Slashdot Mirror
CS Prof Decries America's 'Internal Brain Drain'
walterbyrd writes "Dr. Norman Matloff of the University of California-Davis computer science department argues that US citizens are avoiding 'Science Technology Engineering Math' (STEM) careers, because US citizens see those fields as being ruined by massive offshoring and inshoring. 'Despite widely publicized claims that foreign tech workers and scientists represent exceptional ability and are thus vital to American innovation, Matloff called that argument merely "a good sound byte for lobbyists" supporting industry proposals for higher visa caps. The data (PDF), on the other hand, indicate that those admitted are no more able, productive, or innovative than America's homegrown talent, he said.'"
If it were all about talent, with 95% of the worlds population being from outside the US, we'd see more CEO's dumped for off shore replacements. Its about the money.
The laws of supply and demand still operate: If you want great STEM workers, then you need to pay for them. If you aren't getting as many as you'd like, increase the amount you're willing to pay them, or improve working conditions, until you get them.
That said, the reason that many US employers prefer foreign labor over US labor have nothing to do with the costs, and everything to do with foreign labor having less ability to go find another job when they get mistreated.
I am officially gone from
...because all they did was get drunk, skip class, and screw hookers all the time.
Perhaps if you'd worked as hard at training for your future job as they did, you'd be employed too ;-)
I'm interested in Science and Technology. I'm fascinated and obsessed by it. But I left the programming field 6 years ago when I started losing projects to outsourcers charge 1/10th what I could charge.
- For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat
I see this all the time. The bright kids today are going into law or the financial industry, because that's where all the money is. Why bother working your ass off in school studying hard subjects that involve math, when you can party your way through school, get a law degree or something in financial mumbo-jumbo, and make 3 times as much working for Merril Lynch? Not to mention not worrying about having your job shipped to India or China.
In any sane society this kind of imbalance would be corrected by the rulers. However in our current society the lawyers and the financial industry owns - oops I mean make "campaign contributions" and "lobbies" - the government, so they have all the power.
I can't really see anything good in the future for a society where a parasitic class, which produces nothing of value, is given such an overwhelming priority over the productive classes.
>>>they'll make up the words that sound as reasonably sounding to a regular Joe to make it sound like it is in his best interest.
This is why I quit the IEEE. In the early 2000s they kept sending-out newsletters about how we need the Government to allow more Visas for imported workers, and keep America competitive. And I believed them, until I stopped to think - "More workers == more competition when I go looking for a new job. Why would I want that???"
That's when I realized IEEE was lobbying for the Corporations, not the the electrical engineers they supposedly represented. So I quit renewing my membership.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
Typical conservative POV:
1. American exceptionalism
2. American exceptionalism redux -- we're so freakin' awesome, God's chosen people etc
3. Strong on national defense
4. Self-reliance
5. Sloppy kisses for capitalism
6. Strong support for the average folk (working people who work for their money)
7. Everything that's wrong with this country starts and ends with liberals and they're the ones trying to tear it apart from the inside because the black filth of communism is pumping through their veins
Well, the reality is that America's not all that special. We're being torn apart from the inside in end-stage capitalism where we cease to exploit internal markets and are now cannibalizing ourselves to support the credit binge.
I would tend to think that a strong national defense begins with a strong national economy. We wouldn't need to be engaging in all these wars in the middle east if we didn't need their oil. Viable alternative power like solar and wind would do more to secure our nation than fleets of F-22's.
I understand why that sort of thing isn't happening. I just don't understand why these people are too blind to see it. Gay marriage is a threat to the American family? Fuck, no! Two parents having to work 60 hours a week to put food on the table is destroying the American family. Pay enough so that one job-holder can support a full-time parent who stays at home and you'll make one hell of a start towards saving the family. And how about some goddamn affordable health care? No, we can't have health care but we can ban abortion and that's being pro-life. Wait, what?
I just can't understand how myopic people are. It's like those seniors marching at the townhall meetings carrying signs saying "Government: hands off my medicare!"
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
Because the people smart enough for it see it as a bad career. Why slave to make 80-100k a year with a Masters degree when you could be making 250-300k as a lawyer....
We were all warned a long time ago that MS products sucked, remember the Magic 8 Ball said, "Outlook not so good"
I think the real problem is, Americans aren't interested in Science and Technology careers that lead them to a lifetime of poverty for themselves and their families.
It's about the money. The rest is BS media hyped fantasy. When I can use my brain to become a doctor, lawyer, or financier or any high paying skill which can't be outsourced, why would I bother pursuing a career where my skills can, and inevitably will, be outsourced?
Anybody?
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
'Despite widely publicized claims that foreign tech workers and scientists represent exceptional ability and are thus vital to American innovation, Matloff called that argument merely "a good sound byte for lobbyists'
I hate to say this, but it's true -- sure, there are a few scholastic stars that come out of the USA education system, but the majority of students aren't being pushed (or pushing) themselves to excel. In fact, many do a little as possible to just barely cruise through high school, those that apply themselves and work hard are often teased and goaded for working hard -- and I'm not just talking about the traditional geeks, but that guy on the track team is also called out for sutyding too hard and missing out on the after-school party with the boys.
There's no stigma to not doing well in high school -- or even dropping out. Parents hold much of this responsibility - sure, public schools are lacking, but the drive to succeed in school comes from home. Many parents can't even be bothered to see that their elementary school students complete required homework - and they'll make excuses for it "Oh, that takes too much time, Sally needs time to play" -- for an hour long assignment that was assigned a week ago. Of course, when a parent doesn't have a high school education it's hard for him/her to see the value of a good education, and harder still to help instill good study habits when they don't know what a good study habit is.
In contrast, school in Japan (to use one example) is highly competitive - students know that if they don't do well in high school they aren't going to get into their college of choice (which means a high paying job), and may not even get into a college at all are are relegated to trade school. This pressure starts early in their school life - by 7th or 8th grade a student better be on a college track or he/she is not going to make it. The school hours are long, with Saturday schooldays not being unheard of. Parents in turn push their children to do well in school.
I'm not saying that the Japanese culture is better, but I am saying that it produces better students. If a culture pushes 80% of its kids to excel at school, they are going to produce many more scientists and engineers than one that pushes 10% of its kids to excel, even if it only has 1/3 the population. And that's just one country -- if the USA is importing some of the best and brightest students in the world, then those imports are going to make up a significant portion of USA talent.
Same goes for marketers. No matter how awful your product is, they can find "some study, somewhere" that has something vaguely positive to say. For instance, I'm not sure if you caught it recently, but Lucky Charms was being touted as a health food.
It reminds me of those toothpaste commercials that say "9 out of 10 dentists recommend our brand X!" What they don't say is that maybe they interviewed hundreds of dentists in groups of ten until they finally found a group out of which nine preferred brand X. I have little respect for mainstream marketers because they spend so much time and effort and money exploring the myriad ways one can use deception without technically lying.
I've posted it here a few times and it's still relevant. This is a good quote about the subject:
Television lies. All television lies. It lies persistently, instinctively and by habit. Everyone involved lies. A culture of mendacity surrounds the
medium, and those who work there live it, breath it and prosper by it. I know of no area of public life -- no, not even politics -- more saturated by
a professional cynicism. If you want a word that takes you to the core of it, I would offer rigged.
telephoned, but only the fellow prepared to offer the requisite opinion was invited?
-- Matthew Parris
Many people are far too easily impressed by the official look and larger-than-life appearance of whatever is given a slick presentation, especially on TV. It distracts them from any serious thought about how and why the show was produced and who benefits from its message.
I'd say the other dimension of the problem is that knowing the right people is a much better way to advance than having the right skills. Because of that, what we have is far from a meritocracy. What we have is a collection of many small examples of cronyism. Having malleable principles and a willingness to wholeheartedly adopt the agenda of whoever your gatekeeper may be are the traits we most highly reward and encourage. That's part of why so many high-level managers are sociopaths, because such people feel no guilt about being completely phony and have no conflict about putting on a show solely to win the approval of others.
That and "globalism" and "free trade" always seems to mean "transfer wealth away from the US". It is not the mutual trade and prosperity that was sold to us when NAFTA and other proposals were getting off the ground.
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
Quoting an old Russian joke (from one of their best stand-up comedians):
An American University is a strange entity where Russian professors teach Chinese students a technical discipline in English language.
Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
http://www.sigsegv.cx/
Uh yeah, so things have changed since the economic downturn and there is a growing body of evidence that suggests a Law degree is about as valuable as a BS in the Arts. Unless you can graduate in the top 10% of your class and are at a prestigious university, you will not be hired as a lawyer these days.
Law firms folded like stacks of cards during the economic downturn but these institutions of higher learning have continued to sell the idea that getting a JD will make you big bucks right out of school. There are even reports of major law programs manipulating their employment numbers by hiring former students to be over-educated paper clerk.
So after three years of law school you're saddled with 150k debt and no means of paying it back....sound investment!
If you want a return on investment, go get an MBA :P
Blog source so take it for what it's worth,
> US citizens see those fields as being ruined by massive offshoring and inshoring.
Another cause I have been researching -- increasing income concentration. While the common perception is that the high end of the software engineering pay scale is in the "rich" category, and hence are beneficiaries of increasing income concentration, the data speaks otherwise.
I have extracted the income data from the IRS-SOI going back to 1950. The increasing concentration since the mid-to-late 1970s (it started prior to Reagan -- initially caused by the falling dollar and the failure to adjust the tax brackets) has gone almost exclusively to the top 0.5%, and even there is skewed heavily upward. This has not only affected software engineers, but also entrepreneurs, small to medium enterprise executives, starting to mid-level investment bankers, and a whole host of others who fit the traditional perception of those who benefit from concentration.
The result, of course, is that anyone who has a sufficiently strong, broad skill set (like understanding engineering and business) has a significant financial motive to go to a fortune 500 and climb the corporate ladder. This is great for the Fortune 500s, as it increases the internal competition for promotion. It has, however, been harmful to smaller enterprises and high skill labor (like software engineers).
The complaints of a shortage of US engineers are not entirely unfounded, but it is our tax policy and the resulting shifts in income distribution -- not greater engineering skill in foreign countries -- that is causing it. Our talent can easily see where the money is and there is a direct impact on career path. For those from less advantaged countries, the engineer/entrepreneur payscale looks great, despite the fact that within our country it (along with everyone below the engineer/entrepreneur level, though I might argue that below P30 there is another factor at work -- but I digress) it has been relatively inhibited for the past 35 years or so.
Just another piece of the puzzle. Check out IRS-SOI -- great data to play with.
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
This is got the be the dumbest argument I have ever heard. For every Bill Gates there are million high school/university drop outs that didn't make it in anything, not just computer industry. Besides Bill Gates or Steve Jobs or Zuckerberg are (incredibly lucky) business people and not scientists by any definition of the word, much less computer scientists.
In a globalized society that we are moving towards (and esp. for countries that have practically open borders for highly qualified workers even today like Canada or USA or pretty much any western European country), you are not just competing with your local population, but with the best and brightest of the entire world.
And the lower end (i.e. competing for low end menial jobs) is already taken care of with outsourcing. So, unless you already have lots of money that you can invest or start a business of your own, really all you have is your education and knowledge. True, given the chance you probably can learn to do simpler tasks in software industry (think boring business programming) but if you are ambitious and want to work on interesting problems like operating systems, compilers, databases etc, you will quickly learn that you are missing huge theoretical foundation that you will never have the time and resources to learn on your own.
Besides, there are other benefits of higher education, the 5-10 years you get to spend on just bettering yourself beyond acquiring skills that are immediately useful for employment, like raising your intellectual ability in general, learning to learn and do research, doing mental gymnastics that allows you to learn faster later in life, actualizing yourself, it changes your outlook on life and the world around you etc.
As the island of our knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance.
Watching American Idol and the likes and being good at work are not mutually exclusive.
Also, only in America is working over 40 hours a badge of honor. The Germans seem to be doing pretty well with their 30 hour work weeks and their 2 months paid vacation every year. We Americans often confuse competence with numbers of hours worked.
Unfortunately 6 years ago was about the peak of this experimentation. I know people who have managed those types of teams and most of them ultimately failed. The language barrier and time difference make it difficult to manage an outsourced team effectively and achieve the desired results. Many companies that tried this have moved back to local talent. Testing, on the other hand, has been seen to be fairly effective when outsourced. The time difference is actually a benefit in that case. Programmers here write code by day and ship it off. Then Indian testers test the code and product when it is night here. Then programmers here arrive in the morning with their code tested.
I say ship them back. I see your point and can agree with it to an extent. Here is one; why bring them over in the first place? Let company A outsource to india/china/etc. After many delays, language barriers, garbage coding practices, and having to wait 24 hours for a reply to a simple question, company A will come back to the US and outsource work to a company in North Dakota with low costs of operations and immediate response to questions. The only game to play here is the time zone game.
H1Bs are a waste of time. I have three of them here in my department and none of them can think their way out of a wet paper sack with neon signs written in their own language pointing to the exit. Is there talent that the US should bring over...yes! Most, probably 95-98% should be shipped back to ratville and asked never to return. If the H1B is not a genius, goto 1:
Just my two cents on H1Bs.
"The laws of science be a harsh mistress." --Bender
In America, we make new pies (i.e. increase our GDP) so that the wealthiest .001 percent can have more pie, NOT so that you, Mr. Peasant, can have any pie. You can eat cowflops, or whatever it is you peasants eat. Pie is for the rich.
http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/02/income-inequality-in-america-chart-graph
This shows just how little of the "new pies" the working man has gotten over the last thirty years. In fact, not only has the bottom twenty percent not gotten ANY of the new pie, they have had some of their original pie stolen as well.
Your argument that wealth is not static and traded only apples if the new wealth is distributed equitably. If all of the newly created wealth goes to the top .001 percent, then does it even matter to the rest of us that new wealth was created? No, because, even though we created all of that wealth, we get none of it. The rich do not create wealth, they steal it.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
When did college equal just job training to corporate specifications? If you think that is what college is then YOU are part of the problem.