Some individuals assert that professionals, such as doctors and engineers, should be required to work in the country where they recieved their training, whereas others contend that they should be free to work in another country if they wish. This essay will critically examine both viewpoints before presenting my own opinion.
On one hand, proponents argue that skilled workers, such as medical practitioners and technical experts, must be compelled to serve in the nation where they were educated because people believe that they play a vital role in the growth of GDP. For instance, The USA has more specialist than other countries, and always they serve for their homeland ; as a result, GDP of the USA is higher than other countries. Moreover, doctors save lives and engineers helps to develop the countries.
Conversely, opponents maintain that they should be allowed to perform duties in another country if they desire because other countries provide good salary, accomodation, hospitals, and luxurious lives. For example, I am an engineer and I leaved my homeland due to bad salary and accomodation, now, i live in Canada and i am serving here since 2012. This leads to improving my salary and luxurious life. In addition, this country also assist me alot in my engineering field which makes me happy.
In my considered opinion, despite the merits of both arguments, I am inclined to support the latter viewpoint as it offers a more compelling explanation owing to good salary, accomodation, hospitals, and luxorious lives as well as environment.