• @Rapidcreek@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    05 months ago

    All true, but who is going to force change in those countries? Of course nurses are needed in the US, but are they not needed in those countries too? And when they are needed and not there, will we send some?

    • @PugJesus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      35 months ago

      All true, but who is going to force change in those countries?

      Material conditions. Like the continued issue of emigration of skilled workers. That’s… that’s what the quote is getting at.

      Of course nurses are needed in the US, but are they not needed in those countries too?

      … yes. That’s why the emigration causing investment in the country of origin to create a supply in the local labor market is counted as a positive in this analysis.

        • @PugJesus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          35 months ago

          So, you’re really not talking about permanent immigration, you’re talking about training.

          … no, that’s literally the opposite of what was said. The country of ORIGIN is driven to invest in their education system by this, not the country of DESTINATION.

          • @Rapidcreek@lemmy.worldOP
            link
            fedilink
            -15 months ago

            Countries with impoverished populations are likely to invest money on education. USAiD can help them do that.

            • @PugJesus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              25 months ago

              You’re really not getting it. Sending aid, even with strings attached as to what it’s used for, is not even close to the same as an internal decision by the national government of the country of origin to change their investment priorities.