« Rapid Vaccinations Can Help Avoid the `Third Wave’ in Ontario | Main | If you wanna run hot you gotta run steady »


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

“there is compelling evidence that jobless workers’ odds of getting back to work drops precipitously after 5-6 months”
It would not be surprising to see the odds being rather different this time, when long-term unemployment has mostly resulted from government-mandated shutdowns.

As Ken Schulz observes, this time is supposed to be different. Isn't Larry Summers weighing in with the suggestion that our problem will soon be "overheating"? That said, I apparently work in the midst of an entire staff of people who ought to have scored CRS 75. They're excellent workers, highly motivated, and very responsible. (In contrast, the kids working on part-time student visas are probably shoe-ins to hit much higher scores, and they're goofballs who remind me of me at their age.)

The only reason My sub-75 common-clay-of-the-new-west fellow employees are not making a middle class income is that my employer was able to get away with a two-tier contract in 1998. How that came to happen, and its consequences over time, seems like to have a much stronger bearing on immigrant earnings in the modern Canadian economy than these test scores if my experience is any indication.

Thanks for your comment Erik. The CRS points ("test scores" as you call them) are undoubtedly predictive of earnings. Certainly not perfectly predictive, but predictive in a similar way to how the educational attainment of Canadian-born workers is predictive of their future earnings.

Hi, Mikal. I'm not arguing that low CRS points don't correlate with earnings. I'm pointing out that they correlate with low earnings because most of the people my employer has hired in the last two decades have low CRS scores, and those hired since approximately 2010 aren't qualified to jump up to the top tier in a two-tier wage structure. You can't make a claim to a correlation between earning potential and CRS score because earning potential has been determined by collective bargaining. Those who were able to leverage periods of low unemployment are doing well. Those who didn't time their Canadian labour force entry correctly, aren't.

We know what the solution is: Full employment (and a tolerance for high inflation to accommodate it). We're basically faffing around the problem to avoid that solution.

A recent Financial Times articles mused about reinforcing the pandemic "bubble" industries. Healthcare will be needed. I.T. content would suggest India. There are questions about domestic vaccine manufacturing. Our best "applied engineering" epidemiology minds early tended to liase with other nations, improving testing and medical counter-measures. If we want our own vaccines, our own manufacturing base, and our own open-ended ability to ship to whomever, we will need loyal immigrants. I suggest instead, we focus upon our own domestically sourced non-vaccine pandemic medical solutions (antibodies). mRNA is important for medical cures, but it is maybe a case-by-case risk-reward of when we should look for elite immigrating engineers. Materials science is an alternative that I.T. immigrants can delve into in that our MI complex is weaker than that of most. I suppose if we can can the risk of medical blueprints being invented which shouldn't be, we should look for cure immigrants. If we can't can the risk, we look for materials science I.T. immigrants and defeat even robot rioters.

...a median biomedical researcher makes $68k and soon $90k before Covid. A medical engineer (can eventually make implants) starts off at $51k, and is $7k less than $68k after 7 yrs, about the same as a user experience IT researcher. A materials science engineer makes $68k. I think the mRNA research (to cure diseases) might be safe enough for now under a DARPA or Manhattan Crown. What would one Covid be worth? Less than a lung cancer cure. Maybe an AIDS cure assuming treatments don't improve. At some point, synthetic biology techniques will diffuse and better screening will be needed. The mat-sci may give us dental improvements, or an unhackable metamaterials camera (all optical). The biomedic will cure lung cancer and might double the odds of the Interstellar crop blight. The user exp graduate will give us a better monitor.
FT yesterday said there are two sources of new knowledge: Managers who do the jobs of others sometimes and become multi-disciplinary, and it erred in assuming specialized engineers don't often create new tools. medical engineering suggests very multi-disciplinary. The ability to learn new fields is one group of people, and the willingness to specialize is another. We can maximize their salaries if we determine which learning is mRNA, and what kind of engineering we want (Covid/medicine raises some future salaries and externalities subtract from their earnings).

Clean credit history.

Nasty isn't it?

The comments to this entry are closed.

Search this site

  • Google

Blog powered by Typepad