This removes the workers from their local economy, drains the value they have to offer and plops them back where they came from with a meager wage to show for it.
Creating local jobs in an economy - even outsourced jobs - has a wide variety of ancillary benefits that this will lack.
As an immigrant to the USA (now citizen) I've had plenty of experience on a B-1 visa and I can assure you that life with a B-1 visa and an immigration official between you and the nearest terra firma will be miserable.
This removes the workers from their local economy, drains the value they have to offer and plops them back where they came from with a meager wage to show for it.
Allowing people to immigrate to the US has the same effect.
That doesn't strike me as a very credible statement. A significant proportion of FDI in emerging markets comes from migrants either returning home or investing through personal social networks.
This would be more or less exactly the same with migrants living and working on a ship.
The only point I'm making is that I can't see a substantive difference (for people in the home country) between migration to SanFran and migration to the USS SanFran.
Well, consider someone who immigrates and subsequently has a family. One doubts this ship would have appropriate medical, daycare, or school facilities. Sure, most startup minded are likely single and focused on business, but non work considerations are important to many people. Under current immigration law, family members of green card holders and naturalized US citizens get preference in visa allocations; whatever you think of this as policy, it's certainly a significant benefit for some people in the country of origin which wouldn't be available with the sea borne approach. Likewise potential business or investment partners in a non-US country would probably prefer to deal with someone who has a secure foothold in the US capital or retail market. Speaking as someone who has lived in several different countries, the difference between being a tourist and being properly plugged into the local and legal infrastructure you are working with is huge.
>This removes the workers from their local economy, drains the value they have to offer and plops them back where they came from with a meager wage to show for it.
This voluntary arrangement plops them back into their community... with new found wages to spend that otherwise would not have been acquired in such quantity, and/or at such a high relative cost to the laborer (availability, desirability of the work).
Comments
This removes the workers from their local economy, drains the value they have to offer and plops them back where they came from with a meager wage to show for it.
Creating local jobs in an economy - even outsourced jobs - has a wide variety of ancillary benefits that this will lack.
As an immigrant to the USA (now citizen) I've had plenty of experience on a B-1 visa and I can assure you that life with a B-1 visa and an immigration official between you and the nearest terra firma will be miserable.
This removes the workers from their local economy, drains the value they have to offer and plops them back where they came from with a meager wage to show for it.
Allowing people to immigrate to the US has the same effect.
That doesn't strike me as a very credible statement. A significant proportion of FDI in emerging markets comes from migrants either returning home or investing through personal social networks.
This would be more or less exactly the same with migrants living and working on a ship.
The only point I'm making is that I can't see a substantive difference (for people in the home country) between migration to SanFran and migration to the USS SanFran.
Well, consider someone who immigrates and subsequently has a family. One doubts this ship would have appropriate medical, daycare, or school facilities. Sure, most startup minded are likely single and focused on business, but non work considerations are important to many people. Under current immigration law, family members of green card holders and naturalized US citizens get preference in visa allocations; whatever you think of this as policy, it's certainly a significant benefit for some people in the country of origin which wouldn't be available with the sea borne approach. Likewise potential business or investment partners in a non-US country would probably prefer to deal with someone who has a secure foothold in the US capital or retail market. Speaking as someone who has lived in several different countries, the difference between being a tourist and being properly plugged into the local and legal infrastructure you are working with is huge.
>This removes the workers from their local economy, drains the value they have to offer and plops them back where they came from with a meager wage to show for it.
This voluntary arrangement plops them back into their community... with new found wages to spend that otherwise would not have been acquired in such quantity, and/or at such a high relative cost to the laborer (availability, desirability of the work).