Slashdot Mirror
Examining Presidential Candidates' Tech Agendas
Aaron Ricadela writes to mention that BusinessWeek is taking a look at the tech agendas for several presidential candidates. The amount of attention being paid to Silicon Valley especially is unprecedented with the computer industry citing contributions of $2.2 million up from just $1.2 million in the first six months of the 2004 and 2000 primary campaigns. "So even while the general election is likely to be dominated by the war in Iraq, the continued threat of terrorism, and economic issues, candidates have staked out early positions on topics dear to the tech industry, including increasing federal spending on research and development, allowing more highly educated foreign workers into the country, widening the availability of high-speed Internet service to create new markets for hardware and online services, and improving the state of U.S. math and science education."
I hope one of their goals is to get bigger tubes for this new "inter-web" thing.
I hear it could be big.
I for one would be more than happy to give up my Internet connexion so Iraqis/Haitians/everyone else can have some food on their table. Are any candidates actually addressing Human Needs?
Not that such a thing would ever be meaningfully implemented anyway, but I can't imagine the second half of that *helping* research.
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
Gets twisted to mean "Corporate Tech Industry" instead of mere "Tech Industry" when money is involved. More H-1b visas only helps those hiring techies, it depresses the wages of the techies themselves, for instance. And of course, they look towards more closed source options as well- you don't see any of this money trying to provide policy for alternative energy or open source projects.
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
...Ron Paul gets ignored by the media.
"Prefiero morir de pie que vivir siempre arrodillado!"
i find it interesting that Former Senator Mike Gravel was not mentioned in TFA. Although he's far from a mainstream candidate (much to my chagrin), he's been the oevrall biggest supporter of net neutrality among the candidates. From his official platform:
/dev/null
Net Neutrality aims to keep the Internet free from large companies who are using their networks to limit the amount of websites their customers can view, and the speed at which they can view them. Examples range from, being forced to use the search engines your Internet Service Providers (ISP), only being able to view streaming videos that your ISP deems acceptable, and charging a website an extra fee to maintain the usual connection speed. Senator Gravel guarantees a free and open Internet with no restricted access to any site, for any reason. He will do this by supporting legislation and regulation that keeps you in control of your Internet usage. Intelligent replies welcome, redirect flames to
Ron Paul is not for "net neutrality", but he seems to be the only candidate who actually cares about keeping the internet deregulated and free from warrantless surveillance, and stupid bans on gambling and weird ID laws for social networking sites. Does anyone know what his views on copyright/DMCA are? I'd imagine he supports the 14 year maximum copyright term specified in our earliest laws, but I could be mistaken.
As far as these issues go:
Education is generally a local and parental matter. Not much the President can do.
Other issues are going to get lost in the shuffle of Presidential priorities. At least I think that's likely.
A good revamp of the patent system would, in my estimation, spur a lot of economic activity and decrease the amount of money wasted on lawyers.
Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
I'm no law expert, but I don't believe Bill Clinton is eligible to run for a third term. But it's not like you can tell who's black and who isn't sitting at your computer, now is it?
If there's no internets, then theres no rocket sauce. If there's no rocket sauce, then there's no rock 'n' roll.
Why should political aspirants have prejudicial tech inclinations? I look forward to a future of impartial leaders that give unfamiliar issues equal weight relying on subject matter experts from all sides. Sound, informed decisions without prejudice.
Unless they want to replace all government machines with Ubuntu- then they already got my vote.
1. Suck up to the RIAA/MPAA.
2. Suck up to the large tech firms.
3. Make meaningless promises to support "the greater interests of the public with regards to technological issues".
4. "Think of the children!" to restrict our freedoms further.
3. Rake in the campaign contributions for next term while screwing America in the present.
If the Democrats win, we'll be living like Star Trek on January 21, 2009. If the Republicans win, we'll all instantly forget that fire and the wheel ever existed on that date.
Get a clue, and cut it out with the rampant unsubstantiated FUD.
As a Canadian I know many former colleagues who are now working in the US on H1B's, and know even more who have returned to Canada (for one reason or another) after working in the US for years in the same capacity. I also know a great number of work visa immigrants in my home country that I work closely with every single day.
All are highly educated individuals who are very capable in their work, and amongst the elite in their home countries. None come from sweatshop environments, in both the literal and metaphorical senses. All were very well paid in their home countries and enjoyed a quality of life similar to what we enjoy here.
All of the Canadian H1B's that went to the States that I know were brought in because of their unique skillsets, not because their salary demands were low. When they were hired their salaries were on par with their American colleagues, and none ever felt that they were there as cheap labour, as opposed to highly skilled additions to the company.
America is built upon these people, and thanks to you and your xenophobic brethren, it is being threatened. The hostility towards Muslims, minorities, and generally anyone out to "steal your job" is making the US plummet on the list of desirable places to move to. The vast majority of my colleagues who went to the USA have since returned, as economic conditions at home improve, and social conditions in your country worsen. Your great nation was built upon the importation of top-notch talent from around the world - Bohr, Einstein, all were immigrants. The openness and inclusiveness of America was what made it a shining beacon for the top people in the world to gather, and your little lighthouse has fallen into ill repair thanks to attitudes like yours.
Expect more inclusive countries to overtake yours soon - countries that embraces importing talent from overseas to strengthen themselves, instead being morbidly afraid of it.
I here he is backing this "Intelligent design" thingy - as a scientist, I like the sound of that..
"A nation that forgets its past is doomed to repeat it." - Churchill
My thoughts exactly.
Even though H1-Bs are supposed to be paid 'market rate', the net result is that bringing them into the country depresses market rates.
Good for business, bad for workers.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
So basically, just more "think of the children" pandering.
NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
After all, if the US didn't believe in getting the best scientist from other countries, Germany would have had the atom bomb first and Nasa would have been set back years.
sure he is
Like which countries? Any Western European one? Har, har, har. Japan? Guffaw... China? You've got to be kidding. I actually don't know of any country which really embraces importing talent from overseas. No, not even Canada.
I don't think too many Americans are upset over Canadian H1B or NAFTA visa workers. It's workers from third-world countries who are perceived to be the problem. Personally I'd rather they be working here than in their home country; if they're working here they have expenses more similar to mine, and therefore will not settle for nearly as low a salary as they would if they were working as outsourced talent in their home country.
I haven't heard any Democratic Party candidates talk about... ...seriously talking about health care either.
I've certainly heard one, and she stated that she wants to enforce mandatory health insurance as a prerequisite to be permitted to get a job. That's totally nuts!
How fitting that the captcha I had to type in to post this is "tyranny".
Easy - Bush - I hear he is backing this "Intelligent design" thingy - as a Pirate, I like the sound of that..
And he's not even running - Avast and Shiver me Timbers! The joke just gets thinner and thinner..
"A nation that forgets its past is doomed to repeat it." - Churchill
Romney gave me the willies when listening to his Iowa Straw Poll speech. He advocated that every computer sold in the US be installed with government spyware to protect the children.
As usual Ron Paul isn't mentioned. IMHO he is right on that as long as the justice department does it's job in enforcing RICO statues and other laws barring ISP's from coercing their customers we should be fine. The reason our telecom system is a mess is the monopoly deals the congress entered into in the 1990s. Stop all federal funding of telecom projects and true competition should normalize the market. States are more than capable of funding basic telecom to rural areas.
bash-2.04$
bash-2.04$yes "Don't you hate dialup connections?"| write USERNAME
Does this translate into any of these candidates supporting the finalisation of the US going metric?
(Before this question spawns any angry posts, keep in mind that metrication is inevitable, the US is already too far metricated to go back, and with just a little bit of leadership, the US could easily finish it's conversion.)
We could always have everyone assigned a Job Placement Chip into their hands. It worked on TV.
Canadian H1-B holders comprise a tiny fraction of the H1-B's issued. The big Indian outsourcing companies (Wipro, et. al.) grabbed about HALF of the available H1-B visas this year. And that doesn't comprise all of H1-B's that go to India. China is next on the list. Canada is hardly noticable.
In otherwords, the OP was speaking about MOST H1-B's.
All of the presidential candidates are trying to take us back to the dot-com bust as fast as possible, with the exception of Edwards. If you'll recall, it was in the years 2001-2003 that Congress increased the H1-B limit from the standard 65,000 to 115,000, for each of those years.
In fact, the reason why this is such a hot topic this year is because the visa's issued in 2001 are expiring this year. This is what you don't hear in the media. And the tech companies know very well that they have absolutely no chance of getting the Visa limit increased in a major election year.
So, if you want to relive the dot-com bust years, vote for Clinton or Obama. Edwards seems like the only one who isn't pwned by the high-tech lobby, and actually gives a damn for the average U.S. citizen.
Ron Paul is against Net Neutrality.
Where is the Undo button for my life? Not to mention the Esc key.
And not one is going to promise not to enforce the DMCA, put people on the bench to rule against it, or back congressional candidates that will have it removed from law.
If none of the candidates can see the error of the many provisions of the DMCA that are detrimental to the citizenry, I can then easily assume they're just spouting whatever gibberish their political handlers taught them to pronounce correctly.
More Twoson than Cupertino
Slashdot is filled with whiny crybabies. These folks can write a Java program and for that they don't think they should have to compete with people the world over. Ignore these idiots.
You have to translate all of that out of Washingtonian-double-talk back into Southern-Dixiecrat-cum-Republican talk. So, for instance, "The American worker must be protected from cheaper imported labor" actually means (and say this in a good Foghorn Leghorn voice) "We here don't want none of those funny brown-skinned peckers with odd last names coming here and takin' any of our lazy-ass good ol' boys jobs they ain't never gonna work at anyways."
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Oddly enough, I tend to think you have it backwards. Because our workers' political and economic lighthouse has gotten into such ill repair (real wage loss, especially when computed with non-core inflation; loss of social safety net; loss of political power for common people; etc.), a backlash against someone should hardly be unexpected. It is a shame that we always find the alien at fault rather than the corporate and political leaders who actually allowed this to happen, but when you see your own potential for economic advancement being washed away, you're not going to feel too happy about sharing what little you have with others.
That is all.
When they were hired their salaries were on par with their American colleagues, and none ever felt that they were there as cheap labour, as opposed to highly skilled additions to the company.
Have you considered that they were depressing wages because the additional supply of labor drove down what they were being paid?
Your great nation was built upon the importation of top-notch talent from around the world - Bohr, Einstein, all were immigrants.
Not to mention Tesla.
H1Bs aren't about bringing the best and brightest. They're about increasing the supply of educated labor to drive down prices.
Einstein, Bohr, Tesla, et all were not brought here on "Worker" visas.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
On the other side of the issue is Edwards, whose campaign says: "Patent litigation reforms that may encourage innovation in some industries may hinder innovation in others," including alternative energy. "American competitiveness is too important for us to let our intellectual-property rules be skewed by lobbyists arguing for their own industries' narrow interests."
How disappointing. Based on the article, it seems John Edwards is the only major candidate (of those who have taken a position on the issue) that backs the patent system as it is. I haven't decided who to vote for (although after this article Obama is looking good), but John Edwards is now officially crossed off my list.
On the 0th day, God created C
I wouldn't say it will be "overtaken" but it will certainly reach a breaking point as a system [as all systems do]. That being said I'm looking into moving to Canada because of the education being less expensive and better, most countries put more emphasis in math and science instead of just sports [or at least are on par] and you actually get to learn the stuff from the very basics, High School was a joke in that dept, and I supposedly went to a very good school, the amount you have to pay to go to a good college [or maybe it's just the name] is ridiculous. So yeah, give more monies to math and science, maybe we will bridge the gap.
I actually know of precisely one: Dubai. They import essentially their entire workforce. And they're doing pretty well :).
Follow the adventures of the new wandering jews
Why do you think so many people who've heard his views are pro Ron Paul?
Speaking of which, why are you even on slashdot if you hadn't even heard of him? Something's not quite right..
Hey ya'll, I think we gots an imposter here. Git 'em!
So, I would be interested to see your comments on the lawfirms that give seminars on how to cheat the system to hire on H1B instead of hiring available local talent. You brush this off like its not a problem because a few Canadian friends of yours weren't part of the masses of cheap labor imported by companies doing illegal things to avoid hiring Americans.
Here is a question for you. What motivation does an American have to become a "highly skilled individual" when the tech sector has become so notorious for importing replacements and using the highly skilled individuals to train them on their way out the door.
Our shining beacon going out has precious little to do with being xenophobic. It has more to do with profit mongering whores doing sheisty things to make an extra buck. Incidentally, you even missed some big ones. Not to destroy your point but I would like to mention the guys like Einstein and Oppenheimer and such weren't here on H1B visas... You want to move here, join society, great, welcome to America, we are glad to have your contributions, you want to come here on a visa and ship your paycheck home, we have plenty of leeches that we can't deal with that are natives, we don't need more.
Personally I would rather take all the illegal immegrants that snuck across our borders and got jobs and are trying to integrate and be productive and give them all of the SSNs of the worthless welfare leeches that aren't immegrants. Then take those leeches and deport their asses instead.
The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
Do you think Valerie Lakey should have gone without top notch legal representation? That is the case that made his reputation representing a little girl who was disemboweled by a defective swimming pool drain-- and survived. Edwards has made a large fortune as a trial lawyer, but he has made most of it representing individual clients wronged by powerful interests with powerful legal representation. He is also the only wealthy candidate I know of who did it pretty much all on his own, starting life as one of the little people and rising by force of merit. He can chase my ambulance any day.
Senator Obama has posited wider broadband penetration as a way to create job opportunities for the urban poor and says he'll overhaul fees the government charges phone companies to pay for it.
I honestly don't see how this will work. If he charges the communications companies more then in turn they will just charge the customer more. All this will accomplish is driving up the price of broadband, making is harder for the urban poor to pay for something that I believe will be almost a necessity down the road all this will do is help shut out the poor people from what they will need to improve themselves down the road.
If i had one dollar for every brain you dont have, i would have $1.
I had this debate a few days ago. I'll start off by saying I'm argentinian. Born here, lived here all my life. I embrace legal immigration from every country to ours, and I think it's racist to be against it.
Here's my reasoning. I'm offered an H1-B visa from someone in the US for my knowledge and skills in a particular area. I move there legally, acquire a home, pay taxes, do everything a normal citizen should. This is immigrating there.
However, many people have issues if I charge less money than a local for a comparative or better job or particular task. How can someone be against me doing that, when I'm paying the exact same money you are for living there, my living expenses are the same if not higher, I'm contributing to the government by paying my taxes, and I'm willing to take the job for less money?
These same people, I doubt would complain had I been born in US soil. The only difference is, then, where I was born, since my other activities are the same as that of someone born there. Therefore they are discriminating against me based on where I was born. That is racism.
If I'm willing to do the same job with comparative quality, while paying the same taxes as you, and charge less, and a company there hires me, it's because I deserve it. If I'm willing or not to live in the same conditions as a local working the same job (I'm talking neighbourhood, food, social habits, etc.) it's my own issue, not yours. If you are willing to charge less for the same quality job, and live in a worse environment than I do, go right ahead. It's your prerogative, you've earned the job and are more what the company is looking for than I am. If I have to pay the same living costs as you do, pay the same taxes, and manage to live legally while asking for less money than you do, it's simply that I'm more fit than you are to survive.
That being said, I'm against illegal immigration, and don't justify it. We do have illegal immigration problems here in Argentina, especially in the textile and construction industries, from most of our neighbours. I completely disagree with that. But you'd be quite wrong to think that I would pick an argentinian that wants $2500 a month, to a legally immigrated bolivian wanting $2000 a month for the same quality job, if both are presenting similar qualifications. Choosing the argentinian one would make me racist.
Perhaps I'm being obtuse - would someone mind explaining me why a paraguayan person immigrating here, living here, paying his taxes, and asking equal or less than a local person, with similar qualifications, is less fit for the job?
he is opposed to regulation of the free market system, not because he is against the rights of the consumer
Ah yes, that's totally different. Unfortunately in that perfectly unregulated free market wet dream of his, the consumer will have absolutely no rights whatsoever. But, you know, as long as that's just a byproduct and not the intent, it's all good, right?
I really don't get this Ron Paul fascination. OK, so he's an "honest politician" for whatever that's worth, but for the most part his platform consists of regressive social policies and insane economic ones. What's the fucking appeal?
sic transit gloria mundi
You can't take the sky from me...
I'm happy to see this type of attention. What we need is coverage of what our next president is going to DO, not what they plan to think about Iraq and abortion.
I think that is a distinction without a difference. The end result being the same. He's consistent though. And as Emerson said, "A foolish consistency is the hobgloblin of little minds."
Where is the Undo button for my life? Not to mention the Esc key.
Is anyone else frightened that the government should have a "tech agenda," meaning further control and regulation of the tech industry, in the first place? Should be really be applauding political robber barons for stealing our tax dollars and enriching themselves from various government schemes? Getting in bed with the government is like getting into bed with a pitcher plant.
Slashdot: Playing Favorites Since 1997
He's much more knowledgeable about the American monetary system than most. He's the only person who cared when the Fed stopped reporting the M3. He's obviously not fond of inflation, fiat currencies, or fractional reserve lending. As a result, Ron Paul is in my five ;) He's right between Feingold and Boucher.
I read your post, agreed heartily then saw your sig. My jaw dropped.
Ron Paul may have a sane foreign policy, but his economic policy leads to worsening the nightmare situation you described. Massive deregulation is exactly what makes the money pump from bottom to top.
Deport them to where?
Inventions have long since reached their limit, and I see no hope for further development.-- Frontinus, 1st cent. AD
Net Neutrality is regulation of the internet.
What, you think we're going to tell the telcos to play nice, but not back it up with laws? That's what regulation is.
"Ok, guys, you have a big responsibility as network providers to not play favorites with your traffic. You can't throttle your competitors' connections and boost your own; that wouldn't be fair. However, since regulation is Bad (tm), we're not going to pass any laws forcing you do play nice, or even check up on you. We think you'll be good all on your own."
For security, the MD5 hash of this message and sig is 09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0.
Being against net neutrality implies a position which is not the one that Ron Paul has displayed with his voting record, even though that record shows a vote against net neutrality which is consistent with his position of not imposing unnecessary regulations.
You can't take the sky from me...
It's a fine line with lots of variables, and arguments. I think thought a lot of people feel that these companies are trying to manipulate the labor market in their own countries to their own benefit, through the hiring of illegal immigrants, or the over user of H1-B's.
In your two examples, in the US on an H1-B, or working illegally in Argentina, there is sometimes not a lot of difference. Both sets of workers are in a foreign country, working for a lower wage (in your example) than what domestic workers would require. Shouldn't it be the right of people in those countries, native citizens and currently legal immigrants, to have first crack at those jobs?
I honestly haven't decided. I mean the bottom of the ocean sounds nice. Or maybe send them to whatever country of origin the new owner of their SSN came from. I mean its only fair if people are sneaking out of a country that we send SOMEONE back to replace them right? Hell maybe we should send them out on the C Ark Douglas Adams style.
The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
Ron Paul is anti-immigration,
...
... throughout the United States"
Anti ILLEGAL immigration. (As in "They have to go back home and get in line behind those who DID follow the rules. No prizes for breaking the law.")
bad bad bad for tech.
Really? How does illegal immigration help tech?
Last time I looked illegal immigration was mainly good for breaking unions, increasing the number of unemployed, and providing cheap labor to businesses at pay scales and working conditions below those a citizen is ALLOWED to accept, subsidized by mainly-citizen and LEGAL immigrant taxpayers (at least those who still remain employed) in the forms of loads on tax-supported social services for the illegal workers and their families.
And while may illegal immigrants may be "honest working people just trying to make a living", a system that takes people who come from a country where the law is a corrupt joke and requires them to break OUR laws even to be here makes it hard to convince them that any OTHER laws ought to be obeyed. Instead it rewards those who gratuitously break laws whenever it's in their interest and provides a selection pressure for such people to come here while the more law-abiding stay behind.
(as well as unconstitutional, unlegitimate,
Quite the contrary: Congress is explicitly authorized by the Constitution (Article 1 Section 8) "To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization
And I'll skip the remainder of your claims (which are value judgements) with the comment that gratuitous assertions can be gratuitously denied. B-)
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
For all the talk of Small Government, NCLB is a huge intrusion into local control of schools and it's agenda is to sabotage public education by setting up schools to fail.
But I was under the impression that the public schools had largely ALREADY failed (do in some extent to previous federal interventions), they were on a downward spiral, and the NCLB's agenda was to put them on a spot where, one-by-one, they either cleaned up their act or were destroyed and the kids moved elsewhere.
Of course it's not MY agenda to defend the NCLB. (IMHO the solution is to get the fed out of the business of education altogether, rather than trying to patch its previous mismanagement with more layers of management.) But let's at least characterize it correctly.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Thanks to Senator Kennedy (D-MA) and his 'leadership' 40 years ago, the only two ways for a skilled foreigner to work in this country is to either marry a citizen, or wage-slave for 6+ years as an H1-B.
I for one cannot thank Ted enough...
Obama likes poor people so much, he wants to make more of them.
There is no such thing as a perfect candidate. The only way to get someone in office that agrees with everything you do is to run yourself. While Ron Paul may not have the same views on abortion, he is right on the money with other issues that are more important to me.
Prioritize what matters to you the most and find the candidate that satisfies the most important issues to you. You have to find the happy medium between what you get and what you give.
Invexi - a Phoenix, AZ based web design and web development company.
The real problem is that domestic employers try to gain the legal system so that they can avoid looking for qualified workers in the domestic labor market entirely and skip straight to hiring a foreign immigrant, thus lowering wages.
The laws governing H1-B visas state that US companies must make every attempt to fill jobs with an American worker, but all American companies ever do is bitch about our education system (yes it's godawful, so why aren't you fixing it?) and go straight to H1-B.
I think our entire immigration process is totally fucked. It absolutely should not take so long and so many backflips through flaming hoops to become a citizen. The real problem with illegals isn't that they are here, its that they are here and not paying taxes. I personally believe rather than building a fence, or arming guards, or any silly shit like that...we should just line up IRS workers along the border so they can hand out SSNs. "Welcome to America, here is your SSN, enjoy the services we have to offer, oh...and thank you in advance for paying your taxes."
:)
Remember kids. Illegally entering our country gets you little more than media attention and some rednecks yelling at you. Tax evasion and you are going to jail for a long long time. Enjoy your stay.
The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
In the future this problem will be solved when it is possible to download one's consciousness into a computer. A huge computer will be built to take on the office of President, and at each election you will be able to vote for the stances on issues that interest you for each candidate. The result will be some sort of hybrid consciousness which will make everyone happy.
Saying "I'll probably get modded down for this" in a post is the best way to get it modded up.
If you consider the Fourth Reich a good thing I guess Ron Paul wouldn't appeal to you. Otherwise to see the "appeal" please consider the alternatives.
Only his tendency toward a dazed stupor prevented him from screaming aloud.
You have good points, but I think you are wrong to call this racist. It's not, because favoring those who were born in my country over those that weren't has nothing to do with race.
A cat can't teach a dog to bark.
I don't know about that. Unlike many Republicans (and Dems), Ron Paul when deregulating would take away incentives, subsidies and loopholes for large corporations, and remove impediments to small enterprises, which would counter any increased power of the big people over the little.
How can someone be against me doing that, when I'm paying the exact same money you are for living there, my living expenses are the same if not higher, I'm contributing to the government by paying my taxes, and I'm willing to take the job for less money?
The same reason we'd be pissed off if you went scab and crossed a union picket line. You're undercutting the power, both economic and political, of the workers of the United States. And while you might not realize it at the time, thinking that they're making a pretty nice chunk of change, you're undercutting yourself as well since you just lowered the level of that position.
Of course a few people here and there isn't that big of a problem, but when it's a lot that puts a lot of downward pressure on the prevailing wage for that position. There is basically only one argument in support of large numbers of H1B workers that is not related to paying them less, and that is that there simply aren't enough trained people here to do it. If that were true then these H1Bs should be making the same money that current resident would make in the same position. This doesn't seem to be the case and gives the lie to that argument.
I've really got to ask who is racist in this situation, the one who thinks that it's just fine and dandy for rich white Americans to import brown people from all over the world because they can pay them less or those of us who think that if the job can be done domestically then it should be and if not then whoever is imported to do it should make the same as if they were native? Because your proposition seems pretty fucking "racist" to me.
Perhaps I'm being obtuse - would someone mind explaining me why a paraguayan person immigrating here, living here, paying his taxes, and asking equal or less than a local person, with similar qualifications, is less fit for the job?
No reason, but you're the asshole saying he should make less money.
A little disclaimer, I only read the beginning and end of your post because skimming the middle seemed to be filled with the same sort of quasi-libertarian, "why can't I fuck myself over if I want to" bullshit, and I'll go out on a limb here and assume more attempted race baiting. Too bad, because it seemed like you were on domestic workers choosing to work for less than their colleagues in the same positions and I could have brought up all the examples, that I'm sure you would approve of wholeheartedly, like women and black men who are already "choosing" to do this.
The Farewell Tour II
I don't know if that would help across the board. There are a ton of Americans being raised to not even believe in science. I think they believe in math, but it's hard to tell because they don't seem to know any.
The Farewell Tour II
Aha, so he's just another "not-quite-as-bad-as-the-other-guy" - why didn't you say so in the first place? It's just that some people made it sound like they liked him on his own merits.
sic transit gloria mundi
I see where you're coming from, but I -SERIOUSLY- doubt that those relatively minor (not to say that they aren't good ideas, they are) offsets could compare to the giants like microsoft, google, walmart (especially walmart, they'll figure out how to reintroduce indentured servitude) etc unleashed from accountability.
:-)
Oh, you can say that they're accountable to the stock owners, but let's face it, in today's Ameritrade, mutual fund, 401K, blind investment world stockholders become more and more irrelevant when compared to company officers. Oh, the BIG stockholders count, but those big dawgs are as likely as not to take a loss on company A (where they own 12% and have significant influence) to double the stock on company B (where they own 55%) or dump tons of toxic waste in a river because it saves them massive cleanup costs and they know they'll be shutting that plant down in 6 months anyways. It's all shell-game strategy. This is already a problem due to under-regulation, no regulation will exasperate the problem, in my opinion.
Either way, you seem to believe what you say, and what you say (regardless of my doubts) makes sense. I can at least respect that. Hey, at least your guy doesn't think paying companies to ship jobs overseas is a good thing.
I don't get all the Hillary/Obama hype. I like Edwards a lot, I don't know why he isn't doing better than he is.
waiting for ad.doubleclick.net
- The DMCA is draconian; it needs to be repealed. (I'm thinking of protecting academics who study security from being pushed around, let alone 13 year old girls and grandmothers who download a couple of songs). Yes, I did just use the "Think of the children" defense. Anyway, I've never seen a political candidate who even has a public position on the DMCA.
- Government documents need to be archived in an open format. Microsoft abused the standards process, hard. Again, no politicians are even talking about odf/ooxml. No one even mentioned Microsoft's abuse.
It is frustrating that these things aren't even being talked about. I'm not saying that Politicians should spend a huge amount of time on these issues. I just some candidate would write two sentences somewhere, to the effect of "I oppose the DMCA and favor open standards. If elected, I would work with congress to repeal the DMCA, I would investigate Microsoft's manipulation of the standardization process, and I would make ODF the standard from government documents." Is that too much to ask?What evidence do you have that Paul is a racist? Are you saying that all Texans are racists? Funny, but NOBODY else has been saying anything like that.
Monopolies are not "free market". Paul does not support monopolies.
They deliberately left him out. Come on, get real.
I found this answer by Obama on the connection between education and technology.
The first half of Obama's comments are the usual talk we hear from all the democratic candidates - that no child left behind is a failure, etc.
The last minute and half of the answer, however, is very interesting - Obama presented a great new idea (and I've heard pretty much every idea that every candidate throws out there on most issues, but I had never heard this) that ties together two important campaign issues: energy independence and education. More than that, I think there might be two parts to his point, one subtle and one obvious.
The first part is that we need kids to go into science and engineering, and energy independence is a good motivator. The second, subtle part is that if we have a president who can once again inspire the youth like JFK, we'll be twice as effective in the first part - and truly will be able to create a movement around energy independence that will probably spread to other needed economic arenas.
You have to translate all of that out of Washingtonian-double-talk back into Southern-Dixiecrat-cum-Republican talk.
It's been done already.
What?
Dubai is not a country... it's a city (and an Emirate) within the UAE. However, you are correct that they do this, and they do it across the board- from low paid construction workers to university professors.
First off, I agree with the parent. Secondly, I think regulation doesn't solve a whole lot of anything. Even on environmental issues, regulation works only in that it the laws are abided by and enforced. Unfortunately, the enforcement record -- or more precisely, lack thereof -- of environmental regulations by the federal government stands for itself.
The answer isn't entirely market forces, either, though, as the Libertarian Party would have you believe (I am a small 'l' libertarian). Market forces only work if people are educated and understand what's going on. If that were the case, Wal*Mart wouldn't be the #1 retailer in this country.
Ron Paul is not my 100% ideal candidate, but you have to be realistic and say probably nobody will ever fit your politics 100% unless you are a drooling idiot, in which case anybody will do. But as far as the field of candidates goes, he's the only one I would cast my vote for were he on the ballot in Novemeber 2008.
My blog
>Ron Paul may have a sane foreign policy, but his economic policy leads to worsening the >nightmare situation you described. Massive deregulation is exactly what makes the money >pump from bottom to top. Only the way we have it set up now. The rise of the modern day robber barron is actually due to anticompetitive legislation passed at all levels of government. It could be much more fair under a Paul system if much of this garbage legislation is overturned or if judges can set precident against it. Dr. Paul would only be able to fix the federal level abuses. But at least it you could pack up and move to the best states when yours fails the test. Or elect Libertarians to state and local office. Bottom line, any way you slice it, Free market econimics is the only path to true prosperity. We just have to be vigilant against influence!
Just for the sake of completeness, I'd like to point out that I'm a Kucinich supporter myself. No, he's not 100% what I'd like, but he's honestly closer than any other politician I've ever heard.
;-)
And I would vote for Ron Paul myself if he were up against the Hillary or Obama. I'd rather not be drafted into a war with Iran thank you very much.
Kucinich / Paul '08
Gosh, let's look at that quick list:
Increasing federal spending on research and developmentResearch & development are pretty clearly not a federal issue; they're really not an issue for any State. Yes, the Internet was a result of federal research; but one wonders if it mightn't have existed anyway: networks are useful, and if something is useful someone will figure out how to make it.
Allowing more highly educated foreign workers into the countryWell, securing the borders is a federal responsibility. It seems to me that the President can't have a programme, though: all he can do is approve or deny the laws Congress passes (and they can of course over-rule him). As for how smart it is to increase H1-Bs, I'm uncertain. I've worked with some very intelligent visa workers for certain. On the other hand, I've seen a lot of very intelligent citizens let go. We keep on reading about a tech jobs shortage; why then is everyone in IT so desperately afraid of losing his job? I wonder if the agitation for more H1-Bs is not simply a way to keep wages down.
Widening the availability of high-speed Internet servicePlease explain how this is a federal responsibility; please indicate which clause of the Constitution gives the President or the Congress that authority. I'll admit that interstate networks are naturally federal--but we already have some nifty interstate networks. The issue is not those, but the 'last mile,' which is quite clearly not federal in scope. It is local, though: just as roads, water, telephones and electricity are either public or very closely supervised by the states, so too should networks be.
Improving the state of U.S. math and science educationThat's not a federal responsibility. The Department of Education is unconstitutional, and should be eliminated. As for education, we know how to educate: it's easy. What we're not willing to do is actually do it. Read the Underground History of American Education for more about how American schools don't accidentally fail: they're designed to produce poor results and bad citizens. If you really want education to be a federal responsibility, change the Constitution; the amendment process is there for a reason.
"Edwards has made a large fortune as a trial lawyer"
That should have gone to his clients (the victims).
I don't expect Canadian or even Mexican H1B workers to give you a fair idea of the problem. Those are people who could leave for home is they were substantially abused. But their contracts are probably not fair examples of normal H1B contracts. And H1B workers reportedly are treated as indentured servants, aren't allowed to change employers, have their contracts misrepresented before they leave home. (Possibly not actually. It could be that they just have no concept of how expensive it is to live in an apartment in a US city.)
Note that H1B contracts aren't standard worker contracts. These are people who aren't being given permanent resident status, and can't earn it without returning home and applying from scratch.
Being against H1B workers is rather against being against slavery...only that's a bit of an overstatement. E.g., I'm not aware of rules that state that if an H1B worker gets married, then any kids are bound by his contract. (They better have dual citizenship, though, or they'll be in a hard way when their parents are deported at the end of the contract...and that's dependant on the rules of the country of origin.)
I'm against H1B workers because it's unfair competition in the same way that slavery is unfair competition. But as I said, I doubt that much of this applies to workers who can leave and return home under their own power. If you treated them the same way, they WOULD leave and return home.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
According to whom? Statements like these need to be supported with references in order to be taken seriously.
Liberty is desirable for its own sake, regardless of its consequences.
Practical arguments are irrelevant.
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
The really interesting part is that everywhere I go, Ron Paul campaign signs and posters are the only ones that are up yet. The 'little guy' seems to really be stoked about Ron Paul, which is very interesting because he still hasn't gotten enough media attention to be that popular, traditionally. He seems to be spreading by word of mouth. That's how I heard about him - an e-mail from a friend asking me to just take 10 minutes and type his name into YouTube.
The idea behind dismantling the government is that the current government became useless for the people of the country and now stands on the way of any progress at all. I support this idea in principle, of-course implementation is not very clear. Formerly all revolutions ended up creating even worse situation than that prior to them. So how do you dismantle the government?
Another issue is this, what principles would you build the new system upon? I'd think most people would agree that the federals should be given much less power than they have now and that the local governing system should be the most important system. The local system should be responsible for its own infrastructure, but how do you decide what is 'local' in the first place?
Of-course a more fun idea than others is to have a shoot out and divide everything from scratch. On the other hand this will not go well with property owners. Well then, maybe the most important local government should start from everyone's own place of residence. Wouldn't that be fun? If everyone lived by their own laws in their own house and those laws would trump any externally imposed laws. The problem is that there is no way to stop one household from cooperating with other households. Once two households cooperate, they are more powerful than any one single household. That's the problem with people - they like to cooperate while they really should be trying to survive on their own. How do we turn off the cooperation gene once again?
Ok, so given that people will cooperate and form alliances and thus will create the job of a politician, who will become more powerful and will always have more voice than a non-politician, how do we ensure that the politicians don't create the same problem that is observed at this time right now?
How about a meta-democratic system, requiring the voters to display good understanding of the issues they are supposedely voting on and displaying good logical sense and understanding the difference between a faith based and a scientific process of dealing with the world? So these people become an elite really, but anyone can then enter this elite by becoming more informed.
Of-course some masses that are not and are incapable of becoming the elite, will stop trusting this elite, but then who cares about those people right? But the truth is that those people also should be able to make decisions in their own lives, no matter how uninformed and mentally incapable they are.
Maybe different states should have different voting processes, while limiting the feds from real power over the states. Some states should only allow the abovementioned elite to vote, some states should allow everyone to vote, some states should not allow voting at all, etc.
Then, every 3 years or so, the states should get together and look at the results of this experiment and adjust it accordingly to the results.
So this is it, the system should constantly change and adopt, we should only create laws and systems to direct these changes onto the path of progress, efficiency, happiness and such. Maybe it is something like the original intent, but better, because the political systems in each state would have a choice rather than be dictated to the same political system.
You can't handle the truth.
I know another - The Netherlands. Amsterdam, with its miserable population of below 1 million is more culturally diverse than New York (177 nationalities vs. 150). If you look at the history you will see that the great success of Holland in the past is due predominantly to their willingness to accept people who would not be accepted in other countries. When Galileo was threaten by the Church, the ruler of Holland offered him a position in the Leiden University. IMO, America is becoming increasingly xenophobic and afraid of everyone, it is certainly a place where I would not go to live.Pity!
I'm *glad* you have such economic insight! Recession for US and many European countries is almost granted, the interest rate lowering it is just a joke, as it is preferable a sharp correction (recession) than a deep and large progressive decadence (depression). Your bet? 2-3 year recession or 15 year depression? 1 stagflation (expensive oil inflation / other goods deflation) + 2 recession years? (not trolling, promise!)
- Ron Paul is an authoritarian power-freak opposed to immigration. Sure he is not an über-authoritarian-power-freak like most candidates but the fact remains that his position on immigration make him despisable.
- Immigration is very important to the tech industry. Recently MS moved a research center to Canada for lack of H1B visas in the US. Voted YES on more immigrant visas for skilled workers. (Sep 1998)
You can't take the sky from me...
When he talks about immigrants he means the constant influx of poor Mexicans, not skilled workers applying for visas, and that does mean he is "unconstitutional, unlegitimate, immoral, unethical, etc)", as you claim. And I don't even think that "unlegitimate" is a word.
You can't take the sky from me...