Slashdot Mirror
CIO Magazine On Offshore IT
lpq wrote to us with a reference to the cover article from this month's CIO Magazine that talks about the off-shore movement of IT from its traditional bulwarks to the developing world. A selection from the article:"
Think again. There are real costs associated with shipping your IT department (or a portion of it) overseas. Our Special Report covers the Backlash from a growing political storm as well as the Hidden Costs you should be aware of before you join the stampede overseas. "
Sad that people who spend years on an MBA degree that presumably includes a course on Spotting The Obvious 101 can't, well, spot the obvious.
After Isabel hits on thursday, I'm gonna be living offshore.
You know, because my house is going to get blown away and swept into the chesapeake bay, you insensitive clod.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
It's called capitalism. It works. Get used to it. If offshoring makes sense, companies will do it. If it does not make sense, they will not do it. That's how it works. Engineers don't know anything about finance. That's why most successful companies don't have engineers talking about finance. I'm just posting this pre-emptively before a bunch of engineers start talking about the finances of offshoring. And, yes I'm an engineer too.
I've done maintence programming and support for a few applications that have been farmed out overseas. Based on the limited experience with only a few development teams I've come to the decision that farming all this stuff out is a bad idea. They frankly cannot program very well and now we're going back and recoding huge portions of the application in house because they do such a bad job. No version control systems, poor development cycles, hardly no testing, desire to work on the live production servers to make "quick" changes. It's a PITA.
And my move to Bangalore was all set, $10/month budget and all. Damn.
Roving Web-Teleoperated Robot
Actually, last study showed Americans work harder (or more) than anyone else on earth.
There's a growing sense that even if The Future comes,
most of us won't be able to afford it.
-- Lemmy
So they're finally realizing that you can't skip the analysis of an action, just because it's the hot new thing all the management consultants are raving about?
Man, no wonder the economy fell flat on its face. The CEOs didn't notice their shoelaces were tied together.
...
I've always found that when things are outsourced (or moved offshore) is that the dialog between the users and the devlopers/support etc breaks down. The idea of IT is to help the company function and for that a good dialog is needed during development etc.
There is nothing to compensate for talking round the water cooler and say "Whilst I think of it...". I hoenstly believe that the development costs might be lower but overall it will cost more on the bottom line
Rus
Cheap UK and US VPS
Why bother shipping IT overseas when you can ship the exec's job over seas.. they are the ones that don't do anything and get paid way to much for it.
"I am a kernel in the linux army"
Lets set up tariffs. They want to farm there work offshore, lets make it so expensive to do so that they will lose money outsourcing.
There's a growing sense that even if The Future comes,
most of us won't be able to afford it.
-- Lemmy
The Atlanteans are receiving call-centre training as we speak.
From the article: "Internal people will refuse to transition to the offshore model because they have a certain comfort level, or they don't want their buddy to lose his job," Renodis's Manivasager says. "There has to be a mandate. Trying to build consensus can take a very, very long time." Manivasager has seen some relationships take as long as three years to get off the ground because the strategy was neither shared with nor embraced by employees.
The strategy was not embraced by employees about to get laid off? Ummmm.... how stupid are you if you think people will embrace being laid off to save the company a couple of bucks? (which then goes into an executive bonus, no doubt)
Why do I h8 apple?
Here's another article I just read this morning at ComputerWorld:
IT's Global Itinerary: Offshore Outsourcing Is Inevitable. An interesting read, and they do make it seem pretty inevitable.
I became redundant when my department that they no longer needed a Turbo Pascal developer for 16-bit Windows 3.11 applications. I feel especially wronged by this offshore outsourcing.
What should I do?
So they're finally realizing that you can't skip the analysis of an action, just because it's the hot new thing all the management consultants are raving about?
Nope. They're realizing that the current Offshore IT fad is over-rated. Come the next fad they'll be praising it to high heaven as if there had never been any other fads. The IT industry has no long term memory at all.For me, jobs going offshore exposes the fault in our economic system, and shows how in many ways it is very primitive.
At the turn of the last century people imagined a time when everyone would live in luxury and not have to work. Machines would be able to do the work, and the majority of people could just relax and have a good time. The idea is even more possible today - we can create machines to do most jobs these days, and we should all be living in a work-free time of abundancy. So why aren't we? The simple answer is that our economic system won't allow it - in our system, in order to be able to have stuff, you need money, and to get money you have to work. They crazyness of this situation is highlighted by the fact that periods of adundance now actually cause recession - things become "too cheap", defalation occurs, people can't make money, everybody looses when things are plentiful.
How does this relate to offshore IT? For me it is exactly the same situation. If someone is willing to do my job in another country, then great, I should be able to put my feet up and relax. But of course it doesn't work like that - I loose my job and have no money.
People say that our current economic system is the best system because "it works" but I don't buy that. In many ways it is fairly crude. I think if an alien came from an advanced planet and looked at us today it would think, "look at those idiots working most of their lives when they've already most of the tools to live a life of luxury!"
From the article:
"A good American programmer will push back and say, What you're asking for doesn't make sense, you idiot," Zupnick says. "Indian programmers have been known to say, This doesn't make sense, but this is the way the client wants it."
What a bad comparison: compare a "good" local worker to a generic "bad" offshore worker, rather than comparing good-good or bad-bad. I look around and see plenty of local programmers who adopt the "build-to-specs-regardless" stance without hesitation. Similarly, many of the projects here that involve overseas development involve far more communications meetings to work out the details prior to building applications.
There is no shortage of poor programmers here. Blanket statements like the above only steer people toward looking for poor qualities in foreign developers, while ignoring those around them.
Actually, last study showed Americans work harder (or more) than anyone else on earth.
Yes, in fact Office Space is a documentary...
Trolling is a art,
As a nation with an MBA President, we should be prepared to outsource everything but our "core competencies". What are America's "core competencies"?
1. litigation
2. consumption
3. entertainment
4. warefare
This change will not change until we start outsourcing the two political parties.
Woverly Harris Gooch, IV CTO American Fire and Bomb, LLC
..that they will be increasing their Indian workforce. They did it with quite a play on words too.
With the success of this initial stage and with our need for resources continuing to grow, we will be resourcing to grow this team substantially in the coming weeks.
While we are directly recruiting in India now, we would also welcome your recommendations of suitable external applicants that you may be aware of as potential permanent employees in Bangalore.
Applicants should have 3-5 years experience in billing system deployment with perl, SQL, Oracle and Unix skills. Willingness to travel internationally and to be based and paid in India is a requirement.
Here's what bugs me about my company specifically, and the trend of moving work to India generally:
1. My company is trying to do this covertly, like we wouldn't notice more and more layoffs in our offices in North America and Europe while at the same time increased staffing in India and a requirement that those Indian workers must be willing to travel internationally.
If you are going to farm your workers out to India , at least be honest about it and admit what you are doing, all in the name of a temporary increase to share price....which leads me to point two:
2. If your company will go bankrupt unless you move your workforce to India, then fine. But if you are going there to save a few bucks and make the share price jump 1/4 point, then fuck you. I get billed out at around $300 US per hour, of which I see less than $30 US. Isn't that enough of a profit margin? Maybe we should bring back slavery so that they can make that margin jump to a full 100% of the $300!
I don't hold anything against India workers, but I truly hate any corporation that farms work to India (and other cheap countries) all for the sake of a quick buck.
"The market alone cannot provide sufficient constraints on corporation's penchant to cause harm." -- Joel Bakan
At least on a per case basis, if not on the whole.
Our staffing company, in all its brilliance, hired an Indian systems manager to run one of our overseas offices. they saved about $1000 per month in salary. Well, due to his one week of wrecking half the systems, that $1000 they save per month will necessitate his working at least 6 months just to pay for the phone bill.
You see, he crashed the e-mail server, basically irreparably. Needs to be redone from scratch, and he, of course, has not the first clue of how to do this. So who does he call past mignight to unfuck his system? Me! The only American sysadmin at the company.
While e-mail is down, the workers turn to fax/phone for communication, so our long distance and cell phone bills are now skyrocketing, just because of this twat. I wrote a nasty-gram to HQ about how whatever money they thought they were saving has just evaporated.
Going overseas is not always the answer. There is some superb, home-grown talent that even makes economic sense to employ, when all factors are taken into account.
Knunov
Why do users with IDs under 100,000 or over 700,000 usually have the most worthwhile comments?
The corporation I work for has it's "make or break" product being developed in India. What we have seen on the Betas is long delays in getting bugs and other issues fixed. Often they have had to fly in part of the Indian development team to the Beta customer inorder to get these issues resolved, because no one based in the US has been brought up to speed on the architecture.
Unfortunatly, these delays and lack of knowledge by the corp has made us look incompetent and word is getting out to other potential customers.
In addition, the in-house employee will be quite pissed for being forced to train his replacement, and will not do so as a result.
There are a lot of positions available that pay very good - maybe better than at an IT company. The position requires you to do more than a single task and that makes you more valuable in the long run. You have a small IT staff but a lot of work. You're move valuable there than in a shop like at a telco. There's a whole lot of companies out there that needs top IT people to support their specialized industries and these jobs are all here in the USA.
Banjo - The more I know about Windoze, the more I love *nix
Reminds me of ads in trade journals for various database products, showing a picture of a non-geek executive getting amazing results from the product, with a slogan that amounts to "Simple Yet Powerful!"
If it's that simple, it's not powerful.
If it's powerful, it's not simple. (Furthermore, it's not really powerful if you can't hurt yourself with it. A power saw that won't saw your arm off isn't much of a power saw; same as power-tool software.)
If offshoring is so simple
-kgj
http://www.naplesnews.com/03/09/business/d961376a. htm 4 /c3736054.htm t udy/
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/01_2
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/439595.stm
http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/26/077.html
http://www.cnn.com/2001/CAREER/trends/08/30/ilo.s
I found that an even more recent (2003) study that says south koreans work more hours but are not as productive.
There's a growing sense that even if The Future comes,
most of us won't be able to afford it.
-- Lemmy
One hidden cost is you are paying Indian programmers to learn your business. After they learn well enough, Indians will certainly begin to compete against you.
They will cut out the middleman and the middleman is you. Indian global banking services, anyone?
For outsourcing to work, you need a project that can be properly outsourced. This is the part that constantly boogles my mind, is when I see companies outsource work for perceived savings... when in reality, the product should never actually be outsourced to begin with.
Certain things can be outsourced, but the key it seems is for the item to be extremely well spec'd and self contained. If project A depends on project B being completed, and project A is done in house... project B should not be outsourced. The ideal things that can be moved over seas, are projects that can be completely managed at the other end, and have few dependancies on this end. In other words... all the design specing, etc... has been established already... the people doing the work will have *NO* questions as to what needs to be done, and what their deadlines/goals/etc... are.
Where an outsourced project seems to breakdown are:
Improperly defined specication for work needed or misunderstanding of said work
Dependancies on projects/information else
Poor communication structure between parent company, and outsourced branch
Lack of understanding of parent companies needs or function
No understanda engrish ( this one is bigger then you think )
Where I am at now, we are a manufacturing environment that is expanding. Now, we dont exactly outsource, we build new plants in other countries. As it stands now... *EVERY* time we set up a new plant... it was always a communication breakdown that was the primary problem. Also, setting up the infrastructure between China, US, Canada, etc... isnt even slightly cheap. Every new faucility costs a wack of cash. That said... not one of the expansion plants we have built overseas ( including Europe ), has approached the success level of the ones we have in North America. Additionally, local laws have all but resulted in closure of one remote faucility... and work ethic of one certain European country, is soon to result in another.
There are alot of hidden costs in dealing with countries outside of North America. Until you go down that road, you are going to be shocked to find out, just how many. ( For example... probrably 1000 man hours, atleast... and 100 cross continental flights... just for initial training/setup ).
He has a good point. Our corporations are protected from offshore corporate competition by high tariffs being placed on imported goods. Why do our corporations receive the benefit of taxable import on goods, when we the people do not receive the same protection.
This is a ridiculous double standard, that needs to be remedied immediately. Either drop all import tariffs or enforce tariffs on exported jobs. The government is by the people, of the people, and for the people, so let's start acting like it.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. It's just that yours is stupid.
There is another aspect to offshoring that everyone seems to be missing. It goes like this:
I send out a spec to my carefully chosen offshore vendor and they dutifully develop the application at a lower TCO than I think I can do it for.
While they're developing it, they have a secret 'shadow' team - maybe in a completely separate company - that takes my spec and produces an enhanced version 2.0 of my application. Now they can bypass me and market directly to my customers, competing with my (now out of date) v1.0.
Oh, they can't steal my Intellectual Property like that? Think again. And you think you're actually SAVING money???
I do not have problems with it as long as we outsource management along with the other workforce at 1:1 ratio.
But later on he says:
So here he is, richer and better educated than most of the humans who ever lived and he can't even handle basic moral action! He doesn't think something is right, but either can't be bothered or doesn't have the power to say or do anything about it. This makes him either a coward or a slave, neither of which is particularly admirable.
You will not drink with us, but you would taste our steel? - Walter Matthau, The Pirates
Quote "A man in the audience fumes that offshore outsourcing has the potential to wipe out the middle class. "Are our legislators aware of this?" he asks."
But what you do not reliaze is that your legislators have ben bought and paid for by most of these groups that are doing this! it is a sad reality.
going off on a tangent (core issue)
This is why we need to build into these public offices accountablilty (remember who you are working for?), fiscal accountablilty, and a REAL campain finance reform. NO SPECIAL INTREST, or PAC groups! NONE, GONE, BYE, BYE.... those are the real threat to american freedoms, and jobs.......
madd is a tool of the devil
riaa is a tool of the devil
statistics are a tool of the devil
john ashcroft is a tool of the devil
These last two are almost certainly true, but it's how they compare to the first that matters. The engineers always want to make the best product, and understandably so if they take pride in their work. But management has to consider the possibility of making the second-best product if it's a damn sight cheaper. It can certainly be a good move.
Does it strengthen the company from within? No.
That's pretty nebulous, and doesn't really translate effectively to the company's bottom line. Strengthening the company by reducing costs might be worth more. And it's questionable how a company would strengthen itself by keeping overpaid, underskilled, non-management-material American coders on the payroll.
Does it lower cost in a reasonably reached fashion that increases internal productivity and doesn't make the other 10,000 workers in your company pray every night that their job isn't going to be shipped overseas to someone else? Likely not.
Like hell. First, the most motivated worker is the one whose job is on the line, like it or not. It may not be pretty, it's the truth. Hell, remember the dot com boom? Where was the employee loyalty to the company then when employees were shopping themselves to the highest bidder? That shows how taking a hit for a "stronger company" gets the company nothing. Why should they take that cost hit for nothing when their employees leave anyway when the economy gets good?
Face it, today neither labor nor the company has any loyalty to the other side, as neither has earned it. Bottom line is if your job can be performed by an Indian almost as well as you do it for 20% of the cost, that's what they'll do.
If anyone has any actual numbers to counter this, I'd like to hear it. All I know is that the American auto industry strengthened itself immeasurably after moving manufacturing jobs overseas. For one, it actually became profitable again and stopped hemorraging market share to foreign manufacturers.
And that's the kind of jobs we're talking about here. We're not talking about people on mission-critical projects fearing for their jobs. We're talking about code monkeys, the equivalent of the assembly-line bolt-turner of the auto industry. That under-educated person has never had security in any other industry, and I fail to see why the code monkey should expect anything different.
What it means is that the economy will no longer guarantee $60,000 a year and job security to someone who can only write mediocre code with no other skills. Most other people are probably safe.
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat
I assume this is a troll, but I'll bite - too much money??? Are you insane? This ain't 1999, bub. Bus drivers, bartenders, and Cable Installers make more than we do. Crane operators on construction sites can make 100k/yr. The guys climbing the poles for Verizon make over 75k/yr, at least according to their recent ad campaign. IT salaries, on the other hand, have fallen to 30s-40s/yr, maybe 50k if you are a manager. Thats assuming you can find an IT job at all
While a few were rich, most people seldom even had enough to eat. The 20th century was incredible. We acquired the ability to produce food and goods to satisfy the needs of everyone on earth, though we did not make them available to everyone.
We have had two major power struggles during the 20th century. At the beginning, production was 'difficult', so those who could produce were able to 'call the shots'. WW II was a war of production and it was won by the side that was able to produce the most bombs and bullets.
Since then, productivity has continued to improve. Production is no longer the 'hard part'. The challenge during the past few decades has been to convince people to buy. Hence marketing has become king. Between 3rd world labor and automation, production costs have fallen dramatically. For most products, the major costs are Marketing & Distribution and R&D.
But the smart folks have recognized that the 21st century will be even more unsettling than the 20th century. Computer controlled extraction of natural resources and production (including nanotechnology) can drive manufacturing costs to almost zero. (Go read 'A for Anything' , by Damon Knight) With the Internet, we will be able to distribute the knowledge of how to produce. This will eliminate most of the challenges associated with distribution (since it will be possible to do most production locally) so there will be little money to be made there either, unless artificial controls and impediments are implemented.
This is why there's such a fight for intellectual property rights. Only by controlling the knowledge of how and what to produce can power be maintained by those who value it. By the middle of the 21st century, the major cost of any material item will be the 'intellectual property' charge.
With production automated, almost everyone who is employed will be working in service jobs by 2050. And then it gets more interesting.
As AI research progresses, we will be able to build robots capable of doing service jobs. The health care crisis will be 'solved' during the second half of the 21st century. Robots will replace, not only orderlies and nurses, but physicians and surgeons, too. The cost of producing these robots will be minimal. The valuable commodity will be the knowledge of how to program them to do what you want them to do.
By the end of the 21st century, creativity -- the creation of intellectual property -- will be the only currently known role that will still be the domain of us humans. And the control of that creativity is what is being fought for now.
That's the power struggle going on now. It's just started.
One more thing. By the end of the 21st century, molecular genetics will have progressed to the point where most people will be able to live almost forever. Imagine living forever in a world where production and services basically cost nothing. The only thing of value will be control of the intellectual property behind it all. Imagine a world where material items sell for a dollar each and services are provided for ten cents an hour. It could be paradise if you have the money to pay for what you want. But if you don't, how do you compete against such prices?
The challenge as we approach the 22nd century will be to rethink the issues of access. How will we reward innovation while making it possible for most people to survive and live reasonably good lives?
Because, if most people cannot pay for those goods and services, there will be a revolution. If that revolution succeeds, those who were on top will be gone. If the revolution fails, the whole economic system will collapse from lack of customers.
Hang onto your hat. It's going to be a wild ride.
There were tens of thousands of lines of code like this. So what are we suppose to do? Spend a senior programmer's hours to do code reviews of the H1B code? Where's the cost savings then?
The project was $270k over budget and a year late. That's the cost of three senior programmers at $90k per year for a full year. And we havn't even touched on the cost of maintaining this mess. Do you really think that the situation will get better if the programmer is 10,000 miles away?
Why can't management understand THAT side of the equation?
Sounds like a good idea, people will buy only from US sources.
But then the US supply is limited (which is why there is a huge trade deficit), so the US suppliers jack up their price.
The consumer has to either pay the inflated US price, or buy the imported goods with the tarrif.
The end consumer ends up paying more for the same goods, and the market loses competition.
This is a basic econ topic, along with why minimum wage kills jobs and such.
First, how interesting how loudly programmers cry now when during the outsourcing of manufacturing jobs they said nothing.
Second, if companies can send jobs overseas, and move their capital around whither they will, so too should workers be able to chase the jobs. I'm sure many folks here would be more than happy to code while sitting on a beach in Goa.
Third, with video conferencing a CIO/CFO/CEO could really be anywhere in the world. So why not hire an Indian CEO with a degree from Stanford for $50K? Think of the millions the company would save! Hey, what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.
The agenda isn't hidden. We would like to keep our fucking jobs, or for those of us just out of college, we would like jobs to begin with. Selfish? Perhaps. Hidden? No.
All of this outsourcing is a thinly veiled attempted to commodidize not just IT, but IT services. Look at every stinking product coming down the pipeline. It's all designed for a chimpanzee to use. Sure it can't do half of what the previous version did, but it uses MicroSoft's backend, costs 3 times as much, and we can hire a teenager to feed it.
So what if all these rosy assumptions explode and take our customer service with it. We sure showed those IT people who was boss. Who needs them...
"Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
--Dr.W.Edwards Deming
I've seen the same thing. If you have really simple stuff, you can do it. Anything larger and we basically had to rewrite it. This has happened on 3 projects now. According to managment there will not be a 4th.
It wasn't just bad, it was even unreadable in places.
Just my 2cents worth, go ahead and mod me down for being redundant........
So Long and Thanks for all the Fish.
"Does it strengthen the company from within? No."
That's actually a really, really good point. While I personally am not a good candidate for outsourcing (writing process control software that for now requires me to be on-site), my morale and loyalty to the company would be greatly depleted if my company were to send hundreds of IT jobs offshore.
Why? Well, regardless of my necessity at current, I'm always going to be working with one foot out the door if I know that I'm really only around until they can figure out how to pay someone else less for what I'm doing now.
--- What
My experience with a small shop in the US in Oregon was almost exactly the same, totally and utterly useless gung-ho "we can fix it" cartoon like characters. And of course with any Microsoft code that has ever escaped into the wild you couldn't exactly bandy about the word quality.
Shit programmers exist everywhere. There are shit hot people in India, there are crap people in the US. The trick is to meld the good people in both areas to create decent teams as the client needs to speak NOW to someone, and that person HAS to be in the US. But the basic work can be done by top quality people in India.
It does work, and I for one have had good experiences of it, and I'll tell you one thing. Its a damned sight easier to get rid of the shit person on your project in India than it is in the US.
An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
I seem to recall how some celebrity (Martha Stewart, somebody else?) was in a scandal because her clothing line was alleged to be made overseas by child labor. Illegal here, perfectly legal there.
I'm sure there are many inconvenient labor laws here which can be avoided simply by sending the work overseas.
Point is, some people insist on the notion of free global trade, and open competition between all the participants in the world economy. However, until everyone has to play by the same set of laws, labor and otherwise, some countries will have an unfair advantage in this competition.
And until then, countries which have this unfair advantage, should be penalized with tariffs and anything else to balance out any advantages, real or perceived, that outsourcing would provide.
They say the first thing to go is your penis. Well, it's either that or your brain. I forget which...
It's not just the fault of our economic system. It's also the fault of our political/legal system.
There is more than cost savings when moving work offshore. Companies also gain a lot of relief from litigation. They don't have to worry about lawsuits for discrimination, sexual harassment, or wrongful termination.
It's similar to when manufacturing plants went offshore. Corporations loved the relief from unions, OHSA, environmental and child labor laws.
It's a race to the bottom....
"You get what you pay for"
Although in truth it doesn't always apply to highly paid workers (some are still lazy buggers), but quite often is the truth when dealing with attempts to save money by outsourcing.
Seriously, I doubt that anyone thinks that you can get 100% quality for 60% cost, but I'm sure many companies find the quality/cost ratio they end up with is well below what they expect.
The guys climbing the poles for Verizon make over 75k/yr, at least according to their recent ad campaign.
;)
Those ad campaings were produced by Verizon in order to sway public sympathy away from their (unionized) workers that were about to strike in order to protect their benefits. My wife, brother-in-law, and cousin are all techs with Verizon, and, believe me, they do not make anything approaching $75k/year. Possibly with 30 or so years with the company and 15-20 hours of over-time each week (if it is available), then they might the approach $75k. A better estimate would be around $40k/year. Hell, I wish my wife made $75k, my life would be much easier
TODO: Insert witty sig
How? First, please visit the web site that explains "H-1B Myths". Professor Matloff, who teaches computer science at a top-notch university, has campaigned tirelessly to terminate the H-1B program.
Anyhow, we have only 2 choices.
The second choice is best and will result in the long-term gain of jobs for Americans. The United States of America (USA) is a big market, and companies will set up shop in the USA once their share of the market reaches a certain critical size. As well, domestic content laws facilitate this trend. Toyota and Honda are excellent examples; they have built huge manufacturing and design facilities in the USA.
Further, by terminating H-1B employment, you ensure that American jobs stay with Americans.
The second choice also directly deals with the strongest bogus argument by unethical American companies like Intel and possibly Google. Even when Silicon Valley has 8% unemployment, they insist that cannot find American workers for critical jobs and that they must hire H-1Bs. We in the Slashdot community should say, "Fine. Go set up shop overseas. There is plenty of labor there."
Why in the world would the whole IT industry collude against skilled workers out of *spite*? Pat yourself on the back all you like by saying you are worth your weight in gold, but by saying that you specify the very reason the commoditization of IT services *is* about money. Like you said, you are *expensive*.
If you lost a job to an Indian IT worker, I suggest you *compete* instead of *whine*. (Glad I had karma to burn on this. I can't believe it got modded insightful.)
Boom Shanka
US asked, pushed, blackmailed to get as much as free trade as possible. Always pushing "capitalism" where they begin to have interrest, but hell, as soon as it get cold they subsidide (the farmer, like EU), they want to put tariffs (steel) and now they are protesting some smart people outside US are "stealing" their job. Well tough luck. You can ask for free trade and have it all they way out, or tariff and protextionism. You can't have both.
And since you are speaking of protectionism, how about tarif on US farmer product, US biogenetic seeds, Tarifs on everything the US product and export everywhere. You might have a trade imbalance deficit, but once other country follow you, you WILL feel the pain. Do not ask for more that you wish.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
I think your view of the evolution of the US is unfortunate and at its roots simply pessimistic for pessimism's sake -- or perhaps a little prejudiced? I mean no insult, just my genuine feeling from your post.
You back little of what you say with data, and have peppered your argument with the kinds of 'proletariat overthrowing the bourgeious' Marxist rhetoric that died with, well, a vast majority of the Marxist states. Dialectical Materialism is all but dead, unless you like what's happening in Vietnam and Cuba.
For the middle class, undoubtedly the most powerful entity in the US ecoonomy, to die, and the lower-income segment of the population dominate the population numbers, a huge disparity in wealth would have to occur. Mind you I write 'wealth', not 'income'. Look at the average middle-class American, his/her life is not necessarily so different than that of the elite. TVs, nice cars, vacations, McMansions, all of these things abound. The *relative* cost of material wealth in the US, and for the most part the rest of the capitalist world, is constantly decreasing when compared to income.
It's also pretty easy to find data that debunks your claim that there is a blooming lower-income representation in the US. There is a *huge* amount of mobility in America in terms of income. As long as the lowliest, poor, academically challenged kid can train to become a plumber and make six figures, people in the US will continue to (with notable exceptions) rightly blame themselves when they're unhappy with their incomes/overall wealth. Mobility is alive and well, and small-medium sized mom 'n pop businesses continue to be a backbone for the economy.
Your post was lined with an implicit criticism of materialism in the US. I couldn't agree with you more, there. What famous Marxist said something to the effect that the West would sell the noose to its executioner? Unfortunately, it seems like the charge from materialism leads quickly to religious fundamentalism, a disease that is quickly spreading through all parts of the globe.
But I feel real, real bad about it now. I'm sorry.
"Avoid employing unlucky people - throw half of the pile of CVs in the bin without reading them." -- David Brent
This article talks about the about the kind of folks who are working in Offshore IT :
Dilbert pokes fun at IIT grads
Contents:
Jokes apart, the ongoing backlash in the US against job losses to Indian techies has found a place even in the famous cartoon strip Dilbert, the latest of which (September 15, 2003) goes on to take a dig at IIT grads from India.
Asok, the brilliant but naive Indian trainee, the cynical Wally and the ever-sceptical Alice are sitting in the boardroom with the pointy-haired Boss. Asok says that though he was the project manager, nobody replied to his e-mail.
However, he is proud of the fact that he is an IIT graduate and considers himself superior to his counterparts and thus had been able to finish the project himself. When Wally asks him, "Are you tired?", he replies: "I am trained to only sleep during National Holidays".
And this spoof shows up the threat of Indian takeover in global arena specially in the field of technology. It also show up the Indian techie - the IITian - as he is perceived by his colleagues: a work maniac who has inhuman abilities to slog and thus outpace his American counterparts.
India's IITs have, of course, been the subject of admiration - now bordering on envy - in corporate America for more than five years now. A 1998 BusinessWeek article on India's whiz kids has this to say for IITians: "The rise of IITians, as they are known, is a telling example of how global capitalism works today. The best companies draw on the best brains from around the world, and the result is a global class of worker: the highly educated, intensely ambitious college grad who seeks out a challenging career, even if it is thousands of miles from home. By rising to the top of Corporate America, these alumni lead all other Asians in their ability to reach the upper echelons of world-class companies."
A researcher at UC Berkeley estimated that fully 20 per cent of start-ups in Silicon Valley are IITian-owned. Amazon.com CEO and founder Jeff Bezos has described the Indian IITian as a "world treasure." Bill Gates says the computer industry has benefited greatly from them.
Besides graduates of the prestigious IITs, where the quality of technical training is comparable to the best of the educational institutes in the world, India has a growing bank of 4.1 million technical workers, supplied by over 1,800 educational institutions and polytechnics. These train more than 67,785 computer software professionals every year - many of whom are a threat to America's homegrown computer jocks in the competition for jobs.
With the recent swell in outsourcing key software development jobs to India - coming on top of the BPO migration - a mixture of awe and resentment about India's brainpower is beginnning to develop. The American media have so far been mostly kind to IITs and IITians. CBS 60 Minutes had a very flattering portrayal of IITs recently. In fact, a co-anchor on CBS 60 Minutes had gone on to describe IIT Bombay thus: "Put Harvard, MIT and Princeton together, and you begin to get an idea of the status of this school in India."
But as usual, cartoonist Scott Adams - who draws and writes the Dilbert strip six days a week, is probably ahead of the pack in anticipating media and public opinion about IIT grads.
Here's the:
Dilbert strip