Because it is the reason the US is a tech hub in the first place ?
No immigration means no concentration of talent, which means companies would just move to a country that allows that (e.g. Ireland) and they'll take their high-paying jobs with them.
I don't think you can plausibly claim that the US was a leader in technology until the 20th century, which is long after the US started having enormous amounts of immigration.
We're talking early boom? Like WW2 era? It was more industrial. If we are defining tech worker as a person that worked at a factory for technology, I am pretty sure there is a history of immigration there too.
I don't think we could cleanly say either way though, it would come down to nitpicking the definition of "tech worker". I have no real interest in that, and will grant you could look at it either way.
Comments
Because it is the reason the US is a tech hub in the first place ?
No immigration means no concentration of talent, which means companies would just move to a country that allows that (e.g. Ireland) and they'll take their high-paying jobs with them.
This implies the immigration came before the technology, which is not what happened.
I don't think you can plausibly claim that the US was a leader in technology until the 20th century, which is long after the US started having enormous amounts of immigration.
Silicon Valley industry grew big before major tech immigrant inflows. Also, you're assuming that US people can't do the jobs of visa people.
We're talking early boom? Like WW2 era? It was more industrial. If we are defining tech worker as a person that worked at a factory for technology, I am pretty sure there is a history of immigration there too.
I don't think we could cleanly say either way though, it would come down to nitpicking the definition of "tech worker". I have no real interest in that, and will grant you could look at it either way.