How and Why Government, Universities, and Industry Create Domestic Labor Shortages of Scientists and High-Tech Workers (Content): Difference between revisions

==Summary of Sections==

Weinstein opens by challenging the notion that long-term labor shortages, particularly in high-tech fields like science and engineering, occur naturally. He argues that these shortages are artificially created by government, universities, and industry through wage manipulation and immigration policy. The key assertion is that by avoiding wage increases, employers lobby for immigration and government funding, leading to an oversupply of foreign workers, which depresses wages for domestic scientists and engineers.

This section discusses how, since the 1990s, the market for PhD-level scientists and engineers has been oversaturated, particularly with foreign labor. The influx of foreign students and postdocs, especially those on temporary visas, is identified as a primary factor. As foreign PhDs became the majority in many technical fields, domestic wages were suppressed, and the employment prospects for U.S. scientists and engineers diminished.

Weinstein discusses how the Immigration Act of 1990 was passed in response to warnings from the National Science Foundation (NSF) about an impending shortage of scientists and engineers. This led to a significant increase in the number of visas available for skilled workers, particularly from East Asia. However, instead of addressing any actual shortage, this influx worsened the job market for U.S. workers by suppressing wages and increasing competition.

This section critiques the methodology used by the NSF to predict a shortage of scientists and engineers. Weinstein explains that the projections focused solely on the supply side—ignoring demand—which led to erroneous conclusions. This supply-side analysis was seen as unorthodox by most economists and was heavily criticized as a form of “voodoo economics.” The section describes how these projections failed to account for market adjustments, such as rising wages, that would naturally occur in a free market.

* '''The Analysts Respond:''' Economists and labor market analysts pushed back against the NSF's projections, stating that the market would correct itself through wage adjustments, not through government intervention or increased immigration.

Weinstein delves into the lesser-known internal NSF study that projected rising salaries for PhD-level scientists as the "pessimistic scenario." This internal analysis showed that wages would naturally increase in response to a tightening labor market, but these findings were suppressed because they threatened the political agenda of maintaining low wages through the influx of foreign labor.

This section highlights how the government, universities, and industry worked together to manipulate the labor market for their benefit. Weinstein discusses the formation of the "Government-University-Industry Roundtable" (GUIR), which brought these stakeholders together to control labor costs and influence policy. Instead of allowing wage competition, these groups collaborated to depress wages by expanding immigration and securing government funding for technical training.

Weinstein explores several irregularities in the labor market manipulation, including the suppression of critical analysis within the NSF. He provides examples of how internal divisions within the NSF, such as the Statistics Division (SRS), were marginalized when their findings contradicted the shortage narrative. He also discusses how Congress was misled by the NSF’s inflated shortage projections.

The paper concludes by emphasizing that the real victims of these policies are the domestic scientists, engineers, and knowledge workers who have been left out of the decision-making process. Despite being the backbone of the U.S. innovation economy, these workers have seen wages stagnate and job security erode due to the manipulation of the labor market by the government, universities, and industry. Weinstein calls for a reassessment of these policies and for the needs of domestic workers to be prioritized over the interests of large employers.

Throughout the paper, Weinstein includes several ''Wage Boxes'' and ''Predictions Boxes'' that provide additional commentary and quotes from key figures in academia, industry, and government. These boxes highlight the prevailing views on wage suppression and labor market manipulation, as well as predictions from economists and demographers about the future of the labor market for scientists and engineers.