But historically, it has been much, much more proactive.
Thread:
Take England's copper industry, which by the 19thC was world-beating.
Or take the 17thC civil engineers who drained the Fens
Yet Britain was not alone in having promigration policies.
In 1719, Britain even banned the emigration of skilled artisans (definitely not something to emulate today!), and spent vast sums re-enticing them back.
When Marc Isambard Brunel fell into debt in the 1820s, the government bailed him out on the condition that he not move to Russia!
So what can the UK today learn from this history?
Otherwise, however, it simply tries to make itself more attractive.
And it makes it easier for UK startups to compete with the high-paying US for managers, e.g. with a scheme for taxing stock options as capital gains.
So here are some lessons:
In the past, this involved granting royal pensions or knighthoods. Today, it might involve incentives for a government agency to want to find top talent.
After all, people are more likely to want to immigrate if they think the bureaucracy is on their side.
Although UK universities hire globally, there's nothing quite the same.
Other countries are adopting similar policies to it, such that it no longer stands out quite as much.
And meanwhile, countries like Singapore have been using proactive promigration policy for years.
tenentrepreneurs.org/blog/finding-t…