How much does the UK need foreign scientists?

MissMoneypenny

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

The Tier One (general) rules don't mean you have to have a PhD. You can get it with a recent income of zero, and with no academic qualifications at all, so long as you make up the right number of points.

As a new applicant, you need to have 80 points. As a renewing-visa migrant, you need 75.

You get 30 points for a bachelor's degree, 35 for a master's, and 45 for a PhD. They are not cumulative, you claim the highest level you are entitled to.

You get 80 points for a very recent MBA from specific places, so you'd get there just with that.

You get points for income, too - for a new applicant, 5 points for earning £35k to £30k, 15 points for £30k to £35k, all the way up to 80 points for £150k or more.

You can get 5 points for a UK qualification, and 5 points for earning money in the UK before.

You get 20 points for being under 30, 10 for being 30 to 34, and 5 for being 35 to 40.

The applicant must have 10 points under paragraphs 1 to 2 of Appendix B - English language ability.

The applicant must have 10 points under paragraphs 1 to 3 of Appendix C - enough money to keep you going while you find a job.

That's why this goverment want to cap numbers and operate a Tier 1 pool like NZ have, instead of capping the number of Tier1 (General) visas on a first come, first serve, basis.

On the NZ 'pool' system, those who qualify for T1 (General) can pay to go in a pool for 6 months. Every 3 months, the goverment will cream off the top of the pool. There is a time limit of 6 months in the 'pool'.

vivatifosi

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

Tell that to Richard Branson and Bill Gates. Neither of them have a degree.

So why bring them into a conversation about the points awarded by the government for the holders of MBAs vs the holders of PhDs? Its a different issue.

MissMoneypenny

vivatifosi wrote: »

So why bring them into a conversation about the points awarded by the government for the holders of MBAs vs the holders of PhDs? Its a different issue.

Because you said

vivatifosi wrote: »

That's crazy. People with MBAs have the ability to earn money and run companies and make a difference now, people with science PhDs have the ability to shape the future.

Both Bill Gates and Richrd Branson run a business or two, without getting a degree and both are shaping the future. A degree doesn't guarantee that someone will be able to run a business or "shape the future". If it did, western governments wouldn't have caps on numbers.

Clearly this government seem to realise this too as they allow high earners without degrees, to have a Tier 1 General visa. In the case of the Investors and Entrepreneur visas, they are encouraging these people in and not putting a cap of their numbers. There is no requirement for them to have a degree.

vivatifosi

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

Because you said

But my point was that MBAs should not be worth more points than science based PhDs which is what I was responding to. It has nothing to do with entrepreneurs. FWIW I have an MBA from a good Uni, DH has a good PhD. He had to do three years of original research which has genuinely shaped the future, even though he didn't end up staying in science. For my MBA I did a research project for which I received a distinction, but while it may be of interest to people working in the same area as me, it will make little difference to the future of mankind and most of my fellow students did the same.

Branson is a natural entrepreneur, I suspect Gates is too, though he also had possibly one of the biggest ever right place, right time advantages. Any country would be right to bite the hand off anyone willing to bring such wealth and job-creating skills to a country. I've said before on this forum that more should be done to help natural young entrepreneurs and I feel the same way about gifted scientists as both add to the wealth of the country. The system is just too inflexible though to differentiate and I don't think they've quite got the model right yet.

misskool

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

MY son was at a top English university and was grabbed by the banking sector. They have asked him to go back to his uni on one of the business open days and grab some more. They want certain degrees from the universities they have identified that turn out the type of person they want.

And therefore the universities now need foreign scientists to teach the future of the generation. Tell your son to serve the country and no one will need to import any more scientists.

Except that he'll have got used to earning 100k+ a year and doesn't understand how academics work 60+ hours a week on a third of that.

What is your problem? You complain when scientists are imported in to universities yet in the same thread boast about how other sectors poach the best and brightest away from academia?

MissMoneypenny

misskool wrote: »

And therefore the universities now need foreign scientists to teach the future of the generation. Tell your son to serve the country and no one will need to import any more scientists.

Except that he'll have got used to earning 100k+ a year and doesn't understand how academics work 60+ hours a week on a third of that.

My son is serving his country by paying lots of taxes and buying things that helps other firms employ staff, and so on. He often works 60 hour weeks and never has a dinner break. He gets 4 weeks holiday a year. He could work in New York or Hong Kong and earn more there and was even offered a permanent job in Australia, but he chose to pay his taxes to his country.

My daughter has a physcis degree and I have a maths degree and we have all serve our county by paying high rate taxes. Private firms money are the lifeblood of UK ltd.

As you brought the up the subject of 'serving ones own country': why don't foreign scientists want to serve their own country?

MissMoneypenny

misskool wrote: »

What is your problem? You complain yet in the same thread boast about how other sectors poach the best and brightest away from academia?

Where have I complained "when scientists are imported in to universities"? I sincerely hope your job doesn't involve any sort of research: you only had to read 3 pages on this thread and you still got it wrong!

misskool

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

My son serves his country by paying lots of taxes and buying things that helps other firms employ staff, and so on. My daughter has a physcis degree and I have a maths degree and we have all serve our county by paying high rate taxes. Private firms money are the lifeblood of UK ltd.

Why don't foreign scientists want to serve their own country?

They do. Scientists regularly move countries depending on where the research money is and what sort of areas are good for them. When the Americans banned stem cell research, the UK had a large influx from those interested in doing that. There are different research centres of excellence based on what they are interested in studying in.

Now with the looming comprehensive spending review and the tightening of immigration laws, many of them are leaving to other countries that value them.

The point which I don't appear to have made very well is that scientific knowledge should be freely shared around the world. Of course some restrictions apply but it should not be made impossible, which the government is trying to impose.

I'm just suggesting that perhaps academics and those related to academia would be afforded a different category instead of being lumped in with the others.
edit to add: Remembered reading something yesterday http://blog.sciencecampaign.org.uk/?p=2287
A group of Nobel prize winners (from the UK!) "These benefits are jeopardised by the Government’s plan to cap migration to the UK. It would damage our ability to recruit the brightest young talent, as well as distinguished scientists, into our universities and industries. International collaborations underlie 40 per cent of the UK’s scientific output, but would become far more difficult if we were to constrict our borders. The UK produces nearly 10 per cent of the world’s scientific output with only 1 per cent of its population; we punch above our weight because we can engage with excellence wherever it occurs."

However, you seem intent on refusing entry those who are educating the next generation of high rate taxpayers. Can I also point out that foreign scientists who work here also pay tax? They may not pay as much tax as they don't earn so much but they are also serving the country in more ways than one.

Please pick on some other profession, like maybe footballers who have been made exempt from taking English tests when entering the country, as they clearly contribute more to the country that scientists

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/footballers-win-exemption-from-english-tests-1419361.html

MissMoneypenny

misskool wrote: »

They do. Scientists regularly move countries depending on where the research money is and what sort of areas are good for them.

So not really serving your own country then: more a case of doing what suits you. Why did you state that others should serve their own country, if you don't serve yours?

The point you seem to be missing is that a lot of western countries have caps, including America that you keep on mentioning. Why are you so upset about the UK bringing in these caps too?

I work with quite a few people on visas, who have worked in other countries with immigration caps. They all say that caps won't make any difference to the immigrants that a country needs.

lostinrates

misskool wrote: »

And therefore the universities now need foreign scientists to teach the future of the generation. Tell your son to serve the country and no one will need to import any more scientists.

Except that he'll have got used to earning 100k+ a year and doesn't understand how academics work 60+ hours a week on a third of that.

What is your problem? You complain when scientists are imported in to universities yet in the same thread boast about how other sectors poach the best and brightest away from academia?

Misskool, I know from our own friends and family not all academics currently work as hard as you. At the top of their (international) game some academics do earn £100k plus..like my f-i-l but not necessarily from just their university incomes.

while I nod with the rest not acknowledging that there are incomes for truly go-getting talent, as in other careers, and there are people who coast..the discussion is unbalanced.

eta: miss moneypenny and misskool both make passionate and interesting arguments parts of both I nodded too. Thanks to both.