Slashdot Mirror

All flaws in the system - chronic overproduction, recessions, chronic unemployment (to where in the US, the economic term "full employment" actually means 5% or so are unemployed who want jobs and can't find them). Companies can't "break even" - they must profit, meaning if some of the wealth created by people working isn't going to say some heir who inherited a company, the job will cease to exist. Not to mention that the average inflation-adjusted hourly wage in the US is below what it was 30 years ago. But that too is just another side effect.

Computers have consistently exhibited rapid technological change that must be taken into account to avoid biased estimates of inflation.2 For example, a mainstream desktop computer that sold for $2,200 in 1993 may have included a 33 megahertz (MHz) central processing unit (CPU), 8 megabytes (MB) of dynamic random access memory (DRAM), a 210MB hard drive, a 15-inch monitor, as well as many other defining technological characteristics. In 1998, however, a desktop computer that sold for $2,200 could easily have been configured with a 450MHz CPU, 128MB of SDRAM, an 8,000MB hard drive, a 17-inch monitor, and included other advanced features unavailable in 1993, such as a DVD player and 3D-graphics capabilities. In this example the observed prices for the 1993 and 1998 computers are identical. However, technological change over this 5-year period has been remarkable: CPU speed (MHz) jumped 1,263 percent (this actually understates the change in CPU performance3), system memory increased 1,500 percent, hard drive capacity increased 3,700 percent, and monitor size increased 13 percent.

Brilliant points, parent.

The real problem here is trying to get "all gain with no pain". The recession has been buried with paper-printing and off balance sheet spending. While growing the government to huge proportions has propped up some of the unemployment -- the rest is covered by simply changing how we compute the data.

The way we compute unemployment now and inflation is different from the 1970s. Plus, the new phenomenon of both parents working and people working more than one job have skewed everything. If I am employed for two jobs, does our current unemployment figure account for that? I don't know. But you aren't counted as unemployed after about 5 months -- which means anyone can be jobless but not unemployed. That is called a discouraged worker. Anyhow, the real growth has been in disability. If you really want to not work, you go on disability -- this figure is a huge revenue drain and is not counted in the CPI data that everyone nods sagely to on the Financial News Network.

Just from common sense; with all the changes we've seen in the economy from 1990 to 2005, the unemployment figure has (as far as I remember) never fluctuated more than 1 % from 5.5 %. So, from booming economy to massive off shoring and we still get pretty much the same number. Putting it that simply, doesn't that tickle your Bull Shit detector?

OK. Still not convinced? Now I blow your mind. When GM massively lays off people, the Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics can actually compute job creation. How? Well, only 40 % of large businesses are used to compute actual employment. Since a lot of jobs are based on small companies and self-employment and none of those are actually sampled -- the government can assume that those 12,000 workers in the auto assembly plant at GM have now become profitable entrepreneurs selling doilies on e-Bay. What the F@%#, you ask? This is called the CES Net Birth/Death Model.. A name that is so weird and obscure that you wouldn't stumble upon it accidentally and worry your pretty little head about economic matters that might be inconvenient. Yes, it is 1984 every year where we come up with meaningless names. Since wall street likes unemployment because this lowers wages because more people are trying to compete with illegal workers that we let in for construction and sweat shops, but doesn't like them too low because that scares consumers into not rotating debt between 3 credit cards and a second mortgage... well, they want to tell us that we got about 200,000 new jobs each month. So, this past year we've had 35,000 actual new jobs reported and 180,000 estimated with B/D Model in one particular month and another month we actually had about 320,000 (which might have scared wall street) and 120,000 were subtracted (because whatever). But on average, we've had about 80k jobs added each month this year to "fluff up" the figure. OK -- these are from a vague memory. I get all this info and then check it out with actual www.bls.gov figures at this web site -- good source of rumors and Angst.

Inflation. Well, basically, the government now has a huge incentive to keep this reported figure as low as possible. Union Wages and government programs and a whole host of other expenses have built-in inflation increases. The 3% inflation that we keep getting reported doesn't include volatiles like the price of Gas, Food, or Day - Care. Volatiles aren't included because they change a lot and it is reasoned that those prices are going to effect the durables eventually. But let's look at what we actually spend money on in my house; the House payment is just near the top of expenses. Since I refinanced with a low interest loan (and these rates are a danger to our countries debt finance) and a lot of people have re-fied to 30 and 40 year low interest loans -- so that reduces a major expense that reduces apparent inflation -- even though the price of the houses is going up at about a 20%

That's just too much for a game system. I usually buy the new consoles when they come out (proud owner of a PS2, XBox, and Atari 2600), but these prices have pushed them out of the realm of game system and into the realm of major electronics investment.

You claim that the Xbox 360 at $299 or $399 is too expensive (I don't think the EB Games preorder ripoff is a proper basis of comparison), yet the Atari 2600 was introduced in 1977 for the low low price of $200. Using the consumer price index as a guide, $200 in 1977 * (188.9/60.6) = $623 in today's dollars [based on the whole year average]. Furthermore, the price of the Atari 2600 didn't drop significantly until the introduction of the Atari 5200 in 1982.

It seems odd that you were willing to buy a gaming system for ~$600 almost 25-30 years ago, when you presumably had less disposable income, to watch poorly rendered aliens march back and forth across your standard definition television through a composite/RF connection, but you aren't willing to buy a vastly superior system for a similar fraction of your earning capacity.

I don't agree. While I am not inclined to pay more than the MSRP for the console, an enthusiast will apparently have no problem giving up that much of their hard earned cash.

The CPI is virtually useless. It significantly overstates inflation.

How so? It's just an aggregate of the measured increases of retail prices. This is often affected by swings in things like gasoline prices or food supply issues. If you want more accuracy, you can track specific areas and/or products or product categories.

If, like most people, you're referring to cost-of-living, you're correct. The CPI wasn't intended to measure cost of living. However, there is a related index (the "chained" CPI) which eliminates the "substitution bias" that makes the CPI higher than a true COL index, if there were such a thing. This C-CPI more accurately reflects COL though.

See the CPI FAQ for more information.

Disclaimer: IANAE (I am not an economist).

The CPI is virtually useless. It significantly overstates inflation.

How so? It's just an aggregate of the measured increases of retail prices. This is often affected by swings in things like gasoline prices or food supply issues. If you want more accuracy, you can track specific areas and/or products or product categories.

If, like most people, you're referring to cost-of-living, you're correct. The CPI wasn't intended to measure cost of living. However, there is a related index (the "chained" CPI) which eliminates the "substitution bias" that makes the CPI higher than a true COL index, if there were such a thing. This C-CPI more accurately reflects COL though.

See the CPI FAQ for more information.

Disclaimer: IANAE (I am not an economist).

The CPI is virtually useless. It significantly overstates inflation.

How so? It's just an aggregate of the measured increases of retail prices. This is often affected by swings in things like gasoline prices or food supply issues. If you want more accuracy, you can track specific areas and/or products or product categories.

If, like most people, you're referring to cost-of-living, you're correct. The CPI wasn't intended to measure cost of living. However, there is a related index (the "chained" CPI) which eliminates the "substitution bias" that makes the CPI higher than a true COL index, if there were such a thing. This C-CPI more accurately reflects COL though.

See the CPI FAQ for more information.

Disclaimer: IANAE (I am not an economist).

I think you're getting ripped off if you're not making more than a teacher.

According to the Dept. of Labor:
Median annual earnings of computer programmers were $60,290 in 2002. The middle 50 percent earned between $45,960 and $78,140 a year. The lowest 10 percent earned less than $35,080; the highest 10 percent earned more than $96,860.

Median annual earnings of kindergarten, elementary, middle, and secondary school teachers ranged from $39,810 to $44,340 in 2002; the lowest 10 percent earned $24,960 to $29,850; the top 10 percent earned $62,890 to $68,530.

Sources:
http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos110.htm
http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos069.htm

I think you're getting ripped off if you're not making more than a teacher.

According to the Dept. of Labor:
Median annual earnings of computer programmers were $60,290 in 2002. The middle 50 percent earned between $45,960 and $78,140 a year. The lowest 10 percent earned less than $35,080; the highest 10 percent earned more than $96,860.

Median annual earnings of kindergarten, elementary, middle, and secondary school teachers ranged from $39,810 to $44,340 in 2002; the lowest 10 percent earned $24,960 to $29,850; the top 10 percent earned $62,890 to $68,530.

Sources:
http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos110.htm
http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos069.htm

The #1 problem is jurisdictional barriers

Would you trust your data to a European country? The problem with confidential data security isn't outsoucing, it's outsourcing to countries with poor policies.

You're living in the past again. Back then they didn't send every new industry that came up, overseas practically overnight.

There's a difference between packing up industries and sending them overseas, and expanding overseas. I agree some sectors like data centers and tech support are moving, but overall the IT industry has remained in the US. The employment numbers for IT are flat. Companies aren't sending jobs overseas, they just aren't expanding domestically. Which makes sense since China and India represent expanding economies.

You're clinging to a free market ideology that is unsustainable.

What is the alternative, a completely closed system? We can keep our same level of pay, but everything is just more expensive, and it still won't fix issues with jobs being replace by machines and productivity increases.

I care about my people in my country before I care about others

So you don't care about the rich becoming richer, you just want to make sure you are part of the rich.

So, poor people are homophobic, and too stupid to murder their own babies when its for their own good. Congratulations! That is the most retarded and ignorant statement I've read on /. today!

Lets compare Missouri to neighboring Blue State Illinois. MO's unemployment rate: 5.6%, just above the national average. Il: 5.8%. Mean average anual salary in Missouri is $34,130. Il: $38,360. You might think that $4,230 means something until you factor in the cost of living, which is 93.6% for MO compared to 112% for Il. That means it's 18.4% cheaper to live in Missouri than in next-door Illinois - a blue State. While we're on the subject, health costs are lower in Mo compared to Il (105.8, 112.3, 100 = baseline).

Seems to me that Illinois is a poorer state. And they voted for Kerry.

As to this notion that welfare helps poor people, go into any southern urban area and speak to families that are trying to get ahead on public assistance. Welfare laws are structured in a way that keeps the poor down. Want to own property? You won't get welfare in 44 out of 50 states. Trying to get an education? Most welfare programs won't pay for anything more than vocational training, so you can get a nice manufacturing job that pays a 'living wage'. Got children? WIC will pay for food, but it won't pay for diapers, day care, or baby clothes. So you'll have ignorant fat naked babies. Oh, I forgot. You were supposed to abort them.

Seriously. Get a clue. Don't spout such ignorant sweeping generalizations as this.

Sources: Sperling, US Government Bureau of Labor Statistics,

And just where is that to come from?

The film and video industry alone directly employs 360,000 people, mostly in Los Angeles and New York. That excludes employment through independent contractors, support services and all distribution channels except the multiplex.Motion Picture and Video Industries

The industry is well organized and strongly positioned in the nation's cultural and financial capitals, red and blue states alike. But a politician doesn't need much encouragement to support a clean industry that provides jobs at all skill levels and generates billions in domestic and foreign sales.

Remember judicial rulings can be overruled by constitutional amendments and other means such as judge replacements etc

The decision in Grokster was unaminous and you'll not see anything better emerging from the House or Senate.

When I was a kid, the ticket at the theater was about $1.50, that was in the 60's...

$1.50 sounds to me like a lot of money in the 60s. Let's hop on over to http://www.bls.gov/cpi/home.htm
and adjust that 1.50 into 2005 dollars.

You don't specify which year of the 60s you're talking about, let's do a range of years:

1960: $9.85
1965: $9.26
1969: $7.95

So that $1.50 movie in the 60s is about the same cost as it is now, after adjusting for inflation. People tend to forget the huge inflation that happened in the 1970s. Sure movies are more expensive, but people also make a lot more money to keep up with increased cost of living.

Oh for cripes sake quit endlessly spouting speculation that conveniently supports your preferred view and go look it the fuck up. They use a weekly random national survey of 60,000 people. It hasn't got a goddamn thing to do with who is or is not colecting unemployment insurance.

The majority of people not employed are stay at home mothers, students, and retirees. The statistics count people aged 16 and over. Age 16-19 labor force participation is only 47.4%. Age 65 and over is only 13.2%.

Women 25-34, for example, participate 75.1%, while men in that age range participate 92.4%.

Detailed statistics are here.

Some people think that to get these figures on unemployment the Government uses the number of persons filing claims for unemployment insurance (UI) benefits under State or Federal Government programs. But some people are still jobless when their benefits run out, and many more are not eligible at all or delay or never apply for benefits. So, quite clearly, UI information cannot be used as a source for complete information on the number of unemployed.

Since I'd rather not mod down incorrect responses to your question, I'll just post an answer. Short answer is 'No'. Long answer follows.

The unemployment rate is calculated by the Bureau of Labor Statistics based on two *surveys*, a household survey and an establishment (business) survey, with the household survey being used for the unemployment percentage, currently 5.1%. Basically, A person is considered 'unemployed' if they don't have a job *AND* they are looking for one. If they're not working but not looking, they don't count (removed from the both the numerator and denominator of the unemployed % because they're not considered part of the labor force). See here for more details

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.tn.htm

Specifically, "The unemployment data derived from the household survey in no way depend upon the eligibility for or receipt of unemployment insurance benefits".

Occasionally, the news will report on new initial unemployment claims filed as another indicator of the job market, and those numbers would be affected by fraudulent claims, but that's the extent of it.

Unemployed persons (Current Population Survey)
Persons aged 16 years and older who had no employment during the reference week, were available for work, except for temporary illness, and had made specific efforts to find employment sometime during the 4-week period ending with the reference week. Persons who were waiting to be recalled to a job from which they had been laid off need not have been looking for work to be classified as unemployed.

-All people (98%+/- have televisions in U.S.)are used to advertising
-Most people won't mind a few commercials in everything, they are used to it. Even your shopping cart has advertisements on it.
-Advertising is everywhere and it WORKS.

For those that like google's adverts today, it is only a matter of time before they are replaced by something more (wait for it....) PROFITABLE. Look at Yahoo. Same idea, different day.

Double-click is here to stay. Double-click along with the rest of the ad industry (442,000 + 56,000 advert workers in 2002 http://www.bls.gov/oco/cg/cgs030.htm) likely pushing hard to get ads forced into browsers one way or another.

Switch to Linux, and maybe elinks or whatever that very useful text-only browser is called and regain some peace of mind.

Note to self:
Kill my television.

Canada has 40% unemployment?

Do a google search you xenophobic fucking idiot.

http://www.statcan.ca/english/Subjects/Labour/LFS/ lfs-en.htm

Wow it's 7% in Canada.

What's it in the USA?

http://www.bls.gov/

It's 5%.

Yeah, we're SOOO WORSE off here in Canada....

Tom

see http://www.bls.gov/search/ooh.asp?ct=OOH

I've always been curious as to how much movie ticket prices have gone up over the years. Here's a quick analysis taken from

http://www.natoonline.org/statisticstickets.htm
and then adjusted for inflation at:
http://www.bls.gov/cpi/home.htm in 2004 dollars:

2004: $6.21
2002: $6.09
2000: $5.91
1998: $5.44
1996: $5.32
1994: $5.20
1992: $5.59
1990: $6.10
1988: $6.56
1986: $6.39
1984: $6.11
1982: $5.72
1980: $6.17
1978: $6.78
1976: $7.07
1974: $7.24
1971: $7.70
1967: $6.90
1963: $5.31
1958: $4.44
1954: $3.44
1948: $2.82

Which is very interesting. What's not at all clear is if this data is from all first run theaters, or all theaters. These prices are obviously the average price, though I don't know any first run, non-matinee theater around my area (Minneapolis) that's only $6.21. Around here typically ticket prices for first run theaters are around $8. The matinee is $6.00.

Can anyone find any more conclusive prices that are only first-run theaters?

The american motion picture and video industry alone directly employs 360,000 people, mostly in New York and Los Angeles: Motion Picture and Video Industries.

You do not build a taxpayer revolt around clean industries, high-wage jobs, and a lucrative export market.

The business market is much bigger than the consumer market.

and your facts are all messed up:

376,000 jobs were added in may 2005 if you look at official government page:
http://www.bls.gov/cps/home.htm
so yes there is enough demand from nuerosurgery and finance and other service sector jobs to make up for the loss of manufacturing jobs.

median wages rose between 2003 and 2004 so its not just fast food jobs being added to the economy:
ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/lf/aat37.tx t

take a look at the characteristics of the unemployed. there is no way the unemployment rate would double if you added in discouraged workers:
ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/lf/aat35.tx t
it might go up a percentage point.

and your facts are all messed up:

376,000 jobs were added in may 2005 if you look at official government page:
http://www.bls.gov/cps/home.htm
so yes there is enough demand from nuerosurgery and finance and other service sector jobs to make up for the loss of manufacturing jobs.

median wages rose between 2003 and 2004 so its not just fast food jobs being added to the economy:
ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/lf/aat37.tx t

take a look at the characteristics of the unemployed. there is no way the unemployment rate would double if you added in discouraged workers:
ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/lf/aat35.tx t
it might go up a percentage point.

and your facts are all messed up:

376,000 jobs were added in may 2005 if you look at official government page:
http://www.bls.gov/cps/home.htm
so yes there is enough demand from nuerosurgery and finance and other service sector jobs to make up for the loss of manufacturing jobs.

median wages rose between 2003 and 2004 so its not just fast food jobs being added to the economy:
ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/lf/aat37.tx t

take a look at the characteristics of the unemployed. there is no way the unemployment rate would double if you added in discouraged workers:
ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/lf/aat35.tx t
it might go up a percentage point.

> I don't believe numbers of priests are declining.

That's one of my issues with the religious. People believe things, and never bother to check whether their belief has any basis in reality. Been on the Internet long? Heard of Google? Been alive long? Heard of statistics? The US Bureau of Labor Statistics: http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos063.htm

> The shortage of Roman Catholic priests is expected to continue,

Ah, so there IS a current shortage.

> In recent years, the number of ordained priests has been insufficient to [...] replace priests who retire, die, or leave the priesthood.

And it's not new.

If you want non-US, see this: http://www.futurechurch.org/fpm/cardinals/facts.ht m

Seriously, can't you be bothered to look for one freaking second? You know, just because you don't like what someone has to say, it doesn't mean they are wrong.

Grrr, Slashdot is REALLY pissing me off...
> Slashdot requires you to wait 2 minutes between each successful posting of a comment to allow everyone a fair chance at posting a comment.
> It's been 56 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment
I've been trying to post one fucking message for 30 minutes now, and this shit has been going on for at least two days. This is goddamned annoying.

I can't speak for PyWiz, but programming and engineering unemployment is at all-time highs. Even the new H-1B visas are not being grabbed up - that tells you how little interest there is in hiring.

Just FYI - the Bureau of Labor Statistics does not agree with your assessment that programming and engineering unemployment is at an all-time high. For more information, visit: BLS Unemployment by Industry for May

Thank God that is sarcasm. The average starting schoolteacher's salary is $30k according to http://www.aft.org/salary/2003/download/2003Table2 .pdf.

The average salary of a teacher is about $44k, according to http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos069.htm. Not bad for a job where the outlook is good to excellent, with employment in most locations and a high measure of job security and decent benefits. Plus there are three months of vacation.

...which places you among a minority so small that it can safely be ignored.

the onus should be on the companies to prove that their content is worth it to the people, for us to continue to maintain their monopoly.

The Incredibles return to date is $640 million world-wide in ticket sales and DVD. 18 million DVD sales domestically in its first release, and currently the gold standard for home theater projection and sound. The odds are approaching 1 in 5 that if you own a DVD player, you will own a copy.

there is no compelling reason why the populace or government should help them.

The industry employs 360,000 waged and salaried workers in the U.S., concentrated in the cultural capitals of New York and Los Angeles. Motion Picture and Video Industry Not counted here are the numbers employed in secondary distribution channels such as cable tv, video rental and sales.

Hollywood has been tremendously successful in exporting culture, no one does it better; the export market for american films is huge and politically significant. Hollywood in the Era of Globalization

http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServle t?request_action=wh&graph_name=LN_cpsbref3

You can also get additional employment information in general (I can't find it broken out by visa status) as the Bureau of Labor Statistics

I hope you're enjoying Bush's America, composed of lies, hatred, war, poverty, and rapid decline. Maybe you'll get a date with one of the Bush twins!

Really? Lets see...

Lets just touch on poverty, and "rapid decline":

Unemployment -
http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServle t?request_action=wh&graph_name=LN_cpsbref3

Productivity -
http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServle t?request_action=wh&graph_name=PR_lprbrief

CPI -
http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServle t?request_action=wh&graph_name=CU_cpibrief

If you'd like to cover War, Hatred, and Lies we could go into Somalia, the long list of murders surrounding the former president, and selling nuclear weapons technology for campaign contributions.

But for now, we'll just leave it at that. Oh, and a date with the Bush twins certainly would be a riot.

Posting as AC to escape the tyranny of popular politics.

I hope you're enjoying Bush's America, composed of lies, hatred, war, poverty, and rapid decline. Maybe you'll get a date with one of the Bush twins!

Really? Lets see...

Lets just touch on poverty, and "rapid decline":

Unemployment -
http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServle t?request_action=wh&graph_name=LN_cpsbref3

Productivity -
http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServle t?request_action=wh&graph_name=PR_lprbrief

CPI -
http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServle t?request_action=wh&graph_name=CU_cpibrief

If you'd like to cover War, Hatred, and Lies we could go into Somalia, the long list of murders surrounding the former president, and selling nuclear weapons technology for campaign contributions.

But for now, we'll just leave it at that. Oh, and a date with the Bush twins certainly would be a riot.

Posting as AC to escape the tyranny of popular politics.

I hope you're enjoying Bush's America, composed of lies, hatred, war, poverty, and rapid decline. Maybe you'll get a date with one of the Bush twins!

Really? Lets see...

Lets just touch on poverty, and "rapid decline":

Unemployment -
http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServle t?request_action=wh&graph_name=LN_cpsbref3

Productivity -
http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServle t?request_action=wh&graph_name=PR_lprbrief

CPI -
http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServle t?request_action=wh&graph_name=CU_cpibrief

If you'd like to cover War, Hatred, and Lies we could go into Somalia, the long list of murders surrounding the former president, and selling nuclear weapons technology for campaign contributions.

But for now, we'll just leave it at that. Oh, and a date with the Bush twins certainly would be a riot.

Posting as AC to escape the tyranny of popular politics.

Don't listen to those guys - my passion in college was smoking pot and listening to records. While enjoying your work is important, you have to be somewhat pragmatic - career planners always steered us toward the Bureau of Labor Statistics forcasts.

So how do you propose to allow people to support themselves? Allowing a person to work a job which cannot possibly support them is equivalent to slavery.

You fail to understand slavery. Slavery is a deprivation of freedom, not of conditions. Historically, some slaves have lived very comfortable lives -- but they were still slaves.

The cost of living has been going up all over the country. The price of food has gone up significantly; In my area eggs have gone up about 25%, milk about that as well, cheese by about 30% or more... and this over just a couple of years.

I'm amazed to hear that "the cost of living" is tied exclusively to the price of dairy products. And further, that inflation is somehow a new and unprecedented thing; that prices haven't increased ~2000% in the past hundred years or so.

If the minimum wage doesn't increase, then a lot of people who are stuck making it will just end up homeless and in amazing amounts of debt. This is not particularly good for the country.

It isn't a particularly good thing for anyone to be earning the minimum wage, no matter what it is. The fact is that less than 3% of the workforce earns minimum wage, and that number has been in decline for as long as it's been measured (since 1979).

And in that time, prices have gone up 283% while the minimum wage has only increased 170%.

So, unless you think the country has been in a perpetual crisis for the past 25 years, I think a better solution is to decrease the number of people earning the minimum wage.

Also, there is no such thing as 'software engineering'. Calling something engineering doesn't make it so. Professionaly, the word 'engineer' has a precise legal definition, and calling yourself one when you are not is illegal.

In Texas at least it is quite legal, as determined by the Texas Board of Professional Engineers. It may be legal in other states....I don't know, I just googled it real quickly. In addition, the US Dept. of Labor says there is such a thing as a Computer Software Engineer. In addition, some universities are starting to offer Software Engineering majors.

Me, I'm just a programmer.

http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos267.htm

As many of the people who read slashdot know, the software industry in the USA (and I'm guessing Europe too) has suffered from ousourcing. I've read the US Department of Labor's Occupational outlook handbook for it, and one thing I've noticed is that it's always written in a dry, politically neutral style, which leaves the MEANING of the information up for interpretation by the (hopefully skeptical) reader. If you don't read between the lines, you'll not get an accurate picture of a career field from the handbook. I recommend actually talking to both happy people and disgruntled people in a career field before deciding whether it's what you want. That said, read on for info on software engineering from the handbook:

Computer software engineers are projected to be one of the fastest growing occupations over the 2002-12 period.

Computer software engineers held about 675,000 jobs in 2002. About 394,000 were computer applications software engineers, and about 281,000 were computer systems software engineers.

What they don't say is how many of those jobs are held by Americans, in the USA. IIRC, those figures come from employers, and so if an American company hires 500 software engineers, but they're all from India, the USA government will still proudly announce the addition of 500 new jobs to the US economy, when in fact, those jobs are actually overseas, and they're actually hurting the USA economy by removing money from it. Welcome to the world of political spin, and half-truths.

An increasing number of computer software engineers are employed on a temporary or contract basis, with many being self-employed, working independently as consultants.

What they don't say is how many of those jobs will remain in the country that created them.

As many of the people reading this will probably already know, in the software industry, "consultant" or "self-employed" typically means "unemployed" or "underemployed". Companies iin the USA aren't willing to hire permanent employees, so the easiest way to get at least SOME work, is to be an independent contractor or consultant that can be easily dumped when you've worked yourself out of a job. Of course, it's not always like that, but it's like that often enough to make people think "unemployed" when someone says "I'm a consultant" at social gatherings.

Also note that those who the government considers self-employed are counted as employed, even if they haven't earned a check in a year, and unemployed people who NEVER find a job in their field are counted as employed as soon as they're no longer eligible for unemployment benefits.

Job growth will not be as rapid as during the previous decade however, as the software industry begins to mature and as routine software engineering work is increasingly outsourced overseas.

As with other information technology jobs, employment growth of computer software engineers may be tempered somewhat by an increase in contracting out of software development abroad. Firms may look to cut costs by shifting operations to foreign countries with highly educated workers who have strong technical skills.

The truth comes out, at least a little. Remember, these are bureacrats and politicians writing this, so when they use words like "tempered", what they mean is "holy crap, this is important, read this section twice!". You should probably also take a look at Tomorrow's Jobs to get an overview of the entire USA economy. Notice that even though the USA has been in it's worst economic condition since the 1980's, everything is rosy in nearly every sector, according to the goverment.

I'm not a software engineer, and I could be biased in some ways, so here's a little about me. I work in manufacturing, which has been suffering longer than any other sector from outsourcing. The only sector that's decli

http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos267.htm

As many of the people who read slashdot know, the software industry in the USA (and I'm guessing Europe too) has suffered from ousourcing. I've read the US Department of Labor's Occupational outlook handbook for it, and one thing I've noticed is that it's always written in a dry, politically neutral style, which leaves the MEANING of the information up for interpretation by the (hopefully skeptical) reader. If you don't read between the lines, you'll not get an accurate picture of a career field from the handbook. I recommend actually talking to both happy people and disgruntled people in a career field before deciding whether it's what you want. That said, read on for info on software engineering from the handbook:

Computer software engineers are projected to be one of the fastest growing occupations over the 2002-12 period.

Computer software engineers held about 675,000 jobs in 2002. About 394,000 were computer applications software engineers, and about 281,000 were computer systems software engineers.

What they don't say is how many of those jobs are held by Americans, in the USA. IIRC, those figures come from employers, and so if an American company hires 500 software engineers, but they're all from India, the USA government will still proudly announce the addition of 500 new jobs to the US economy, when in fact, those jobs are actually overseas, and they're actually hurting the USA economy by removing money from it. Welcome to the world of political spin, and half-truths.

An increasing number of computer software engineers are employed on a temporary or contract basis, with many being self-employed, working independently as consultants.

What they don't say is how many of those jobs will remain in the country that created them.

As many of the people reading this will probably already know, in the software industry, "consultant" or "self-employed" typically means "unemployed" or "underemployed". Companies iin the USA aren't willing to hire permanent employees, so the easiest way to get at least SOME work, is to be an independent contractor or consultant that can be easily dumped when you've worked yourself out of a job. Of course, it's not always like that, but it's like that often enough to make people think "unemployed" when someone says "I'm a consultant" at social gatherings.

Also note that those who the government considers self-employed are counted as employed, even if they haven't earned a check in a year, and unemployed people who NEVER find a job in their field are counted as employed as soon as they're no longer eligible for unemployment benefits.

Job growth will not be as rapid as during the previous decade however, as the software industry begins to mature and as routine software engineering work is increasingly outsourced overseas.

As with other information technology jobs, employment growth of computer software engineers may be tempered somewhat by an increase in contracting out of software development abroad. Firms may look to cut costs by shifting operations to foreign countries with highly educated workers who have strong technical skills.

The truth comes out, at least a little. Remember, these are bureacrats and politicians writing this, so when they use words like "tempered", what they mean is "holy crap, this is important, read this section twice!". You should probably also take a look at Tomorrow's Jobs to get an overview of the entire USA economy. Notice that even though the USA has been in it's worst economic condition since the 1980's, everything is rosy in nearly every sector, according to the goverment.

I'm not a software engineer, and I could be biased in some ways, so here's a little about me. I work in manufacturing, which has been suffering longer than any other sector from outsourcing. The only sector that's decli

Handwringing about the quality of American education usually preceeds whining about shortages of workers.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the quality of the schools will be less important anyway because most of the jobs likely to be created in the next decade don't require a bachelor degree. This Businessweek artticle summarizes that point.

I know many underemployed people today. Some were underemployed during good times. And now the BLS says this is likely to not only continue but worsen. So why is there a hue and cry about bad schools? Why are industry leaders like Gates involved? They are setting the table for subsequent lobbying campaigns to raise the quotas of H1-B and L1 visas. This isn't the first time they've followed this script and it won't be the last.

The grandparent post had a reference. Where is yours. When it comes to a "does too does not" argument, people are going to side with the guy with the most facts. You don't have any facts, all you have is a screechy voice. His citation shows that the statistics are collected from a household survey, and not by looking at how many unemployment checks are being written.

Here's the link again: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employment Situation Summary.

Gee, most West European countries pay unemployment benefits for many years. And they have been doing it for decades. They seem to be doing quite well.

Europeans also have MUCH higher tax rates, higher unemployment, and lower economic growth rates.

That is because Europe counts everyone. America stops counting people after their 6 months of benefits run out.

WRONG. Official US numbers are calculated from household surveys that count everyone. Here is a Bureau of Labor Statistics report if you don't believe me.

The 30 fatalities from coal mine accidents are just the tip of the iceberg. There's risk in any industrial activity. We're very safety-conscious in the U.S., but there were still over 5000 work related fatalities in 2003 (and plenty more stats here. Trucking is probably the most deadly to civilians because of traffic accidents, but no one would ever suggest stopping food deliveries to the supermarkets.

The 30 fatalities from coal mine accidents are just the tip of the iceberg. There's risk in any industrial activity. We're very safety-conscious in the U.S., but there were still over 5000 work related fatalities in 2003 (and plenty more stats here. Trucking is probably the most deadly to civilians because of traffic accidents, but no one would ever suggest stopping food deliveries to the supermarkets.

More analysis... (stolen from a coworkers reponse to the same news) Thanks TG!:

"According the Bureau of Labor Statistics http://www.bls.gov/cew/state2002.txt the 2002 avg US wage (based on salary only) is $17.68 per hour (based on a 40 hour work week). That breaks down to 29.46 cents per minute. 2.8 minutes a day X .2946 = 82.5 cents per day spent deleting spam. For the price of a cup of coffee, I can delete spam or support one of Sally Struthers' kids in a third world country. Being the cheap ******** I am, I'd rather pocket the 82.5 cents a day." -TG

The unemployment rate is 5.4%, The american dollar is losing value because of the weak economy, to the point that it's dangering the Canadian economy. America has been cutting its interest rates to spur growth, and avoid deflation. I have no vested interest in American politics, but America is in a recession- wake up.

I think you've been reading too many Paul Krugman articles. I'll address your points specifically:

the unemployment rate is 5.4%
I am assuming you are making the assertion this is a doom and gloom number. However, historical facts eliminate this assertion.
Notice how the peak is two years gone, and all of 2004 has been a downward slope since then.

The american dollar is losing value because of the weak economy,

I think you should provide evidence of this weak economy. I've written on slashdot several times about this before, but I'll say it again. Economics is not a zero sum game. People are currently calling the dollar "weak". This means that people trading with US companies get MORE goods for their money than they would with buying from other countries. This causes people to buy MORE American goods, infact European businesses were scared about the holiday shopping season because so many were buying American goods rather than European ones.

America has been cutting its interest rates to spur growth, and avoid deflation.

Growth like the productivity of American non-farm workers that is skyrocketting.

Growth like Real GDP(inflation adjusted) has been on the rise for 4 years and is currently it's highest since 1999.

but America is in a recession- wake up.
ah yes, but I digress... we are in a recession. I'll just sweep the numbers under the table, those can't possibly mean anything.
I know it's popular to be "down on/with America" these days. But the least you could do is actually take a position that has some facts to support it.

The unemployment rate is 5.4%, The american dollar is losing value because of the weak economy, to the point that it's dangering the Canadian economy. America has been cutting its interest rates to spur growth, and avoid deflation. I have no vested interest in American politics, but America is in a recession- wake up.

I think you've been reading too many Paul Krugman articles. I'll address your points specifically:

the unemployment rate is 5.4%
I am assuming you are making the assertion this is a doom and gloom number. However, historical facts eliminate this assertion.
Notice how the peak is two years gone, and all of 2004 has been a downward slope since then.

The american dollar is losing value because of the weak economy,

I think you should provide evidence of this weak economy. I've written on slashdot several times about this before, but I'll say it again. Economics is not a zero sum game. People are currently calling the dollar "weak". This means that people trading with US companies get MORE goods for their money than they would with buying from other countries. This causes people to buy MORE American goods, infact European businesses were scared about the holiday shopping season because so many were buying American goods rather than European ones.

America has been cutting its interest rates to spur growth, and avoid deflation.

Growth like the productivity of American non-farm workers that is skyrocketting.

Growth like Real GDP(inflation adjusted) has been on the rise for 4 years and is currently it's highest since 1999.

but America is in a recession- wake up.
ah yes, but I digress... we are in a recession. I'll just sweep the numbers under the table, those can't possibly mean anything.
I know it's popular to be "down on/with America" these days. But the least you could do is actually take a position that has some facts to support it.

In other news Inflation was 3.3% last year according to the CPI.

so, accounting for inflation, this "0.5% raise" is an effective 2.8% drop in average IT wages. Just goes to show that statistics can say anything, but their meaning is often obscured.