Ferraris, Bugattis, and Lamborghinis have descended upon the streets of London this past summer, according to John Burn's article "Super Cars Inspire Mixed Feelings in London.”
These cars, some of which cost upwards of one million dollars, are the playthings of wealthy Arab oil tycoons who flee the desert heat for the English summer, according to the article. Between descriptions of the after-midnight street-racing and extravagant cost of the cars, Burns notes that Arab visitors to Britain have increased after 9/11 because many Arabs perceive London as more tolerant than New York or other U.S. cities.
Given the ridiculous debate over the construction of an Islamic center two blocks from Ground Zero, it would seem as if that perception is correct. While alienating a few oil sheiks may not seem like a big deal, it shows the deterioration of the complicated economic relationship many foreigners have with the U.S.
The loss of shopping and tourism dollars is from only partial involvement by foreigners in the U.S. economy. The education and employment of foreign nationals are much more important to the present and future of the U.S. economy, yet are just as threatened as tourism spending. Foreign nationals, defined as citizens of another country living in the U.S., are attracted to study or work here because of the vast resources of our schools and entrepreneurial-spirited market.
The National Science Foundation reports that nearly 50 percent of all doctorates in engineering, economics, mathematics, computer science and physics are granted to foreign nationals. In business, many have been successful: one-quarter of engineering and technology companies with sales totaling $52 billion have been started by at least one foreign-born founder in the decade from 1995 to 2005, according to a 2005 Duke University study.
Foreign nationals are a key group to develop intellectual property as well: one-fourth of international patent applications are filed by foreign nationals in the U.S., which does not take into account immigrants who became citizens before filing their applications.
That all may be changing. A 2009 study by the Kauffman Foundation surveyed Indian, Chinese and European graduate students in American universities and found a mere 6 percent of Indian, 10 percent of Chinese and 15 percent of the European foreign nationals indicated a desire to stay permanently in the U.S. post-graduation.
The first reason cited for these foreign nationals not wanting to stay in the U.S. was their desire to be back with friends and family. This motivation is completely understandable but difficult to change. The second most frequent motivation to move back home, was the perception that the home countries would be better environments for business development, which is most likely true if you look strictly at growth rates. Simply put, the developed U.S. economy cannot grow at the same rate as the developing Chinese and Indian economies.
This does not mean the U.S. government is powerless or that the economy is weaker than others. What is means is that the Chinese and Indian economies will soon be peers of the U.S. economy. In the few decades of true globalization, the U.S. has shed many manufacturing jobs, relying on service- and technical-based jobs to bolter the economy. If steps are not taken now, even these jobs may be lost to workers abroad. The government needs to ease the visa and permanent residency approval process in preparation for that time to safeguard the technical brain trust. Maybe if we gave graduating doctoral students a Ferrari as incentive to stay in the U.S., we could solve all of our problems.
Send Dan comments at djgarry@asu.edu
