action they are useless to most small inventors, for whom such a patent fight would be pointless (note the case of STac electronics v Microsoft ) and thus patents are not even remotely associated with protecting inventors, but rather the Corporation, likely in exchange for campaign funds. In short no challenge to patents is likely to be successful if it relies on appeals to "promoting Science and the useful arts" as it is clear to me that modern patent law has no such purpose in mind, but it may be possible to accelerate the expiration of such patents to be more constant with the pace of change technology.
Other important questions include the issue of the scope of patents over an entire class of inventions -- such patents are rarely enforced but they make great fodder for greenmail. If we do not reform our patent system inventors will be forced to take refuge overseas.
5 months ago
in Will Stirs the High-Skilled Hornets Nest on The Technology Liberation Front
"You aren’t entitled to a $300k house and two cars, especially if it’s coming out of the hide of people who are significantly worse-off than you are."
Good god man are we now just socialist, pretending that free trade is good because it achieves the social engineering that command and control could not. How about this: the labor we are importing is able to undercut our wages because there domestic economies are basket cases,and that therefore by importing there high skill labor to the US( at a discount due to lack of options) we are killing off whats left of their domestic economy and thus make those that remain even worse off ( OH and not even you and your egalitarian friends can believe that we can import 4-5 Billion people on H1-B.
SO even if we grant the notion that US national interest has no baring on the question of immigration ( we can discuss what that interest is an how H1-B quota advance or retard it )it is pure folly to suggest that the US, and it would seem only the US, has a moral duty to lower its standard of living to match the rest of the world.
Perhaps if there was no escape path to the US, more reform, both economic and political would be demanded in there home counties by the would be emigrants. This might actually elevate the world wide standard of living with out the zero sum game that is currently driving down US wages.
BTW you may want to investigate the role of fraud and corruption,as well as civil unrest in these countries-- do you think this might have something to do with the lack of advancement there.
Oh and one more little detail --the high cost of the US, as well as our declining infrastructure and disastrous education system, are the result of taxing ourselves to death to support an empire over which we have police responsibility but for which we earn little benefit other than cheap imports and downward pressure on wages.
The dollar is falling as a result of our trade deficit and soon we will have no choice but to stand down as police of the high seas, extract value from our territories, or defend the standard of living differential which in part supports that military largess. One day the Iran will try to block the Strait of
Hormuz -- who will prevent this -- The French :) no wait chindia :)
N
Good god man are we now just socialist, pretending that free trade is good because it achieves the social engineering that command and control could not. How about this: the labor we are importing is able to undercut our wages because there domestic economies are basket cases,and that therefore by importing there high skill labor to the US( at a discount due to lack of options) we are killing off whats left of their domestic economy and thus make those that remain even worse off ( OH and not even you and your egalitarian friends can believe that we can import 4-5 Billion people on H1-B.
SO even if we grant the notion that US national interest has no baring on the question of immigration ( we can discuss what that interest is an how H1-B quota advance or retard it )it is pure folly to suggest that the US, and it would seem only the US, has a moral duty to lower its standard of living to match the rest of the world.
Perhaps if there was no escape path to the US, more reform, both economic and political would be demanded in there home counties by the would be emigrants. This might actually elevate the world wide standard of living with out the zero sum game that is currently driving down US wages.
BTW you may want to investigate the role of fraud and corruption,as well as civil unrest in these countries-- do you think this might have something to do with the lack of advancement there.
Oh and one more little detail --the high cost of the US, as well as our declining infrastructure and disastrous education system, are the result of taxing ourselves to death to support an empire over which we have police responsibility but for which we earn little benefit other than cheap imports and downward pressure on wages.
The dollar is falling as a result of our trade deficit and soon we will have no choice but to stand down as police of the high seas, extract value from our territories, or defend the standard of living differential which in part supports that military largess. One day the Iran will try to block the Strait of
Hormuz -- who will prevent this -- The French :) no wait chindia :)
N