Slashdot Mirror


Small Town USA Competing With India

William Hood writes "According to a news article at ABC, companies are sometimes opting to outsource to rural USA rather than foreign countries. Although it still achieves the same result of lowering the value of a job, I think the idea of moving to a larger house that costs less in a town with no traffic is a much better option than flying to Bangalore to train your replacement." From the article: "Sebeka is 14 miles from the closest traffic light, hours from the nearest Starbucks coffee shop and a far cry from the Chicago suburb he left. 'There is no traffic,' said technical consultant Clayton Seal, who also works in Sebeka. 'Anytime, day or night, you can cross Main Street -- almost don't have to look 'cause there's nobody there.' Seal also lost his job to outsourcing."

63 of 496 comments (clear)

  1. Larger house on smaller salary, huh? by Seumas · · Score: 3, Interesting

    How exactly do you buy a larger house on a smaller salary? Chances are, if they move you to a more remote and cheaper part of the country, they're going to reduce your salary to an adjusted range for that region.

    So let me get this straight... you move away from your family and friends. You pull your children out of their school, away from their family and away from their friends. You go through the trouble of selling your house and moving to a new place and buying a new house on your reduced salary. You lose the conveniences and diversity of a big city.

    And what do you end up with? A job that could still always be outsourced if someone gets that bug up their ass. And what happens when that position is no longer there? Well, now you're stuck in the middle of nowhere and will probably have to move again because your new little podunk town isn't where all the jobs are - just your current one.

    But if you want to inconvenience your family and live like a nomad, at the beck, whim and call of your employer - go for it.

    For the record, my employer did this recently, too. But I refused to follow along unless they not only retained my previous salary dollar for dollar (not just salary GRADE), but gave me an increase. Most people, however, are not in a position to make such demands and will be in the "do it or we give your job to some guy in Russia" category.

    Even companies that are doing this then move on to the next step of outsourcing, because no matter how cheap they can find labor in America, it's cheaper elsewhere. There are places without OSHA. Places without the same expectation of benefits. Places without the same taxation requirements or insurance. Places with cheaper construction, electricity and maintenance costs. If you can hire an engineer for $4-$7/hr outside of this country, why would you ever waste your money hiring an American when they could make more than that at Burger King?

    To stay employable in the future in this country, you need to have highly marketable skills that are unlikely to be shipped overseas. Brush up on your ability to push a broom or ring up a cash register.

    Seriously, any and every job that can be outsourced, eventually will be. I can't think of many that could not be. Even surgery eventually (since we saw the story of a surgery taking place across the ocean, via a remote/robot). Management could be handled overseas. Product manufacturing can be done over seas. Taking orders at a fast food drive through can be done overseas. Gas pumping can be automated. Even cashier work will eventually be automated. I guess security guard work is probably a sure bet. Police work. Janitorial work. And, I suppose, hollywood/acting type of work. Maybe teaching?

    And yes, I'm a little bitter because I was too young to get into the game to enjoy the dot-com insanity and profit from it and now it feels less like a career every day and more like an 8-5 burger flipping job.

    1. Re:Larger house on smaller salary, huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hello this is HAL,
      How can I help you?
      Would you like cheese with that hamburger?

    2. Re:Larger house on smaller salary, huh? by Uhlek · · Score: 5, Informative

      Obviously written by someone with no knowledge of the housing market.

      Most large metropolitan areas are, and have been the last 5 years or so, in the middle of bubble markets. Some are worse than others, but in almost all cases, those that make the median incomes cannot afford the median home.

      Take where I live, Washington DC. We're in one of the worst bubbles in the history of the United States. People who make six-figure salaries cannot afford homes within 50 miles of the District. Even housing in far-flung communities like Fredericksburg VA, Waldorf MD, and even Martinsburg WV are skyrocketing.

      The reason is speculation. People are willing to purchase homes they cannot afford out of the concept that they will make massive returns on it later on. They're right -- up to a point. Eventually (many are saying within the next couple years) the price point will level off because there simply aren't enough people who can afford those prices, then once it levels off, the speculation will end, and prices will plummet. Personally, I think it's all a scam engineered by real estate investors, which is why I'm renting.

      Rural areas have been spared this. Making 100k a year, you can only afford to rent in and around DC. Making 50k in a rural area, you can afford a large home with acrage and still have enough left over for a very comfortable lifestyle. You won't be wearing the latest fashions and drinking at the finest clubs, but, you won't be expected, to, either.

      There's always other friends, and besides, children would probably be better served growing up in a rural area vice a city, with all the problems that they come with.

      It's all contingent on what's important to you.

    3. Re:Larger house on smaller salary, huh? by LWATCDR · · Score: 5, Insightful

      " How exactly do you buy a larger house on a smaller salary? Chances are, if they move you to a more remote and cheaper part of the country, they're going to reduce your salary to an adjusted range for that region."
      Easy they cut your salary by 20% and homes cost 1/5 what they do where your from.
      I am thinking of doing this with our current tech support center. The difference is that we are planning on paying the same as we currently do. We are in South FL and frankly we can not FIND anyone that will work for $12-$15 an hour to do tech support. Home prices have gone up over 100% in the last 4 years. The average home costs over 200k now. The schools are over crowded and traffic is out of control.
      Depending on what is important to you small towns can offer a better standard of living than a big city for a fraction of the cost.
      If you want.
      Clean air.
      Good primary schools
      little traffic.
      Outdoor activities like, cycling, hiking, camping, hunting, and fishing.
      Then a small town might just be perfect for you.
      If you want
      clubbing.
      bars.
      Chinese food that will melt your eyeballs at 2:00 am
      Art galleries.
      Live Theater.
      then yea a big city is a good choice.
      Yea you do sound bitter. My customers do not care that that a home is going to cost 300k here soon. They do not care that gas is almost $3 a gallon. They do not want to pay twice what they are paying now for technical support. I do care that the people that work for me can not afford a home and that the schools that they have to send their kids too suck.
      We will give them a choice. They can stay hear of move at the same pay.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    4. Re:Larger house on smaller salary, huh? by SwedishChef · · Score: 3, Interesting

      How exactly do you buy a larger house on a smaller salary?

      Anyone who has watched "What You Get for the Money" on cable tv knows that what you get depends more on where you are than on what you make. Rural America is no different. In N. Dakota you can buy 300 acre farms for less than a studio apartment in San Francisco. But unless you are a damn good farmer (or semi-retired) you might not want to move there.

      However there are lots of places with most of the amenities of big cities without the high prices. In Moses Lake, Washington, for instance, you can buy a nice 3br, 2ba ranch house for under $100,000; often lots less. Or a condo on the water with dock for your jet-skiis for $129,000. And about 2.5 hours to Seattle or 1.5 hours to Spokane if you really *must* get to a big city.

      Want Internet? Moses Lake has DSL and cable Internet plus Fiber-to-the-home in many places (not all) at reasonable prices (under $50 per month for duplex 1mbps). And power rates that are among the lowest in the country at under 4 cents per kw/hour.

      Moses Lake has an entire former B-52 bomber base with a 13,000 foot runway and tons of room for construction of new buildings in case you don't like the old Air Force hangars.

      Recreation? The lake itself is great for water skiing, kayaking, sailing and jet-skiing. We have hundreds of acres of sand dunes south of town for 4-wheeling and off road motorcycling. Bird hunting in the fall, fishing in the summer and deer and elk close by if you really have to go kill something. We are 1.5 hours from ski resorts and x/c ski areas, Moses Lake has a *FREE* ice skating rink in the winter, bike trails, tennis courts, a dozen baseball fields, great parks, and friendly people.

      Ever want to learn to fly gliders? One of the finest locations for soaring flight is run by the Seattle Glider Council and located at a former WWII training base in Ephrata; only 20 miles away. This is where the Seattle pilots come to really learn to fly gliders.

      Top it off with free concerts in the park every Saturday during the summer, a Community College and affiliations with several 4-year universities, splendid weather featuring summers with rainy days you can count on the fingers one hand and friendly people.

      So not only can you buy a bigger house on a smaller salary but you get a better lifestyle too.

      --
      No one ever had to evacuate a city because the solar panels broke!
    5. Re:Larger house on smaller salary, huh? by Hugonz · · Score: 3, Funny

      What if all I want is proper HTML, maybe some bullets here and there??? couldn't resist, sorry.

    6. Re:Larger house on smaller salary, huh? by aka1nas · · Score: 3, Informative

      Where do you live that a house near, let alone in, a big city is only $250k? In SoCal, the average house price is well over $400k now. Somewhere in the midwest, you can buy a decent home for closer to $100k depending on area.

    7. Re:Larger house on smaller salary, huh? by rpozz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Don't worry about it.

      Firstly, offshore outsourcing in computer science appears to be grinding to a halt, according to a few sources, mainly because overall it doesn't really save money. Slashdot won't report it because their parent company, VA Software actively supports outsourcing. OSTG has plenty of adverts on it (not here though obviously - two-faced bastards).

      Secondly, no manager wants to get too carried away with outsourcing, because inevitably their job is next, especially seeing as they will have an enormous salary.

      Finally, as even Slashdot will report, India is becoming too expensive(!!) for outsourcing. However, not many countries have as many English speakers as India, so it isn't as easy to achieve.

      There's a good joelonsoftare article on why it makes sense to hire programmers based on skill, rather than salary.

    8. Re:Larger house on smaller salary, huh? by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 4, Interesting
      There's always other friends, and besides, children would probably be better served growing up in a rural area vice a city, with all the problems that they come with.

      Not necessarily:
      * City magnet schools are some of the best, if your kid is smart and can get in
      * Rural areas have their social problems, too, often more so than cities (witness the recent problems with crystal meth in the Midwest and West)
      * Kids can actually *walk* in cities with less of a risk of being hit by a car (counterintuitive, but cities have sidewalks and traffic doesn't move that fast). Not to mention that there are interesting places to go to within walking distance. I see a lot more 10-12 y.o. kids out walking on their own in NYC than in any rural area
      * Gangs are still a problem in "rural" areas. Look at some parts of New Mexico for an example of this.
      * Don't think that rural areas aren't polluted. Pesticide runoff and industrial pollution (like from mining and coal burning powerplants) is more of a problem than one would like to think.

      Cheers,
      -b.

    9. Re:Larger house on smaller salary, huh? by lost_n_confused · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I moved to a rural area 9 years ago and I lost so many of those big city conveniences. I lost all the metal detectors to protect my kids. I lost the drug dealer on every corner. I lost all the street gangs. I lost all of the crime. I lost having to lock my doors. I lost having my car broken into. I lost the traffic. I lost $250k houses and replaced them with $50k to $100k houses that are bigger with land measured in acres. I lost having to pay $10 a person to see a movie (In the next town admission for 2 adults to a movie, a large popcorn, and 2 20 oz bottles of pop is $10). I lost crowded schools (my daughters high school graduating class will be 18.) I lost crowded state parks. I lost fighting for hours every weekend to put my boat in at the lake. I lost crowded camp grounds. I lost all the lovely air pollution. I lost 3 hour waits to renew my drivers license. I lost high priced doctor's office visits (a visit to the local hospital emergency room at 2 AM, x-rays, doctor's fee, cast, pain medication, and follow up for a broken hand was $409. The one local doctor who still make house calls for $35 moved into town 5 years ago.) I lost having to worry if my wife breaks down that the car load of 5 or 6 teens that pull up behind her are up to no good. I lost the shitty workers at local stores (they bag my groceries for free and ask which of my cars I was driving today so they can carry them out.) I lost the fear and distrust of the big city (the day I moved in I was at the local hardware store and forgot my check book they just asked me for my phone number and address and would send me a bill if I didn't make it back to the store.) Your right I lost all of those wonderful big city things.

      As for moving your kids so what, I know more then a dozen IT workers who moved over 500 miles to get a better position. Sorry you didn't get to enjoy the dot-com boom but I did and still had the life style of a rural area. I flew to either the west coast or east coast every week and loved it. At this point in my life I want to make a change and I am back in school full-time as is my wife something I would never be able to afford if I still lived back east.

      In rural areas of South Dakota you can buy houses for $7.5k - $20k that are the equivalent of the older homes that are rental property in most larger cities. Want a lake front home that is $150k to $350k. It is a small lake and you can only drive your jet ski for 60 miles one way and have to turn back.

      Spend the rest of your life trying to find a job where you can't be replaced is a dream. When you grow up and want to join the big boy's world come back and talk to the rest of us. You remind me of the whiners on my first job after I finished my engineering degree they pissed and moaned that I was paid a lot more then them. Sometimes you have to make sacrifices to achieve something. You want your cake and eat it to. Sometimes you have to make changes in life you don't want for the benefit of your family or career and relocating is one of them. You think you will ever find a position where you are indispensable you are nuts. Virtually anything and anyone can be outsourced over seas.

      The point of the article is that while you can hire a moron 10 time zones away that has no idea what a vertical producer of something does for $5 an hour you can also hire an American in a rural area $20 an hour who does understand your company and market. In a rural area that person can live better on $20 an hour then you can on $40 an hour in most big cities because of a lower cost of living. I am willing to bet a lot of IT workers are paid a bit below $40 an hour. The midwestern work ethic is something you most likely wouldn't understand either. If I was going to open any kind of manufacturing or high tech company it would be in a rural midwestern area because people out here tend to be less likely to job hop because of limited opportunities and they tend to stay with the same companies for many years because most people here never move away. Where did it say in TFA that they are tr

      --
      -- To mess up an OS X box, you need to work at it; to mess up your Windows box, you just need to work on it.--
    10. Re:Larger house on smaller salary, huh? by idsofmarch · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Are you retarded or just completly fucking ignorant? Comparing the KKK of lynchings, beatings, and public abuse to someone trashing your yard?!

      The 'liberal anarchists' of Seattle don't set fire to crosses in your yard? But, maybe they threaten you if you sit at the front of the bus? Or maybe drinking from a different fountain? Or maybe you dated a liberal and now a few of them took you out to a field and beat the shit out of you? No? Well, of course there's all those Republicans who mysteriously disappeared. Or, maybe a few staunch 'Ditto-heads' who were found swinging from a tree?

      No. I wonder why.

      Or right, because it's completely fucking different. Get of your "Help, I'm being prosecuted" perch and start paying attention.

      --
      Anyone who whines about being modded down should be.
  2. It wasn't HIS job by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Seal also lost his job to outsourcing

    Ah, yes. Them dang foreigners are stealin' our jobs.

    Wake up. It was never Seal's job in the first place. No-one owns a job or has a right to a job.

    1. Re:It wasn't HIS job by Seumas · · Score: 5, Insightful

      On the other hand, a company that gets massive tax breaks and general corporate welfare on the cost of american citizens should not be able to sell those same american citizens out for cheaper foreign labor that the citizens that helped get and keep the company running in the first place could not ever possibly compete with, simply because they had the misfortune of living in a top-society that values the Fortune 500 more than they value employing americans and keeping the economy strong?

      How is the economy going to work out when the only jobs in this country are service jobs and everything that is consumed is produced overseas? Including knowledge and intellectual property.

      No, nobody has a "right" to a job - but that doesn't mean anyone has the right to sell the entire country short, either. There is a serious difference between the freedom of the employer and the freedom of the employee in this country. You probably couldn't even live on the street for what they're paying in a lot of cases overseas. Are you suggesting that people in this country are just whiney and lazy because they can't compete with a position that requires 10 years of experience and a 4 year university degree on $6/hr?

      Wake up and stop buying the Fox News Channel business-line hook and sinker. Not everything big business does is glorious and representative of democracy and freedom. A lot of it is underhanded, backstabbing and unpatriotic. Like using offshoring as a forceful threat to induce Americans to accept lower wages and worse working conditions.

    2. Re:It wasn't HIS job by mdwh2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      By the same reasoning, no one owns an employee, but we still have everything from overexcessive "we own everything you think" IP contracts, to no-compete contracts.

      That's the thing I don't understand - by all means have a laissez-faire approach if you really think that works better, but that should work both ways, in the employee's favour as well and not just the employer's.

    3. Re:It wasn't HIS job by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Wake up. It was never Seal's job in the first place. No-one owns a job or has a right to a job.

      Remarkably, people tend to work better if they have some reasonable expectation that their jobs are their jobs, and good employers understand this. Attitudes like the one you express, while all too common, are ultimately destructive to employers and employees alike.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    4. Re:It wasn't HIS job by DigiShaman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      While I agree that what is happening with American companies outsourcing is highly unethical at first sight. But the more I think about this and look back on history, the more I'm starting to see that America has been spoiled with a quality of life far beyond what should normally have been. This is in part to the tapping of cheap labor.

      Now fast forward today... We have international travel and instant communicans that it makes globalism that much closer to home. As such, the process of outsourcing (and insourcing too) is what happens when you reach a point of achieving Global-Economic-Equilibrium. As each country demands higher pay for the services they are selling, you simple re-outsource to Africa, Mexico, Asia...etc untill the cost of their services equals that of what can be bought in America.

      Now you might think this really *sucks*. But let me ask you something. Would you rather force to keep jobs in America so you can buy your next "X-Box"? Or, would you rather the jobs be offered to 10 people in your place that just wish to have clean water and shelter over their head? In retrospect, I now know what the ethical choice should be.

      Basically to sum things up, we Americans and Europeans are spoiled and don't realize just how good of a life we have it. Untill the rest of the world catches up in skills and industry and thus demand higher wages themselves, expect the 1st world to stagnate for some time. Keep in mind this will only be a temporary event that might last for 20+ years from now. However, the fostering of free enterprise does alow for democrocy at the same time which should make for a safer and more peaceful world.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    5. Re:It wasn't HIS job by composer777 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Since when have markets EVER worked the way you describe? Your proposition reminds me of my vegetarian friends who don't eat meat because they think that if we consume less meat, it will help solve world hunger problems. That's NOT why people are hungry, we throw food away every day in this country. We have more than enough surplus to feed the entire world. It's because markets are inefficient. If all Americans decided to quit eating meat tomorrow, that still wouldn't change the fact that the reason people go hungry is because they don't have money, and without money, you don't get to eat in a market based economy.

      The same goes for your example of labor outsourcing. Corporations are not doing this to provide running water, etc. to third world countries. Only a small minority in India are benefitting from any of this outsourcing, the rest are just as poor as they ever were. It would be nice if corporations were actually installing infrastructure, but that's not reality. The reality is that they are doing the bare minimum, like making sure that the warehouses that the employees work in have electricity, and running water, but when those employees go home, they still live in the same 3rd world standards that they had before. Again, this is a small minority, the rest are living in poverty. The net effect of outsourcing has been to lower the standard of living, not to raise it. As soon as the standard of living gets to high, the corporations will move. The goal is to drive wages down to the lowest level. Small miniorities of rich people will benefit, both in the US and in the 3rd world, but everyone else will suffer.

      You keep describing this as a process of wealth redistribution to the 3rd world, when the reality is that the wealth is being distributed to the rich. The way markets have worked, and the way that they have always worked, is that the poor get poorer and the rich get richer. The net effect of free trade is not redistribution of wealth to 3rd world countries, but is in fact to redistribute wealth out of the hands of the middle class and in to the hands of the upper class. I would quit thinking about this in terms of nationality, that only confuses the issue. Free trade's goal is not the redistribution of wealth between nations, but is in fact a policy that redistributes wealth between class. Making "India" or "China" richer means absolutely nothing. Nationalism no longer has meaning in this world of globalization. The proper way to view this and to gain understanding into why free trade proponents love it so much, is to view it in terms of class. When one does a class based analysis, and looks at what this policy is doing to each class (middle vs upper vs lower), it becomes obvious that around the world, free trade has taken money away from the middle and lower classes, and put it in the hands of the upper classes. The rich in India, China, US, etc. have gotten quite a bit richer treating and trading middle class labor as if they were commodities, and the poor have gotten quite a bit poorer as a result.

    6. Re:It wasn't HIS job by WiMoose · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm a libertatian at heart and I really don't mind as long as these companies are at least not given tax breaks to offshore work. Companies should be allowed to do stupid things, and I should be allowed not to buy from them. As long as the gov't isn't using my money to encourage corporate stupidity.

      Personally I think this outsourcing thing is a bit of a corporate fad which will, if not disappear at least become more rational as companies realize that it isn't as *universally* a good idea as it might seem at first blush.

      The true costs of outsourcing are often higher than the financial savings, which in turn are often less than they seem at first.

      My brother-in-law is responsible for helping set up IT centers for Bank of America in India and now China, and he emphatically agrees. The communication issues are huge, and largely because of that, you often don't get the kind/quality of of product out that you do with domestic IT groups. It is *not* because the foreign groups are less technically competent, educated, smart or industrious, but the intangible aspects of getting a team to be effectively productive make it a lot less effective than it seems on paper.

      Also, since saving money is a prime motivator for going overseeas, they often try to save money over there by getting the cheapest people (least trained/educated) available abroad. It's not like they go and recruit the top 10% of IIT's graduating class.

    7. Re:It wasn't HIS job by smallpaul · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You keep describing this as a process of wealth redistribution to the 3rd world, when the reality is that the wealth is being distributed to the rich. The way markets have worked, and the way that they have always worked, is that the poor get poorer and the rich get richer.

      This seems to be the key sentence in your post. According to this view, market-driven countries like America, Britain and the rest of Western Europe have seen their poor grow poorer over the last 300 years of capitalism. And yet, by any measure you care to mention, this is not true. Nutrition is better than the pre-capitalist period and better than that in communist countries. Education is better. Working days are shorter. Health is better.

      Furthermore, this is true not just in "rich" countries but also in most poor countries that have adopted global capitalism. With the exception of war-torn and AIDs-ravagead sub-saharan africa (which is hardly a key part of the globalized economy), people's health and and other development indicators have been trending steadily and rapidly higher. In other words, the facts are starkly at odd with your "opinion" that the world's poor are getting poorer. These findings are summarized in an easily digestible form at the UN site. http://www.undp.org/hdr2003/flash.html

      Among other things you can see there, the average Chinese life expectency has increased from around 43 to around 70 over the last 50 years. GDP is about 10 times what it was in 1950. Even the poorest regions of China are better off today than they were 20 years ago.

      The poorest countries of the world are not those that have embraced globalism most warmly (your poor get poorer theory) but rather those that have been fighting wars that prevent their economies from participating meaningfully in the global economy.

      My question for you is: do you hate the rich so much that you would ignore the the demonwtrated benefits of globalization for the poor?. Or are you willing to look the facts in the face? http://www.undp.org/hdr2003/flash.html

  3. Sounds like a change for the better. by FireFlie · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Although it still achieves the same result of lowering the value of a job

    We are still a capitalist society. If someone is willing to do a job just as well (or better) than the guy currently doing it, and for less money, what do you think will happen?

    For the guy that is accepting the job out in the country this may be an good thing idea because the cost of living is often much less out in the country than in the burbs or in a big city. I'm sure there are also people out there that like both working with computers and living on farms, all with the added benefit of having little to no commute to worry about.

    Another good side effect of this would be bringing money into smaller, rural communities without bringing in Walmart (I live in Kentucky and there are many such areas neighboring the town that I live).

    Regardless, I agree with Hood, I would very much prefer to hear that jobs are being outsourced more and more to Americans rather than being sent overseas to India.

    1. Re:Sounds like a change for the better. by Seumas · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Except the reason that people are now in the position of being willing to do the job for this pay and these circumstances is only because the alternative is for those jobs to go completely away thanks to globalization. I'm all for capitalism, but while my employer has a global work force to choose from, I do not have a global pool of employers to choose from.

      This isn't a good thing. If we weren't so lax about allowing offshoring like there was no tomorrow, people would not be accepting these jobs for pennies on the dollar in the states.

      This is nothing more than the result of corporate strong-arming. And capitalism is all about free enterprise and pursuit, yes? Yet I only see the free part being attributed to the corporations.

      And as some whiney bitch posted elsewhere in this thread about "people need to find another line of work then" -- the fucking point is today it's tech jobs. Tomorrow, it might be your job. Or your mom's job. Again - find me a job that couldn't be outsourced? Pretty much all of them eventually could be. And if we don't stand up, check for our own nuts and stop buying the whole "but this is the way a free society works!" bullshit, we're going to send all of our jobs offshore. Then we're going to be stuck importing everything. All of our money will (and already is) going out... and not coming back in... We are reducing our own country's value for the same of a few lame ass CEOs and a small echelon of the investor-class.

    2. Re:Sounds like a change for the better. by BackInIraq · · Score: 3, Insightful

      All of our money will (and already is) going out... and not coming back in... We are reducing our own country's value for the same of a few lame ass CEOs and a small echelon of the investor-class.

      But I would think that this can't go on forever. Once all the jobs are outsourced, we'll hit the point where we can't consume the products India and China are exporting, at any price. Then it will be a wake-up call for them, because it sucks to be a business when your biggest customer is gone. Eventually we'll see Indian and Chinese companies outsourcing to the US, because we're so poor we're willing to work for less.

      But in the long run what I see happening, the final effect of the global economy, will be a sort of equalizing effect when it comes to wealth across the world. Indians and Afghanis and Mexicans become more wealthy, and Americans less. The humanitarian in me cannot help but see that as a good thing. Of course, the American in me thinks it freakin' sucks.

      That, and it wouldn't happen overnight, and the process wouldn't be pretty. I'm talking "Gee, doesn't the Great Depression look like it might have been a fun thing to live through" not pretty.

    3. Re:Sounds like a change for the better. by MSBob · · Score: 4, Insightful
      But I would think that this can't go on forever. Once all the jobs are outsourced, we'll hit the point where we can't consume the products India and China are exporting, at any price.

      This point will come when oil stops being traded in US dollars. Right now your currency is grossly overvalued because anyone who wants to buy oi has to pay in greenbacks. This creates an artificial demand for US dollars. If it weren't for that US dollar would carry little more respect than a peso.

      Now, your govt isn't stupid and knows this prety well, so they invaded Iraq as soon as Saddam announced that they'd trade Iraqi oil in Euros. Now, that Iran is trying to do the same thing (and even start their own oil Bourse traded in Euros) your president is throwing a hissy fit. Except this time he's way too weak to do anything about it.

      Soon enough the chinese plasticware at Walmart is going to get verrry expensive for ya.

      --
      Your pizza just the way you ought to have it.
    4. Re:Sounds like a change for the better. by smallpaul · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm all for capitalism, but while my employer has a global work force to choose from, I do not have a global pool of employers to choose from.

      Why not? Do you think that there are no employees of Japanese companies in America? IIRC, Honda just opened a big plant in my old home town. And I know people in America who work for German software companies (e.g. SAP).

    5. Re:Sounds like a change for the better. by MSBob · · Score: 4, Insightful
      We're in real tinfoil territory now.

      Yeah, it was all about Iraqi Freedom, silly me! Or is it Weapons of Mass Destruction? Which one is it this month?

      Believe your government's propaganda all you want but ask yourself this question. If Iraq had been sitting on massive reserves of figs or bananas would they have been invaded by the USA?

      There are brutal regimes all over the world, African ones seemingly the most vicious of them, there are WMD in former Soviet republics that can be had for a few crates of vodka. Why doesn't your government interven there if the WMD threat is its true motivation?

      --
      Your pizza just the way you ought to have it.
    6. Re:Sounds like a change for the better. by Guppy06 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Do you know why the US dollar got off the gold standard? Voters who were debtors were in favor of a currency that could inflate; if a dollar was worth less, so were the dollars they owed to the bank.

      Fast forward a century, and we now have the government that is deeply indebted, and while both parties like to gloss over it, it's still an albatross around the federal government's collective neck. The easiest way to pay off this debt? Devalue the dollars that debt is measured in.

      This is why the US government has done little in the wake of the dollar's slide in the past few years, and why foreign governments (including/especially Japan) have been scrambling to prop it up. And this is why your particular conspiracy theory holds no water.

      Absolute value with respect to other currencies doesn't matter, the only important part is the change in value over time (think back to first semester calculus). If the US dollar being worth less than a (presumably) Mexican peso is such a bad thing, then why isn't Japan in a panic since there are about 10 yen to a peso? Was Italy a third-world country back when they still used lira?

    7. Re:Sounds like a change for the better. by Scudsucker · · Score: 2, Informative

      Perhaps invading Iraq wasn't a great decision, but at least America tries to do something about murderous tyrants.

      No, it doesn't. The invasion was about WMD's, remember?

  4. Evil quote from article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Debronsky said the town's isolation will help guarantee workers will stick around. "There's no other work within two, three hundred miles," Debronsky said with a smile.

    Translation: "We can treat these people like complete shit if we choose, and most of them will just roll over and take it due to the hassle of relocating to find alternate employment."

  5. Good or bad, depending on what's important to you by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Living in the city is important to some people, but not to all. I lived in Seattle for a dozen years. My wife comes from a small town in eastern Washington state (we met in college in Seattle). Every time we go back to visit her folks, I always end up thinking "this is such a wonderful place - too bad there aren't any jobs".

    Personally I'd take this sort of job in a short second. Friendlier people, a real sense of community, no commute, an amazingly lower cost of living... sure sounds good to me. Plus it'd make my wife happy - she's still a small-town girl at heart.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  6. Good things about rural areas by Infinityis · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Some positive things I can personally attest to about living in a rural area:

    Your kids can graduate as Valedictorian or top 10% with relative ease

    You can turn your TV/music way up and no neighbor cares.

    Because it takes longer to get from A to B, you get a lot less visitors, particularly annoying visitors.

    You actually take grass for granted (note: When I went to college, people were surprised at how I would cut across a grassy area without even thinking about it--apparently grass was respected if it was next to a sidewalk).

    More space for personal projects.

    Less traffic (as pointed out in the article).

    No "Homeowners Association"...if you want to do home improvements or park cars in the yard, have at it.

    An excellent view of the night sky.

    Those are just a few of the things I miss about living in a rural area...

    1. Re:Good things about rural areas by Wiseleo · · Score: 2, Informative

      Tell them to go review the FCC website that states in plain English that passive reception devices are their authority, can be deployed anywhere on your property, and that they explicitly override any landlord or HOA with regards to these decisions.

      --
      Leonid S. Knyshov
      Find me on Quora :)
  7. The catch ? by rkt · · Score: 2, Informative

    There is no problem doing this in a small US town.

    The problem is that u need to find very well trained people who are willing to live there and work from there and still be happy with what they get paid.

    Its a funny thing that u guys think there are no traffic lights in india. The cities where these outsourcing companies work from are not 14 miles away from traffic lights and not 50 miles from a starbucks like coffee shop. Its hard to see how a computer savy group can live without computer shops around, without the modern amenities and most importantly without coffee !!

  8. Unaware to the causes by [cx] · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If someone is going to do the same job as you for less money and arguably as well, or even better, not many people are going to keep you on the job just because of the fact you live in the same country as them.

    In a capitalist country, how could you justify it as a citizen to keep your job when someone else is willing to do it for cheaper?

    That's how the game is played, the harder you work and less you complain the more likely you will have a job. This whining about outsourcing is just a bunch of over-priviledged people who are used to having it easy.

    If you want your job back, move to India and work for $5/hour, that's right you didn't just want "your" job (its a position, not a posession) you wanted the paycheck.

    Get into a field of work that can't be outsourced if you want job security.

    [cx]

  9. I'll work for $12/hr or 25k/yr by CrazyJim1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I can code anything you can imagine, and work with any software program. I live in nowheresville PA :P Nothing to do here but bum on the internet 24/7 and wait for Dungeons and Dragons Online to be released.

  10. I actually lived in Sebeka by Chaos+Engine · · Score: 3, Informative

    I lived in Sebeka in 1990, it was a really nice little town. Good school, nice people, a public pool and ice rink. It even has a little river running through it.

    I don't remember it being THAT small tho. I wouldn't want to live there now, but if I ever wanted to raise a family I could think of worse places.

    How can you go wrong living in a place less than 10 miles from Nimrod, MN??

    --
    And then he did that thing with that stuff and it was like, wow...
  11. Protectionism by MrSteveSD · · Score: 4, Insightful

    My boss is always looking to outsource our jobs to India, China or Poland. Fortunately they are so paranoid about people stealing our business ideas, they never go through with their plans.

    You will notice a distinct lack of protectionism when it comes to outsourcing jobs. When our industries are being undermined by cheaper foreign imports, the government starts introducing tariff barriers and/or quotas. This is because the rich people at the top of the chain are being affected. In contrast, job outsourcing benefits these same rich people, so there is no reason for the government to introduce protective measures. The government only protects its direct paymasters, not the little fish.

  12. Interesting by digitalgimpus · · Score: 4, Funny

    Sometimes I wonder if it's harder to understand tech support outsourced to India, or southern US.

  13. Re:Outsourcing should be illegal. by littlerubberfeet · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Market economics will eventually take care of outsourcing.

    If all of our high-paying jobs are going elsewhere (say, manufacturing to China) then US residents will be working for much lower wages in service industries. We won't be able to afford the very goods that we USED to make, causing US companies to fail, cycling us into a depression, until we become the cheap labor again. In the long term, outsourcing hurts corporations as much as us lowly workers.

    That being said, we need to stop corporate tax breaks for outsourcing and understand that US corporations are nothing without US consumers and US workers. A global economy can only work if we grow in such a way to bring standards and wages up around the world...Corporate-dominated market-economics destroys the very consumers needed to sustain capitalist growth.

    --
    Sig (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)
  14. Outsourcing work to people's homes... by UpLateDrinkingCoffee · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What surprises me is that firms seem more than willing to outsource entire projects to another country or to some out of the way rural place, but as soon as the subject of current employees working from home comes up, it immediately get's dismissed for reasons usually related to "making sure the work is getting done".

    1. Re:Outsourcing work to people's homes... by cliveholloway · · Score: 2

      Paul Graham had something interesting to say about that at OSCON this year. Here's a snippet:

      "To me the most demoralizing aspect of the traditional office is that you're supposed to be there at certain times. There are usually a few people in a company who really have to, but the reason most employees work fixed hours is that the company can't measure their productivity.

      "The basic idea behind office hours is that if you can't make people work, you can at least prevent them from having fun. If employees have to be in the building a certain number of hours a day, and are forbidden to do non-work things while there, then they must be working. In theory. In practice they spend a lot of their time in a no-man's land, where they're neither working nor having fun.

      "If you could measure how much work people did, many companies wouldn't need any fixed workday. You could just say: this is what you have to do. Do it whenever you like, wherever you like. If your work requires you to talk to other people in the company, then you may need to be here a certain amount. Otherwise we don't care."

      --
      -- Trinity in high heels carrying a whip: The donimatrix - there is no spoonerism
  15. Get a clue about what "rural" is - and isn't by gregwbrooks · · Score: 4, Interesting
    God, I love it when people talk about all the horrors of moving to scary, unconnected "rural" America.

    A few data points from Plattsburg, Missouri (pop. 2,375), where I call home... based on what I can tell (and I've lived in Chicago and SoCal, as well as other rural areas) these data points could be duplicated in many areas:

    • Wages are lower, but the variance in housing prices and other cost-of-living items far outstrips the wage differential. The wage thing doesn't faze me because I'm self employed and, before that, I drove into Kansas City (higher wages) for work. Still, it shows up in a lot of small ways, like the fact that it's cheaper to get your car fixed or your air conditioning unit installed. Housing, on the other hand, is a shocker for anyone who isn't used to these sorts of prices. I paid $145k for a fully restored Victorian painted lady; there are small-but-cute houses in town for about $80-90k and I think the nicest Victorian on the market right now is about $225k. Compare that with the metro market of your choice.
    • "Rural" doesn't mean "no access to a major metro area. I'm 35 miles (and 35 minutes - there is no traffic) from the Kansas City metro area.
    • No crime and good schools. 'Nuff said.
    • Yes, Virginia, there is connectivity in the boonies. You just have to shop for it. We had to have DSL and we had to have it with a provider that wouldn't get its corporate panties in a twist if we wanted to run mail and web servers. It wasn't that hard to find.
    • One downside: The housing market isn't very liquid. A house put on the market in my town will take about six months to sell. That number is trending down as people discover the area, but it's still a far cry from the sell-it-in-a-weekend character of a hot metro market.
    • Another downside: Less access to fast food. We don't have any fast food in town -- the closest is about 13 miles (and 13 minutes!) away. On the upside, I've dropped 20 lbs. since I moved there. ;)
    --


    "It was a summer's tale: Just a boy, his Linux, and a head full of dreams..."
    1. Re:Get a clue about what "rural" is - and isn't by Peter+La+Casse · · Score: 2, Informative
      Kansas City isn't a major metro area, though.

      By what standard? With almost 2 million people, whatever big-city conveniences the KC metro area doesn't have are not due to its size.

    2. Re:Get a clue about what "rural" is - and isn't by TykeClone · · Score: 2, Insightful
      In San Francisco, I have 10-20 companies that I could go to tomorrow and get a job. In KC, you would be lucky to have 2-7 companies in that kind of market if you were adequately marketable.

      All you need is 1.

      --
      A fine is a tax you pay for doing wrong and a tax is a fine you pay for doing all right.
  16. Where I live is a perfect example by ShatteredDream · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I live in Harrisonburg, a college town in VA where $35,000 would actually be a pretty good starting salary for a programmer since the cost of living is $17,000 a year. I'd rather be paid $40-45,000 a year here starting out than $60,000 in Fairfax, VA which is a pretty large IT area in the US, because the money would go farther here.

    Seriously, these companies are abysmally stupid. They can always hire an English-speaking CS or CIS student and start a new branch in bumblefuck USA for much less than going to India. The best part about it for the management is that it's all domestic and if they do it right, they can drive out that day and talk to the team in person.

    Like many CS students here, I'd rather work in this town for $45,000 because it's close enough to bigger areas that it's not a struggle to get out on the weekend, but it's small enough to make an entry level salary really attractive. I can honestly say that I'd be very happy making that same salary around here for 4-5 years because barring VA's tax rate going through the roof (yeah, fuck you Gov. Warner!) it'd be easy to really save and invest A LOT out here on that kind of salary.

    Outsource to bumblefuck USA, not Bangalore India. That should be our new anti-offshoring slogan :-D

  17. Corporate welfare to small, not global, businesses by Safe+Sex+Goddess · · Score: 3, Informative

    During the Democratic presidential primary I heard one candidate talk about the need to stop giving welfare money to large corporations but instead give tax breaks and incentives to small businesses. The rationale is that small businesses keep jobs here in America rather than outsource them. I like the idear not only because it keeps jobs in America, but it fits in well with the American Dream. Giving people the opportunities of making a good living while being your own boss.

    --
    Abstinence is a government conspiracy. www.SafeSexZone.co
  18. Bribery by MrSteveSD · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is slightly off-topic but I was thinking about why governments do not protect workers from outsourcing and I had an idea... The Government makes decisions that favour big business, since big business is the government's paymaster. Sometimes these decisions involve sending us to war and getting us killed just so they can get more bribes and directorships from companies like Halliburton. I have a radical proposal. Why don't we just bribe the government directly? Imagine if everyone in the country gave £10 a year to a special government bribe fund. You would have several hundred million pounds (or dollars if you're American) with which to bribe the right people. Suddenly we might be able to create legislation that benefits the public at the expense of big business. Bribing the government to get what you want would be a lot better for your health than protesting. When you protest, you have to stand out in the rain and get clubbed over the held by riot police. You don't see the board of directors of Raytheon protesting in the street. They are smart enough to know that bribery is far more effective. For example, if the government was being bribed by arms companies to invade Iran, we could counter-bribe and prevent it. This kind of thing could even work internationally. Many people around the world would be better off if the U.S. did not invade Iran. On an international scale you would have many billions of dollars in the bribe kitty! How can we go about pulling this off?

  19. Re:From the blurb by Dielectric · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's not an option because the Indian government will not allow US citizens to work there. They've got an amazingly one-way division of labor.

  20. Small town development work by MSBob · · Score: 4, Informative
    I live and work in a small town in Eastern Canada. Now, there are some benefits to living in a semi-rural environment such as less traffic and cheaper housing. At the same time, rural areas of North America tend to be pockets of some dire poverty so it's not exactly the most heartening experience to live like a king on top of a garbage heap.

    Rural America is quite different from rural Europe in that it typically consists of very marginalized societies that live in their own communities governed by their own rules and frequently exist outside the main judiciary system. Yes I'm talking rednecks with shotguns here.

    Rural America, unlike rural Europe does not benefit from equalization funds similar to Europe and resembles Bangalore India much more than it resembles villages in coastal France or northern Scotland.

    When you move to rural areas you also give up a lot that is taken for granted in urban environments, that is selection of foods and products, access to culture and amenities and the ability to mingle with like-minded people. There simply is just a lack of everything.

    Now, the housing cost compensates a little bit especially if you intend to have more than a couple of kids. What you have to offset this against is the real possibility that even if you manage to hold on to your job your spouse may not find gainful employment in a rural or semi-rural area. This is frequently a problem for my co-workers who have well educated but frequently underemployed spouses and girlfriends.

    Rural areas may get hit hard by the impending energy crisis. There is nothing for public transport in where I live and no real chance of seeing any. Having a car is an absolute necessity to even stay fed and clothed. Driving distances tend to be enormous. My work place is 60 miles from my house while the nearest grocery shop is at least 5 miles away.

    As a European I can't get over that I have to travel that far for milk and bread with no walkable community. And I'm actually in the main town's subdivision!

    Having ended up where I am I'm seriously reconsidering returning to Europe. You can make a little more money working here vs Europe but you have to sacrifice sooo much more!

    --
    Your pizza just the way you ought to have it.
  21. Oklahoma! by Ranger · · Score: 2, Funny

    If I've said it once I've said it a half-dozen times: "Outsource to Oklahoma. It's like a third world country!"

    We have pockets of high tech surrounded by wasteland. People work hard and the wages are low. So is the cost of living. The roads are bad. You need an off road SUV to drive on city streets. People do have a high school edumacation. And the speak Engrish better than some non-natives. It's a great place to live but you wouldn't want to visit here. Tulsa itself is a mecca for low cost call centers. We have over 70. It's one saving grace is that folks here are pretty friendly.

    "Ignorance is bliss" isn't just our motto. It's a way of life. Oh, and if you ask someone from Oklahoma City what the natural color of dirt is. They'll tell you it's red. Try it.

    --
    "You'll get nothing, and you'll like it!"
  22. Been there, done that by renehollan · · Score: 3, Insightful
    At one point I left a $100k job in Chicago to take an $85k job in Dallas and bought a new house 50% bigger than the 20 year old one I had for around 80% of what my old one sold for, and had more money to save after living expenses.

    Of course, I didn't move to "Bumfuck, Noplace, U.S.A" -- I moved to a place which had a fair amount of local high tech biz taking advantage of the lower cost of living, not quite the rural extreme depicted dependent on a single remote employer.

    What tends to happen is that the high-tech people in a rural area with traditional low-tech employment opportunities tend to be the local "rich folk" that stimulate and reinvigurate the local economy.

    --
    You could've hired me.
  23. This is why I'm content in here in.... by $1uck · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Southern ohio. The only thing I really think I'm missing is an ocean. I mean I have access to all 4 seasons, reasonably priced restaurants, housing, insurance, several major metropolitan areas (Cincy, Columbus, Indy, Cleveland, Detroit, Louisville are all 3 hours or less away) when I need some culture. Ok I'd also like some decent public transportation, but having your own car is easy enough and has advantages (visiting people/places 1-3 hours away is easy).

    The big thing that seems to be lacking are jobs though that seems to be changing. I've always thought they ought to outsource to the MW.

  24. No by cameldrv · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This argument is constantly floating around, but it makes no sense. Oil being traded in dollars makes almost no difference. It's the goods that are purchased that is the issue. Suppose I am a Chinese oil company. I have yuan to buy oil with. I go to the currency market, and exchange my yuan for dollars and pay the dollars to Saudi Aramco. Now suppose the Saudis want to buy some of those $29 DVD players. They go back to the FX market, convert the dollars back to yuan, and buy the DVD players. The only benefit that the U.S. gets from this situation is that both parties briefly held Dollars. This is called Seignoriage. Suppose the money is in dollars for three months while the trade is completed, then if all world oil were traded in Dollars (which it's not), then the seignoriage is only about two billion dollars a year. Two billion dollars doesn't keep a 10 trillion economy floating.

    1. Re:No by MSBob · · Score: 2, Insightful
      We could be butting heads on this one all the time. First it matters enormously because even if both parties of your example hold dollars for even a split second their M1 is controlled by by Greenspan. That's an enormous amount of power right there. Also you forget that oil is a fungible commodity. Most contracts are signed on international exchange markets with the vast majority of them on NYMEX.

      Secondly because the dollar is pegged to oil, which is the real currency of the modern world, you need dollars to buy oil. This makes everything cheaper for Americans vs the rest of the world. The only problem is that dollars in the hands of foreigners aren't worth as much as when they are in American hands. The Chinese found out about it the hard way when they tried to buy Unocal. So much for their paper wealth in US bucks when they can't buy with it what really matters ie. energy.

      As for your other point, not all oil is traded in dollars. Only like 90% of it.

      --
      Your pizza just the way you ought to have it.
  25. Come join me! by GweeDo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I live in a great town of just over 2000 people. It is very different from when I lived in the Kansas City area, but I wouldn't trade it for the world. I work as a software engineer for a small/medium size company that has a great work environment. I just bought a 1603 sq ft house four months ago for $45k. So lets see...
    1) work in the IT world (check)
    2) have a great house for little money (check)
    3) have 3MB DSL to my house (check)
    4) 3 minute commute to work...on my bike (check)

    Yup...I love it here. Outsource to these regions would be a very nice alternative.

    Got any questions about rural America and IT works? Feel free to ask.

    (wow...am I an info-mercial?)

  26. Success by failure by heroine · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Sooner or later you have to make money. Holding up in the most remote location you can find so you'll get hired for the least money can keep you alive but around the age of 30 you'll realize you can't work forever and you'll need to start accumulating massive amounts of money if you want to partake of modern medicine.

    You'll die young because you wanted to stay in software, but whether dying young was necessary or not, a lot of people are going to still be around after you pass away. You'll have achieved nothing but miss out, and no-one's going to care why you missed out.

    The other thing you'll realize is that Indians are buying bigger houses. Chinese are buying bigger cars. Your college buddies are moving to more extravagent neighborhoods. But you're in the same situation you were in 10 years ago.

    Most humans want to be in a better situation than they were in 5 minutes ago. Whether you feel a poorer situation is mandated by the decline in software jobs or not, the world is going to be richer tomorrow than it is today.

    Meanwhile you're degrading your situation and making sacrifices to stay in software. You know, no-one else cares.

  27. Why don't companies creativly keep jobs in US? by vparikh · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I am getting sick and tired of companies claiming that they can save a lot of money by outsourcing to India, China, Phillipines or Europe. This is all bull. Let the employees work from home and make them come in on a designated "meeting day" for face to face meetings. Your day to day interaction could easily done with video conferencing and IM. Companys can save on office space, electricity, computers, etc. Besides most programmes have better equipment at home then what the company will be willing to spend anyway. Employee would be much more loyal and productive. I know I would. No more dealing with rush hour traffic. No more interruptions from rediculous office politics. I would probably end up working more hours because I can work around MY schedule as opposed to the 9to5 corporate schedule. I know what most employers would say about this. Exactly what my managers said - "Then I couldn't manage you". Last I checked managing involves more then what time I came in and what time I left. That argument doesn't hold any way. After I got this answer to my suggestion they sent a few projects to India - how the hell are you going to "manage" people on the other side of the planet who work in a time zone with a 12 hour differntial who you have never met? I don't know - maybe I'll have to get an MBA to understand "the business side" of it.

  28. Dave La Reau by $exyNerdie · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is the first time on slashdot, I can comment from my first hand experience as this company is where we outsourced outr work and I met Dave La Reau about a month ago in person. What they won't tell you is that they took a 3 month project last one year and it is still not complete!! His company hired people and sent them to our site as experts when they barely had any knowledge of the platform/technology. They were learning on the job while charging over $40 an hour rate. It is shocking to see them trying to get publicity on ABC news when they provide such crappy skills that mediocre offshore contracting firms can provide much better!!

  29. Re:Cookeville Tennessee USA by jrockway · · Score: 2, Funny

    Was the minimum security orphanarium on campus, as well?

    --
    My other car is first.
  30. Re:From the blurb by deepestblue · · Score: 2, Informative

    Here you go:

    http://passport.nic.in/visrules.htm
    http://www.immigration.com/india/visa-info.html

    (disclaimer: I didn't do the web-design :-))

    Google search keys:
    "employment visa" site:in
    immigration to India

    BTW, I'm not pretending it's hassle-free - the Indian govt. remains bureaucratic and corrupt, but I can think of equivalent hassles that potential immigrants to the US face.

  31. sure- lets go live in the 'company town' by justdrew · · Score: 2, Funny

    this is like shadowrun becomming reality. these big businesses will basicly end up running these small towns.

  32. Moses Lake is a scummy mess by CatGrep · · Score: 3, Informative

    My parents have lived in Moses Lake for the last 12 years. They're trying to sell their house and get out of there; unfortunately for them the housing market there is not as hot as it is other places. In fact they haven't had any bites in the last couple of months it's been on the market.

    You mention water skiing in Moses Lake - However whenever I have visited the lake is full of algae scum. It's a rather stagnant lake. Not anything I'd want to swim in.

    And the weather? It gets very cold in the Winter (down around 0 is not unusual) and very hot in the Summer (100 is not unusual this time of the year). And it's a desert landscape without much of anything interesting. There's a park nearby called the Potholes Park (sounds just lovely). Lots of farms around so you can get plenty of pesticide spray wafting your way (one of the reasons my parents want to move - it has become enough of a problem that it's effecting their health). Oh and then there's the Hanford Nuclear Reservation not an hour away - lot's of glow-in-the-dark fun to be had there!

    No, Moses Lake is not the beauty spot you make it out to be. I actually find it to be one of the most depressing places I've ever visited - but maybe it's partly because I prefer the green side of the mountains.

  33. It depends on the place. Just like in the city. by Hartree · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Rural areas run the gamut, just like neighborhoods in a big city run the gamut. Some are great, some are terrible. Just as you choose a neighborhood to live in in a city, you have to use some choice about where you live in rural areas.

    You paint a pretty bleak picture compared to what I've seen living in rural areas of the US for 40 odd years. I'm in a town of 1200 and have better cable modem throughput than a lot of people in cities.

    One thing I notice about rural areas, is that what poverty there is is less shoved off to the side than in cities and suburbs. When the town is a half mile square, the other side of the tracks is still just up the block. In some ways, I think that's healthier than in some of the Chicago suburbs I visit where the only minimum wage earners you see are the ones working in fast food joints. The poverty there is miles away, and easy to ignore.

  34. Come join me! by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I live in a great town of just over 8000000 people. It is very different from when I lived in the Podunk, Nowhereville are, but I wouldn't trade it for the world. I work as a software engineer for a Fortune 100 company that has a great work environment. I just bought a 400 sq ft flat four months ago for $396k. So lets see...
    1) work in the IT world (check)
    2) Have a great place in a vibrant area (check)
    3) have 3MB DSL to my house (check)
    4) 20 minute commute to work...walking (check)
    5) Classical music concerts every day (check)
    6) Uncountable book stores. (check)
    7) Several big parks to unwind and relax. (check).
    8) Amazing selection of any goods imaginable. (check)
    9) Meeting people from all around the worl. (check)
    10) Cinemas showing movies from all around the world. (check).
    11) Art galleries with blockbuster exhibitions regularly. (check).
    12) Easy access to the rest of the worl.(check)
    13) Tolerable levels of criminality (hint, no guns allowed). (check).

    Yup...I love it here. Outsource from these regions will be a real tragedy.

    Got any questions about big cities and IT works? Feel free to ask.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.