in the range of industries have to work in the land they were educated in. On the other hand, some people believe that they should choose where they want to work regarding the place they were given schooling. I agree that those professionals should have their free will to select the work, hence it is creating a range of opportunities, and increasing their profit.
It can be true that people should repay the government of the country they were trained in, but it should not limit the access to work in other countries forever. Working only for one country can lead to deficiency in workforces’ inputs. For example, in mostly poor countries ,like India and Nigeria, there is a lack of research tools compared t UK and Canada, therefore it results in works efficiency.
Serving for different states, especially nowadays, creates a tremendous growth space for professionals, not only in their abilities but also in a monetary prospect. It is likely for engineers and doctors , to receive an informative knowledge in countries that are highly developing in those spheres, as they exceled compared to others. Additionally, making it possible to receive more money than they did in their countries. It is logical that as skills accelerate the demand grows too, resulting in a much more profit.
in this debate, where others demand for professionals to work in the countries they were trained in ,and other part stands for free choice of the country to work regardless of the education background, it would be highly incompetent to choose the former. The place they were trained in should not affect the workers’ will to work in other states, as it can bring more skills and profits to them.