Slashdot Mirror


U.S. Engineers Undercounted

mcho writes "Red Herring reports that 'The United States graduates far more engineers annually than typically reported in the press, a study said Monday, while the number of engineering graduates in India and China, long considered threats to the U.S.' status as a technological superpower, may be overstated ... the data implies that per every 1 million citizens, the United States is producing more technology specialists than China and India.' Are U.S. Engineers undercounted?" We've reported on the trend of U.S. students leaving the field previously.

73 of 375 comments (clear)

  1. Under-waged by biocute · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The problem now is not U.S. Engineers being undercounted, it's about them being underwaged by rising countries like China and India.

    And let's not be fooled by this per-million figures.

    The friendly article stated:

    USA: 225,925
    India: 215,000
    China: 644,106

    How's that making USA produced more engineering graduates? And more importantly, what's the point of producing more of a product when nobody buys from you? This kind of self-comforting is poisonous!

    If anything, this huge amount of graduating engineers every year is what caused the problems in the first place.

    1. Re:Under-waged by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Per capita:

      USA: 725 per million
      India: 199 per million
      China: 493 per million

      In other words: fun with statistics!

  2. I hope it's wrong by plover · · Score: 4, Insightful
    TFA says there are 225,925 annual engineering graduates instead of the 70,000 figure typically quoted by the media.

    Well, I hope this ISN'T true. My son is entering an engineering school next fall, and a glut of engineers can only make him less marketable. This basically says his chances of repaying his student loans just got 3 times worse!

    TFA also says, The report's findings are meant to clear up misinformation about U.S. engineers and the U.S. education system, Mr. Wadhwa said. It's also intended to inspire more young Americans to take up engineering as a profession, he added.

    I don't see how telling someone that he or she's got three times the expected competition is supposed to be an incentive or an inspiration.

    --
    John
    1. Re:I hope it's wrong by TheSync · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I don't see how telling someone that he or she's got three times the expected competition is supposed to be an incentive or an inspiration.

      I've never understood this "number counting" either. Who cares how many people of X profession we have? As long as the government doesn't over-regulate the production of a profession (as is evident with doctors), there will be enough people to do the job.

      It is important for young people to know how much profession X pays, and what the unemployment rate is. For example, electrical engineering seems to have been going through a time of less employment recently (probably brought on by increasing ease of automated design of digital circuits, use of FPGAs and programmable DSP chips, killing the analog design field).

      I think every high school student should have to designate a desired career, and then do some role-playing based on their likely financial outcomes. "You want to be an actor. Roll a die. Only 1% of actors can live on acting, you rolled a 23, so now you are a waiter barely making the poverty line, growing older and sadder every day..."

    2. Re:I hope it's wrong by Murdoc · · Score: 2, Informative
      TFA says there are 225,925 annual engineering graduates instead of the 70,000 figure typically quoted by the media. Well, I hope this ISN'T true. My son is entering an engineering school next fall, and a glut of engineers can only make him less marketable. This basically says his chances of repaying his student loans just got 3 times worse!

      You know I really don't want to sound like a troll, but I see a problem in this logic. For the reason "so (I/my son/daughter/whatever) can be more marketable (i.e. get more money)" there should be less engineers around. This doesn't really benefit everyone else though does it? The progress of technology requires people competent enough to perform, and the less we have, the more our technological infrastructure suffers, then everyone suffers. This isn't even getting into the standard competition arguments about improving quality either (because they don't always hold water, but in some cases they do).

      I see this "less is more" idea all over the economy and I don't like it. I think we need to rethink this whole "scarcity" thing, to say nothing of considering the bigger picture.

      --
      Our ignorance is not so vast as our failure to use what we know. - M. King Hubbert
    3. Re:I hope it's wrong by dr_dank · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Another thing you have to wonder is what qualifies as an engineer in China or India. In Cuba, it was a point of pride amongst the communist government there that they had more doctors per capita than any other country. In reality, they had extremely loose criteria of who can be called a doctor, thus artificially inflating the numbers. Would communist China do anything less to keep up appearances at all costs?

      --
      Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
    4. Re:I hope it's wrong by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 3, Funny

      "You want to be a successful business owner or politician, but roll a 'not upper-class', so instead you're unemployed. Should've set your sights lower, ya poor to middle-class dipshit!"

    5. Re:I hope it's wrong by Billly+Gates · · Score: 2, Informative

      Its very important from an economic standpoint.

      Micro/macro economics teach the following. The larger the supply the less demand per unit and vice versa.

      When MS went after netscape they bundled IE all over the place in order to bring the demand so low that a browser market could only exist below cost. IT was a trick that Bill Gates used.

      Same is true with labor.

      If your an engineering student or professional you have to compete with whoever is willing to work for the lowest price. Vice versa if the demand for qualified engineers overtakes supply wanted in the market, then the engineers dictate their salary. Now the employer decides and if you dont like it tough.

      An equalibrium with supply and prices is reached when excess demand or supply leaves a market and a price point for an X amount of quantity is picked. The hope was with less engineering students and a better economy is that the demand (wages) would increase again to reasonable levels.

    6. Re:I hope it's wrong by brontus3927 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I know about a dozen engineers, spanning tracks from computer, to electrical, to mechanical, and even some civil engineers. Noe of them had any problem finding a job out of college. If you/he is really worried about finding a job and getting job security, look for openings in small firms. As long as the company is financially stable, once you get a job, as long as you don't do something to jeprodize it, you'll be there until you quit or retire. It doesn't matter if the engineers in your specialty are a dime a dozen, get in with a small company and you'll never have to worry about getting "traded in for a better model" Other advantages of a small firm are greater flexability, and the knowledge that your work actually makes a difference in the fate of the company. One friend adjusted his shift to come in and leave an hour earlier to avoid traffic; all he had to do was tell his boss he was going to do so. Meanwhile, if he has an idea for a new product, or a more efficient proccess, the company will actually care.

    7. Re:I hope it's wrong by bcattwoo · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I think every high school student should have to designate a desired career, and then do some role-playing based on their likely financial outcomes. "You want to be an actor. Roll a die. Only 1% of actors can live on acting, you rolled a 23, so now you are a waiter barely making the poverty line, growing older and sadder every day..."

      Indeed. It is sad to read about people who are struggling to make ends meet saddled with $40+K of student loans because they went to a $30K/yr school to become a $20K/yr social worker or such. Not that it's wrong to pursue a low-paying career if you find it personally fulfilling, but you need to plan accordingly for the financial realities.

    8. Re:I hope it's wrong by speculatrix · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The big problem at the moment, with the glut of engineers, particularly in software and electronic engineering, is that employers are far too picky: they want an exact match.

      Just recently I was turned down before even getting to interview because I only had 9 out of the 11 skills on the requirements! Someone had left the position and they wanted someone to step into the role with no gap.

      Don't employers realise that aptitude (ability to learn) and attitude (discipline and enthusiasm) are at least as important as specific skills? In fact, I'd go further to suggest that a perfect fit would actually be bad, because the new employee would have nothing to learn, no reason to strive, nothing to challenge.

      I get my technical kicks from solving problems I can only initially *guess* how to do... the first time you do something, it's interesting and a challenge; the second time you refine the process, the third time you get bored and probably create something too fancy and bloated just to make it more interesting*!

      (*lets see, Windows NT, Windows 2000, WIndows XP... yep, that confirms my theory).

    9. Re:I hope it's wrong by Medievalist · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You are correct, but with engineers it's even more futile to try to use these numbers; engineers are (at least in theory) able to create products that distort the market. For example, engineers created the calculator, and look at what that did to the market for slide rules. THe IBM PC was also created by engineers - look at what that did to every single marketplace!

      More engineers might just create more need for engineers.

    10. Re:I hope it's wrong by Bloke+down+the+pub · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Micro/macro economics teach the following. The larger the supply the less demand per unit and vice versa.
      One, check your verb agreement: economics is singular.

      And two, it teaches nothing of the sort.

      --
      It's true I tell you, feller at work's next door neighbour read it in the paper.
  3. go figure by BushCheney08 · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is what happens when you let MBAs do the counting...

    --
    Be a real patriot: Question authority. Think for yourself. Formulate your own conclusions.
  4. If only they counted... by 808paulson · · Score: 5, Funny

    If only they counted by weight, U.S. Engineers will be properly represented.

  5. Broadcast engineers? by TheSync · · Score: 2, Interesting

    A number of broadcast engineers I work with did not have an engineering college education, and just learned their way up from camera operator to master control operator to station chief engineer, etc. Yet these people are internationally known experts in fields like digital television (MPEG-2 transport streams, PSIP, 8VSB modulation, and such). Some didn't even graduate from college! While the top folks might be counted as IEEE or SMPTE members, I'm sure many fall through the cracks.

    1. Re:Broadcast engineers? by TastyCakes · · Score: 2, Informative

      In Canada at least, you're not supposed to call yourself an engineer unless you graduate from recognized engineering school. There are a couple of exceptions (driving trains etc) but I'm pretty sure "broadcast engineers" isn't one of them. I'm not saying these people are not as valuable as "real" engineers or aren't as good at their jobs, but I doubt they are officially recognized as engineers or that the numbers in this article include them.

    2. Re:Broadcast engineers? by onkelonkel · · Score: 2, Informative

      There's more. In Canada the title "Engineer" is legally restricted to registered members of a Provincial Association of Professional Engineers. Just like graduating from law school doesn't make you a lawyer (you have to pass bar exams and be "called to the bar"). The normal route to getting there is to graduate from a recognized engineering school, have about 2 years equivalent of engineering experience, pass the professional practice exams, and if your application for registration is accepted then and only then are you an engineer.

      I understand that in the US of A things aren't quite so rigorous, but in Canada the P. Eng. Associations have swarms of lawyers waiting to pounce on any non-member who calls himself an engineer.

      There was a big fight with Microsoft over MCSEs calling themselves engineers in Canada, and a university almost lost accreditation for their engineering school when their computer science school wanted to grant degrees in "Software Engineering" without the approval of the local P.Eng Association.

      --
      None of them can see the clouds; The polished wings don't care.
  6. Technology Specialists, not engineers by Sporkinum · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Technology Specialists, not engineers. I am not an engineer, but have been in the tech field for 25 years. I think the US probably has more tech-adept per capita than the other countries.

    --
    "He's lost in a 'floyd hole"
    1. Re:Technology Specialists, not engineers by QMO · · Score: 4, Funny

      "It seems everybody wants to be called an engineer these days."

      And most of them have never driven a train in their life.

      --
      Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
  7. Engineer Graduates first hand by drakethegreat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Most everyone of my friends is a studying to be an engineer. I think the reality is that we are graduating its just taking longer then 4 years these days. I know its taking some people up to 6-7 years in a 4 year program to actually graduate. Most of this has to do with horrible advisors in my opinion. They don't give or offer much direction in 4 year state schools. Instead students are left to figure it out on their own and that means they don't always pick exactly what gets them out of there the fastest. Keep in mind people are switching majors a lot more these days too.

    However I have noticed that the graduate times for students at private universities in the US is less then state schools. My honest opinion is that the state governments have underfunded certain parts of our public universities but not everything. Its understandable cause they needed money for something else right now that we can't afford. Thats one of the reasons why I transfered to a private university, I feel the education I am getting right now is a more expensive but the quality is a lot higher.

    1. Re:Engineer Graduates first hand by amightywind · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Most everyone of my friends is a studying to be an engineer. I think the reality is that we are graduating its just taking longer then 4 years these days. I know its taking some people up to 6-7 years in a 4 year program to actually graduate. Most of this has to do with horrible advisors in my opinion.

      What a terrible attitude! As an adult you are expected (heavens!) to make some choices about you future, and project your life a few years out. You expect someone else too? Maybe a year in the real world would cure your Catcher in the Rye immaturity. The 7 year program was made for people like you. Enjoy those student loan payments.

      --
      an ill wind that blows no good
    2. Re:Engineer Graduates first hand by Newander · · Score: 2, Interesting
      However I have noticed that the graduate times for students at private universities in the US is less then state schools. My honest opinion is that the state governments have underfunded certain parts of our public universities but not everything. Its understandable cause they needed money for something else right now that we can't afford. Thats one of the reasons why I transfered to a private university, I feel the education I am getting right now is a more expensive but the quality is a lot higher.

      So high, in fact, that you can almost tell the difference between then and than.

      I graduated in six years from a public university, and it was all my fault. I actually knew a guy who graduated with CprE and EE in three years, but he was taking 19 or 20 hours a semester the whole time. He did most of his sleeping on the weekend.

      --

      Jesus saves and takes half damage.

    3. Re:Engineer Graduates first hand by HardCase · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The best that you can assume is that it's been a problem for somebody, not necessarily them.

    4. Re:Engineer Graduates first hand by grgyle · · Score: 2, Insightful

      He has the right attitude and expectations IMHO. Advising and schedule management is what the students pay the colleges to provide. Self-discipline is fine, but very few students (especially as young students who haven't had to sink or swim in the 'real' world) have those skills, nor should they be expected to possess them.

      I could realistically study most (if not all) of a degree program by visiting libraries and taking MIT open courseware. However, I currently pay a *lot* of money so that I can have a managed program, disciplined schedule, advising and consulting, teaching assistance, and evaluation. I could pursue this on my own, but I'm realistic to know that I wouldn't be able to discipline myself to do so successfully as I would in a university setting.

      The 6-year-bachelor syndrome is very much (but not entirely of course) the fault of inadequate advising and support from the university administration, and the attempt to satisfy ridiculous special-interest degree requirements.

      I speak as one whose degree was delayed in large part to false promises and non-existant support from schedule advisors, never knowing that I needed a cultural anthropology course that was only offered one term per year at a weird hour to graduate for a BS in Physics.

      --
      ----- And all that the Lorax left here in this mess was a small pile of rocks, with one word...UNLESS.
  8. Graduates versus Engineers by sunderland56 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    There's a large difference between people who graduate in a field, and people who end up working in that field.


    If you don't believe me, ask at any McDonald's.

  9. What about foreign students? DUH!!! by RootsLINUX · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As a caucasian American in my major (EE), I have always been in a minority. I'd estimate that between 60-75% of the students in my classes are students from outside the country: India, China, Indonesia, etc. Does this study even consider taking that into account? Glancing it over briefly, it sure doesn't seem so.

    --
    Hero of Allacrost, a FOSS RPG for *NIX/*BSD/OS X/Win
  10. Someone needs to hire some engineers... by digitaldc · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...to count the number of engineers. It would also help the unemployment figures.

    --
    He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
  11. oh yeah, like "software engineer" even counts! by mekkab · · Score: 4, Funny

    thats not even real engineering!@

    /B.S. in E.E.
    //M.S. in Comp Sci
    ///yep, I'm a S.W. Eng, baby!

    --
    In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
  12. Finally! by GweeDo · · Score: 2, Funny

    I have been doing the work of four people for years...now I am finally counted correctly!

  13. Private Sector Detours by Cr0w+T.+Trollbot · · Score: 3, Insightful
    You get a lot of American engineers who found out (at least during the dotcom boom) that they could make more money as programmers, technologists, SysAdmins (etc.) than they could in an entry-level engineering job. A lot of them may end up going back to get their degree later, or else starting their own company. Makes it hard to compare to an economy when credentialism is mroe important.

    Crow T. Trollbot

  14. We're graduating enough engineers by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think Bill Gates and Co. can stop complaining to the government now about how they need help getting lower-paid foreign engineers and hire some of the homegrown boys and girls.

  15. But look even closer... by gasmonso · · Score: 2, Funny

    The US numbers are somewhat inflated because they count sanitation engineers who are merely garbage men and custodial engineers who are merely janitors.

    http://religiousfreaks.com/
  16. But how many work as engineers? by tktk · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Are the number of graduates that important? What about the number of engineers looking for jobs?

    This is my little anecdotal story.

    Having 2 engineering roomates, I was friends with a qute few engineers in college. We all graduated around 1997, give or take a year or two.

    Out of 20 that I'm still in contact with, I'd say that 6 are still engineers today. Some have moved up to management or higher and, by their own admission, don't do any engineering work. The rest have moved on to other jobs completely.

    1. Re:But how many work as engineers? by lixee · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Engineer's prerogative! Ever seen an MBA ending up working as an engineer? Not me.

      --
      Res publica non dominetur
  17. Seriously, Does this matter? by argoff · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Really, does this matter? IMHO, society puts too much focus on education level and not enough on freedom and independent thinking.

    For example, is used to be that people could run successfull businesses without a high school degree, but then the government took away some economic freedoms, and when people had troubble making it - they said that's because you should have a highschool education.

    Then they took away some more economic freedoms and people had troubble making it, so they said both you and your spouse should work.

    Then they took away some more economic freedoms and people had troubble making it, so they said well you should go into debt to buy a home and a car.

    Then they took away some more economic freedoms and people had troubble making it, so they said well you should put your retirement money into tax free IRA's and sighn up for tax free employer sponsered health plans.

    Then they took away some more economic freedoms and people had troubble making it, so they said well you should get a college education and go into debt to pay for it.

    So, IMHO, while education is important, society is pushing it as an end in itself when all it really is - is a hoop that distracts us from what really matters. Freedom is an end in itself, rationality is an end in itself, education is a consequence of these not an ends.

    1. Re:Seriously, Does this matter? by toleraen · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think you disprove your own argument by making so many grammatical and spelling errors. Not to flame, but one of the major educational values pushed during my time at college was solid communication skills. So yes, education level is very important. Without it, you would have a very difficult time expressing your "independent thinking".

    2. Re:Seriously, Does this matter? by AuMatar · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No we couldn't. Without the taxes there would be;

      *No roads
      *No police protection
      *No fire departments
      *No primary or secondary education
          *As a result of which, 90% of our middle class would be being paid substinance level wages, working 12-16 hour days to be able to eat. You know, like we did before we enacted regulations to stop that shit.
      *No military, so we'd likely be part of China by now
      *No social security, so we'd have elderly people competing for jobs in order to live
          *A large homeless problem, as elderly people will frequently lose the competition
          *A much lower expected lifespan, due to the above and lack of medicaid
      *Garbage all over, since we wouldn't have garbage pickup and people would refuse to pay

      I could go on, for several chapters. While there is undoubtedly waste in government spending, the vast majority of it is for needed purposes. Without it, life would be a hellhole. Just study your history, particularly the middle ages and the industiral era before the populists and progressive movements.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    3. Re:Seriously, Does this matter? by ADRA · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You pay the American government for your quality of life. If you don't like it, there aren't export controls on your citizenship. Leave and find a country that doesn't make you whine so much. Taks away the taxes and regulations, and you get companys running a muck like they do in Asia, you get delapidated government services and social programs. You think your government's social programs do nothing for you now? You wouldn't want to live outside of your walled neighbourhood with armed security drones, and if you can't afford one of your own, you can get fed to the lions! Actually I'm taking this much too far, but so are you. The gov tax you to continue economic development, and frankly, your country isn't doing too badly when comapared to most westernized nations. I'd look at this as a growingly painfull adjustment to the balancing of the world's quality of living that globalization will -eventually- result in.

      --
      Bye!
    4. Re:Seriously, Does this matter? by Red+Flayer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Please, explain what you mean by "they took away some economic freedoms."

      What the hell is an 'economic freedom'?

      And what 'economic freedoms' did we have in 1900 that we don't have today?

      If by "they took away some economic freedoms" you mean, "People weren't satisfied with what they could afford," then I might agree with you.

      What is boils down to is that the typical American quality of life is much better than it used to be, and all those gains cost money. The employment market, not any mysterious 'they,' is what determined that a college education leads to better jobs. The empowerment of women in the late 40s and early 50s is what led to dual-income households, and the fiscal benefit that conveys.

      The government never mandated you need a high school education to get a bank loan -- banks did that, since people without an education tended to be poor credit risks.

      Do you think that in 1900 everyone could get by with a decent standard of living only working one job? Do you think that non-working spouses had it as easy as today? How about the people who worked 80 hour weeks just to have room and board for their family -- if they were lucky? How about the countless people who starved or froze to death in the great depression?

      Read some history books. Then go read some more. Then read some period fiction from the past century.

      And realize that what we consider to be a barely decent standard of living would have been considered very comfortable or even luxurious 50 years ago.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    5. Re:Seriously, Does this matter? by TedCheshireAcad · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You're right. Without taxes, we wouldn't have such wonderful things as:

      * Welfare, for people who don't feel like workin'
      * Social Security, for people who don't feel like savin' for retirement
      * Pork projects, for politicians who don't feel like campaignin'
      * A war in the middle east, for presidents who don't feel like diplomatin'
      * FEMA relief debit cards, for people who didn't feel like evacuatin'

      The list goes on. I'm not saying that taxes should be abolished, but if we had some sensible spending, we'd be paying a lot less in taxes.

    6. Re:Seriously, Does this matter? by khallow · · Score: 3, Insightful
      There's so many problems with your post that I'm surprised it's not modded down as flamebait. Let's try one of the more difficult rebuttals.

      You claim that these services wouldn't exist if it weren't for taxes. The US, for example, has a number of examples of private services filling each of these needs. Even now, there are a large number of private primary and secondary schools in the developed world despite the presence of cheap public education.

      Social Security (especially the US kind) does a terrible job of actually protecting the elderly from being poor especially when you compare it to private investment and savings. Why are we shuffling hundreds of billions of dollars a year to keep a few hundred thousand people out of poverty? Surely it would be easier to pay these people directly.

      Further there are serious problems with paying the elderly not to "compete". Namely, that we take away the most experienced portion of our population. This is foolhardy.

      Medicaid is a disaster. It needs to be destroyed not funded.

      Garbage cleanup? Come on. In a lot of places that is already private.

      I could go on, for several chapters. While there is undoubtedly waste in government spending, the vast majority of it is for needed purposes. Without it, life would be a hellhole. Just study your history, particularly the middle ages and the industiral era before the populists and progressive movements.

      I'm sure you could. But what would be the point? You already are out of touch. Just to use a couple of examples you cite, Social Security and Medicaid/Medicare, we have a huge portion of government spending in two entitlement programs. Now, perhaps entitlement programs aren't automatically waste, but these two programs do very little aside from shuffling wealth among people who don't need it (and being used as a sneaky way to increase government spending), and helping to boost the inflated medical costs in the US. Both are what I'd consider waste.

      Let me add, it surprises me how a certain class of person can talk about how important taxes are, and then ignore the full range of what these taxes get spent on. For example, US citizens have paid, so I hear, half a trillion dollars on the Iraqi invasion. Some people apparently don't appreciate this war, but appreciate US taxes. You get the whole package with government.

  18. Huge Difference by J05H · · Score: 2, Insightful

    THere's a huge difference between a "technology specialist" and an engineer. Any monkey with an MSCE or Red Hat training is a tech specialist, it doesn't mean he can design rocket engines.

    Josh

    --
    gigantino.tv - Heavy but weighs nothing.
  19. Why should there be more engineers in the US? by geneing · · Score: 2, Interesting
    If we are talking about civil or mechanical or chemical engineers why do we need more? The infrastructure in the US is very much built out and there is not much new construction going on. India and China have a lot of new construction going on and that's where engineers are needed most.

    Isn't it just like saying that US has fewer farmers than India or China? True, but who cares if they can supply all the food we need.

    1. Re:Why should there be more engineers in the US? by Skagit · · Score: 2, Interesting
      The infrastructure in the US is very much built out and there is not much new construction going on.


      Wow, that's incorrect. The infrastructure in the US, as graded by the American Society of Civil Engineers (who might know a thing or two about the subject), is pretty miserable. Just look. The levee failure in New Orleans was a single tragic example of infrastructure failure. The next one could be an Amtrak commuter line going through a bridge into the Hudson River or a refinery blast spewing a zillion gallons of crude into the Delaware. The US needs engineers to repair the infrastructure.

      Drive through the suburbs and look at all the new housing developments springing up. Drive through New York City and Philadelphia and Boston and Washington and look at the forest of tower cranes and new high rises. Look at all the pedestrian protection lining the sidewalks. Construction is growing and, according to the Engineering News-Record, civil engineering departments can't keep up.

      So, in a word, "no."
      --
      Why does my coffee mug smell like trout?
  20. Vocational mistake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I graduated with a an engineering and computer science degree. Since then I've been a salesman, writer, mechanic, a music producer, a volunteer counseller for homeless vets, and now I am considering retraining as a plumber. There's a reason for this and it's simple psychology really, IT jobs are the most thankless and stressful in existence. Reading the ealier post on Top 10 Admin Truths made me sweat with bad memories. Almost all the time you are working for dumbasses who don't understand anything, don't know what they want, but want you to fix it right now. They think that because you are a techie you must be some kind of minion who sorts out all their problems while they make all the money and treat you like shit. So called 'managers' who fail to manage, PHBs with disgusting attitute problems, dotcom maniacs who think they can just throw up a server and it will print money for them, there seems no end to the fakes and blaggers occupying the top ranks of IT. My my own admission I have an 'attitude problem'. The problem is that I'm happy with my attitude not to be taken for granted by idiots. It's a shame because computing could be such a challenging, stress free and worthwhile occupation, but I've had to look elsewhere for job satisfaction. The problem is not a shortage of skilled engineers, it's a shortage of decent employers.

    1. Re:Vocational mistake by amightywind · · Score: 2, Funny

      and now I am considering retraining as a plumber.

      Nothing wrong with that. Your knowledge of networking and graph theory is immediately applicable. Demand for your services is inelastic and resistant to outsourcing.

      --
      an ill wind that blows no good
    2. Re:Vocational mistake by Malc · · Score: 2, Funny

      I had a plumber come in to one of my apartments once due to a blocked toilet. He had it unbolted and turned upside. WHAT A MESS. Literally shit everywhere. If you can handle that, you deserve the high-paid plumbing job! Me? I think I would rather be an electrician. Still get to drill holes in people's homes, make a mess, and then leave without cleaning it up!

  21. link to the actual study by uujjj · · Score: 5, Informative

    The Red Herring article fails to link to its source. Ironically the actual study criticizes articles like these for failing to identify their sources. So here is the study itself. Enjoy.

    1. Re:link to the actual study by danmart · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The actual study shows that what the now inflated US numbers count are associate degrees along with bachelor degrees.

      US
      BS in IT 84k
      BS other 137k
      AS all 84k

      Total 222k

      Hey the Indian and Chinese numbers are fake and ours are not! Wait, if we include all our associate degrees and all our non-IT degrees then our fake numbers are higher than their fake numbers! Yay for America!

  22. Being called an Engineer is not cool enough by AB3A · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you want a big salary, in today's market driven world, you need to think big. You're not an engineer, you're a technical plan implementor --or some other such balderdash. That's the problem with job titles where I work. If you want better pay, you have to stop calling yourself an Engineer, even if that's what you do. So they have engineering managers, control system specialists, Antenna site managers, and so forth. These are all jobs which require an engineering background.

    So, when someone goes to our company to count the number of Engineering positions, we don't have many. But we do have lots of people with engineering educations and engineering backgrounds. Now the managers want to know how many engineers they have. They have already recast most of us in to different titles. So the count the few who still work under the old titles, and GASP! they don't know where all the engineers have gone.

    This is why they write idiots guides to management, but not idiots guides to electrical engineering.

    --
    Nearly fifty percent of all graduates come from the bottom half of the class!
  23. Re:Heavy courseload for four years by richdun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    On the other hand, as an aerospace engineering graduate who finished last year after only four years and had a blast doing newspaper, student government, and a wealth of other activities, it depends on where you go - go to a tech school, and it's four years easy (plus a minor in Materials Engineering for my Tech Elecs). Two semesters at 15 hours, two at 18, and the rest 16-17. If you want to be an engineer, go to a school with an engineering curriculum, not a general curriculum with engineering tacked on top. Most of my friends finished in four, or took 4+ or 5 to get two degrees. It's not impossible, you just have to choose the right school.

  24. built out? by conJunk · · Score: 3, Interesting
    If we are talking about civil or mechanical or chemical engineers why do we need more?

    built out? I know it's pulling at obvious strings, but does New Orleans mean anything to you? Built-out == old and crumbling in a great many cases. how about today's apartment building collapse in new jersey? civil engineers are needed in droves to keep people alive (that's totally conjecture, but you know what i mean)

    my housemate, for example, is a CE who's field is earthquake engineering... here in CA that's a pretty important field! and as for chemical engineers? i don't know about you, but i'm not going to buy a car until it runs on something other than petrolium products. our future as a society is entirely in the hands of next year's civil, mechanical, and engineering graduates

  25. How China now dominates in system engineering by sidles · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There's not much doubt that the US is being seriously out-performed by China in system engineering (http://courses.washington.edu/goodall/MRFM/whats_ new.html#n0036). As the web page shows, most of the peer-reviewed articles in system engineering are now written in Mandarin, not English.

    This is a new phenomenon: it began about five years ago. And the number of such articles is increasing by about 30 percent per year.

    Graphic here: http://courses.washington.edu/goodall/MRFM/pg_0035 .png

  26. Road Blocks by sgt+scrub · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I wish it was as simple as being undercounted or underpaid or even unwanted. I think the biggest reason is engineers are inventors. In china and India the only thing holding you back is enough money to put it on the market. If someone in the US invents something they have to worry about getting sued for patent infringement.

    --
    Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
  27. Re:I can explain this by eutychus_awakes · · Score: 2, Funny

    90% of my job is half political.

    --
    This sig is a test. If this had been an actual sig, you would be reading something quite a bit wittier than this now.
  28. Re:Americans? by Golias · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Another question: Who cares?

    Engineers are engineers. Everybody's gotta eat. Why should I whether a Chinese engineer has a job and an American engineer is out of work or vice versa?

    --

    Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

  29. Not surprising by tsotha · · Score: 4, Insightful
    These numbers depend on who you ask, and there's a reason. The big tech companies can only get the H1-B visa cap raised if they can convince Congress and the media there's going to be a shortage of engineers in a year or two. There's never been a shortage (outside of the boom, which was driven by extraordinary demand) even though "they" forcast one every couple of years.

    It turns out all you need to do to fool the media (and Congress, which gets its information from the media) is turn out a scientific-looking study showing a large gap between the number of graduates and the projected need. The vast majority of reporters and editors have no math skills whatsoever (remember, these guys are the journalism majors for college), so they don't have any way to evaluate the garbage churned out in advocacy research.

    So they raise the H1 cap. That way the high-tech companies in the US have a way to exert downward pressure on engineering wages. And all for the price of a couple of bogus "studies".

    So am I surprised US schools are turning out lots more engineers than we've been led to believe? Nah, not really.

  30. What is the definition of an Engineer? by Secrity · · Score: 2, Interesting

    When I was working in Saudi Arabia in the 1980's, I came across two types of workers that were called Engineers but they would not be considered to be engineers in the US. One group was called "Electrical Engineers" (nationality unknown, they were Muslims and looked Asian) which were doing (sloppy) electrician type work. The other group that I came across were called "Mechanical Engineers" which were Pakistani and I believe that in the US they would be considered to be very good diesel mechanics.

  31. how many us grads are foreign nationals? by swschrad · · Score: 4, Insightful

    somebody is dragging a red herring across the trail here. both times I was in college, there were a tubload of foreign nationals studying for bachelors and advanced degrees in the US.

    don't go counting total grads and equating that to all-US grads. red herring, indeed, masking the scent.

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  32. Yes, but what do they produce? by castoridae · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'd say the number of engineers in any country isn't really an important metric. The important metric is what do the engineers in that country produce? How many innovations? What is the impact of those innovations? I'd love to see statistics on this, but it's so hard to measure - I think revenue is probably one good measure, but still obviously flawed as that also takes into account things like effectiveness of sales & marketing.

    Also along these lines, how much more valuable are those engineers who first create a new innovation versus those who simply replicate those innovations elsewhere?

  33. Amusing statistics by brokeninside · · Score: 5, Insightful
    First, the Duke study criticizes other studies for counting engineers in other countries with less than a four year degree:
    These massive numbers of Indian and Chinese engineering graduates include not only four-year degrees, but also three-year training programs and diploma holders.
    But then, they count US graduates with less than a four year degree:
    Total Bachelors and Subbaccalaureate*** Engineering, Computer Science and Information Technology Degrees
    US ---- India--- China
    222,335 215,000 644,106

    ** Subbaccalaureate degrees refer to Associates degrees in the United States, short-cycle degrees in China, and three-year diplomas in India

    First, over 80k of the new US number comes from precisely these subbaccalaureate degrees.

    Second, the IT degrees from many universities are offered by the business college rather than the engineering college.

    I suspect that if you only counted four year comp-sci and engineering degrees that the numbers would be far closer to the 70k number provided by the National Acadamies. IMO, the study ought to have done a better breakdown. I'm also curious as to why postgraduate work wasn't included.

  34. Re:Economic Freedom by Red+Flayer · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "C'mon, total taxes can exceed over 50%, the govt prints up and loans money like it's doomsday ... and you can't guess what an economic freedom is?"

    Nice straw man. I'm asking you to define 'economic freedoms' because your OP makes no sense; maybe your definition could help shed some light on it. Are you saying that an economic freedom is just not having to pay taxes?

    You make these stupid sweeping statements that have no basis in fact, and expect everyone to guess what you're saying? I see, if you can't define the terms, there's no way of disputing your garbage statements.

    Government is part of the market. Don't forget that. Economically, it just represents the collective wants and produce of part of the population. The need for superhighways (which, by the way, were heavily lobbied for by the auto industry) was met by government, simply because that's how a significant part of the market established how to do things like massive infrastructure building.

    "Also, I don't recall saying that women shouldn't work, or people shouldn't be educated. - C'mon, you know better than that too."

    No, you said that dual incomes and education requirements for high incomes were caused by "[government] taking away economic freedoms," which is total BS. You ignore the real causes, which have nothing to do with taxes. I was pointing out the real causes, which were social modernization and the market. Don't throw up the straw man again, my points were to dispute what you say caused specific results in today's job/wage environment.

    "Look, the simple fact is that they are pushing these things to make up for lost freedoms. I'm calling bullshit, respect our freedoms first and let the rest follow on it's own."

    What are 'they' pushing? Give me specifics, not only of what they are pushing, but how they are pushing it, and what that has to do with 'freedoms' that are casuing it.

    What lost freedoms? Give me specifics, or are you just railing against taxes?

    You seem to connect a lot of things that aren't connected, to attribute causation where there is none, to make general sweeping statements that are devoid of meaning.

    --
    "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
  35. Re:Why these articles don't mean anything to me. by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That feeling lasts until about your late 20's.

    Then you get tired of being poor and having trouble keeping a relationship because you are poor.

    With a few exceptions, you are going to need more like 80k if you buy into consumer society at all. If you really are happy with a 27 inch TV, living in a cheap apartment with tatty furniture, riding public transportation, never going on those skiing or rafting trips with friends, or going out to big events, never having really sharp clothing, and being low status then you are a saint and can probably retire well on a 30k income. If you are at all normal tho, you'll have a car ($20k+), a house ($120k+), eat out ($3k per year), etc.

    While you might find "miracle spouse", money is way ahead of sex for breaking up relationships. So if you work on that low salary, you'll have more arguements, struggle a lot more if you have kids, etc.

    You can be as good as you want programming, but MANY good programmers are forced out of the field once they hit their 50's. Age discrimination is rampant in the field- I -STILL- see ads for "YOUNG, dynamic individual" which by rights should get the company sued left, right, and sideways. Most are smart enough to say "dynamic individual willing to work long hours" as a way to get around the age issue while letting you know they really care about the age issue. As a good example, INFOSYS, is very pointed about wanting to know your EXACT HIGH SCHOOL graduation date. That's the new way businesses are getting around the age issue since everyone learned to dye their hair before interviewing.

    Anyway, my point is that it is very romantic to be poor when young but it gets old.

    --
    She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
  36. degree != profession by Khashishi · · Score: 2, Insightful

    An engineering degree does not an engineer you make.

  37. undercounted and underemployed by Wansu · · Score: 4, Interesting



    Industry trade groups periodically whine about shortages of engineers, scientists and programmers. I graduated from engineering school 25 years ago and every few years they trot out the same old dog-earred dire projections. And yet, those of us who work as engineers, programmers and scientists never see these shortages materialize. Their magazine articles are plants used by their lobbyists to justify the need for increases in work visa quotas to the politicians they court.

    The majority of those who graduate from engineering schools do very little or no actual engineering work. That's because there ain't enough engineering work to go around. It's been like that since I got out of school and older engineers told me that was their experience as well. Engineering schools seem to still be fighting the cold war. The old timers told me engineering schools went into high gear after the Russians launched Sputnik and only now are enrollments beginning to decline. Only after a 5+ year tight engineering job market are some of the prospective engineering students reevaluating their choice.

    It's been a real challenge to stay employed in technically stimulating work. Somehow I've done it but my circumstances have been better than those of many engineers burdened with more intense family obligations. I've worked hard and I've been lucky. I'll stick with it because I'm pushing 50 and it's the best option I have. But through no fault of my own, I may be forced out of technical work before I reach 65. If and when that happens, I will no longer be counted as an unemployed engineer in the statistics should I accept a job doing something else. Instead, I will be counted as an employed hardware store stock clerk or whatever. One more engineer will have disappeared into the employment statistics to be counted no more and the industry trade groups will continue to whine about shortages.
     

    --
    Wansu, th' chinese sailor
  38. Re:Americans? by vsprintf · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Engineers are engineers. Everybody's gotta eat. Why should I whether a Chinese engineer has a job and an American engineer is out of work or vice versa?

    So does it make any difference if an American engineer who made many contributions to the success of the company is put out of a job so that the profitable American company can replace him/her with a cheaper and less experienced Chinese engineer and thereby redirect even more profit into the CEOs compensation? That is what it is about. There are little or no cost savings being passed on to the customers. The cost goes down while the price remains the same. The added profit goes somewhere, and it is not benefitting the long-term health of industry in this country or the country in general.

  39. Re:I can explain this by Geoffreyerffoeg · · Score: 3, Insightful

    In America an engineer has to be 80% politician!

    I'm I the only engineer here who finds working for their company is 80% political and 20% engineering? I've learned so much about lying and trickery I'm considering running for office.


    Why do you think that's exclusive to engineering? Every job is like that. Politics (as in lying and trickery, not as in political philosophy) is the natural result of human relationships. You need to know how to wield it to do anything.

  40. Re: self-comforting is poisonous by vsprintf · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Engineers will have to reinvent themselves to stay in the game. Those that can't won't make it.

    Well hey, you leave us all waiting for the answer. Engineers should "reinvent themselves" into what? A lot of American IT workers have been asking the same question. C'mon Kreskin, if you have the answer, give it up.

  41. simple math by circletimessquare · · Score: 2, Interesting

    the chinese can graduate an order of magnitude less engineers per citizen than the usa and still bury the usa in engineers

    mental exercise: if we both have one engineer per one thousand citizens...

    (1.3 billion / 1000) > 4 * (300 million / 1000)

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  42. Why Oh WHy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How is this news?

    Does anyone really care what some statistic is?

    I am a Civil Engineering graduate. I design telecommunications networks for a living. Am I being counted? Probably not! And, who the hell cares?

    Why don't we just ask the question . . . "Which country creates more ideas per capita?" That would be just about as useless a statistic as the engineering numbers.

    Move along . . . nothing to look at here . . .

  43. Re: self-comforting is poisonous by metlin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    As an EE engineer with graduate degrees in Physics and CS, let me tell you this - you can apply science anywhere.

    You can apply science and engineering principles in any domain. Just how hard is it to diversify into another related area? What's keeping people away is not the difficulty but the ineptitude to be creative and explore other domains.

    Work for the humanities, write a graphics program for archaeologists (someone I know does this for a living after he lost a graphics programming job at a game company). Hell, go back to school and get yourself a graduate degree. Do research. Start your own company.

    If all you want is to do your engineering job, then you deserve what you get. Sometimes, you need to be able to do things you weren't taught to do. Improvise and move ahead, or die out - I do not mean to sound callous, but it is the truth. It always has been, and just because folks here aren't ready to admit it does not make it not so.

  44. graduates in India? by x86processor · · Score: 2, Informative

    Having done an undergraduate degree in India, an MS in the US and been working in India, I [shakthimaan.com] can definitely tell you that the quality of so-called "engineering" education is poor in India. I don't even consider students in engineering colleges as "engineering students". The syllabus is outdated and never reviewed, often. Students are not taught to think laterally or do they involve themselves in problem solving. Most of the time they just get a degree for the sake of a job. The HR give the tag of "software engineer" for most of the people who work in the service industry, and they really don't do any "software engineering". Its usually testing/maintenace work that comes to India. Its only cost cutting that companies send their jobs to India, trading quality for cost.

    I really enjoyed the study culture in US universities. It was so dynamic and flexible. Its quite unfortunate in the US that they have good facilities and professors, but, no jobs for their quality of work.

    Most Indian companies have half-implemented stringent policies in the name of corporate culture and ISO. If you get the time, do read my article on "/Work.in.India" at shakthimaan.com.