Slashdot Mirror
IBM Moving Developer Jobs Overseas
helixcode123 writes "According to the New York Times (also on Yahoo News), IBM is planning on moving a substantial number of high level jobs overseas to 'India and other countries.' IBM argues, in essence, that they need to do this to stay competitive. The article
quotes that Forrester Research '...estimated that 450,000 computer industry jobs could be transferred abroad in the next 12 years, representing 8 percent of the nation's computer jobs.'"
great! more lost jobs. any city anywhere should yank any tax breaks they are getting. its hard to work with someone thats hours are soo offset from your own.
We'll be telling our grandkids that the US actually had an H1B visa program to encourage tech workers from other countries to work here, not the other way around. And they'll say
"Grandpa, you're pulling my leg!"
SCO to Hell
But good for IBM. I mean this, but I know it won't be popular. By IBM cutting developer jobs, they will be able to stay competitive in more markets and increase the GDP of the nations they are moving operations to. That means increased buying power for that nation, and in turn, everybody benefits from selling to that nation.
It also means that while developer positions are harder to come by, more jobs in other sectors will be created to satisfy the increased revenue IBM has available.
So, before you flame IBM try to see how this isn't a greed manuever but something that can benefit more people outside of the software development industry.
Dacels Jewelers can't be trusted.
As an Electrical Engineer, I'm thoroughly convinced that defense jobs are the only ones that are going to stay in-country. Might as well jump on the band-wagon now. Viva le Tomahawk!
The meek might inheret the earth, but they'll be in India.
I need to make sure I have this right. If we give the rich a tax break, they will create more jobs. Those jobs in turn will be transfered overseas where the rich will again see an increase in their capital investments which are now taxed less. Ok. Just making sure I understand. No further questions.
You mean to tell me that International Business Machines might employ people in other countries!!!?!?!!112@
That's just so wrong!
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
Well, I guess it depends upon the industry. For years German and Japanese companies have been moving automobile production to the US because the labor and benefits are much cheaper, while IT is being more and more phased out to India and other countries.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
Ok software companies already have a problem with good work code here in North America.
If we go by the logic that clothing made in overseas sweat shops is cheap and crappy how will software produced over there be.
If companies have to maintain profitiablity, and developers are cheaper in other countries, what choice do they have except to export those jobs? Sure, it makes life harder for the developers in the US, at least for the short term, but what if exporting that work enables IBM to spend money on R & D that provides even more work for state-side developers in the long run? I'm just thinking there are some benefits and some disadvantages with just about any solution IBM chooses.
OK, here come the 500 posts all crying about the loss of jobs here in the US....
Stop your crying. Listen, this has been happening in all industries since the dawn of the industrial age. Remember, the NorthEast US used to make textiles. Sugar Cane used to be grown in Hawaii. Steel used to be made to in Pittsburgh. And, televisions once were made here as well.
Programming is simply a commodity. I oughta know, I am a programmer. My job will go overseas sometime soon. I'm just trying to make as much money as possible beforehand, in the opes that I am prepared.
I agree. I am fairly sure my company could save more money by using cheaper offshore management than it could from offshore staff.
And you can spec that comments must be written in English. Given the pitiful nature of most comments anyway, who cares?
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
Wait, wait, wait.
At what point do you expect an *American* programmer to enter into it?
Thanks to globalization, the middle class will find themselves increasingly distanced from the wealthy. The IBM situation is merely one example of this.
What we're pretty much seeing, yet again, is the valuation of the company over the individual. People like Larry Ellison and Bill Gates and pretty much every other CEO in the tech industry are getting richer and richer at the expense of the people who keep them there.
Where will this end? Equilibrium? I honestly can't see that happening. I'm pretty sure you could ship every technical job to India and China, and their cost of living, and hence their salaries, would still undercut the US by a massive margin. So what's to stop the flow? I think that legislation might be the only way. Hey, Mr Gates, if you want to use this country to stay rich, then you have to pay it back, your workforce has to be a certain percentage American.
Without that sort of thing, I worry, I honestly do. All I can try to do is be the best in the global market, not just the local market. But how good can I be. You can hire 5 or 10 Indians for what it takes to keep me in a job here in the States. I just can't compete any more.
Couple of notes on this:
1. Brush up your Hindi/Cantonese/Tagalog/Mandarin.
2. While we in the US can keep crying about this (and will) don't you think it is a good move for the globe? This is practical wealth redistibution. Instead of 1% of the world population, now the wealth generated by IT can be shared with 20-30%. Isn't it just fair? Specially if you notice that this is not only an IT related phenomenon.
Effactively the US corporate giants (mostly Republicans) are doing what the liberals have been preaching for a long time (not Democrats, but Greens).
What do ya know?
Code poet, espresso fiend, starter upper.
Do we have to have a 'Made by U.S. Programmers' label for software packages?
Honestly, did you 'look for the union label' before buying your clothing? Why do you think anyone else is going to care if their software was made in the USA? Ultimately, they just want the lowest price.
The situation sucks, but I'm not sure what we can do about it. Maybe tax breaks for companies that hire American workers in America, but even that would probalby not helpt too much.
I'm an American. I lead a lifestyle that is substantially better than most of the people on the planet. Outsourcing of IT jobs to countries like China, Russia and India is threatening that lifestyle, and if I'm not careful it could all go right down the drain.
I say: Good. It's about damn time.
Why does America deserve to have all the wealth that it has? If someone in India can do my job at 1/10th the cost, why exactly should anyone pay me to do it? Simply to support my American way of life? No. The American way of life is not a birthright. It has to be earned. You earn it by doing what those guys in India and China and Russia can't do. You earn it by innovating, and by taking risks. You earn it by seizing on oppertunities that those guys simply do not have access to.
It's time to wake up people. Being able to sling a little code, set up a webserver and talk your way around a design meeting is not going to cut it anymore. You need to get off your ass, put the time in on the weekends and:
1) Identify what it is that you can do that cannot be done by anyone else (or at least, anyone who is willing to work for your salary)
2) Train yourself to do it well.
Otherwise you will not have a job. Simple as that. Just like during the manufacturing boom in the 50's and 60's, America (and Western Civilization in general) had gotten fat and lazy in the last few years. Now there is simply no reason why you are worth 10 times more than the rest of the world. So you had better come up with a reason, or move to China.
Ha ha, only serious :)
Once enough of these jobs are located in India, the wages companies will have to offer Indian workers will rise.
Until that happens, those of us in the Western world can invest in companies that are relocating or doing outsourcing work. As these companies become more profitable, their shareholders can win too.
What's that you say? Shareholders? Who are they to profit? Oh, those horrible corporations making scads of money, setting up a new aristocracy of shareholders as the companies they own become more profitable? Oh, the horror! How dare they! How exclusionary, how elitist! Damn those corporations with their Congress-bought laws that prevent Joe Sixpack from joining the New Elite by, umm... opening up a brokerage account, hey, that was easy, but I'm sure the Evil Business Conspirators exclude undesirable rabble from, umm... buying shares with the, umm... click of a mouse. Umm, but it's all a part of the violence inherent in the system! Yeah! Help, help, I'm bein' repressed!
You don't really understand economics, do ya? In US, traditionally, there has been much resistance to lowering the wages, even in times when the economy does not grow at the "optimal" rate of 3.5% GDP. This applies to everyone, not just the top management (union contracts, for example). So it is makes a lot of sence to just eliminate the position and recreate it in a low wage country. If they could find the quality top management in the lower wage country, they would move this function as well. Now, OTOH, the productivity of US workers is much higher than in other countries - this is something to think about.
Programmers aren't wanted as burger flippers anyway. They think too much and tend to stir up discontent. Face it, nobody wants to hire bitter ex-Programmers for much of anything.
"so its okay to outsource jobs to reduce costs but not okay to lower salaries of the top management to reduce costs?
WTF?
You mean Milton Freidman was right after all?
Stop Cribbing, Guys! Get your skills upto date....there is no dearth of jobs for quality workers.
That's like saying "Learn to swim better guys, you can out swim this tsunami!" as the tidal wave breaks over your head.
You think they don't have quality workers in India? You think the USA is the only place which has quality workers?
Now the game is all about price anyway, and we're way overpriced compared to quality workers in India. Time to learn how to fix cars or teeth.
I wonder if the time zone difference might be seen as an advantage, i.e., as a way to have skilled, white-collar employees working on a problem 24/7 without having to pay them a premium for working overnight? The second page of the article states:
Only Women Bleed (Sex, Sharia remix)
Have a law that any over-seas programmer must be paid wages which equal or exceed the wages of U.S. programmers should.
That way no one gets fucked over.
Paying an Indian programmer less than a U.S. programmer is fucking the Indian programmer over.
Moving software development overseas so you don't have to pay standard wages to U.S. programmers if fucking over the U.S. programmer.
Yeah, that's a real comfort to all of us still in college getting degrees in computer science because we enjoy computers and programming. How the hell will we be able to compete with out of work programmers who have years of real-world experience and are willing to work for peanuts? We're completely fucked.
The key is "devotion to the interests or culture of one's nation". This is what we should be doing in a business sense. We rob our citizen's of jobs in an effort to enrich few.
Therein lies the problem, eh? Capitalism, i.e., "rob[bing] our citizen's of jobs in a effort to enrich few." is at the heart of our nations culture. You can't really blame IBM for the fact that American culture is - erm - cannibalistic.
no comment
> Therefore, I have the thesis that technical jobs
> in the US are simply getting more and more
> advanced, whlie "easier" technical jobs are
> being moved overseas.
No, this just means that the US has either still better living conditions* or just better propaganda than India.
Indian engineers wanting to come to the US might just mean they are ill-informed about the US.
*actually, I think living in the US isn't too bad. If I could freely choose where to live the US would definitely be somewhere in the top 20.
so its okay to outsource jobs to reduce costs but not okay to lower salaries of the top management to reduce costs?
.... just on a company wide scale.
...
This happens!
Lean and mean 1970's SONY repleaces fat-and-bloated RCA
Lean and mean 2010's Samsung replaces fat-and-bloated SONY
Lean and mean 1970's Honda replaces fat-and-bloated AMC
Lean and mean 2010's Hyundai replaces fat-and-bloated Honda
Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.
close.
What will happen is that the middle class will fade away, and we all will be liuving in run down shanties thankfull for the pittence they pay everybody in the world.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
In my opinion, computer programming should no longer be considered a "high-tech" job.
Sure, there is science in the mix (mostly logic, math), but how many programmers actually make use of this stuff on a daily basis? Most programming that is done in industry is relatively routine stuff;
Code, Run, Debug, Repeat.
Only a lucky few are developing completely new algorithms, and doing what can really be called 'research'. The rest are just engineering jobs, if that.
Now the former, research-related stuff, will stay in the country. Our universities and research are still much better.
The latter type of programming, which unfortunately is what most people are doing, like writing VB programs to solve relatively simple tasks and such, cannot compete.
There is no reason to keep those jobs in the country if someone else can do the same thing cheaper.
And that's just fine with me. For nations like India, it's still one step up on the ladder of technology, and for us, it's a motivation to keep pushing upwards towards the new areas that really are "high-tech".
...it's very good think. I live in Poland, where unemployment rate is as high as 20%, 50% of university graduates are unemployed, and where I work as a system administrator for about 1000 zlotys (less than 300 USD) monthly and last payment was from March.
I have a Masters Degree in Physics, and I am finishing my Masters thesis in Law. I'm 25 and still living with my parents in a flat (let's just say, that renting one room flat costs over 500 zlotys (half of my pay)) and I consider myself very lucky having a place to live, a job, and at least some perspectives.
So whenever some US corp. is moving out of US, we people from underdeveloped countries, are rather happy, as this means better future for us.
When in doubt, go to the library. - Ron Weasley in Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets
If they could find the quality top management in the lower wage country, they would move this function as well.
Bullshit. "They" ARE the quality top management.
Do you really think that there aren't any smart, charismatic, suitably amoral businessmen in China?
Do I need to point out specific instances of managers lining their pockets at the expense (direct or otherwise,) of share-holders?
Now, how many instances do you know of where shareholders force out their overpayed management? I know of several instances where corporate raiders (themselves overpaid managers of a holding corporation,) have forced out reasonably paid upper management who weren't ruthless enough for their tastes, but I cannot, off hand, think of many share holder revolts that bankrupted a CEO - say it with me, "golden parachute". The only way market discipline can ever apply to upper management is if the people above them in the supposed pecking order - the shareholders - force it on them. Don't hold your breath.
Of course, I think market discipline is a vicious practice with no place in a civilized world, but don't pretend it applies to the rich.
The good and new comes from no quarter where it is looked for, and is always something different from what is expected.
Why do you think they are moving the jobs to India - to better distribute the wealth??? They are doing it because it's cheaper!
Following your argument, we should expect deepening discounts on IBM software and services, right?
Face it, this is about concentrating wealth, not spreading it around...
Jan
What makes you think that we care whether IBM increases revenue?
eat shiat and bark at the moon
Easy. Don't be a developer.
Get involved in infrastructure work - all the suits left here aren't going to be communicating with the slave labor over there via the US Mail - they'll still need computing infrastructure here, like Internet access, email, and decision support systems.
I would say that you should look at computer security, but over the years I've tried to train a lot of people in it (my field) and I've become convinced that it just takes a certain kind of person to do it - you're pretty much always interested in it, or you're not and can't get that way by training.
I've got some karma to spend, so I'll say it - a certain amount of this will be good for the industry as a whole. A lot of the people getting weeded out by this outsourcing are the ones who took their classes to become a developer and "make the big bucks". Over time we'll realize that IT in the US will be left with the people who think up the cool stuff to do and leave it to the overseas grunts to actually execute.
That said, I also want to say that I'll be the first to laugh when one of these countries (probably not India, though) becomes the next Iraq and some US companies get put in a serious bind.
As for those saying that this will redistribute the wealth globally - get real! We're creating a new overseas worker class, not new overseas companies. The jobs are going there because the people will work for peanuts, not because they have great skills and deserve huge salaries.
It is your choice to study what you like and pursue the profession you want. It is my choice to oppose restrictive business practices.
However, if you are truely good, creative, proactive and original you will always find good work (or create it).
But if you are a typical CS graduate who says "all jobs are going overseas and there is nothing on a plate for me here" I have no sympathy.
OK, I don't mean to be rude, but you're an idiot. Here's why:
Once enough of these jobs are located in India, the wages companies will have to offer Indian workers will rise.
You know there's almost a billion people in India, right? And even with our current job situation in the US, wages have fallen through the floor. How many of these jobs do expect to be created in India? 100 million? Think.
Damn those corporations with their Congress-bought laws that prevent Joe Sixpack from joining the New Elite by, umm... opening up a brokerage account, hey, that was easy
Remember: JOE SIXPACK NO LONGER HAS A JOB. Sory for yelling, but how do expect someone whose job has moved to India to buy shares in the company that moved it there? Are you crazy? I mean, seriously, get your head out of your ass. And while you're at it, stop being so condescending to people who are obviously worried about their livelyhood. Remember what happened to the first person to say "let them eat cake".
If you fall off a building, go real limp, because maybe you'll look like a dummy and people will be like hey, free dummy
After reading the usual bitching and moaning about tech jobs going overseas, it struck me odd that the same people who are proponents of Free (not necessarily *free*) software are some of the loudest whiners. Ok, so you can charge for Free software, but once it is in the wild, then what? Well, you are shit out of luck! Unless you can talk a user of your software into a maintenance contract or whatnot, you are never going to see another penny from your software unless some do-gooder decides to pay for it even when they can get it for free.
Guess what? If I am a large multinational that makes, say, CRM software, and along comes some Free and kickass version that my customers start using then I start fucking laying people off or shipping my work overseas. Why? Because I am not making as much money. That in itself may not be too bad -- a little competition is a good thing -- but in this case now *no one* is making any money. Whoohooo!
People may want to see MS go down, and I can't necessarily say I am not one of them. However, stop for a minute and think of the mind-numbing and crippling effects that would have on the entire worldwide software industry. There are thousands and thousands of companies that make their money from supporting MS products, writing add-ins, etc... In the Seattle-area I would venture to guess that about 95% of the solutions providers and about 80% of the development shops rely on MS. MS goes away? Thousands and thousands of jobs go away as well. Fun fun.
</RantingTangent>
For all those who have been wailing about loss of US jobs; here are some interesting things to know:
.... Service-producing industries-including finance, insurance, and real estate; government; services; transportation, communications, and utilities;
... these jobs account for 8 out of the 20 fastest growing occupations in the economy.
t hal/5.2.html
:)
(source: http://www.bls.gov/oco/oco2003.htm)
Employment
Industry
**The long-term shift from goods-producing to service-producing employment is expected to continue
**Employment in the goods-producing industries has been relatively stagnant since the early 1980s
**Nondurable manufacturing, on the other hand, is expected to decline by less than 1 percent, shedding 64,000 jobs overall. The majority of employment declines are expected to be in apparel and other textile products and leather and leather products industries, which together are expected to shed 131,000 jobs by 2010 because of increased job automation and international competition
**Mining. Employment in mining is expected to decrease 10.1 percent, or by some 55,000 jobs, by 2010.
**Computer occupations are expected to grow the fastest over the projection period
**Declining occupational employment stems from declining industry employment, technological advancements, changes in business practices, and other factors. For example, increased productivity and farm consolidations are expected to result in a decline of 328,000 farmers over the 2000-10 period.
I know I have used a few numbers from the report. For a reason. Before complaining about loss of job/lack of job, PAY ATTENTION TO THE TRENDS IN EMPLOYMENT. Try to see which job sectors will not be affected too badly by outsourcing. Try to see if your interests/ abilities/ education can get you a job in one of these fields. Stop complaining over nothing.
And for those who think people in India cannot speak English:
In terms of numbers of English speakers, the Indian subcontinent ranks third in the world, after the USA and UK. An estimated 4% of the Indian population use English; although the number might seem small, out of the total population that is about 35 million people (in 1994)
Source:
http://www.scholars.nus.edu.sg/post/india/hohen
Just for sake of clarification: Job loss/ lack of job is BAD. For me, for you, for everyone. The important thing is that instead of blaming the corporations, tey to THINK how you can 'beat the system'. And also, don't complain when you find that half the things you buy are "Made in China"
Face it, technical jobs are becomming increasingly a commodity that can be filled as easily by someone in Bangalore as Boston. So, when the Joe CEO of Moneygrubberscorp realizes that he can slash costs by many times through overseas outsourcing, what do he's going to do? That's right, he sees that lower costs = higher profit = more money for Joe CEO, his cronies, and the all mightly shareholder. Almighty capitalism at its finest!
Unfortunatly, that means that means that the middle class workers he just eliminated are SOL. Their piece of the pie is gone, eaten up by Joe CEO so he can afford another villa in Switzerland. Poor John Programmer now must try to find another job - but unfortunatly, no other company can justify the cost to hire him.
As more companies outsource, those who don't, out of patriotism and respect for their countrymen, have higher costs, realize less profit, and lose their competiveness. Eventually, they will either: A) Be eaten by Microsoft / Oracle / etc B) Go out of business.
What does this mean? IT MEANS THAT SOON, THE ONLY COMPANIES LEFT WILL THE ONES WHO HAVE OUTSOURCED ALL THEIR WHITE COLLAR JOBS. John Programmer will have to find something that has not / can't be outsourced, such as the trite example of flipping burgers. Thus, bye bye middle class.
Who wins? Joe CEO, Moneygrubberscorp, its shareholders and all the other's companies like it make out big time by pocketing the difference between the salaries of thousands of John Programmers.
What can be done? I'm not going to preach here (I'll leave that for another time). Just be aware that this is happening and ITS ONLY A MATTER OF TIME BEFORE IT HAPPENS TO YOU!
"It's in India" DOES cut it I think you'll find. Once you are in India you are subject to Indian law and Indian trade practices, any US law/custom has nothing whatsoever to do with anything in India. If they want to pay you 50 Rupees a month they can, just as you can refuse to work for that sort of money.
Welcome to the global free market.
"Why does America deserve to have all the wealth that it has? "
because we deloped global capitalism.
Because we set the standar for other to achieve.
"1) Identify what it is that you can do that cannot be done by anyone else (or at least, anyone who is willing to work for your salary)"
Well, that would be aahhhh nobody.
"2) Train yourself to do it well."
I do programming well. you would be hard pressed to find an area of programming I have not done. yet, I still will loose a job overseas.
Nobody has gotten fat and lazy in the last few years. That is always the perception because we work harder then most countries, but we also play harder.
well, thats a great attitude you got there, lets see what you have to say when your living under a bridge.
Hell yeah, America first.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Welcome to the real world. The one where you're not guaranteed a job just because you spent a few years of your life on education. The one where experience may outweigh education in cases.
/. all day and moans about not being able to find a job at all. You're not fucked if you can adapt to the market and look in to getting jobs in other fields.
;)
You're only fucked if you end up one of those computer guys who sits on
Basically, the world does not revolve around anyone except big CEOs. Hey, maybe you could change majors.
It may not be a crime, but it may also not be realistic.
There is a remarkably arrogant attitude here in the US that we Americans are born with a soverign right to get paid more than someone with equivilant skills in other countries, and the coming years are going to give a lot of Americans expecting to live better than their foreign counterparts a serious moment of pause.
IBM needs programmers. They can hire one American, or three people in another country. To a business, it's a no brainer. Sensible economics. Will it have a downard effect on the standard of living in the US? Yes, probably. Maybe we're due (or overdue) for that to happen.
Joe "Computer Job" Sixpack doesn't have to live paycheck to paycheck, and doesn't have to be up to their eyeballs in debt, the way so many of them lived in the late 90s. I really can't feel too sorry for people who lived outside of their means, and now lost their job, without having sufficient savings or sufficient skills to find a new one.
I can dig competing for my labor costs on the strength of my skills, but I can't compete with developers who make $5,850 a year, because I can't even rent a hole in the wall in my city for that yearly income, let alone feed myself.
Do we really want to 'Flint, Michigan' the entire high-tech industry? At the very least, lets insist that only countries with similar social standards as ours can get looked at for this kind of expatriation of jobs.
Personally, I'm not interested in returning to the days of the Industrial Revolution where workers had no rights-- cause thats what it's like in many third-world countries.
What the hell, lets just expatriate everything... I'm sure we can find dollar-a-day workers for it all over there-- course by then they'll be nobody to pay the lawyers and buy the goods they want to sell to us-- at least the lawyers will all die of hunger too, thats should be a good thing.
Do not spread "09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0" over the internet, thank you.
On the other hand, people that never would have had a chance at a decent living in less developed countries get a chance at the very same dream you aspire to; opportunities to go after that goal are harder to come by in those countries. The more the multinational corporations spread themselves over countries, the more those countries will have a chance of developing a middle class; sure, first-world middle classes will suffer, but it only seems fair considering many of our products come from sweatshops in these very same countries so we can have lower prices.
OK, I don't mean to be rude, but you're an idiot.
/not/ a programmer glut there. Do some research before calling bullshit.
Ah, the first signs of enlightened argument.
You know there's almost a billion people in India, right? And even with our current job situation in the US, wages have fallen through the floor. How many of these jobs do expect to be created in India? 100 million? Think.
Because clearly, the entire billion-strong population of India are computer programmers. Also, because Visual C++ has such wonderful Hindi support, as well as the other 17 languages recognized by their constitution.
Also, there's such a strong tech sector there, and they've all got such easy access to PCs.
So as long as you're being sarcastic at someone else for thinking things through, you might try it yourself. He didn't say they'd go up to American salaries, but he's right, they certainly will go up; this is just how supply and demand works. There is
Damn those corporations with their Congress-bought laws that prevent Joe Sixpack from joining the New Elite by, umm... opening up a brokerage account, hey, that was easy
Remember: JOE SIXPACK NO LONGER HAS A JOB.
Isn't it nice when the person that replies to you in a yelling fashion is yelling exactly what you're being sarcastic about? Here's a hint: the reason he was making it seem uncertain is that he was talking about a steel worker going online and becoming an online broker. It's a fantasy; the market doesn't make money, it only exchanges it. And it's generally the untrained that are doing the losing, despite the legions of Slashdotters who are sure that they missed the RedHat IPO boat but the next one's on its way.
Please stop jumping on posts you clearly don't grok.
StoneCypher is Full of BS
No, but I bet my cost of living is at least 30 times higher. The falacy of your argument is that it doesn't take into account the differences in cost of living. I could not survive, to hell with keeping my house, on the wages of the people they are outsourcing these jobs to.
And where are the saved costs going? Will the price of IBM software and services go down? Or will the CEO get a fat bonus and the stockholders get a nice dividend?
Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
Problem.
Let's say that one percent of the people in a given population have what it takes to be a programmer.
That means there are about 10 million people primed and ready for action over there.
How about china? 16 million...
US is down there at 2.5 million... how many programming jobs in the world do you think there need to be?
I know I'm looking to get out.
Move the IT jobs to places with a lower cost of living, TX, OK, AL, KS, LA, NB, etc. There are skilled people in those states who won't demand silicon valley salaries.
-- Viva FreeBSD --
Going to use India as an example:
First, as more companies invest in places like India, wages will rise (just as they may fall in the US).
Second, developers in India will leave American companies and form spin-offs or direct competitors, which requires more local employees, reducing the number of developers available for the US firms, also driving up wages in India.
Third, India will eventually develop a market for software, rather than just be a supplier. As that market grows, more and more Indian developers will be employeed to fill the demand, and American companies can compete as well.
Fourth, many jobs can't or won't be moved over, and IT is in general still a growing field. Computers and software are even more ubiquitous than ever, and the demand for domestic workers will still exist.
Fifth, only large companies can really afford to do this. They're usually the shittiest jobs anyway; I'd rather sand-blast my ass-crack than work for IBM. Working for a small-to-medium sized company is far more exciting.
And get paid $10,000/yr ?
Please.
What happens in a case like this is that a VP hears or is told by his underlings that his company can save significant amounts of money by shifting jobs overseas. He waits a bit, notices that some competitors have done so successfully. He reads a couple articles in Forbes (always enthusiastic about new trends, as their folks are terrified about missing one). They're from high-level execs from companies that have shown savings preening themselves and trying to build up their personal recognition by talking about what a good move it is.
He gets a group of people at his company to evaluate the possibility of moving jobs overseas. They, knowing that this is a pet project, work damn hard to show that doing so is profitable and hand him back the results. The company then contracts out to some company to assist in transitioning jobs overseas.
Five layers down, a few months later, a bottom level manager is stuck with a mandate that he hire only (for example) Indian workers unless he can show good cause otherwise. He doesn't really care about company money -- as a matter of fact, if he's significantly under budget, his budget for next quarter will be simply cut to match updated expectations. He only cares that the job gets done (the one thing that *will* make his boss tromp on him). He simply finds the company in India with the best reputation, and ignores cost. He doesn't care.
A couple of Indian businesspeople start a company, grab a few Indian folks with a reputation, probably bootstrapping their new (or existing) company with some foreign (American, European) people who are well-known and can give the company an appearance of strong competency.
Prices start out somewhat low, but rapidly rise. The consulting company wants to jack prices as high as possible, and the manager contracting out doesn't care about cost (up to his budget). They hit near-US prices. If managers were worried about cost, US-based contractors wouldn't be paid what they are today.
Moving jobs to India won't have a major long-term improvement in savings.
However, it will move a significant chunk of the world's wealth, which has been very much tied up in the US, over to India. Smart investors can, as always, take advantage of the situation by investing in emerging firms overseas.
May we never see th
I ndia
B ecause of
M oney
I've seen lots of postings here raving of how great capitalism is, and that giant sucking sound of high standards in a race to the bottom is nothing we should be worried about. Here is a little secret: communism failed because it is an unattainable goal, but so is true free market capitalism too.
The US has nothing more than a demo(ney)cracy, if you can't pay for it, you just don't get it. I think this trend will just have to continue longer and longer until the flint michigan scenario plays out before people stand up and wonder what happened to their life style and demand that something be done about it.
More jobs to India, Indians have more money, Indians buy more stuff or capitally invest, this spreads around wealth, India is now a richer country, Indian salaries go up. The same thing already happened to Japan. Is Japan being a rich country good or bad for us? It is good. India getting richer will be the same.
I guess a lot of American IT people really are bad at math. Japan has a population of "only" 120 million, the US has 280 million, and India has about a billion. India could eat up not only every IT job in the US, but every job period, and still not be able to command anywhere near US salaries.
A few other points that make the Japan analogy false. Even in the 60's and 70's Japan had a much higher standard of living, and hence commanded higher pay, than India does. What's more, Japan basically built its economy on its own (albeit with the help of some serious protectionism). In the case of India, and to some extent China, US corporations are falling all over themselves to build up their economies both via capital investment, and more importantly, by handing them American expertise.
It's fine and well to outsource and cut 450,000 jobs, but at the same time they are doing irreprable damage to the economy. These same 450,000 people will not be around to buy products and software which will in turn cut the contracts that IBM may be getting for it's products. And the vicious cycle continues.
Economy is a complex web, by sending more money overseas, IBM is seriously damaging the domestic economy and should be taxed accordingly. This tax will be used to pay the unemployement, job placement fees, etc for the multitude of workers out of work.
India, China and many other countries bordering on poverty in many regions will find workers that will literaly code for food. This will be seen as immediate profit for IBM (or other outsourcing company). What they never account for (I have come to the conclusion that most CFOs cannot see further than the next quarter) is that in the long run this will cost them way more than the money they saved.
I have worked at three different companies that outsourced some code to India and China. All three were utter failures.
In one case, their representatives here were making claims that they have PhD level people on their staff and can produce almost bug free code (salepeople are universal liars). In this particular case the company "had" a PhD that consulted with them, but most of the staff were people fresh out of college with a BS in CS or even worse people who took some CS courses and were sitting around collecting wages for the company and for themselves.
Well one fine week a co-worker was visiting India (his parents live there) and decided to drop by to check on their progress. He could not explain the chaos that caused. Their state of the art facility looked more like a low tech sweatshop, the owner quickly did a song and dance and took him elsewhere.
When it came time to deliver the alpha for review, they claimed they would need few more months and blamed our requirements (requirements were drafted and never changed thru the life of the project). It was a very simple data mapping of SGML to HTML (we did not have much faith in them and had 2 guys working in parallel just in case). Well months later we still got more hand waving and more complains and request for more time. At this point out internal version finished beta testing and was ready for official testing.
Well, when the executive who decided to go overseas found out about this "mutiny" he immediately ordered our project scrapped, asked for people to be reassigned and wanted to see heads roll. If the CEO did not find out about this debacle most people would have been fired and with correct spin the overseas project would have been made cost-effective.
After all was said and done, the Indian company was given an ultimatum of 1 month to deliver a beta product or else. A month came and went and they could not produce anything. We used the internally developed product while execs fiddled with numbers to justify the overseas loss.
I am sure there were many successful projects that were produced by Indian companies (I have yet to encounter one). I think some of the best developers India had to offer came to the US and despite the tough times, companies are not giving up their good people.
I've always found it interesting that a CEO which can drive the profits of a $1b/y net company up by 30% is often not
seen as worthy of their $4m/y or so paycheck.
Of course, when the company suddenly has a $1B/quarter net loss it is never due the actions (or lack thereof) of the
CEO, who continues to receive $4m/yr. Sorry, the theory that all profits are generated by the executive suite and all losses are due to outside forces or incompetent underlings doesn't wash
The only problem with this argument is that the list of professions not susceptible to exportation is growing perilously short. Accountants, scientists, architects, engineers, financial analysts, and all the HR and other support staff that go with them are now vulnerable. What we're seeing now is just the tip of the iceberg ... any career without a mandatory customer-facing component is looking to face the offshoring axe sooner or later. It will gut the US economy, and, in what little justice emerges from this, Bush in '04 as well ... his free-trade trips across the globe won't look so hot when unemployment is still rising late next year.
The real question we should ask is whether the kind of free trade that has emerged since the early 70's really in our best interests? Will reducing trade barriers with countries offering labor at levels 1/5 or less than ours improve our quality of life? Countries such as India and China are engaging in some rather questionable practices, not the least of which is pegging their currencies at artificially-low levels relative to the dollar. This parasitic trade arrangement is destroying our industrial and intellectual base. It can't last forever ... we can't consume indefinitely while continually gutting our production capacity and going ever deeper into debt. While some sort of correction down the road is inevitable, I just hope its one we all can live with.
BTW ... don't let the recent rise in the stock market fool you. The correlation between the Dow/S&P and the state of the American economy is thin given these are *multinational* organizations we're talking about here, not sure if they really even qualify as American companies anymore.
that can spell worth a damn? Or who can get they're, their, and there right? (obviously not many slashdotters, to read a few posts) Or, for that matter, two, to, and too? Or than and then? Or affect or effect?
;>
I work in an industry with a considerable population of well-educated persons from India-- and I know a heck of a lot of Americans (being one myself, and having grown up here, ya know). One of my co-workers' children has far better grammer and spelling than the average slashdotter (i.e. knows and understands the above grammer items, and can spell very well). He obviously hasn't been studying English for 10 years, given that he's only nine.
My point is that people in the US whine and moan about jobs going overseas to "less educated" people-- while the average American high school student can't even find Iraq on a world map. If Americans want to compete globally, they have to do more than just go back to school to get a degree for "life experiences"; they're going to have to actually get smarter and work harder. If stating that bluntly makes me an asshole, so be it
1984 was supposed to be a warning, not an instruction manual.
How do you think third world countries grow into places where workers and citizens have rights? You're posturing as someone concerned about developing nations, but your argument seems to be that we should only allow Sweden as an outsourcing country.
Good jobs empower workers. $6000/year may be peanuts here, but are you so naive to think that isn't an excellent salary in much of the world? As these contries develop, they'll be able to compete more strongly, and their incomes and infrastructure will improve. Complain if you want about the effect on programmers here (I'm one too), but don't pretend it's out of concern for other nations.
No, you have missed the entire point.
The reason that companies look for cheaper labor is so that they can produce cheaper product. Every dollar they can save is another unit that they can sell for profit.
A common misconception is that companies are the sole beneficiaries of increased revenue. They are already maximizing their profit. It's maxxed out. They will milk every single dollar out of the revenue that they can at any given second. Since companies are already at a maximum profit ratio for their revenue, they need to increase revenue by reducing costs and increasing output.
When these jobs get send over, it's true that some workers will get paid less... but the prices for the products go down as well. Every company that is implementing an IBM solution then saves some money in software costs. Some of that money goes to profit the fat cats, some of that money goes to expand their respective businesses. This growth caused by cheaper prices leads to more and more jobs.
Who loses? The no longer "needed" workers who must retrain and reinvest themselves. Who wins? Everyone else. Cheaper prices for the direct beneficiaries, greater growth for the companies using said products, greater P/E for the stock holders of the beneficiaries, then more jobs for the general workers.
As far as your "investor" class? Look around, we're all around. Pensions and 401k's are the largest block of capital of the planet. In fact, CalPERS typically owns 5% or so of every market in the world. That "investor" class that makes money, yeah, that's all of your workers you say are getting screwed.
This is a New World Order, it's a change from the socialistic trade practices of yesteryear for a time where the individual can do as they see fit.
Some people may be too blind to see the true effects of globalization. Too awed by the very visible negative effects, and too blind to the amazing almost intangible benefits. Everyone that loses a job that can be even kind of blamed on globalization does so, but no one goes to the store and says, "Wow, I'm so happy globalization makes it possible for me to buy three times the goods with my wages then I could have otherwise."
If globalization were truely a race to the bottom that you describe, then prices wouldn't be falling like they have been for ages. If globalization were truely the damning of the poor that you describe, then the liberalization of the Chinese economy would have been a disaster. Instead, 300 MILLION people were brought out of poverty.
300 MILLION. More humans were brought out of poverty by globalization in China alone than the entire population of the US.
The fact is, maybe the US doesn't have a competitive advantage in the basics of computer science as it did before. Then there's no reason to expect that Americans should be flocking in mass to basic computer science jobs. It's just stupid to overpay for labor like that. It's a waste of valuable resources that should be put to good use elsewhere.
I started out as an engineer - robotics from the University of California. I even still maintain a P.E. license. With engineering tanking I went into software development since I am pretty good at it. I have my M.S. in comp. sci. Over the last few years I have focused on "soft skills" like project management, people management, communication skills, etc. Nevertheless, becoming a car mechanic or opening my own automobile detailing shop is looking pretty attrative these days. I wonder how many auto mechanics are more credentialed than those who actually design the cars? I am also an adjunct prof. at one of the local colleges. My summer course in C++ was cancelled due to low enrollment. I am not surprised. The CEOs get richer and the worker bees continue to struggle to constantly "reinvent" themselves to be economically viable.
Only the facts promoted by globalists don't hold up empirically. The "consumer class" which isn't wealthy enough to risk capital in megaprofitable hedge funds and currency speculation but is still wealthy enough to enjoy your "cheaper" goods is continually pared down.
There is some net gain around the fringes in the so-called "developing economies" (which oddly enough funnel most of their capital growth to the established markets) and there is some mild migration into the consumer class in such markets but at the same time in the established markets there is an ever increasing polarization between invest-capable and below-living-wage.
We are turning the bell curve in the devloped markets into a set of two "camel humps." On the one side are those, ever increasing in number, whose consuming power is disappearing while their hours forever increase and their wages forever decrease (see two-worker households who still need food stamps to be able to consume) while on the other side are those who find their consumer power increasing out of all proportion to the world's working populations.
No, 300 million people that were "brought out of poverty" are still in relative poverty compared to our own consuming classes, while another hundred million in formerly stronger markets formerly of the consuming classes are moving ever closer toward relative poverty all so that a few million at the top can accept the capital flowing out of the "emerging markets" in order to take a tenfold increase in their leveraged ability to speculate on the global markets for ever greater amounts of cash at the expense of the said emerging markets in a kind of perverse economic-exploitative double-whammy.
It's ugly and it's why there are kids running around in their idealism trying to stop the WTO.
And meanwhile, what the guys at the bottom know is that they lost their jobs to India (in the US) or to China (in India) or to wherever the market happens to be "emerging" next. Only in each case real wealth doesn't ever actually "emerge" for the bulk of the population.
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
Should I assume that you don't consume any products or services from overseas to save money? Every article of clothing on your body was made in your country, as was every electronic appliance in your home? If so, I admire you for having the courage of your convictions. But if not....
How dare you benefit from the infrastructure here while offshoring the manufacture of your clothes and appliances!? Why should you get a free ride when the people who make those things for you no longer pay US taxes or pay into Social Security?!
grep -ri 'should work'
Make yourself more valuable than those Indian workers by being willing to work 60 hours a week for the same salary
Working 60 hours a week, or 80 hours a week will not save your job. Please re-read step #1 carefully:
1) Identify what it is that you can do that cannot be done by anyone else
A programmer in India can obviously work however many hours per week that you work +1, for whatever you get paid -1. Working hard is not a differentating factor between you and Samir over in India.
I am NOT just saying "work harder". Not at your current job, anyway. What i'm saying is that you cannot stick you head in the sand, casually learn whatever new programming language or operating system is in vouge at the time, and expect to keep your job. You have to LOOK AHEAD and LOOK AROUND.
Looking ahead means figuring out what skills will be desirable in the next 2-5 years that would be difficult to learn overseas, and learning them. These skills may not be limited to Information Technology. If, for example, you want to be a coder, and you think that Informatics (Medicine + IT) is the next big thing (as many people do), then you might want to take some classes at your local university on medicine and biology. That's something that a coder in china probably won't be able to do. Combining domain knowledge that is specific to U.S. companies with your IT knowledge will make you more qualified that those guys offshore.
Looking around means trying to find oppertunities here in the states that are not available to overseas developers. Do you think that an overseas developer can afford the $10,000 in airfare it would take to go to a professional conference like JavaOne? You, however, might be able to make a day trip out of it, learn a few cutting edge skills, and meet a few contacts that those developers in India simply won't have access to.
In the end, it does no good to argue with me. This is going to happen, just like it did in the 70's. You can spend you time whining about capitalism, globalization and the evil multinational corporations... OR you can deal with the situation by making yourself irreplaceable. Not by working harder, or taking less money, but by thinking ahead.
Hi. I also received my BSc just as the dust from the IT market collapsing was starting to settle. Here are some random pieces of advice for you, they served me pretty well:
Keep all this in mind. And keep one ear open all the time - lean on your friends for leads, read the paper, start applying for positions now. And when that opportunity for an IT job comes along, jump on it and pound it into submission - I did, and I'm still holding that job almost two years later.
Good luck.
One god, one market, one truth, one consumer.
If the government's job is to look out for its own citizens, perhaps the best way to look out for its citizens interests is to open up its markets for more competition.
Behind every producer is a consumer. If you artificially inflate the price of a good because of protectionist policies, like preventing the production process to go overseas, then the consumer suffers.
For example, if you were forced to buy $200 shoes in California because the governor prevented shoe production going to Kentucky that would make the shoes $100, you'd be pretty pissed off as a consumer.
Likewise, behind every corporation is a stockholder, who could be you or me, who doesn't get a good return on investment because it prevents the company from acting competitively. Perhaps it's not in your interest as a producer because it'll mean losing your job, but you are not the only American citizen involved in the American economy. There are citizens who buy IBM's services who would like it to be cheaper and better.
It takes more than technical acumen to create marketable products. An inherent grasp of the consumer's culture allows a business to address the various intangible elements that makes a locally-produced product superior to an offshore effort. I've seen the breadth of development being shipped out to India by my company and I see losing our competitive advantage in the next 5 years as offshore contractors pick-up these "intangibles" via osmosis through the sheer bulk of projects they are exposed to. Where would you even start to enforce a non-disclosure agreement when dealing with potential offshore offenders?
I am still trying to figure out how long U.S. companies hope to continue selling goods and services to an increasingly unemployed local consumer base.
It should never be a bad thing to invest in our economy first.
American Workers aren't over priced, INDIAN workers are UNDERPRICED. Compare American Programmers to other countries that actually aren't borderline 3rd world countries. 25% of people in India don't make enough money to EAT. Of course they work cheap. The sad part is, if the American government continues to allow jobs to move overseas tech workers in America will have to work for peanuts to compete. If a company has a certain number of it's workers overseas it should be forced to pay some type of tax, or move it's home base to another country.
I figured it out a long time ago. Engineers and programmers could be outsourced, replaced, or outright eliminated if needed. There are lots of bright English speakers in India who need jobs. They want mine. They've probably already got it.
There are a few places where you can't practically outsource a job. Ever tried outsourcing your car repair to India to fix its air conditioning? Fixing things like air conditioning can be very labor intensive, easily a full day in some cases. It was 105 degrees here in CA today, if my A/C was broken it'd be winter by the time someone in India could have in fixed and back to me. (Including the ocean voyage.)
Another case is health care, if you're sick in a hospital in San Francisco, does it matter that there are nurses in a 3rd World Country? Nope, all the matters is that we don't have enough nurses HERE.
You can't outsource the ice cream shop down the street, you can't outsource the gas station, you can't outsource moving someone from one house to another to somebody in India. You can't outsource services that require a "personal touch."
Here's the plan: Develop the "personal touch" that the person in India can't. Expect to have to change careers. Accept that the 90s are over and you can't work at Starbucks for $10/hr until the economy improves. What you did in the past may not necessarily be what you do in the future, but make a plan for when the future throws you a curve ball.
While what you are saying has been true so far, in the last year or so, the trend has been changing. A lot of very good people are actually returning to India because of a fear of losing jobs, improved prospects here and also a desire to return home.
Also, there is a move up the value chain. The success in the software industry has given Indians confidence in their ability to compete globally, which is leading to a lot of activity in other areas, including manufacturing. This is obviously long overdue for a country of India's size and population.
I am still trying to figure out how long U.S. companies hope to continue selling goods and services to an increasingly unemployed local consumer base.
This is a very common argument against outsourcing. The problem is that this isn't how the companies doing the outsourcing see it. They figure that they'll save money by outsourcing, but that there will be lots of other places for all these unemployed people to go to work instead. What they don't seem to realize is that if they can save so much doing it, why would anyone that employs that profession not also do it? Basically, they don't see their own actions as a significant contributor to the larger problem of unemployment in the white-collar sector.
Exactly right. Every corporation operates as if its actions have no impact on the environment they operate in.
Well, reality will catch up with most of them sooner or later. It always does.
Use 'slashdot stuff' in the subject line in any email you send me if you want to get past the spam filter.
Are F1 students eligible for student loans ? That's news to me. My understanding is that most of them either have to pay upfront, or get financial support (for example, TA positions)
Yeah, but name one -- just one -- activity that involves the production of something (whether it's a computer program or a widget or a vehicle or a part, or anything at all like that), that can't be outsourced.
I'll bet there is no such thing.
You can't provide services to someone who can't afford to pay for those services, and those who provide a service must eventually get their money from someone who provides goods, someone who manufactures something.
And I don't know of any manufacturing activity of any kind that can't be done remotely.
Use 'slashdot stuff' in the subject line in any email you send me if you want to get past the spam filter.
1. The wealth in the US is primarily held by "the captains of industry" who are the same people sending all this work away. They will continue to make money from these companies. It is the employees in the trenches who will pay the price. Even when things get bad, the majority of the people in the higher echelons are sufficiently wealthy to ride out the repercussions of their actions.
2. By definition, the amount being spent in other countries is relatively small, otherwise this wouldn't be happening. Other countries are not going to get rich off this, not even by their own standards. There will be no cleansing redistribution of hoarded US wealth. The poor will not enjoy the luxuries of American standards of living. A great equalization is not just around the corner.
3. The good old entrepreneurial spirit ensures those running the offshore development companies are looking at wealthy American corporate officers as a role model. They want a cut of that pie, and coming from less well-developed nations, and probably a less comfy background, they are probably even more ruthlessly unconcerned about stepping on their fellow citizens to get it. Consequently, you will end up with the same situation overseas, where the top few are doing well (by their standards) and their workers are doing slightly better than average, at best. This will be worse outside the US as those other countries rarely have the kinds of anti-exploitation protections in place that US workers enjoy, and it is to the advantage of the governments of those countries to avoid that kind of protection to encourage further US investments.
Middle- and even low-end managers are very much involved in budgetary concerns in large companies. The problem is, they have no choice. Where I work, it was recently mandated that MOST work (nearly three quarters) must be done by Indians. Ok, they said "offshore" so we have a few Russians in the mix, but it's mostly Indians. The costs will rise due to natural market forces, not because managers don't care. It has already been documented that offshore development costs a great deal more now, across the board, than it used to.
This problem will not affect the US alone. Read The Register. Jobs are already being lost in the UK. The India and China have more than enough warm bodies available to completely trash the economies of the rest of the civilized world. It has been said that the Japanese never considered WWII to have ended, they merely shifted to an economic form of warfare. They may have been on to something. I do not believe India has any dark intent, they are merely looking out for themselves, and I lay the blame on US companies for selling out their own people -- but I believe the US may have no choice but to take a dim view of this. Unfortunately there seems to be no good solution.
Finally, eventually the same problem will hit India. They will experience their bubble, and it won't last as long as it did here because they have less to offer. I have already seen one news story about fears in India about losing their jobs to literally-dirt-cheap offshore contractors in the Philipenes and the former Soviet republics. It's only a matter of time.
I see no end to this, and I believe it will cause severe and long-lasting damage to the US economy. And don't be so naive as to believe the rest of the world can withstand long-term major economic distress in the US.
Slashdot quality declines as the number of hot grits posts decreases. - Provolt's Law, Apr-09-2005
People keep whining about how jobs move out of the US and how living standards are decreasing in the US. Yes, they do, and yes they are. And so what? What is wrong with that?
The US and Europe have been incredibly lucky, being able to build very high standards of living on the basis of cheap labor and cheap raw materials from third world nations. But those third world nations are waking up and they want their fair share. That means our standards of living will probably stagnate or go down until those nations catch up.
And that's not something we can stop anyway. Colonialism is impractical--we don't have the resources anymore to conquer and suppress large numbers of third world nations. If we oppose globalization, our economies will nose-dive. That leaves embracing globalization. But we don't have a lot of competitive advantages anymore: folks in India are smart and well-educated, and they have lower costs of living, so of course they are going to be successful and compete with us.
Overall, this means our standard of living will stagnate or even go down until the rest of the world catches up. The best thing we can do is embrace this trend and help other nations improve their standard of living quickly.