Argument: Home countries will always benefit from sending their students abroad
(Difference between revisions)
|Revision as of 06:59, 21 December 2007 (edit)
Brooks Lindsay (Talk | contribs)
← Previous diff
|Current revision (08:55, 30 June 2010) (edit)
Lenkahabetinova (Talk | contribs)
|Line 1:||Line 1:|
|==Parent debate==||==Parent debate==|
|-||*[[Debate:Governments and universities everywhere should compete to attract qualified students regardless of nationality or residence]]||+||*[[Debate archive: Governments and universities everywhere should compete to attract qualified students regardless of nationality or residence]]|
|==Supporting quotes from the Economist Debate Series==||==Supporting quotes from the Economist Debate Series==|
- Debate archive: Governments and universities everywhere should compete to attract qualified students regardless of nationality or residence
Supporting quotes from the Economist Debate Series
- mahmuda ruby, commenter. Economist Online Debate Series. December 16, 2007 16:50 - "A qualified student in the future can contribute to the development of U.S.A. as well as to their own country and also in world development. On the other hand, all qualified students from poorer countries do not come or stay in USA. Some students naturally stay in their own countries. So, ultimately it do not damage the chances for development of poorer country. Poorer countries have a lot more major problems than this."
- milci, commenter. Economist Debate Series, Education 2. December 14th, 2007 - "Nothing better can happen to the host and to the mother country of a student who goes to study to a foreign country. He will be an ambassador of his country while studying. If he goes home he will take his new experiences - good or bad - home and thus enrich his society. If he stays on to work in the host country he will enrich that countries society with his knowledge of his home country."
- feerdaus, commenter. Economist Online Debate Series. December 11, 2007 06:41 - "For small countries such as Singapore, the ageing of its population and insufficent local talent has forced the authorities to 'import' talented students from around the world. Although the effects of draining talent from poorer countries can be negative, it is important to take note that the experience gained overseas can help the country the student came from in many ways."
- arsalan akmal, commenter. The Economist Online Debate Series. December 11, 2007 22:45 - "I am in favor of students to cross their borders for the sake of gaining knowledge. It not only opens up the thinking ability but one can do wonders for the society when they return back from foreign countries."
- Art Teacher, commenter. The Economist Online Debate Series. December 20, 2007 13:56 - "I want to refute the validity of this brain-drain. I can't deny its existance because I have no statistics on hand that would prove anything. But, just in principle, it seems strange to me that anyone who left his country for an education, and then moved to the US or the UK, would really sever their ties to their home country and family. I've heard it happen, here in Slovakia. And yet, when my wife moved to the states for her job, we ended up coming back to Slovakia 4 years later. So, in my case, my marriage to a foreigner has resulted in the both of us traveling back and forth repeated, getting a broader perspective of the world. On top of this, there's money to be made in the developing world, as with anywhere else. So long as there's a profitable idea out there, green or otherwise, someone will capitalize on it - foreign capitalists ought to be able to pick up the slack of any 'brain drain'.
- I don't have any statistics, but I can reply to this statement: 'Notable examples are developing nations such as India and China where this phenomenon has caused a considerable number of brilliant students'"
- These two countries have had the fastest growing economies on Earth for the last decade or so. 'Nuff said?"