The value and commensurate compensation of talent depends on location. Proximity to colleagues, decision makers, and capital.

Somebody has to sacrifice to be the first to start something like that in their own country.

In America we built companies art and music out of our garages just for the love of it... not because "that's where the compensation was."

You guys move around for opportunity all the time.

Some not most

I think you meant all. All moves when disaster comes.

Meanwhile where there is food there is no need to move.

some people are farmers

Farmers move too when disaster comes. You are out of job, out of food, you move.

Meanwhile where there is food there is no need to move.

What are you talking about? Is this fact or romance? The country certainly did not become what it is through love of sacrifice.

It makes sense for big fish to seek big ponds

India and China arent big ponds?

Many pockets of the pond are not yet deep, making it unsuitable for many species.

They are. When a doctor immigrates from Nigeria to the US, then that's broadly speaking good for the US and bad for Nigeria.

is it though...

Both countries have a shortage of doctors, so yes.

That's not how it works. It depends on whether (how much) they are paid and if so what do they buy with that payment. Are they settled in US buying pizzas and Netflix?

Because if not, then investments to Nigeria past $x will grant it the upperhand since all that money can get you another doctor and more.

5 years is truly a big kill. looks like its a reaction to 99% of them refusing to send money back home and invest in Nigeria, preferring to buy-US and -Europe.

Not sure if you are deliberately misunderstanding at this point, but the problem is obviously not where the doctors spend their money, but the fact that they are not practicing medicine in Nigeria – as Nigeria might reasonably have hoped them to do once they completed their training.

? The problem is obviously whether (how much) the doctors are paid and where they spend that money.

You cannot expect an article to tell you these things.

Whether they work in Nigeria or not is not the issue. The issue is that they are doing it without compensating the country. Worse, they clearly don't intend to come back again (so you don't Ever get compensated at all, not just suffering time value of money) otherwise there's no need for a 5 year penalty. which is relatively huge compared to what the other countries are doing.

I guess sending money back home is not big in Nigeria culturally like it is in Mexico? Welp, I can't enforce you to send money back but guess what, I can enforce you to not leave at all.

>Whether they work in Nigeria or not is not the issue.

It absolutely is the issue, because Nigeria has a shortage of doctors. It has nothing to do with whether or not Nigerian doctors send money back home. If they send lots of money back home, they still aren't in Nigeria practicing medicine, which is what Nigeria actually wants.

If this was about money then there'd be no reason to make a law specific to doctors, as many other Nigerians emigrate for better economic prospects elsewhere.

whatafool, do apply common sense sometimes. Nigeria has a shortage of Everything. But it needs money more than it needs anything else.

> which is what Nigeria actually wants

Declared by who? And that politically correct statement is believed by who? (other than you)

> no reason

??? Doctor training is one of the Top heavily subsidized by the state. (As with weapons. but no one is chanting "Weapons Weapons Weapons" but "Doctors Doctors Doctors" because PC, as zelensky the clown has found out the hard way even for a christian country.) Sure, it's expensive to subsidize the capital for a literature major to sit in a beautiful airconditioned classroom with a courtyard.. at least until you find out the annual mortgage of a PBT facility.

Tldr use common sense. If every doctor I export out of the country gets me 4.48b cf js.do/code/740428 (prepaid btw, for the correct interest rate to charge does not make any sense considering the country may not be around for another 99y), then I only need to export 100 per year [out of 220M] to twice my gdp; heck you'd do it all day long every single day.

When they leave their country it's called Brain Drain.

Because their country doesn't offer the same opportunities to achieve the things they believe they can in their new country. It's the main reason people emigrate. No one's going to build Nvidia in India or China, for instance, at least not back in the time that it was created in America.

America didn't used to be the country that offered those opportunities.

Yet people built it and made it that way.

Nothing is static people csn change anything

These people need to do that in their own countries.

The people that built it and made it that way in America were all immigrants.

I didn't know Bell labs employees Steve Jobs and Bill Gates were all immigrants

Steve Jobs' father and grandparents were Syrian.

> didn't used to be

That's false. By definition none would have come if there wasn't opportunity. You don't need to be a geography student to see that it wasn't just irreligious opportunity.

do you think opportunity just magically springs up in places or do you think people make it?

People who are looking for opportunity see a place where they could make it.

Both

As stated, the geography of north America provides the opportunity, before there were Americans.

Gold rush and stuff is just a bonus, the big money is in cattle and agriculture.

Kind of ironic, considering the whole original population of America (the whole continent) was mostly replaced by immigrants, starting some time after 1492 AD.

well in that context they were conquerors

Colonizers rather than conquerors. Colonizers are effectively migrants, by the very definition of the word.

The British India Company colonisation of India was institutional colonisation.

The company remained for many generations but most (not all) individual British people stationed themselves in India and retired 'home' to England where to whence the money flowed.

Many European countries regarded their "colonies" as places to exploit for resources, places to be travelled to for work for many years, places they didn't regard as 'home'.

There's more to "colonisation" than just simple migration.

Even in Australia the early colonisation was by settler families that were part of larger stay at home families, the black sheep, wayward sons, and fortune seeking adventurers .. in Australia convicts and servant families remained, ultimately a good proportion of the underwritten (from home) settlers stayed .. but initially at least many heads of these families "returned home" to England.

In a similar manner modern USofA has many institutional "colonies" around the globe, bases they've established and never left, these rarely have permanently settled multi generational families.

and those countries that were colonized by Western Civilization countries are very lucky.

they are typically the top performing GDP countries of their region with some of the best quality of life for their citizens

Oh yes. Get the list of countries colonized by the awesome Western Civilization. You will be surprised to learn the world is a lot larger than US and Canada.

Just look at African or South American countries by GDP and see which ones are at the top of the list

You are aware that all South and Central American countries were colonized by Western Powers right?

Obviously he has no clue, and thinks all the (largely southern-)European-looking Spanish and Portuguese-speaking people there somehow descended from Aztecs and Incas.

But they are. Yet men being men will go where they think the money/food is.