Also, working at a major state university in the US, I don't see that the international students are really very good, for the most part. They certainly are predominant (in a numbers sense) in fields like computer science, but they aren't very good overall. Perhaps due to being barely able to communicate in English.

Well that's just it - using the word "generally," the US does poorly. Gap or no, if a huge swath of your population can't compete, that reflects poorly on your country.

There's a gap in China as well but it's made up for by a massive population. Lord forbid they close their gap, that'll be the end of any other country's ability to compete as China and India just throw five hundred million engineers each at their technology sector.

Maybe I'm coming from an overly lucky position, but if so it's not the one you normally see called out for it: midsize town away from the coasts, public school education, middling state school university. The top 50% of the class has done perfectly competitively the last 15-20 years, even as skilled immigration has been high. Maybe we'd make even more otherwise, who knows.

The bottom 50% has gotten fucked by loss of jobs/industries/career paths/debt, but H1Bs aren't helping with that.

So if your contention is "we need to figure out how to better invest in the whole population" I agree, but I don't see the other half of the equation being an overly large limiting point.

If anything, if we're in the lead industry-wise, does importing young talent, teaching them these things, and making it easier for that experience to be taken elsewhere really help long-run? Almost sounds more like a case for paranoid isolationism immigration-wise.

We're never gonna have a billion people in the US in my lifetime, but I don't think that's necessary for there to be enough US self-driven industry to have a nice, happy, productive life.