Slashdot Mirror

When JFK was sworn in, in 1961, the federal government debt was about $285G.

When LBJ was sworn in, in 1963, the federal government debt was about $308G.

When Tricky Nixon was inaugurated in 1969 the federal government debt was about $360G.

When Gerald Ford was inaugurated in 1974, it was about $480G.

When Jimmy Carter was inaugurated in 1977 the federal government debt was about $680G.

When Reagan was inaugurated in 1981 the federal government debt was about $860G.

When GHWBush was inaugurated in 1989 it was about $2.7T.

When Clintoon was inaugurated in 1993 it was about $4.2T.

When Shrub was inaugurated in 2001 it was about $5.73T.

When Obummer was inaugurated in 2009 it was about $10.62T.

On 2014-07-18 it was $17.6T.

At the same time, according to the census bureau _Historical Statistics of the United States_, total aggregate federal government spending (not debt, spending), through 1902, adding each year's spending to the total, was just over $17G, a little less than one-thousandth of the current federal government debt, and much less than the monthly interest on the current federal government debt.

http://www.kermitrose.com/jgoMoney.html#FedDebtsee the graphs

OTOH, the House originates all spending bills, the senate either concurs or floats an amendment; if the House agrees to the amendment, the president either approves or vetoes it. IOW, the responsibility is spread around. The over-spending since 1835 has been perpetrated by the Whigs, Reps and the Dems.

When John Deere was considering off-shoring, they set up a separate facility, connected via satellite links, on their property, manned by guest-workers, so they could test the set-up. They couldn't have done that without the ready supply of guest-workers.

Guest-workers and foreign students also ease knowledge transfer. They learn US academic state of the art and research methods, and even production methods, and take them back with them. Of course, other guest-workers and green card grantees also take defense secrets with them from time to time, while others (who went from F to H-1B to green card to naturalization without being spotted) have been known to try to bomb NY, NY, and they've added to the numbers of illegal aliens in the USA.

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ09FacilitatingOffShoring.html more on how visas facilitate off-shoring

"The United States is still pumping out tremendous numbers of new Ph.D.s in the sciences -- more, in fact, than our economy can presently absorb, as there is a well-reported dearth of jobs for newly-minted science Ph.D.s. The same is true in engineering: According to a recent National Science Foundation report, the number of engineers graduating from U.S. schools will continue to grow into the foreseeable future, out-stripping the number of available jobs..." --- 2005 Summer _New Atlantis_ "How We Measure Up"

2009-01-08: Cheap Science

Studies carried out from the 1990s through 2010 by researchers from Columbia U, Computing Research Association (CRA), Duke U, Georgetown U, Harvard U, National Research Council of the NAS, RAND Corporation, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rutgers U, Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, Stanford U, SUNY Buffalo, UC Davis, UPenn Wharton School, Urban Institute, and US Dept. of Education Office of Education Research & Improvement have reported that the USA has continually been producing more US citizen STEM (science, tech, engineering, math) workers than we've been employing in these fields.

In testimony to the House Science and Technology Committee, Harold Salzman reported that we've been producing as many as 3 times the numbers of STEM workers as we've been employing in these fields.

"Unemployment rates are available and plotted in Figure 6 for chemists, recent mathematics PhDs, and recent biomedical PhDs and MDs. Although not fully comparable in population or time period, these 3 rates, when compared to the overall U.S. unemployment rate, suggest a general increase or leveling in the 1990s, while the general unemployment rate was falling substantially. Rising unemployment in one sector, while the overall economy is doing well, is a strong indicator of developing surpluses of workers, not shortages. Hence, neither earnings patterns nor unemployment patterns indicate an S&E shortage in the data we are able to find." --- William P. Butz, Gabrielle A. Bloom, Mihal E. Gross, Terrene K. Kelly, Aaron Kofner, Helga E. Rippen 2002-11-12 "Is There a Shortage of Scientists and Engineers? How Would We Know?" _RAND Science and Technology Issue Paper_

2009-10-28: "U.S. colleges and universities are graduating as many scientists and engineers as ever, according to a study released on Oct. 28 by a group of academics..."

2010-06-14 Beryl Lieff Benderly _Miller-McCune_ http://www.miller-mccune.com/science/the-real-science-gap-16191/ The Real Science Gap Is a Shortage of Employment Opportunities

* 2010-12-24: "AT&T is getting about 50K applications a month, or around 30 for each person it hires on average, Mr. Smith says." (James R. Hagerty & Joe Light _Wall Street Journal_ "Job ads rising as economy warms up")
* 2010-12-24: Johns Hopkins Hospital and Health System receives 10K applications per month (Eileen Ambrose _Baltimore Sun_/_Grand Forks Herald_)
* 2011-02-03: Google received 75K job applications last week.

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ01NoShortage.html more corroboration and citations.

Even former cross-border bodyshopper Vivek Wadhwa admitted that "by every measure" US engineers are better, and the reason the guest-workers are used and abused is that they're cheap:

"U.S. engineers... [are] more creative, excelled in problem solving, risk taking, networking and [have] strong analytical skills..."
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200707.html#20070702

"Dozens of employers asked to compare American engineers to their much-vaunted colleagues from India and [Red China] agreed that 'in education, training, quality of work, you name it, in every which way, Americans are better'. Even the best schools in those countries 'don't hold a candle to our best schools.', he continues. Newly hired American university graduates 'become productive within 30 days or so. If you hire a graduate of an Indian university, it takes between 3 and 6 months for them to become productive.'"
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200801.html#20080104

"Dynamic" US engineers vs. "transactional" foreign engineers.
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051213
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051227
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200601.html#20060110

Even former cross-border bodyshopper Vivek Wadhwa admitted that "by every measure" US engineers are better, and the reason the guest-workers are used and abused is that they're cheap:

"U.S. engineers... [are] more creative, excelled in problem solving, risk taking, networking and [have] strong analytical skills..."
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200707.html#20070702

"Dozens of employers asked to compare American engineers to their much-vaunted colleagues from India and [Red China] agreed that 'in education, training, quality of work, you name it, in every which way, Americans are better'. Even the best schools in those countries 'don't hold a candle to our best schools.', he continues. Newly hired American university graduates 'become productive within 30 days or so. If you hire a graduate of an Indian university, it takes between 3 and 6 months for them to become productive.'"
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200801.html#20080104

"Dynamic" US engineers vs. "transactional" foreign engineers.
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051213
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051227
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200601.html#20060110

Even former cross-border bodyshopper Vivek Wadhwa admitted that "by every measure" US engineers are better, and the reason the guest-workers are used and abused is that they're cheap:

"U.S. engineers... [are] more creative, excelled in problem solving, risk taking, networking and [have] strong analytical skills..."
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200707.html#20070702

"Dozens of employers asked to compare American engineers to their much-vaunted colleagues from India and [Red China] agreed that 'in education, training, quality of work, you name it, in every which way, Americans are better'. Even the best schools in those countries 'don't hold a candle to our best schools.', he continues. Newly hired American university graduates 'become productive within 30 days or so. If you hire a graduate of an Indian university, it takes between 3 and 6 months for them to become productive.'"
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200801.html#20080104

"Dynamic" US engineers vs. "transactional" foreign engineers.
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051213
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051227
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200601.html#20060110

Even former cross-border bodyshopper Vivek Wadhwa admitted that "by every measure" US engineers are better, and the reason the guest-workers are used and abused is that they're cheap:

"U.S. engineers... [are] more creative, excelled in problem solving, risk taking, networking and [have] strong analytical skills..."
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200707.html#20070702

"Dozens of employers asked to compare American engineers to their much-vaunted colleagues from India and [Red China] agreed that 'in education, training, quality of work, you name it, in every which way, Americans are better'. Even the best schools in those countries 'don't hold a candle to our best schools.', he continues. Newly hired American university graduates 'become productive within 30 days or so. If you hire a graduate of an Indian university, it takes between 3 and 6 months for them to become productive.'"
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200801.html#20080104

"Dynamic" US engineers vs. "transactional" foreign engineers.
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051213
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051227
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200601.html#20060110

Even former cross-border bodyshopper Vivek Wadhwa admitted that "by every measure" US engineers are better, and the reason the guest-workers are used and abused is that they're cheap:

"U.S. engineers... [are] more creative, excelled in problem solving, risk taking, networking and [have] strong analytical skills..."
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200707.html#20070702

"Dozens of employers asked to compare American engineers to their much-vaunted colleagues from India and [Red China] agreed that 'in education, training, quality of work, you name it, in every which way, Americans are better'. Even the best schools in those countries 'don't hold a candle to our best schools.', he continues. Newly hired American university graduates 'become productive within 30 days or so. If you hire a graduate of an Indian university, it takes between 3 and 6 months for them to become productive.'"
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200801.html#20080104

"Dynamic" US engineers vs. "transactional" foreign engineers.
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051213
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051227
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200601.html#20060110

There are a few under-achievers, from families with cultures which do not value academic achievement, or who have been given incentives by the government not to value academic achievement, but the majority of students are being pushed or pushing themselves to excell.

"U.S. engineers... [are] more creative, excelled in problem solving, risk taking, networking and [have] strong analytical skills..."

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200707.html#20070702

"Dozens of employers asked to compare American engineers to their much-vaunted colleagues from India and [Red China] agreed that 'in education, training, quality of work, you name it, in every which way, Americans are better'. Even the best schools in those countries 'don't hold a candle to our best schools.', he continues. Newly hired American university graduates 'become productive within 30 days or so. If you hire a graduate of an Indian university, it takes between 3 and 6 months for them to become productive.'"

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200801.html#20080104

"Dynamic" US engineers vs. "transactional" foreign engineers.

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051213

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051227

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200601.html#20060110

"the mean literacy test score for U.S. adults (272) was 2 points above the mean for all adults in the 20 country survey (270)... Larger, statistically significant, literacy gaps between us and them unfold when you separate immigrant from native-born test takers, as is done in 17 high income countries surveyed by ETS. U.S. natives scored 8 points above the average native of the 17 high income countries. U.S. immigrants scored 16 points below the average immigrant in the 17 countries." --- Edwin S. Rubenstein 2005-12-22 _V Dare_ "The stupid American? Think again"

http://www.vdare.com/rubenstein/051222_nd.htm

"I've mentioned the TIMSS test, for instance, which showed that if [Colorado, Connecticut, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska North Dakota, Oregon, Utah, Vermont, Wisconsin and Wyoming] -- none of which has a substantial under-class -- had been treated as separate nations, each of them would have been out-scored only by Singapore (professor David Berliner, 'Our Schools Versus Theirs', Washington Post, 2001 January 28)... This [both the TIMSS and PISA tests] once again shows, tragically, that the U.S.A. is not doing enough to bring up the educational performance of its under-class. But if one takes the white score as 'main-stream', the U.S.A. would rank 7th out of 27, instead of 18th."

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200603.html#20060317

http://courses.ed.asu.edu/berliner/readings/timssroped.html

"while our average test scores are mediocre, the U.S.A. is a leader with respect to the gap between our best and worst performers. Our best and brightest are equal to, or better than, those of other advanced countries. Our worst rank, well, among the worst anywhere. For several reasons, immigrants exert more of a downward test score drag here than in other advanced countries. First, they account for a larger share of the population. Only 7 of the 27 OECD countries have larger foreign born population shares than the U.S.A. Second -- and more importantly -- our immigrants do poorly on standardized tests compared to the immigrant populations of other advanced countries. The U.S.A. ranked 18th out of the 20

There are a few under-achievers, from families with cultures which do not value academic achievement, or who have been given incentives by the government not to value academic achievement, but the majority of students are being pushed or pushing themselves to excell.

"U.S. engineers... [are] more creative, excelled in problem solving, risk taking, networking and [have] strong analytical skills..."

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200707.html#20070702

"Dozens of employers asked to compare American engineers to their much-vaunted colleagues from India and [Red China] agreed that 'in education, training, quality of work, you name it, in every which way, Americans are better'. Even the best schools in those countries 'don't hold a candle to our best schools.', he continues. Newly hired American university graduates 'become productive within 30 days or so. If you hire a graduate of an Indian university, it takes between 3 and 6 months for them to become productive.'"

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200801.html#20080104

"Dynamic" US engineers vs. "transactional" foreign engineers.

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051213

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051227

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200601.html#20060110

"the mean literacy test score for U.S. adults (272) was 2 points above the mean for all adults in the 20 country survey (270)... Larger, statistically significant, literacy gaps between us and them unfold when you separate immigrant from native-born test takers, as is done in 17 high income countries surveyed by ETS. U.S. natives scored 8 points above the average native of the 17 high income countries. U.S. immigrants scored 16 points below the average immigrant in the 17 countries." --- Edwin S. Rubenstein 2005-12-22 _V Dare_ "The stupid American? Think again"

http://www.vdare.com/rubenstein/051222_nd.htm

"I've mentioned the TIMSS test, for instance, which showed that if [Colorado, Connecticut, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska North Dakota, Oregon, Utah, Vermont, Wisconsin and Wyoming] -- none of which has a substantial under-class -- had been treated as separate nations, each of them would have been out-scored only by Singapore (professor David Berliner, 'Our Schools Versus Theirs', Washington Post, 2001 January 28)... This [both the TIMSS and PISA tests] once again shows, tragically, that the U.S.A. is not doing enough to bring up the educational performance of its under-class. But if one takes the white score as 'main-stream', the U.S.A. would rank 7th out of 27, instead of 18th."

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200603.html#20060317

http://courses.ed.asu.edu/berliner/readings/timssroped.html

"while our average test scores are mediocre, the U.S.A. is a leader with respect to the gap between our best and worst performers. Our best and brightest are equal to, or better than, those of other advanced countries. Our worst rank, well, among the worst anywhere. For several reasons, immigrants exert more of a downward test score drag here than in other advanced countries. First, they account for a larger share of the population. Only 7 of the 27 OECD countries have larger foreign born population shares than the U.S.A. Second -- and more importantly -- our immigrants do poorly on standardized tests compared to the immigrant populations of other advanced countries. The U.S.A. ranked 18th out of the 20

There are a few under-achievers, from families with cultures which do not value academic achievement, or who have been given incentives by the government not to value academic achievement, but the majority of students are being pushed or pushing themselves to excell.

"U.S. engineers... [are] more creative, excelled in problem solving, risk taking, networking and [have] strong analytical skills..."

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200707.html#20070702

"Dozens of employers asked to compare American engineers to their much-vaunted colleagues from India and [Red China] agreed that 'in education, training, quality of work, you name it, in every which way, Americans are better'. Even the best schools in those countries 'don't hold a candle to our best schools.', he continues. Newly hired American university graduates 'become productive within 30 days or so. If you hire a graduate of an Indian university, it takes between 3 and 6 months for them to become productive.'"

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200801.html#20080104

"Dynamic" US engineers vs. "transactional" foreign engineers.

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051213

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051227

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200601.html#20060110

"the mean literacy test score for U.S. adults (272) was 2 points above the mean for all adults in the 20 country survey (270)... Larger, statistically significant, literacy gaps between us and them unfold when you separate immigrant from native-born test takers, as is done in 17 high income countries surveyed by ETS. U.S. natives scored 8 points above the average native of the 17 high income countries. U.S. immigrants scored 16 points below the average immigrant in the 17 countries." --- Edwin S. Rubenstein 2005-12-22 _V Dare_ "The stupid American? Think again"

http://www.vdare.com/rubenstein/051222_nd.htm

"I've mentioned the TIMSS test, for instance, which showed that if [Colorado, Connecticut, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska North Dakota, Oregon, Utah, Vermont, Wisconsin and Wyoming] -- none of which has a substantial under-class -- had been treated as separate nations, each of them would have been out-scored only by Singapore (professor David Berliner, 'Our Schools Versus Theirs', Washington Post, 2001 January 28)... This [both the TIMSS and PISA tests] once again shows, tragically, that the U.S.A. is not doing enough to bring up the educational performance of its under-class. But if one takes the white score as 'main-stream', the U.S.A. would rank 7th out of 27, instead of 18th."

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200603.html#20060317

http://courses.ed.asu.edu/berliner/readings/timssroped.html

"while our average test scores are mediocre, the U.S.A. is a leader with respect to the gap between our best and worst performers. Our best and brightest are equal to, or better than, those of other advanced countries. Our worst rank, well, among the worst anywhere. For several reasons, immigrants exert more of a downward test score drag here than in other advanced countries. First, they account for a larger share of the population. Only 7 of the 27 OECD countries have larger foreign born population shares than the U.S.A. Second -- and more importantly -- our immigrants do poorly on standardized tests compared to the immigrant populations of other advanced countries. The U.S.A. ranked 18th out of the 20

There are a few under-achievers, from families with cultures which do not value academic achievement, or who have been given incentives by the government not to value academic achievement, but the majority of students are being pushed or pushing themselves to excell.

"U.S. engineers... [are] more creative, excelled in problem solving, risk taking, networking and [have] strong analytical skills..."

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200707.html#20070702

"Dozens of employers asked to compare American engineers to their much-vaunted colleagues from India and [Red China] agreed that 'in education, training, quality of work, you name it, in every which way, Americans are better'. Even the best schools in those countries 'don't hold a candle to our best schools.', he continues. Newly hired American university graduates 'become productive within 30 days or so. If you hire a graduate of an Indian university, it takes between 3 and 6 months for them to become productive.'"

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200801.html#20080104

"Dynamic" US engineers vs. "transactional" foreign engineers.

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051213

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051227

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200601.html#20060110

"the mean literacy test score for U.S. adults (272) was 2 points above the mean for all adults in the 20 country survey (270)... Larger, statistically significant, literacy gaps between us and them unfold when you separate immigrant from native-born test takers, as is done in 17 high income countries surveyed by ETS. U.S. natives scored 8 points above the average native of the 17 high income countries. U.S. immigrants scored 16 points below the average immigrant in the 17 countries." --- Edwin S. Rubenstein 2005-12-22 _V Dare_ "The stupid American? Think again"

http://www.vdare.com/rubenstein/051222_nd.htm

"I've mentioned the TIMSS test, for instance, which showed that if [Colorado, Connecticut, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska North Dakota, Oregon, Utah, Vermont, Wisconsin and Wyoming] -- none of which has a substantial under-class -- had been treated as separate nations, each of them would have been out-scored only by Singapore (professor David Berliner, 'Our Schools Versus Theirs', Washington Post, 2001 January 28)... This [both the TIMSS and PISA tests] once again shows, tragically, that the U.S.A. is not doing enough to bring up the educational performance of its under-class. But if one takes the white score as 'main-stream', the U.S.A. would rank 7th out of 27, instead of 18th."

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200603.html#20060317

http://courses.ed.asu.edu/berliner/readings/timssroped.html

"while our average test scores are mediocre, the U.S.A. is a leader with respect to the gap between our best and worst performers. Our best and brightest are equal to, or better than, those of other advanced countries. Our worst rank, well, among the worst anywhere. For several reasons, immigrants exert more of a downward test score drag here than in other advanced countries. First, they account for a larger share of the population. Only 7 of the 27 OECD countries have larger foreign born population shares than the U.S.A. Second -- and more importantly -- our immigrants do poorly on standardized tests compared to the immigrant populations of other advanced countries. The U.S.A. ranked 18th out of the 20

There are a few under-achievers, from families with cultures which do not value academic achievement, or who have been given incentives by the government not to value academic achievement, but the majority of students are being pushed or pushing themselves to excell.

"U.S. engineers... [are] more creative, excelled in problem solving, risk taking, networking and [have] strong analytical skills..."

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200707.html#20070702

"Dozens of employers asked to compare American engineers to their much-vaunted colleagues from India and [Red China] agreed that 'in education, training, quality of work, you name it, in every which way, Americans are better'. Even the best schools in those countries 'don't hold a candle to our best schools.', he continues. Newly hired American university graduates 'become productive within 30 days or so. If you hire a graduate of an Indian university, it takes between 3 and 6 months for them to become productive.'"

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200801.html#20080104

"Dynamic" US engineers vs. "transactional" foreign engineers.

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051213

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051227

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200601.html#20060110

"the mean literacy test score for U.S. adults (272) was 2 points above the mean for all adults in the 20 country survey (270)... Larger, statistically significant, literacy gaps between us and them unfold when you separate immigrant from native-born test takers, as is done in 17 high income countries surveyed by ETS. U.S. natives scored 8 points above the average native of the 17 high income countries. U.S. immigrants scored 16 points below the average immigrant in the 17 countries." --- Edwin S. Rubenstein 2005-12-22 _V Dare_ "The stupid American? Think again"

http://www.vdare.com/rubenstein/051222_nd.htm

"I've mentioned the TIMSS test, for instance, which showed that if [Colorado, Connecticut, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska North Dakota, Oregon, Utah, Vermont, Wisconsin and Wyoming] -- none of which has a substantial under-class -- had been treated as separate nations, each of them would have been out-scored only by Singapore (professor David Berliner, 'Our Schools Versus Theirs', Washington Post, 2001 January 28)... This [both the TIMSS and PISA tests] once again shows, tragically, that the U.S.A. is not doing enough to bring up the educational performance of its under-class. But if one takes the white score as 'main-stream', the U.S.A. would rank 7th out of 27, instead of 18th."

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200603.html#20060317

http://courses.ed.asu.edu/berliner/readings/timssroped.html

"while our average test scores are mediocre, the U.S.A. is a leader with respect to the gap between our best and worst performers. Our best and brightest are equal to, or better than, those of other advanced countries. Our worst rank, well, among the worst anywhere. For several reasons, immigrants exert more of a downward test score drag here than in other advanced countries. First, they account for a larger share of the population. Only 7 of the 27 OECD countries have larger foreign born population shares than the U.S.A. Second -- and more importantly -- our immigrants do poorly on standardized tests compared to the immigrant populations of other advanced countries. The U.S.A. ranked 18th out of the 20

There are a few under-achievers, from families with cultures which do not value academic achievement, or who have been given incentives by the government not to value academic achievement, but the majority of students are being pushed or pushing themselves to excell.

"U.S. engineers... [are] more creative, excelled in problem solving, risk taking, networking and [have] strong analytical skills..."

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200707.html#20070702

"Dozens of employers asked to compare American engineers to their much-vaunted colleagues from India and [Red China] agreed that 'in education, training, quality of work, you name it, in every which way, Americans are better'. Even the best schools in those countries 'don't hold a candle to our best schools.', he continues. Newly hired American university graduates 'become productive within 30 days or so. If you hire a graduate of an Indian university, it takes between 3 and 6 months for them to become productive.'"

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200801.html#20080104

"Dynamic" US engineers vs. "transactional" foreign engineers.

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051213

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051227

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200601.html#20060110

"the mean literacy test score for U.S. adults (272) was 2 points above the mean for all adults in the 20 country survey (270)... Larger, statistically significant, literacy gaps between us and them unfold when you separate immigrant from native-born test takers, as is done in 17 high income countries surveyed by ETS. U.S. natives scored 8 points above the average native of the 17 high income countries. U.S. immigrants scored 16 points below the average immigrant in the 17 countries." --- Edwin S. Rubenstein 2005-12-22 _V Dare_ "The stupid American? Think again"

http://www.vdare.com/rubenstein/051222_nd.htm

"I've mentioned the TIMSS test, for instance, which showed that if [Colorado, Connecticut, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska North Dakota, Oregon, Utah, Vermont, Wisconsin and Wyoming] -- none of which has a substantial under-class -- had been treated as separate nations, each of them would have been out-scored only by Singapore (professor David Berliner, 'Our Schools Versus Theirs', Washington Post, 2001 January 28)... This [both the TIMSS and PISA tests] once again shows, tragically, that the U.S.A. is not doing enough to bring up the educational performance of its under-class. But if one takes the white score as 'main-stream', the U.S.A. would rank 7th out of 27, instead of 18th."

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200603.html#20060317

http://courses.ed.asu.edu/berliner/readings/timssroped.html

"while our average test scores are mediocre, the U.S.A. is a leader with respect to the gap between our best and worst performers. Our best and brightest are equal to, or better than, those of other advanced countries. Our worst rank, well, among the worst anywhere. For several reasons, immigrants exert more of a downward test score drag here than in other advanced countries. First, they account for a larger share of the population. Only 7 of the 27 OECD countries have larger foreign born population shares than the U.S.A. Second -- and more importantly -- our immigrants do poorly on standardized tests compared to the immigrant populations of other advanced countries. The U.S.A. ranked 18th out of the 20

Degrees http://www.kermitrose.com/jgoEduStats.html (from US DoEducation's National Center for Education Statistics annual Digest of Education Statistics)

Employment/Unemployment in a selection of industries http://www.kermitrose.com/jgoIndustries.html (from BLS)

Employment/Unemployment in a sampling of occupations http://www.kermitrose.com/jgoOccupation.html (from BLS, and NACE press releases)

Degrees http://www.kermitrose.com/jgoEduStats.html (from US DoEducation's National Center for Education Statistics annual Digest of Education Statistics)

Employment/Unemployment in a selection of industries http://www.kermitrose.com/jgoIndustries.html (from BLS)

Employment/Unemployment in a sampling of occupations http://www.kermitrose.com/jgoOccupation.html (from BLS, and NACE press releases)

Degrees http://www.kermitrose.com/jgoEduStats.html (from US DoEducation's National Center for Education Statistics annual Digest of Education Statistics)

Employment/Unemployment in a selection of industries http://www.kermitrose.com/jgoIndustries.html (from BLS)

Employment/Unemployment in a sampling of occupations http://www.kermitrose.com/jgoOccupation.html (from BLS, and NACE press releases)

Degrees http://www.kermitrose.com/jgoEduStats.html (from US DoEducation's National Center for Education Statistics annual Digest of Education Statistics)

Employment/Unemployment in a selection of industries http://www.kermitrose.com/jgoIndustries.html (from BLS)

Employment/Unemployment in a sampling of occupations http://www.kermitrose.com/jgoOccupation.html (from BLS, and NACE press releases)

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ04VisaLimitsExcessive.html This page has tables and links to the USCIS "Characteristics" reports and to the State Department "non-immigrant visas issued" reports. But the State Dept. numbers are low, because they include only visas issued by consular offices over-seas, they don't include visas in cases when the State Dept. initially rejected an application and then the applicant got a waiver or was approved on appeal (but I get the impression through their bureau-speak that they push those numbers into the next year's counts). And they don't include all of the cases of change of status from some other visa to an H-1B visa by people already in the USA. (But beware that these agencies sometimes change their URLs, so there could be some broken links.) Both agencies report on the basis of the federal government's "fiscal year" which begins on October 1 and ends at the end of September of the calendar year whose number is used to designate the fiscal year (so, e.g. FY2010 essentially began on 2009-10-01 00:00:00.0000001 and ended 2010-09-30 23:59:59.9999999).

"You have come to the conclusion that qualified applicants are not willing to work for the prevailing wage. I have come to the opposite conclusion, which is that your company is not offering the prevailing wage for qualified applicants."

Right. Consider also the nature of the work. Is it new, exciting, cutting edge? Will it lead to new, exciting, cutting edge work? No. Web weaving is trodding well-known ground, so well-trod that, even focusing on the Java world, the technology has already gone through several waves of framework development aimed at just such applications.

I'd also do a reality check on the meaning of "qualified" in your context. Most experienced programmers could pick up Java in a few hours, and the specific frameworks needed within a few weeks. If you'd offered market compensation, reasonable relocation, and new-hire training, those new employees would be productive by now.

But I understand. You don't think you've got that much money to invest. So, you don't have enough money to pay for what you want. Period. As much as I'd like, I don't have money to get every new Mac or iPad that's released, cars, pizza, land, house... That's life. Live with it. Stop demanding that everyone else put aside their priorities, goals, and dreams to artificially subsidize yours.

http://www.kermitrose.com/econSummaryAnalysis.html summary analysis of the history and effects of the expansion of the F visas, creation of the H-1B, abuse of the J and L visas.

I haven't seen anything that I would really consider "cutting edge" technology for at least a decade. Whatever they are calling "cutting edge" can be quickly grasped by all but the most stupid engineers.

Personally, I think this complaint about a lack of people with the right skills is just an excuse used by mid-level managers and VP's to cover up the fact that they can't get things accomplished.

I have to agree with that. Most of the job ads I've been seeing are for temp gigs doing slog work, integrating data-bases, report writing... many of them using obsolete tools... not developing great new software products using the latest tools.

6% unemployment is not high at all. The "sweet spot" is about 5%. Any lower and it becomes too hard to find people.

Look at the figures in historical context. Look specifically at unemployment in STEM fields rather than the general average unemployment rates for all occupations, you would be very close. By looking at history and looking at the available information about historical government-defined unemployment rates for specific occupations, you will see that full-employment for actos is about 25%, while full-employment for STEM workers is closer to 2%.

The worst problem with the available data is that many move from being fully-employed software architects, biophysicists, mechanical engineers, to serving coffee, selling blue jeans, pet sitting, and the occasional gig teaching those "best and brightest" guest-workers how to program at the local juco. BLS counts them as fully-employed coffee servers and fully-employed retail sales staffers and such, subtracting them from the total available STEM labor force.

"This gradual rise in what is implicitly assumed to be full employment can be seen in the Economic Report of the President. In the Kennedy administration, 4% unemployment was set as an 'interim' unemployment target because they did not want to defend even ths level of unemployment. By the end of the Johnson administration, full employment was creeping up to 4.5%. By the end of the Ford administration, the economic report was defending 5% as full employment. In the 1979 economic report of president Carter, 6% is the implicit full-employment target." --- Lester C. Thurow 1980 _The Zero-Sum Society_ pg 73

Graphs of employment/unemployment by industry

by occupation

test scores and degrees earned (and quotes)

job ads, job ad indices, price indices, etc.

I haven't seen anything that I would really consider "cutting edge" technology for at least a decade. Whatever they are calling "cutting edge" can be quickly grasped by all but the most stupid engineers.

Personally, I think this complaint about a lack of people with the right skills is just an excuse used by mid-level managers and VP's to cover up the fact that they can't get things accomplished.

I have to agree with that. Most of the job ads I've been seeing are for temp gigs doing slog work, integrating data-bases, report writing... many of them using obsolete tools... not developing great new software products using the latest tools.

6% unemployment is not high at all. The "sweet spot" is about 5%. Any lower and it becomes too hard to find people.

Look at the figures in historical context. Look specifically at unemployment in STEM fields rather than the general average unemployment rates for all occupations, you would be very close. By looking at history and looking at the available information about historical government-defined unemployment rates for specific occupations, you will see that full-employment for actos is about 25%, while full-employment for STEM workers is closer to 2%.

The worst problem with the available data is that many move from being fully-employed software architects, biophysicists, mechanical engineers, to serving coffee, selling blue jeans, pet sitting, and the occasional gig teaching those "best and brightest" guest-workers how to program at the local juco. BLS counts them as fully-employed coffee servers and fully-employed retail sales staffers and such, subtracting them from the total available STEM labor force.

"This gradual rise in what is implicitly assumed to be full employment can be seen in the Economic Report of the President. In the Kennedy administration, 4% unemployment was set as an 'interim' unemployment target because they did not want to defend even ths level of unemployment. By the end of the Johnson administration, full employment was creeping up to 4.5%. By the end of the Ford administration, the economic report was defending 5% as full employment. In the 1979 economic report of president Carter, 6% is the implicit full-employment target." --- Lester C. Thurow 1980 _The Zero-Sum Society_ pg 73

Graphs of employment/unemployment by industry

by occupation

test scores and degrees earned (and quotes)

job ads, job ad indices, price indices, etc.

I haven't seen anything that I would really consider "cutting edge" technology for at least a decade. Whatever they are calling "cutting edge" can be quickly grasped by all but the most stupid engineers.

Personally, I think this complaint about a lack of people with the right skills is just an excuse used by mid-level managers and VP's to cover up the fact that they can't get things accomplished.

I have to agree with that. Most of the job ads I've been seeing are for temp gigs doing slog work, integrating data-bases, report writing... many of them using obsolete tools... not developing great new software products using the latest tools.

6% unemployment is not high at all. The "sweet spot" is about 5%. Any lower and it becomes too hard to find people.

Look at the figures in historical context. Look specifically at unemployment in STEM fields rather than the general average unemployment rates for all occupations, you would be very close. By looking at history and looking at the available information about historical government-defined unemployment rates for specific occupations, you will see that full-employment for actos is about 25%, while full-employment for STEM workers is closer to 2%.

The worst problem with the available data is that many move from being fully-employed software architects, biophysicists, mechanical engineers, to serving coffee, selling blue jeans, pet sitting, and the occasional gig teaching those "best and brightest" guest-workers how to program at the local juco. BLS counts them as fully-employed coffee servers and fully-employed retail sales staffers and such, subtracting them from the total available STEM labor force.

"This gradual rise in what is implicitly assumed to be full employment can be seen in the Economic Report of the President. In the Kennedy administration, 4% unemployment was set as an 'interim' unemployment target because they did not want to defend even ths level of unemployment. By the end of the Johnson administration, full employment was creeping up to 4.5%. By the end of the Ford administration, the economic report was defending 5% as full employment. In the 1979 economic report of president Carter, 6% is the implicit full-employment target." --- Lester C. Thurow 1980 _The Zero-Sum Society_ pg 73

Graphs of employment/unemployment by industry

by occupation

test scores and degrees earned (and quotes)

job ads, job ad indices, price indices, etc.

I haven't seen anything that I would really consider "cutting edge" technology for at least a decade. Whatever they are calling "cutting edge" can be quickly grasped by all but the most stupid engineers.

Personally, I think this complaint about a lack of people with the right skills is just an excuse used by mid-level managers and VP's to cover up the fact that they can't get things accomplished.

I have to agree with that. Most of the job ads I've been seeing are for temp gigs doing slog work, integrating data-bases, report writing... many of them using obsolete tools... not developing great new software products using the latest tools.

6% unemployment is not high at all. The "sweet spot" is about 5%. Any lower and it becomes too hard to find people.

Look at the figures in historical context. Look specifically at unemployment in STEM fields rather than the general average unemployment rates for all occupations, you would be very close. By looking at history and looking at the available information about historical government-defined unemployment rates for specific occupations, you will see that full-employment for actos is about 25%, while full-employment for STEM workers is closer to 2%.

The worst problem with the available data is that many move from being fully-employed software architects, biophysicists, mechanical engineers, to serving coffee, selling blue jeans, pet sitting, and the occasional gig teaching those "best and brightest" guest-workers how to program at the local juco. BLS counts them as fully-employed coffee servers and fully-employed retail sales staffers and such, subtracting them from the total available STEM labor force.

"This gradual rise in what is implicitly assumed to be full employment can be seen in the Economic Report of the President. In the Kennedy administration, 4% unemployment was set as an 'interim' unemployment target because they did not want to defend even ths level of unemployment. By the end of the Johnson administration, full employment was creeping up to 4.5%. By the end of the Ford administration, the economic report was defending 5% as full employment. In the 1979 economic report of president Carter, 6% is the implicit full-employment target." --- Lester C. Thurow 1980 _The Zero-Sum Society_ pg 73

Graphs of employment/unemployment by industry

by occupation

test scores and degrees earned (and quotes)

job ads, job ad indices, price indices, etc.

Yah, after all, it's only a few hundred thousand US citizen STEM workers having difficulty landing decent work. http://www.kermitrose.com/econ10PersonalToll.html http://www.kermitrose.com/jgoEconData.html

Yah, after all, it's only a few hundred thousand US citizen STEM workers having difficulty landing decent work. http://www.kermitrose.com/econ10PersonalToll.html http://www.kermitrose.com/jgoEconData.html

"Really, what is this IT sector. Does it include EA? Id? IBM? The guy who fixes the printer? The help desk retard who tells you to reboot?..." Yes, "IT" is a wide-open general term. It includes the old "data processors" and "computer operators", and software architects, and CIS managers, and sys admins and network admins and data-base admins, and programmers, and analysts, and computer scientists, SQA testers, and software engineers. It includes working on software for accounting, for design of parts for nuclear weapons systems and of sky-scrapers, wholesale electricity transmission transaction processing, embedded systems in your toaster and microwave and cellular phone, games, software to do animations and movie editing, econometrics, linguistics, psychology, neuro-physiology... General! But most of the people who use it seem to be talking, most of the time, about the house "geeks" or "techies", kept caged in a non software or computer firm to hold the hands, spoon-feed, and do the dirty work for the clueless B-school bozos, or the bodies shopped to go out to firms to customize the interface and configuration of pre-packaged software like Oracle. Actual software product developers (lumped with all of the other production workers in their firms) are a small minority according to BLS. Let's see... http://www.kermitrose.com/jgoEconData.html employment by industry... Here, we go, "software publishing" versus bodies shopped: http://www.kermitrose.com/images/blsSIC2.jpg They changed the series names and codes on me, but you can see the difference back at the peak. Ugh. You just reminded me. New metropolitan area unemployment rates are supposed to be out, today. Gotta go.

"Really, what is this IT sector. Does it include EA? Id? IBM? The guy who fixes the printer? The help desk retard who tells you to reboot?..." Yes, "IT" is a wide-open general term. It includes the old "data processors" and "computer operators", and software architects, and CIS managers, and sys admins and network admins and data-base admins, and programmers, and analysts, and computer scientists, SQA testers, and software engineers. It includes working on software for accounting, for design of parts for nuclear weapons systems and of sky-scrapers, wholesale electricity transmission transaction processing, embedded systems in your toaster and microwave and cellular phone, games, software to do animations and movie editing, econometrics, linguistics, psychology, neuro-physiology... General! But most of the people who use it seem to be talking, most of the time, about the house "geeks" or "techies", kept caged in a non software or computer firm to hold the hands, spoon-feed, and do the dirty work for the clueless B-school bozos, or the bodies shopped to go out to firms to customize the interface and configuration of pre-packaged software like Oracle. Actual software product developers (lumped with all of the other production workers in their firms) are a small minority according to BLS. Let's see... http://www.kermitrose.com/jgoEconData.html employment by industry... Here, we go, "software publishing" versus bodies shopped: http://www.kermitrose.com/images/blsSIC2.jpg They changed the series names and codes on me, but you can see the difference back at the peak. Ugh. You just reminded me. New metropolitan area unemployment rates are supposed to be out, today. Gotta go.

"U.S. engineers... [are] more creative, excelled in problem solving, risk taking, networking and [have] strong analytical skills..."
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200707.html#20070702

"Dozens of employers asked to compare American engineers to their much-vaunted colleagues from India and [Red China] agreed that 'in education, training, quality of work, you name it, in every which way, Americans are better'. Even the best schools in those countries 'don't hold a candle to our best schools.', he continues. Newly hired American university graduates 'become productive within 30 days or so. If you hire a graduate of an Indian university, it takes between 3 and 6 months for them to become productive.'"
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200801.html#20080104

"Dynamic" US engineers vs. "transactional" foreign engineers.
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051213
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051227
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200601.html#20060110

Gifted individuals account for only 5% of H-1B visa holders at most, so cutting the numbers of H-1B visas from the current 110K to 2,000 or fewer per year and auctioning them off monthly to the highest bidders on the basis of compensation would improve the likelihood that the best and brightest would be welcomed. Cutting them to 1,000 per year would begin to bring back the huge pool of unemployed and under-employed US citizen science and tech workers toward full employment, and thus boost the economy. If all else fails, we should set the bar by conducting multiple IQ tests and admit those whose average scores exceed 160 (or aggregate ACT score above 34 or aggregate SAT score above 1560 or "new" aggregate SAT score above 2100 or aggregate GRE above 1615).
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200705.html#20070513
http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/Archive/NotBestAndBrightest3.txt

"the mean literacy test score for U.S. adults (272) was 2 points above the mean for all adults in the 20 country survey (270)... Larger, statistically significant, literacy gaps between us and them unfold when you separate immigrant from native-born test takers, as is done in 17 high income countries surveyed by ETS. U.S. natives scored 8 points above the average native of the 17 high income countries. U.S. immigrants scored 16 points below the average immigrant in the 17 countries." --- Edwin S. Rubenstein 2005-12-22 _V Dare_ "The stupid American? Think again"
http://www.vdare.com/rubenstein/051222_nd.htm

It's impossible to make a case that executives should continue turning their backs on some of the best science, tech, engineering and math talent in the world and instead hire lower-quality, low-skill, cheaper labor from over-seas.

"I've mentioned the TIMSS test, for instance, which showed that if [Colorado, Connecticut, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska North Dakota, Oregon, Utah, Vermont, Wisconsin and Wyoming] -- none of which has a substantial under-class -- had been treated as separate nations, each of them would have been out-scored only by Singapore (professor David Berliner, 'Our Schools Versus Theirs', Washington Post, 2001 January 28)... This [both the TIMSS and PISA tests] once again shows, tragically, that the U.S.A. is not doing enough to bring up the educational performance of its under-class. But if one takes the white score as 'main-stream', the U.S.A. would rank 7th out of 27, instead of 18th."
http://www.k

"U.S. engineers... [are] more creative, excelled in problem solving, risk taking, networking and [have] strong analytical skills..."
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200707.html#20070702

"Dozens of employers asked to compare American engineers to their much-vaunted colleagues from India and [Red China] agreed that 'in education, training, quality of work, you name it, in every which way, Americans are better'. Even the best schools in those countries 'don't hold a candle to our best schools.', he continues. Newly hired American university graduates 'become productive within 30 days or so. If you hire a graduate of an Indian university, it takes between 3 and 6 months for them to become productive.'"
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200801.html#20080104

"Dynamic" US engineers vs. "transactional" foreign engineers.
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051213
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051227
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200601.html#20060110

Gifted individuals account for only 5% of H-1B visa holders at most, so cutting the numbers of H-1B visas from the current 110K to 2,000 or fewer per year and auctioning them off monthly to the highest bidders on the basis of compensation would improve the likelihood that the best and brightest would be welcomed. Cutting them to 1,000 per year would begin to bring back the huge pool of unemployed and under-employed US citizen science and tech workers toward full employment, and thus boost the economy. If all else fails, we should set the bar by conducting multiple IQ tests and admit those whose average scores exceed 160 (or aggregate ACT score above 34 or aggregate SAT score above 1560 or "new" aggregate SAT score above 2100 or aggregate GRE above 1615).
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200705.html#20070513
http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/Archive/NotBestAndBrightest3.txt

"the mean literacy test score for U.S. adults (272) was 2 points above the mean for all adults in the 20 country survey (270)... Larger, statistically significant, literacy gaps between us and them unfold when you separate immigrant from native-born test takers, as is done in 17 high income countries surveyed by ETS. U.S. natives scored 8 points above the average native of the 17 high income countries. U.S. immigrants scored 16 points below the average immigrant in the 17 countries." --- Edwin S. Rubenstein 2005-12-22 _V Dare_ "The stupid American? Think again"
http://www.vdare.com/rubenstein/051222_nd.htm

It's impossible to make a case that executives should continue turning their backs on some of the best science, tech, engineering and math talent in the world and instead hire lower-quality, low-skill, cheaper labor from over-seas.

"I've mentioned the TIMSS test, for instance, which showed that if [Colorado, Connecticut, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska North Dakota, Oregon, Utah, Vermont, Wisconsin and Wyoming] -- none of which has a substantial under-class -- had been treated as separate nations, each of them would have been out-scored only by Singapore (professor David Berliner, 'Our Schools Versus Theirs', Washington Post, 2001 January 28)... This [both the TIMSS and PISA tests] once again shows, tragically, that the U.S.A. is not doing enough to bring up the educational performance of its under-class. But if one takes the white score as 'main-stream', the U.S.A. would rank 7th out of 27, instead of 18th."
http://www.k

"U.S. engineers... [are] more creative, excelled in problem solving, risk taking, networking and [have] strong analytical skills..."
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200707.html#20070702

"Dozens of employers asked to compare American engineers to their much-vaunted colleagues from India and [Red China] agreed that 'in education, training, quality of work, you name it, in every which way, Americans are better'. Even the best schools in those countries 'don't hold a candle to our best schools.', he continues. Newly hired American university graduates 'become productive within 30 days or so. If you hire a graduate of an Indian university, it takes between 3 and 6 months for them to become productive.'"
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200801.html#20080104

"Dynamic" US engineers vs. "transactional" foreign engineers.
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051213
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051227
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200601.html#20060110

Gifted individuals account for only 5% of H-1B visa holders at most, so cutting the numbers of H-1B visas from the current 110K to 2,000 or fewer per year and auctioning them off monthly to the highest bidders on the basis of compensation would improve the likelihood that the best and brightest would be welcomed. Cutting them to 1,000 per year would begin to bring back the huge pool of unemployed and under-employed US citizen science and tech workers toward full employment, and thus boost the economy. If all else fails, we should set the bar by conducting multiple IQ tests and admit those whose average scores exceed 160 (or aggregate ACT score above 34 or aggregate SAT score above 1560 or "new" aggregate SAT score above 2100 or aggregate GRE above 1615).
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200705.html#20070513
http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/Archive/NotBestAndBrightest3.txt

"the mean literacy test score for U.S. adults (272) was 2 points above the mean for all adults in the 20 country survey (270)... Larger, statistically significant, literacy gaps between us and them unfold when you separate immigrant from native-born test takers, as is done in 17 high income countries surveyed by ETS. U.S. natives scored 8 points above the average native of the 17 high income countries. U.S. immigrants scored 16 points below the average immigrant in the 17 countries." --- Edwin S. Rubenstein 2005-12-22 _V Dare_ "The stupid American? Think again"
http://www.vdare.com/rubenstein/051222_nd.htm

It's impossible to make a case that executives should continue turning their backs on some of the best science, tech, engineering and math talent in the world and instead hire lower-quality, low-skill, cheaper labor from over-seas.

"I've mentioned the TIMSS test, for instance, which showed that if [Colorado, Connecticut, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska North Dakota, Oregon, Utah, Vermont, Wisconsin and Wyoming] -- none of which has a substantial under-class -- had been treated as separate nations, each of them would have been out-scored only by Singapore (professor David Berliner, 'Our Schools Versus Theirs', Washington Post, 2001 January 28)... This [both the TIMSS and PISA tests] once again shows, tragically, that the U.S.A. is not doing enough to bring up the educational performance of its under-class. But if one takes the white score as 'main-stream', the U.S.A. would rank 7th out of 27, instead of 18th."
http://www.k

"U.S. engineers... [are] more creative, excelled in problem solving, risk taking, networking and [have] strong analytical skills..."
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200707.html#20070702

"Dozens of employers asked to compare American engineers to their much-vaunted colleagues from India and [Red China] agreed that 'in education, training, quality of work, you name it, in every which way, Americans are better'. Even the best schools in those countries 'don't hold a candle to our best schools.', he continues. Newly hired American university graduates 'become productive within 30 days or so. If you hire a graduate of an Indian university, it takes between 3 and 6 months for them to become productive.'"
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200801.html#20080104

"Dynamic" US engineers vs. "transactional" foreign engineers.
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051213
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051227
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200601.html#20060110

Gifted individuals account for only 5% of H-1B visa holders at most, so cutting the numbers of H-1B visas from the current 110K to 2,000 or fewer per year and auctioning them off monthly to the highest bidders on the basis of compensation would improve the likelihood that the best and brightest would be welcomed. Cutting them to 1,000 per year would begin to bring back the huge pool of unemployed and under-employed US citizen science and tech workers toward full employment, and thus boost the economy. If all else fails, we should set the bar by conducting multiple IQ tests and admit those whose average scores exceed 160 (or aggregate ACT score above 34 or aggregate SAT score above 1560 or "new" aggregate SAT score above 2100 or aggregate GRE above 1615).
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200705.html#20070513
http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/Archive/NotBestAndBrightest3.txt

"the mean literacy test score for U.S. adults (272) was 2 points above the mean for all adults in the 20 country survey (270)... Larger, statistically significant, literacy gaps between us and them unfold when you separate immigrant from native-born test takers, as is done in 17 high income countries surveyed by ETS. U.S. natives scored 8 points above the average native of the 17 high income countries. U.S. immigrants scored 16 points below the average immigrant in the 17 countries." --- Edwin S. Rubenstein 2005-12-22 _V Dare_ "The stupid American? Think again"
http://www.vdare.com/rubenstein/051222_nd.htm

It's impossible to make a case that executives should continue turning their backs on some of the best science, tech, engineering and math talent in the world and instead hire lower-quality, low-skill, cheaper labor from over-seas.

"I've mentioned the TIMSS test, for instance, which showed that if [Colorado, Connecticut, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska North Dakota, Oregon, Utah, Vermont, Wisconsin and Wyoming] -- none of which has a substantial under-class -- had been treated as separate nations, each of them would have been out-scored only by Singapore (professor David Berliner, 'Our Schools Versus Theirs', Washington Post, 2001 January 28)... This [both the TIMSS and PISA tests] once again shows, tragically, that the U.S.A. is not doing enough to bring up the educational performance of its under-class. But if one takes the white score as 'main-stream', the U.S.A. would rank 7th out of 27, instead of 18th."
http://www.k

"U.S. engineers... [are] more creative, excelled in problem solving, risk taking, networking and [have] strong analytical skills..."
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200707.html#20070702

"Dozens of employers asked to compare American engineers to their much-vaunted colleagues from India and [Red China] agreed that 'in education, training, quality of work, you name it, in every which way, Americans are better'. Even the best schools in those countries 'don't hold a candle to our best schools.', he continues. Newly hired American university graduates 'become productive within 30 days or so. If you hire a graduate of an Indian university, it takes between 3 and 6 months for them to become productive.'"
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200801.html#20080104

"Dynamic" US engineers vs. "transactional" foreign engineers.
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051213
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051227
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200601.html#20060110

Gifted individuals account for only 5% of H-1B visa holders at most, so cutting the numbers of H-1B visas from the current 110K to 2,000 or fewer per year and auctioning them off monthly to the highest bidders on the basis of compensation would improve the likelihood that the best and brightest would be welcomed. Cutting them to 1,000 per year would begin to bring back the huge pool of unemployed and under-employed US citizen science and tech workers toward full employment, and thus boost the economy. If all else fails, we should set the bar by conducting multiple IQ tests and admit those whose average scores exceed 160 (or aggregate ACT score above 34 or aggregate SAT score above 1560 or "new" aggregate SAT score above 2100 or aggregate GRE above 1615).
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200705.html#20070513
http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/Archive/NotBestAndBrightest3.txt

"the mean literacy test score for U.S. adults (272) was 2 points above the mean for all adults in the 20 country survey (270)... Larger, statistically significant, literacy gaps between us and them unfold when you separate immigrant from native-born test takers, as is done in 17 high income countries surveyed by ETS. U.S. natives scored 8 points above the average native of the 17 high income countries. U.S. immigrants scored 16 points below the average immigrant in the 17 countries." --- Edwin S. Rubenstein 2005-12-22 _V Dare_ "The stupid American? Think again"
http://www.vdare.com/rubenstein/051222_nd.htm

It's impossible to make a case that executives should continue turning their backs on some of the best science, tech, engineering and math talent in the world and instead hire lower-quality, low-skill, cheaper labor from over-seas.

"I've mentioned the TIMSS test, for instance, which showed that if [Colorado, Connecticut, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska North Dakota, Oregon, Utah, Vermont, Wisconsin and Wyoming] -- none of which has a substantial under-class -- had been treated as separate nations, each of them would have been out-scored only by Singapore (professor David Berliner, 'Our Schools Versus Theirs', Washington Post, 2001 January 28)... This [both the TIMSS and PISA tests] once again shows, tragically, that the U.S.A. is not doing enough to bring up the educational performance of its under-class. But if one takes the white score as 'main-stream', the U.S.A. would rank 7th out of 27, instead of 18th."
http://www.k

"U.S. engineers... [are] more creative, excelled in problem solving, risk taking, networking and [have] strong analytical skills..."
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200707.html#20070702

"Dozens of employers asked to compare American engineers to their much-vaunted colleagues from India and [Red China] agreed that 'in education, training, quality of work, you name it, in every which way, Americans are better'. Even the best schools in those countries 'don't hold a candle to our best schools.', he continues. Newly hired American university graduates 'become productive within 30 days or so. If you hire a graduate of an Indian university, it takes between 3 and 6 months for them to become productive.'"
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200801.html#20080104

"Dynamic" US engineers vs. "transactional" foreign engineers.
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051213
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051227
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200601.html#20060110

Gifted individuals account for only 5% of H-1B visa holders at most, so cutting the numbers of H-1B visas from the current 110K to 2,000 or fewer per year and auctioning them off monthly to the highest bidders on the basis of compensation would improve the likelihood that the best and brightest would be welcomed. Cutting them to 1,000 per year would begin to bring back the huge pool of unemployed and under-employed US citizen science and tech workers toward full employment, and thus boost the economy. If all else fails, we should set the bar by conducting multiple IQ tests and admit those whose average scores exceed 160 (or aggregate ACT score above 34 or aggregate SAT score above 1560 or "new" aggregate SAT score above 2100 or aggregate GRE above 1615).
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200705.html#20070513
http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/Archive/NotBestAndBrightest3.txt

"the mean literacy test score for U.S. adults (272) was 2 points above the mean for all adults in the 20 country survey (270)... Larger, statistically significant, literacy gaps between us and them unfold when you separate immigrant from native-born test takers, as is done in 17 high income countries surveyed by ETS. U.S. natives scored 8 points above the average native of the 17 high income countries. U.S. immigrants scored 16 points below the average immigrant in the 17 countries." --- Edwin S. Rubenstein 2005-12-22 _V Dare_ "The stupid American? Think again"
http://www.vdare.com/rubenstein/051222_nd.htm

It's impossible to make a case that executives should continue turning their backs on some of the best science, tech, engineering and math talent in the world and instead hire lower-quality, low-skill, cheaper labor from over-seas.

"I've mentioned the TIMSS test, for instance, which showed that if [Colorado, Connecticut, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska North Dakota, Oregon, Utah, Vermont, Wisconsin and Wyoming] -- none of which has a substantial under-class -- had been treated as separate nations, each of them would have been out-scored only by Singapore (professor David Berliner, 'Our Schools Versus Theirs', Washington Post, 2001 January 28)... This [both the TIMSS and PISA tests] once again shows, tragically, that the U.S.A. is not doing enough to bring up the educational performance of its under-class. But if one takes the white score as 'main-stream', the U.S.A. would rank 7th out of 27, instead of 18th."
http://www.k

"U.S. engineers... [are] more creative, excelled in problem solving, risk taking, networking and [have] strong analytical skills..."
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200707.html#20070702

"Dozens of employers asked to compare American engineers to their much-vaunted colleagues from India and [Red China] agreed that 'in education, training, quality of work, you name it, in every which way, Americans are better'. Even the best schools in those countries 'don't hold a candle to our best schools.', he continues. Newly hired American university graduates 'become productive within 30 days or so. If you hire a graduate of an Indian university, it takes between 3 and 6 months for them to become productive.'"
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200801.html#20080104

"Dynamic" US engineers vs. "transactional" foreign engineers.
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051213
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200512.html#20051227
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200601.html#20060110

Gifted individuals account for only 5% of H-1B visa holders at most, so cutting the numbers of H-1B visas from the current 110K to 2,000 or fewer per year and auctioning them off monthly to the highest bidders on the basis of compensation would improve the likelihood that the best and brightest would be welcomed. Cutting them to 1,000 per year would begin to bring back the huge pool of unemployed and under-employed US citizen science and tech workers toward full employment, and thus boost the economy. If all else fails, we should set the bar by conducting multiple IQ tests and admit those whose average scores exceed 160 (or aggregate ACT score above 34 or aggregate SAT score above 1560 or "new" aggregate SAT score above 2100 or aggregate GRE above 1615).
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200705.html#20070513
http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/Archive/NotBestAndBrightest3.txt

"the mean literacy test score for U.S. adults (272) was 2 points above the mean for all adults in the 20 country survey (270)... Larger, statistically significant, literacy gaps between us and them unfold when you separate immigrant from native-born test takers, as is done in 17 high income countries surveyed by ETS. U.S. natives scored 8 points above the average native of the 17 high income countries. U.S. immigrants scored 16 points below the average immigrant in the 17 countries." --- Edwin S. Rubenstein 2005-12-22 _V Dare_ "The stupid American? Think again"
http://www.vdare.com/rubenstein/051222_nd.htm

It's impossible to make a case that executives should continue turning their backs on some of the best science, tech, engineering and math talent in the world and instead hire lower-quality, low-skill, cheaper labor from over-seas.

"I've mentioned the TIMSS test, for instance, which showed that if [Colorado, Connecticut, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska North Dakota, Oregon, Utah, Vermont, Wisconsin and Wyoming] -- none of which has a substantial under-class -- had been treated as separate nations, each of them would have been out-scored only by Singapore (professor David Berliner, 'Our Schools Versus Theirs', Washington Post, 2001 January 28)... This [both the TIMSS and PISA tests] once again shows, tragically, that the U.S.A. is not doing enough to bring up the educational performance of its under-class. But if one takes the white score as 'main-stream', the U.S.A. would rank 7th out of 27, instead of 18th."
http://www.k

Studies by researchers from Computing Research Association (CRA), Duke, Georgetown University, Harvard, RAND Corporation, Rochester Institute of Technology, Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, Stanford, UC Davis, UPenn Wharton School, and Urban Institute, have reported that we have continually been producing far more US citizen STEM (science, tech, engineering, math) workers than we've been employing in these fields.

Examination of employment data and projections from BLS when compared with NCES (US Dept. of Education) records of degrees earned by US citizens confirms these findings.

"As late as 1987, 60K graduates were competing for about 25K open positions, according to Janet Ruhl, author of _The Programmers Survival Guide_" --- Margie Wylie _CNET_ "The skills shortage that isn't: When the rising tide floats employees' boats, employers proclaim disaster" http://news.com.com/2010-1077-281060.html http://www.kermitrose.com/econ1998.html#19980204

In testimony to the House Science and Technology Committee, Harold Salzman reported that we've been producing as many as 3 times the numbers of STEM workers as we've been employing in these fields. http://democrats.science.house.gov/Media/File/Commdocs/hearings/2007/tech/06nov/salzman_testimony.pdf http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200711.html#Runnerup2007

Studies by researchers from Computing Research Association (CRA), Duke, Georgetown University, Harvard, RAND Corporation, Rochester Institute of Technology, Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, Stanford, UC Davis, UPenn Wharton School, and Urban Institute, have reported that we have continually been producing far more US citizen STEM (science, tech, engineering, math) workers than we've been employing in these fields.

Examination of employment data and projections from BLS when compared with NCES (US Dept. of Education) records of degrees earned by US citizens confirms these findings.

"As late as 1987, 60K graduates were competing for about 25K open positions, according to Janet Ruhl, author of _The Programmers Survival Guide_" --- Margie Wylie _CNET_ "The skills shortage that isn't: When the rising tide floats employees' boats, employers proclaim disaster" http://news.com.com/2010-1077-281060.html http://www.kermitrose.com/econ1998.html#19980204

In testimony to the House Science and Technology Committee, Harold Salzman reported that we've been producing as many as 3 times the numbers of STEM workers as we've been employing in these fields. http://democrats.science.house.gov/Media/File/Commdocs/hearings/2007/tech/06nov/salzman_testimony.pdf http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200711.html#Runnerup2007

Studies by researchers from RAND Corporation, Stanford, Urban Institute, Harvard, Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, Georgetown, Rochester Institute of Technology, UC Davis, and Duke have reported that we have continually been producing far more STEM (science, tech, engineering, math) workers than we've been employing in these fields.

Examination of employment data and projections from BLS when compared with NCES (Dept. of Education) records of degrees earned by US citizens confirms these findings.

"As late as 1987, 60K graduates were competing for about 25K open positions, according to Janet Ruhl, author of _The Programmers Survival Guide_" --- Margie Wylie _CNET_ "The skills shortage that isn't: When the rising tide floats employees' boats, employers proclaim disaster"
http://news.com.com/2010-1077-281060.html
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ1998.html#19980204

In testimony to the House Science and Technology Committee, Harold Salzman reported that we've been producing as many as 3 times the numbers of STEM workers as we've been employing in these fields.

http://democrats.science.house.gov/Media/File/
Commdocs/hearings/2007/tech/06nov/salzman_testimony.pdf

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200711.html#Runnerup2007

This isn't just about not paying at a higher rate for additional hours of work.
It's about not paying for the additional work at all.

I have to wonder how many software engineers from Sopchoppy and Chicago will go into California's hideous cost of living not realizing that, no matter how much they work, they won't be paid for anything past the first 40 hours.

Studies by researchers from RAND Corporation, Stanford, Urban Institute, Harvard, Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, Georgetown, Rochester Institute of Technology, UC Davis, and Duke have reported that we have continually been producing far more STEM (science, tech, engineering, math) workers than we've been employing in these fields.

Examination of employment data and projections from BLS when compared with NCES (Dept. of Education) records of degrees earned by US citizens confirms these findings.

"As late as 1987, 60K graduates were competing for about 25K open positions, according to Janet Ruhl, author of _The Programmers Survival Guide_" --- Margie Wylie _CNET_ "The skills shortage that isn't: When the rising tide floats employees' boats, employers proclaim disaster"
http://news.com.com/2010-1077-281060.html
http://www.kermitrose.com/econ1998.html#19980204

In testimony to the House Science and Technology Committee, Harold Salzman reported that we've been producing as many as 3 times the numbers of STEM workers as we've been employing in these fields.

http://democrats.science.house.gov/Media/File/
Commdocs/hearings/2007/tech/06nov/salzman_testimony.pdf

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ200711.html#Runnerup2007

This isn't just about not paying at a higher rate for additional hours of work.
It's about not paying for the additional work at all.

I have to wonder how many software engineers from Sopchoppy and Chicago will go into California's hideous cost of living not realizing that, no matter how much they work, they won't be paid for anything past the first 40 hours.

Whether your job title is "programmer", "programmer/analyst", "analyst", "software engineer", or "software architect" has nothing to do with whether you have a particular degree. Different organizations just use different titles for the same jobs, and different managers are hyper-credentialists, or credentialists, or believers in "self-made men".

A "software architect" *should* take a little different approach than a "programmer", but not especially diffeent from a talented or well-educated "analyst".

The Occupational OutLook HandBook has always been properly classified in the fiction section of the library.

Employment of software publishing production workers has been flat since the Clinton-Bush economic depression started.

The quarterly figures on employment and unemployment rates by detailed occupation have improved a little, but aren't exceptionally rosy.

On-line help-wanted advertising has risen since the deepest depths of the depression, but we don't have a pre-depression base-line (let alone a pre-bubble base-line) to know how this fits in the general schemes, i.e. to know whether it's growing as steeply or not as steeply as it should. Print help-wanted advertising is subterranean, down to 26 now, from 100 in 1987.

Overall labor force participation rates and employment to population rates are up, but LFPR and E/P rates for men are down.

And I don't know what to make of the Institute for Supply Management's employment indices.

check the graphs
http://www.kermitrose.com/jgoEconData.html

"Yes, employment is better now..."

Not that I can tell.

http://www.kermitrose.com/images/SWProdDev.jpg

http://www.kermitrose.com/jgoEconData.html

"Yes, employment is better now..."

Not that I can tell.

http://www.kermitrose.com/images/SWProdDev.jpg

http://www.kermitrose.com/jgoEconData.html

I concur for the most part. The curricula has always been jam-packed, and a lot of languages (especially when several of them are so close to a predecessor language, as PHP and Python are so close to C) can be covered in a single survey course on programming languages.

OTOH, there are religions or schools within the general field such that the terminology they use is different and some terms are used with significantly different meanings such that these should be covered.

Some CS departments don't quite consider web weaving to be REAL software development, so that's another reason they may stay away from languages, design philosophies, etc. primarily associated with web weaving. With multiple departments and degree programs at universities these days (CS, EE, EECS, CE, MIS/IMS, IT, video-game development) there is plenty of room for these kinds of specialization.

Still, employers, or at least those posting job ads, seem to have no clue about how much or little it takes to go from a good foundation to programming in a particular language, using a different framework, or using a particular tool.

I've seen job ads demanding 2 years of experience for some specific brand-name toy that takes only a few hours of work to become productive and a week or two to master. Or they'll give you a telephone test and ask detailed questions on something that works differently in different implementations - the sort of thing no one bothers to remember but just remembers the options and experiments when it comes time to use it to be certain which will work here and now.

The compiler and systems classes sometimes serve to make sense of many of the things the students were doing by rote before that.

I've ended up using even the most boring and obscure things covered in those CS classes.

"Modern 80x86" is an oxymoron.

http://www.kermitrose.com/econ.html