A good way to cut through competing accounts and noise to find "where do people want to live more?" is to look at net migration flows.

▲

Daishiman 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Migration flows are lagging indicators. Look at where researchers are moving, that's the leading indicator.

▲

EA-3167 4 hours ago | parent [-]

What makes researchers in general a leading indicator?

▲

Daishiman 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Countries that are on an upward research trajectory are likely to continue high-tech industrial progress.

▲

EA-3167 3 hours ago | parent [-]

That's a general observation/opinion, not evidence that it's a leading indicator of anything. There are far less indirect measures of "high-tech industrial progress" as well.

▲

Daishiman 3 hours ago | parent [-]

You think the fact that US researchers are leaving for China because the US does not value basic science anymore but China does is not evidence of anything?

	▲	EA-3167 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I think the US under the Trump administration is making a series of errors that do have consequences. I also believe that some researchers and academicians have sought positions in Chinese universities, although the numbers suggest a majority looked to Europe rather than Asia. Very few that I can find hard info on have emigrated however, much like it would be foolish of me to claim that 300K Chinese students in the US per year were migrating here to stay; we both know they're just visiting. I also have to say that in trying to find hard numbers for any of this I was struck by how little is available beyond early claims in late 2025, plans to "welcome" US scientists in various countries, and other projects that haven't been extensively reported on since. If you can find better hard data on the topic I'd welcome it.

▲

cyanydeez 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

So scientists are all leaving for europe and billionaires are all moving to texas and ... is this what you mean?

▲

EA-3167 4 hours ago | parent [-]

All of the scientists! Oh my.

No I didn't mean anything quite that fanciful, I'm referring to net migration between China and the US. Are more people leaving the US for China, or are more people leaving China for the US? It's a crude measurement, but it beats online doomerism.

▲

cyanydeez 4 hours ago | parent [-]

China is working to do this: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-03657-6

They are definitely getting immigrants: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_China

High quality scientists leaving UK and US: https://www.nationpress.com/sciencetech/10-scientists-quit-u...

You'll need to clarify what you value about the immigration arguement.

▲

EA-3167 4 hours ago | parent [-]

I've already been very clear, you simply seem unable or unwilling to read the word "net" in my posts. I appreciate that China is doing many exciting things and happily unlike many in both China and the US I don't see human progress as a zero sum game either. None of that changes what I said however, or the reality of net migration between China and the US.

	▲	cyanydeez 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		yes, ok, net, so what you care about is poor people coming to america; as oppose to smart people leaving it. That's what's confusing. Right, your pov is about body count as opposed to any other useful metric. You want to change it? Are you being racist or what. What exactly is the argument "a bunch of poor people want to come here, even when we're giant fascists, #winning" See, I don't know if you're actually making an argument from the absurd, but if you're trying to win the America is actually desireable, you might want to gauge what exactly is being desired.