[qurren]

> your motivation is not altruistic to the host country in that case, it’s selfish

There is nothing wrong with that. I'm selfish, you're selfish, the government is selfish, everyone in the host country is selfish. It's human nature. We all want good lives. That's the reason a transactional economy exists. It's good for the country's GDP and overall economy to welcome outside talent, and that outside talent enjoys being rewarded for their contributions, and over time, their new place of residence becomes a part of their cultural identity. That's how things usually work.

Not everyone is a saint.

> If it was altruistic you would emigrate because you believe in the country you are emigrating to even if it meant your life was worse.

Reality check: 99% of people would take a better life over a worse life. And there's nothing wrong with that. The entire world is built with this as a base assumption.

Also, reality check: Life in the US kinda sucks unless you have a well-paying skilled job or a lot of money. In either case you'll be contributing to the economy.

[kcplate]

I made no claim that selfishness is wrong or altruism is right. Nor did i make any claims as to what life is like in the US—so I don't need any “reality checks” about what your personal beliefs are about life in the US at specific income levels, it’s not relative here. Being poor in the US probably sucks compared to being rich in the US. I am also sure that you can say that about literally every country on this planet.

My comment was about why this was not a “it’s both” type of situation. So just own your motivation for what it is—you emigrate so you can get a better life in a new country than you can get in your old country. That’s honorable enough.

[thrownthatway]

Fine. No one’s likely to argue you’re wrong.

And it seems you agree: people don’t move to a new place to contribute their skills.

They move because of the potential upsides for themselves.