> Any immigration policy short of opening the borders completely is "protectionist".
How so? The idea of comparative advantage is that one country has a market, another, the means to provide for that market and you facilitate this 'trade'. India, China, pretty much most countries have plenty of top notch talent that cannot be satiated by opportunities within their own countries. These are not necessarily geniuses, but most high-performing highly skilled workers qualify. The satisfaction that these highly talented folks seek is often provided only in the US. For a moment, set aside the notion that people want to work in the US for greenbacks. This is only partially true, in my experience. Most friends and colleagues I know want to immigrate because their jobs are higher quality, as is the work culture, etc.
US provides the (job) market for top talent, China, India, Europe, etc. supply the talent.
Protectionism in this situation is just the act of putting ill-conceived roadblocks in this 'trade'. No one is asking for open borders, just a fair system where this 'trade' can be carried on smoothly.
Non-protectionist would be free traffic across borders like within the EU. Any immigration policy is a form of protectionism.
BTW, I find your naive notion of the US as the promised land rather unsettling. Personally, I don't know anybody who would want to immigrate to the US, and especially not for the archaic, exploitative work culture.
Yes, this is matter of perspective. But you seem to be lacking any other perspective than US good, everywhere else bad. Which is probably one of the reasons why it's so easy to exploit immigrant knowledge workers in the US.
How so? The idea of comparative advantage is that one country has a market, another, the means to provide for that market and you facilitate this 'trade'. India, China, pretty much most countries have plenty of top notch talent that cannot be satiated by opportunities within their own countries. These are not necessarily geniuses, but most high-performing highly skilled workers qualify. The satisfaction that these highly talented folks seek is often provided only in the US. For a moment, set aside the notion that people want to work in the US for greenbacks. This is only partially true, in my experience. Most friends and colleagues I know want to immigrate because their jobs are higher quality, as is the work culture, etc.
US provides the (job) market for top talent, China, India, Europe, etc. supply the talent.
Protectionism in this situation is just the act of putting ill-conceived roadblocks in this 'trade'. No one is asking for open borders, just a fair system where this 'trade' can be carried on smoothly.