> There are only a few players in private space which print rocket engines, and our very own SpaceX was one of the first to pioneer this
The US isn't the only country with a large private space sector. China and India have both been heavily investing in it since the mid-2010s, because a dynamic space sector also means having an indigenous capability to deploy spy-satellites and ballistic missiles.
There's a reason why Maxar, SpaceX, etc all get outsized DoD funding.
India's space sector is also getting a massive cash infusion from the UAE [0] and KSA [1], as they both begin their process of building domestic space capabilities due to worries of Iran.
"The 6.2-meter-tall vehicle is made of carbon composite, which gives it a liftoff mass of 1,268 lb; at its heart is the 3D-printed semi-cryogenic engine that Agnikul manufactured in-house, each of which provides 6.2 kN of thrust."
This is like they clubbed together processes which Russia seems to use for manufacturing of some of its Novator cruise missiles. That technology must have transferred over somehow and they are just adapting it for space. It's great they adapted a military technology for something else (though I expect it will stay military), but it's nothing novel.
> That technology must have transferred over somehow
Nope. Russia and Israel attempted that for India in the 1990s but were threatened by US sanctions for breaking MCTR.
Idk why you're so surprised that these kinds of domestic capabilities exist in India now.
India is fairly poor, but R&D capabilities have been strong, and there is an actual reverse brain drain going on from the US now that GC backlogs are multi-decade in length.
> it's nothing novel
It's a significant incremental development, as it drastically reduces the upfront cost for ballistic missiles or sub-orbital launches (eg. satellites), because you can manufacture much more faster. Plus, it is actually indigenous, which is a significant change.
Where do those laid off Indian H1B and EB1/2 move?
The reverse drain has started already for several years now (around 2021-22). Indians will still come to the US, do a BS masters, and then work in an American company for a couple years, but they inevitably face a 134 year backlog for naturalization.
You can either live in the US as an indentured servant for a company, and end up getting kicked out if you get laid off and can't find another employer. Or you can upskill as much as you can in the US, and then leave once you have a strong enough professional network.
Canada is much more immigration-friendly than the US. It also has a program to green-light and fast-track immigration for all H1B holders in the US, though for calendar year 2024 the cap of 10k visas has already been reached. But my understanding is that there's a pretty significant population of skilled workers that were planning on settling in the US permanently (or semi-permanently), and have instead relocated to Canada because of immigration difficulties related to the greencard backlog.
Europe is also an option, though it's not as pro-immigration as Canada (and has lower salaries as well).
1. Europe is a big region, Switzerland, Norway, Iceland, Sweden has far far far more higher living standards than Canada, their total disposable income is higher, even if canadians might get paid decent, cost of housing is crazy, taxes are crazy, you cant get any medical surgery done without years in waitlist, So europe is 10x better than canada (just being frank, Canada was an amazing country 10 years ago, not anymore)
2. Canada also has a huge surge in re-migration, that is, the most skilled immigrants in your country, are leaving for other countries, they only come to take your citizenship, as a safety net, and then try leaving for more better countries (the high income ones, not the rest, they stay back in canada), the number of applications in permanent residency is going down among skilled immigrants, you're receiving a lot more of fraudulent immigration from degree mills who are abusing your immigration rules.
3. Canada is already probably will have the lowest growth and highest decline in income among all OECD countries, and is predicted to stay the same in next 3 decades, if it continues doing the same things.
USA still has a strong immigration procedure, but a lot more countries are now getting skilled immigrants from China, India, other Asian, African and Latin American countries, Japan is slowly going to increase immigration (already starting), a lot of European countries welcome skilled migration like Germany, India itself is surging and giving more high income job prospects (they are struggling at creating blue-collar jobs, but white collar well paid jobs are increasing, with more and more GDCs opening there (Global Development Centres), most major computer chips used are designed either in India or Taiwan, the majority of it, happening in other sectors too now)
Canada is immigration friendly, but as a whole along with its other policies, it's inviting the wrong group of immigrants (low-skilled workers across the world, who'll fight with natives for lower paid jobs and drive down wages) that is not a good immigration policy, America also has better diversity capping immigration for each country at 7% max, Canada's immigration policies are poorly designed, and will continue to hurt the country going forward.
Post-tax, post-essentials income comparisons are absurdly complicated and always depend on the individual. For example, dual-income families in Germany can tick slightly ahead of similar families in the USA because of how much more expensive it is to raise children in the US and how many (cash and societal) benefits you get from the social support system in Germany. But even this is a can and not will; that will also depend on your specific tax situation, and a whole host of other things. And whether the discrepancies in income levels are balanced out by different standards of living is also something you can really only evaluate on a case-by-case basis, because it's different for every job. For example, the income differential in software engineering is way higher between NA and Europe than it is for, for example, healthcare workers. In my specific case, when I moved from the US to DE, my gross decreased by 2/3 and my post-tax, post-essentials decreased by 1/2 -- and by post-essentials, I'm including things like massively higher rents in the US.
> a lot of European countries welcome skilled migration like Germany
I'm an immigrant to Germany and I would absolutely *not* consider it welcoming to immigration, skilled or otherwise. And given the results of the past few elections here (and elsewhere in Europe), which have been dominated by extremely negative discussions of immigration (with the notable exception of most/all of the Scandinavian countries), I don't really think your comment is painting an accurate picture.
I've never lived in Canada and have no experience with immigration there, so I can't speak to Canadian immigration policy beyond what I've already said -- that the current government is very pro-immigration and has policies in place specifically meant to compete with the US on skilled workers. What I can say though, is that much of what you're saying is very contrary to both my lived experience as an immigrant to Europe, as well as much of my experience with several very close friends who've been through the H1B -> green card lottery in the USA. Also, from an economic perspective, I would neither describe US immigration policy as "smarter", nor "better" than Canada's. And I would absolutely *not* describe it as a "strong procedure".
I mean, people move back to be close to their family, for jobs, for startup capital, cost of living, and even for the politics.
There is a former coworker who flew back to vote in the election and even have some kind of celebration because some kind of Communist government got voted out of his province.
I agree there are many different reasons to move. I would really call out people who are saying that Indian talent is leaving the US and/or Canada because from my viewpoint we have a very significant amount of Indians leaving India and coming here. It's much more the exception to the rule of Indians leaving North America and going back to India.
It takes them 40 years to make a contemporary fighter jet, not all of which is in house, and they cannot make an infantry rifle, tank, or any defense equipment that their DoD equivalent is happy with outside of "ring laser gyroscopes", which was developed as a part of their guided missile program, which was made with covert and overt Russian and possibly Iraqi help.
They cannot make their own trainsets, cars, and consumer goods to fulfill local demand aside from food. India is on the road to privatizing many of its industries, but if you look that the list of GoI enterprises versus public private partnerships and the endemic levels of corruption (or else ethno-fascism) it is likely these are going to succeed anything soon. Indias largest exports are ideas and philosophies like religion, and I bet in the future it will be manufacturing and operating philosophy like Japan did with Kaizen.
India is a good place to go to offshore costs for space, and many countries do. They know how to squeeze the inefficiencies out of a process (and also not pay people, but that's another story) and bring down the costs of a mission. But there is nothing novel about the missions themselves. There is nothing pioneering, and there is nothing wrong with that. This is the case with Japan. Most of Japanese innovation is actually from US companies that they took over.
In any case, it's important to be realistic-- it's nothing to do with India being poor. They are not poor. They can afford a lot, and do a lot. Some people are in the mindset to accomplish a great deal mentally. Most people are not and still throw banana peels into the highway after eating them. No country without a basic civic sense can (in the immediate few years) have the R&D capabilities you speak of in a meaningful fashion.
Maybe in a few decades when people are more educated.
You should look into the sheer amount of industrial espionage that Japan did in the United States and Soviet Union post WW2. It is mind boggling. We started legally transferring and licensing technology to them so that at least we would make some money back.
And you know what? Even some of the Indian companies at the time were super good.
HCL was the Indian IBM. In fact, it's a one letter shift from IBM, and one of the earlier Indian tech companies. There were opportunities. People wanted money and things and didn't want to wait.
Yes. You need to have national unity, pride, and not be entirely selfish in order to have more engagement and participation in higher education and therefore in R&D. You need to be in a position in which you can inspire your citizens that there is a better life for them by engaging in that R&D and morale improving projects, but that attitude also needs to be seen on the streets, not just on TV.
India has some parts of the population in which that exists, but that's far from a large part of the population. Most people are very self interested, and you cannot blame them. People think of themselves. Why do you think there is a brain drain? People are educated at the government's expense at premier institutions and leave because they don't feel any sense of allegiance or civil responsibility to develop their country.
My math teach told me that during the Cold War, in the United States, the math that they learned was harder than it was now. It was your duty to become a scientist or engineer or something positive to push your country forward. That should be how it is for India, but aside from a smaller segment of the population (who are pretty loud and say some interesting things) people are more self interested. And you can't blame them. If your cousin moved to the United States and seems to be "living the life" why wouldn't you leave?
So a whole generation of scientists and engineers who were top notch educated at IIT at the government's expense under socialist India in the 80s basically left in the 90s and 00s because of more money, even though there were possibilities in India for them at the time (HP and IBM India, CDAC, CDOT, DRDO, ISRO, HAL, etc)
And sure, I am biased. That was my dad's life. That was his story. He made the call to leave India hoping to improve his career by moving to Australia and then the United States. He considered moving back multiple times, but could not bring himself to do so, not because of the lack of good opportunities, but because of the lack of civic sense.
There are people in India who work super hard (which he really likes), but then there are people who are so selfish, driving on the sidewalk in the opposite direction, get upset because the ambulance is speeding to the hospital and refuse to move and block it intentionally, taking all kinds of shortcuts and opportunities to cheat each other instead of conducting business honestly, etc. No good treatment of women.
It's messy and it needs to get more organized to do anything meaningful in terms of R&D in that country.
> There are only a few players in private space which print rocket engines, and our very own SpaceX was one of the first to pioneer this
The US isn't the only country with a large private space sector. China and India have both been heavily investing in it since the mid-2010s, because a dynamic space sector also means having an indigenous capability to deploy spy-satellites and ballistic missiles.
There's a reason why Maxar, SpaceX, etc all get outsized DoD funding.
India's space sector is also getting a massive cash infusion from the UAE [0] and KSA [1], as they both begin their process of building domestic space capabilities due to worries of Iran.
[0] - https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/spotlight/indian-space-m...
[1] - https://www.zawya.com/en/business/technology-and-telecom/sau...