Slashdot Mirror


US Losing R&D Dominance To Asia?

bednarz writes "U.S. companies are locating more of their R&D operations overseas, and Asian countries are rapidly increasing investments in their own science and technology economies, the National Science Board said in a report released this week. The number of overseas researchers employed by U.S. multinationals nearly doubled from 138,000 in 2004 to 267,000 in 2009, for example. On the education front, the U.S. accounts for just 4% of undergraduate engineering degrees awarded globally, compared to China (34%), Japan (5%), and India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand (17% collectively). 'The low U.S. share of global engineering degrees in recent years is striking; well above half of all such degrees are awarded in Asia,' NSB said in its report."

461 comments

  1. asian all the way down.... by schlachter · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And most of that 4% in the US is Asian anyways. Just hope we can keep them here in the US after graduation instead of shipping them back to China because our fucked up immigration policy.

    --
    My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
    1. Re:asian all the way down.... by flyingsquid · · Score: 4, Funny

      Oh, R&D dominance? Whew! When I first read that, I thought it said that the U.S. was losing D&D dominance to Asia.

    2. Re:asian all the way down.... by stanlyb · · Score: 2

      Or, can you imagine, the "MAGIC: The Gathering"? Nooooooo

    3. Re:asian all the way down.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod parent up.

      Undergrad in Silicon valley and grad in the midwest (top 3/ top 5 schools) in the 2000's. Engineering (electrical and computer) in Si valley school (the one near Oakland) had 90% asians? I could count in one hand the # of non-asian & non-indians in my class (seriously). It got a bit better in the midwest, but I'd say its about 65-70% asian&indian, still, and I'm being generous here.

      Percentages roughly the same for other engineering majors, but just subtract a constant offset of about 10-20%, I'd guesstimate.

    4. Re:asian all the way down.... by jd · · Score: 1

      It lost Rolemaster dominance to Mordor.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    5. Re:asian all the way down.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Slashdot was a lot better before everyone thought they were a hilarious comedian.

    6. Re:asian all the way down.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      Am i the only one who sees this news as a Good Thing? It seems to create a better balance in the world... Americans already have a dominant army, dominant political influence, and vast amounts of natural resources and farming land. It's advantageous for other parts of the world to take ownership of other industries like high-tech.

      Perhaps Americans think they're in competition with everybody else and therefore should be dominant in everything at any cost, but the rest of us like to play nice with the world and we have no problems getting our latest technology from Asia.

    7. Re:asian all the way down.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same anonymous coward here. I believe that people who work hard deserve to get into the major they want to study, by the way. No advocating for anything other than the standard of what is fair. Regards

    8. Re:asian all the way down.... by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1

      Your worried? I misread it as R&B dominance. Call me back when Bollywood has anyone to compete with James Brown!

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
    9. Re:asian all the way down.... by desdinova+216 · · Score: 3, Funny

      when was that?

    10. Re:asian all the way down.... by jhoegl · · Score: 1

      I wish they would TAKE it.
      OOOHHHH You flipped a random card and beat me by one point.
      Chance is for texting while driving and hand grenades. Real men play chess!

    11. Re:asian all the way down.... by styrotech · · Score: 1

      If anyone knows that, he would. Anonymous Coward has been here longer than anyone else!

    12. Re:asian all the way down.... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I hate to tell you, but just about anyone in Bollywood could make better R&B music than James Brown can now. It's pretty hard for a dead person to make new music.

      Comparing living people with the achievements of the dead is really not very productive. Buster Keaton was a great actor, but it's not like Hollywood can call him up and ask him to star in another movie for them.

    13. Re:asian all the way down.... by Ihmhi · · Score: 1

      As soon as the Japanese can pronounced "Elves" correctly, we're all boned.

    14. Re:asian all the way down.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And most of that 4% in the US is Asian anyways.

      And 50% of that 4% pass U.S. secrets back to China anyway.

    15. Re:asian all the way down.... by Runaway1956 · · Score: 2

      Why don't we clear up a misconception here? That of "American companies". There aren't very many "American companies" traded on the stock exchanges. Go ahead, try to find some. IBM? Nope - they are a multinational conglomerate. Microsoft? Nope - ditto. I'd have to actually look, before I stick my foot in my mouth about one or another companies, but most of them are multinationals, with absolutely no loyalty to America, or to the American people.

      I happen to work for an American company. It is NOT traded on any stock exchange. It is owned by Americans, run by Americans, and all of the people who work here are Americans. More than half are Mexicans, but they are from North America, despite the fact that half (or more) of them are here illegally.

      As for losing R&D dominance - what can be expected? America is being raped by the world, predominantly by China, with the full cooperation of these multinational conglomerates. Much of China's so-called R&D is actually a matter of reverse engineering, trying to catch up to American and European tech levels. The rest of their R&D is real R&D of course. Meanwhile, the US just rolls over, to accomodate those who are so busily raping her. We can't be bothered with R&D while we are enjoying a nice, long, and deep rape.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    16. Re:asian all the way down.... by ozmanjusri · · Score: 1

      Your worried? I misread it as R&B dominance.

      I misread it as B&D dominance and was about to embark on a rant about subbies who should be spanked for their rampant RAS syndrome...

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    17. Re:asian all the way down.... by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      RAS syndrome

      I'm familiar with SAM Syndrome, but the only RAS syndrome I know refers to redundant acronyms. Enlighten, please?

    18. Re:asian all the way down.... by pitzG · · Score: 1

      UC Berkeley? Or are you referring to one of the various scam colleges in the SFBay area that exist primarily to supply SV firms with cheap tech labour on student visas/OPT?

      The Asians/Indians at UCB, those are almost entirely US citizens. Of course, it doesn't seem to matter to the SV employers, who still leave a good chunk of UCB EE/CS grads unemployed while bringing in non-citizen guest workers by the thousands from India.

    19. Re:asian all the way down.... by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

      As an outsider looking at historical events, the worst thing that happened was allowing the export of manufacturing jobs to Asia. The generation that worked in the factories saved and skimped to send their children to university. Since no person or group has exclusivity on intelligence, it just means that their next generation has the brains to do the designs. Why, when you have 10's of thousands of engineers in your own country, would you go to the USA to use American Engineers.

      The difference between America and its MBA style of doing business, is "Live for today", and don't bother about tomorrow. The Asian and other countries do 20 years forward planning for industry and infrastructure. What is the forward planning done in the USA?

      Yes, do your best to keep the 4% in the USA, but realize that the quality of life is better back home for most graduates.

      --
      Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
    20. Re:asian all the way down.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your worried? I misread it as R&B dominance. Call me back when Bollywood has anyone to compete with James Brown!

      No, *you* call *us* back when America has anything to compete with Bollywood. Our phone number is any 1-800.

      PS. It's 'you're', not 'your'. Learn English!

    21. Re:asian all the way down.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since 9-11? Not happening. Since then ever increasing numbers of those Asian STEM graduates have been returning home instead either because 1) their home economies have been doing better than the US in terms of hiring STEM, or 2) because US immigration laws have radically tightened to keep them from getting visas or citizenship, or 3) the increase in xenophobic racist vibes they get from both the media and government officials/officers like ICE, HLS, etc. puts them off wanting to life in the US.

      But biggest atop this has been that very few native-born Americans have been going into STEM since the 1970s so the amount that do occupy US schools has long been visiting students from Asia and the US has only really been sort of on top because so many could and would stay.

      Where were the native-borns? They were taking subjects that would help them ease into Ponzi businesses in finance, insurance and real estate (FIRE). And while that was the "easy money", "hard money" like actually building things (requiring STEM) was being outsourced as unnecessary and unprofitable (well, sure, compared to Ponzi growth rates, everything else is unprofitable). So starting in the 80s but really accelerating after 1995, the US started pissing away the critical business/industrial infrastructure it need to 1) manufacture things easily, 2) have a ready supply chain (up and down), and 3) have jobs for a lot of STEMs.

      It was a Jenga pile ready to tip anyway in 2000; it just needed a push of taking out the wrong, last block. 9-11 and the WoT (which reduces business efficiency as the price for security) were the nails in the coffin.

      Why do I know this? I'm an engineer who say it happening in slow motion. I now live in Asia because, frankly, that's where my industry is now, not the US. And I'm actually OK with it personally now. Sure I had to learn me some Chinese and relocate permanently to a different country but the quality of life is actually better here and, well, I have a job in something I know well. Zero chance of that in the US now or any time in the future.

      And maybe it's just part of the rich tapestry of history: my great-grandparents had to leave Eastern Europe before the turn of the 20th century and came to the US primarily for economic reasons just like this. At one point I realized that if my ancestors could tough it out, so can I. And then I realized I actually like my new home country. Not the US and in all too many ways: thank God it's not!

      All the demographics of population and energy consumption make it pretty clear: the US is not going to be any more significant economically or politically in 50 years than, say, Denmark or Lithuania is today, even with its size.

    22. Re:asian all the way down.... by BenLeeImp · · Score: 1

      Building the deck is the part that takes skill. A good deck will have a high win/loss ratio. Playing the deck is largely procedural, although there usually are a number of decisions in the game you need to make based on an estimated probability of certain actions taken by your opponent. Play enough games to remove the random factors from the equation, and you can see how well your deck performs on average, and work to improve that.

      Its a game for people who like spreadsheets.

    23. Re:asian all the way down.... by LunaticTippy · · Score: 1

      It seemed to me to be less a game of skill than a game of burning money. People who were willing to buy thousands of cards or pay top dollar for rare cards bragged about their unbeatable decks.

      --
      Man, you really need that seminar!
  2. Duh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is simply the race to the bottom that corporate America is pursuing writ large. When we traded our democracy for a corporatocracy, this was the inevitable result.

    1. Re:Duh. by hedwards · · Score: 1

      More or less, if we want this to change we need to do something about patent trolls and force corporations to demonstrate the need to import workers to fill those jobs if they want to get the necessary visas granted.

    2. Re:Duh. by khallow · · Score: 2

      This is simply the race to the bottom that corporate America is pursuing writ large. When we traded our democracy for a corporatocracy, this was the inevitable result.

      "Race to the bottom"? So what do you recommend to encourage corporate America to stay in America?

    3. Re:Duh. by Bucky24 · · Score: 1

      Why should we be licking their balls to get them to stay?

      Because they give us jobs that allow us to continue to live the standard of life we have come to expect.

      --
      All the world's a CPU, and all the men and women merely AI agents
    4. Re:Duh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tax them. Tax the VERY high paid CEOs and tax the VERY high corporate profits.

      High taxes give businesses a reason to pay their workers more. High-paying jobs that require college degrees encourage people to go to college.

      $10,000,000 for the CEO taxed at 90%, or bring in 100 new fresh-out of college employees at $100k each, which is a tax-deductible business expense for the corporation?

      Those 100 workers will produce new products for the company and drive innovation in a way that a CEO never could.

      Those 100 workers will spend most of their salaries, thus providing local markets for the goods & services that the CEO wouldn't have used. Each of them will buy a house in the area, for instance--and each house provides work for electricians, plumbers, repair men...local service men, etc. Restaurants will start up, or increase business.

      The CEO would have just bought stock. We have enough stock brokers in NY who produce nothing.

    5. Re:Duh. by drnb · · Score: 1
    6. Re:Duh. by Ihmhi · · Score: 1

      The biggest companies who are racing to the bottom all eventually leave America... I don't know if I see a problem with this.

    7. Re:Duh. by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      And us doing those jobs gives them an actual product/service to sell. You've just explained why it should be a symbiotic relationship, not why they should call all the shots.

    8. Re:Duh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would you want to keep corporate America in America? As long as there are customers over there there will be someone selling something to them. And if your current huge corporates somehow magically stop doing business on the American soil there will be new ones to take their place.

    9. Re:Duh. by khallow · · Score: 1

      Fuck corporate America. They're the assholes that started the entire mess. Why should we be licking their balls to get them to stay?

      How is the US going to maintain its civilization if it can't afford the things that maintain civilizations? I think we saw a result of this sort of attitude in the last financial crisis. It was about highly leveraging investments of certain real estate securities not productive enterprises. The productive enterprises left the US, the unproductive games did not.

      I'm seriously sick of this "Oh, they're being hostile to business!" bullshit that comes up whenever someone tries to criticize businesses for being assholes.

      I see business hostility as being one of the largest reasons the US (and the developed world as a whole) is failing. The original poster termed the flight of businesses from the developed world, "race to the bottom", but these businesses are going to better places from their point of view. The response to this seems to be sour grapes. "We didn't need those companies, jobs, or tax revenue anyway" rather than how can we keep or increase the jobs that we want?

      I wonder if fifty years from now, the US will have devolved into yet another failed, third world country with people saying the same thing about civilization. "We didn't need that anyway."

    10. Re:Duh. by khallow · · Score: 1

      You've just explained why it should be a symbiotic relationship, not why they should call all the shots.

      Be a business then, not a flunkie. Seems pretty straight forward to me.

    11. Re:Duh. by khallow · · Score: 1

      Those 100 workers will spend most of their salaries, thus providing local markets for the goods & services that the CEO wouldn't have used. Each of them will buy a house in the area, for instance--and each house provides work for electricians, plumbers, repair men...local service men, etc. Restaurants will start up, or increase business.

      The CEO would have just bought stock. We have enough stock brokers in NY who produce nothing.

      So the 100 workers would have spent their money while the CEO would have invested his? So why should we hire 100 workers again? I guess this is the problem with just measuring an economy in terms of GDP. The first group increases churn in the market and hence, looks good for the GDP metric. The second creates more of that economy. Do you understand how flawed your argument is?

      It's also worth noting that a good CEO of a large business can be worth a lot more than $10 million a year while 100 average recent graduates aren't worth any where near that much money.

    12. Re:Duh. by khallow · · Score: 1

      Why would you want to keep corporate America in America? As long as there are customers over there there will be someone selling something to them. And if your current huge corporates somehow magically stop doing business on the American soil there will be new ones to take their place.

      There will be new ones to take their place? Maybe, and there's an increasing chance those companies won't be on US soil.

  3. Yes, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...we're the leader in Human Studies diplomas. We're all set for the future.

    1. Re:Yes, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is correct. The big science driven era of the past is coming to a close. What more can we invent? We are running out of cheap, easy energy, so even if there's somehow some huge magical R&D breakthrough, there won't be the energy to power it. So, we need to change society. Its very foundation, what people expect, will need to change. Who's going to do that, a bunch of engineers?

    2. Re:Yes, but... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      There's tons of things you can invent; obviously I can't list any examples because they haven't been invented yet, but I can point to some things that could be developed as the basic ideas have been invented: space elevator, orbital solar power stations, moon mining, useful fusion power, electric vehicles good for more than just short commutes, personal rapid transit systems like SkyTran, and lots more.

      We just don't invent (or develop) many things because of too many problems in our society: patent trolls and overly-broad patents, lack of innovative spirit, greed, excessively-long copyright terms, etc. If we don't fix some of these problems, then our society is going to wither away (like Britain, which is a pathetic ghost of its former self), and some other society (China, India) is going to be the world leader in technology.

    3. Re:Yes, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You started off almost normal and then went off to la-la land. Space Elevator? Why do you dumbfucks always bring up this bilge? It's NEVER EVER going to happen. EVER.

    4. Re:Yes, but... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      You're a moron. You're like a caveman who can't comprehend an airplane.

  4. Don't worry we have plenty of managers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Who needs to build something when you can manage someone else doing it.

  5. surprised? by stanlyb · · Score: 0

    I am not. And if you start to count the USA engineers that are USA born and educated, it will be ever more stunning. But who cares, the SOPA will take care of it.

    1. Re:Surprised? by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 3, Informative

      Baloney. The US is still the world's largest manufacturing nation.

      China assembles iPhones, athletic shoes and similar consumer knick-knacks. The US makes airliners, CPUs, pharmaceuticals, heavy mining and earth-movers and food.

      http://business.time.com/2011/03/10/can-china-compete-with-american-manufacturing/

      Yes engineering has advantages when located close to manufacturing sites. That is not the same as R&D.

      The US R&D spend rate is still very high. Even though it isn't as high as it should be it is still only barely exceeded by all of Asia combined as a percentage of the world, i.e. 31% vs 32%.

      From: http://www.scidev.net/en/science-and-innovation-policy/finance/news/asian-countries-collectively-top-us-r-d-spend.html

      The total science spend of China, India, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam rose steadily between 1999 and 2009 to reach 32 per cent of the global share of spending on science, compared with 31 per cent in the US. Per capital the US spends 10x Asia.

      The US needs to up it's game, certainly. But dig into the stats and the picture is not at all what it is painted to be in sensationalized news articles.

    2. Re:Surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yet, Boeing is building factories in China to win short-term contracts without considering that once you can build a wing, you can build just about anything else for an airplane: http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=1795

  6. What's the point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When we learn to make something new and innovative, when they will just copy it anyway?

    1. Re:What's the point by Sentrion · · Score: 2

      Then it's time to get innovative and come up with stuff that will work regardless of who copies it. Innovation doesn't stop just because the rules of the game change or don't seem fair.

      Just because math is hard doesn't mean we don't learn calculus because we got a few headaches trying to learn algebra.

      And innovation doesn't have to stop with technology. We need innovations in law, business, finance, and culture as well.

    2. Re:What's the point by gerddie · · Score: 1

      Copying someones work (with attribution) is actually a way to show admiration. Only in a profit oriented society like the one we currently live in is this seen as a problem.

    3. Re:What's the point by s73v3r · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Admiration is nice, but sadly it doesn't usually pay the bills. While I'd definitely be flattered if someone copied one of my designs and it got mega popular, if I don't get money from it, it doesn't really help me. I still have to eat.

  7. What did you expect? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While this isn't unexpected, I don't see who they'll be selling to if they move ALL the jobs. Maybe I don't understand economics, but as far as I can tell, you either have a business or a job if you want to have money. The jobs are going away. Welfare is paid by taxing jobs, so welfare is going away as well as a direct consequence. No money, no food or housing. I don't see the US going the way of the Zeitgeist any time soon (that's so anti-American), but I would see the US going the way of Zimbabwe. I can generalize this statement for the entire western world.

  8. Who needs R&D? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    America's got patents. We can trade those for Asian R&D.

    1. Re:Who needs R&D? by shentino · · Score: 1

      Why should asia bother to trade for them when their government can just steal it through espionage anyway?

    2. Re:Who needs R&D? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I may not be the best at geography, but when did Asia become a country?

      Damnit people, keep me up to date on this type of thing!

  9. But did they LISTEN? by overshoot · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I personally know people in industry who have been warning of this for the last 20 years. The "new economy" of that era promised to reduce costs by moving manufacturing overseas while keeping R&D in the USA. People who knew how R&D worked said that the manufacturing was, if nothing else, necessary to the local support (machinists, PWB fabs, etc.) that support R&D.

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
    1. Re:But did they LISTEN? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This has been happening since the 1970s.

      The problem is that US law as it has evolved in the past two decades is very hostile to a R&D culture:

      1: A nascent product can be sued out of existance. I remember an issue about a helmet company refusing to put out a new safety feature for fear of a bankruptcy producing class-action lawsuit because they didn't do it earlier.

      2: IP laws are so tangled that a company has a minefield of patents that are overly broad or vague. It only takes one violation to have a company shut down and liquidated.

      3: The media shows tech-savvy people as second class citizens. Joe Sixpack is viewed as cooler than Jane Chemist. Engineers are drawn in the press as mentally deranged, toadies, or people from Asia.

      4: Operation Sun Devil scared the [white|grey|black]hat types away from ever working for the US government. Contrast that to China and Russia where this sort of stuff is just as important as physical combat in their armies.

      5: There is such an income difference between being an engineer and other fields. A smart high school graduate can go into CS and might score a job of barely existing. The same guy who parties at a frat, gets his general business undergrad, goes to law school and graduates will be making $100,000 a year starting out, especially if he interns and gets well known at a decent law firm.

      6: Commotization: Why hire people for 40,000 a year in the US when $10,000 can get a contract with 10-20 of the best from Elbonia with guarenteed results?

      7: Tax structure. Payroll taxes are expensive, offshoring gives deductions. Hiring H-1Bs pays more for a company with tax incentives than their salaries cost.

      8: "We can't find any CISSPS to work for us for $15,000/year" translates to "We cannot find any useful talent in the US... we need more H-1Bs!"

      9: It is easy to wind up in jail for vague charges if one shows to be technologically competent. So, people tend to hide this. See #4.

      With the laws and regulations in place that make the US actively hostile to anything but sports heros, rock stars, and actors, it is absolutely no wonder why there is little to no technological progress here.

    2. Re:But did they LISTEN? by Sentrion · · Score: 2

      Exactly. You cannot separate the R&D lab from the plant floor. Both make common use of key personnel and resources.

    3. Re:But did they LISTEN? by Tailhook · · Score: 0

      So you're saying we need to have policies that lead to domestic manufacturing?

      WE CAN'T POLLUTE THE WHOLE WORLD!

      Why would we want dirty manufacturing and industry in the US??

      Better that we have lawyers and doctors and movie directors and investment bankers and graphics artists and social workers and compliance officers and other good clean people like that.

      Bubba coal miner needs to get a degree or move to China and take his enabling engineers with him, or go subsist quietly in a trailer park. Either way stop messing up my environment!

      --
      Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
    4. Re:But did they LISTEN? by d_lesage · · Score: 0

      Don't forget: 10: Pitting religion against science.

      --

      Ich werde nie wieder denken
    5. Re:But did they LISTEN? by s73v3r · · Score: 2

      Why would we want dirty manufacturing and industry in the US??

      Jobs. Further, manufacturing doesn't have to be "dirty". Its just that most companies are lazy and cheap, and would rather turn some 3rd world country into a shithole than invest in clean manufacturing.

      In addition, I'm sorry to say, but not everyone is cut out for white collar or knowledge work. There are a lot of people who's main skill is their brawn.

    6. Re:But did they LISTEN? by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      Well, everybody on this site has read a comment or two of mine.

      lose your manufacturing and lose your economy.

    7. Re:But did they LISTEN? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Was the post unfairly plausible or did you deliberately overlook the sarcasm?

    8. Re:But did they LISTEN? by airdweller · · Score: 0

      If that's not fantastic 'veiled sarcasm' I don't know what is.

    9. Re:But did they LISTEN? by dbIII · · Score: 1

      The R&D was moving back then too. The headline above should read "Lost" instead of "Losing" because it happened some time ago.
      People forget that Silicon Valley worked because people could come from all over the world with their ideas and get funding to develop them (eg. Intel for the largest example), thus something happened which was greater than the USA could produce alone with a declining education system and a drain of top talent into investment etc. Now it is very difficult for people to come in from the outside, and even if they got there the funding was tight as the US economy declined. China and other places have tried for years to copy Silicon Valley, but whether they succeed or not the original has lost the factors that led to rapid growth.

    10. Re:But did they LISTEN? by mjwx · · Score: 2

      1: A nascent product can be sued out of existance. I remember an issue about a helmet company refusing to put out a new safety feature for fear of a bankruptcy producing class-action lawsuit because they didn't do it earlier. 2: IP laws are so tangled that a company has a minefield of patents that are overly broad or vague. It only takes one violation to have a company shut down and liquidated.

      This.

      In Asia a company hires 10 engineers and 2 lawyers to make a new product. In the US a company hires 2 engineers and 10 lawyers to make the same product. The net result is that the engineers have to work 5 times as hard to reach the same deadline and the lawyers are a drain on the development budget.

      The cost difference between an Asian engineer and an American engineer is minuscule and not the problem. The problem is the cost difference between 2 lawyers and 10.

      Trying to create laws to protect things invented yesterday wont help when your competitors are inventing things for tomorrow.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  10. Degrees by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm going to say that Degrees are quite the "meaningless" quantity - I work with a number of "engineers" who graduated in Asia (China/India Specifically) who barely qualify as high school graduates let alone college gradutates. The standards for degrees are not really very comparable across some borders.

    1. Re:Degrees by stanlyb · · Score: 1

      It is true, but even if 1% of these graduates are worth their soil, it is still pretty big number compared to "inside" graduates.

  11. Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by sethstorm · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    They shouldn't be here in the first place if they're taking slots that belong to our own citizens. Save the trip and help our own citizens.

    No sense in not training our own versus helping the enemy.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
    1. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I never knew anyone who didn't have the same complexion as you was considered 'the enemy'...

    2. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't believe sethstorm stated anything about his complexion or anyone else's.

    3. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by gerddie · · Score: 1, Insightful

      They shouldn't be here in the first place if they're taking slots that belong to our own citizens.

      I'm not from the US, so I don't really know, but I always understood that a "slot" at a university in the US is reserved for the person that pays. If the citizens can't pay it, than the universities will just fill these slots by foreigners who can, no?

      No sense in not training our own versus helping the enemy.

      In light of what I said above, you might want to consider Ferengi aquisition rule N 177: "Know your enemies ... but do business with them always."

    4. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No sense in not training our own versus helping the enemy.

      "Enemy"?

      I happen to believe that there is no sense in paying the Chinese to build products that we are going to buy. Especially when we're just supporting the mistreatment of their workers.

      On the other hand, there's every reason to have Chinese and Indians and Iranians and Nigerians, etc come to this country to learn. Because they raise the average.

      My daughter coasted through high school, even though both of her parents are professional academics. She had little ambition and little direction. Her interaction with foreign students who actually place a very high value on their education has had a great effect on her. When she got to college, she saw how hard some people work as opposed to some of the kids she hung around with in high school. She saw students helping each other with study groups, tutoring, even sharing books. It took her a while but now she studies with a group of kids that includes Chinese and Korean and Eastern European students, and in Mathematics, when you hook up with smart people, it's a big help, as opposed to many American students who come in as big swinging dicks and think they've got an A coming as a birthright.

      National borders are artificial. Cultural borders are not. There may not be a reason to see research and development as some grand competition, or the moral equivalent of war, but there is every reason to start spending a lot more money, public money, on R&D. Not because we have to "beat" the Chinese, but because we have to beat a whole lot of problems right here at home, and over-come the increasing anti-intellectualism of many Americans. Of course, I don't think that's going to be an applause line at the South Carolina Republican debate tonight.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    5. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by s73v3r · · Score: 0

      1). Quit being a xenophobic dick. It's really unbecoming.

      2). They are taking those slots because not enough US students want them. Get US students more interested in grad work (read: Make it pay better, and make it more glamorous), and they will.

    6. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by sethstorm · · Score: 1

      I'm not from the US, so I don't really know, but I always understood that a "slot" at a university in the US is reserved for the person that pays. If the citizens can't pay it, than the universities will just fill these slots by foreigners who can, no?

      There are other criteria for admissions than just cash. That, and it makes no sense in denying citizens education for lack of available slots.

      In light of what I said above, you might want to consider Ferengi acquisition rule N 177: "Know your enemies ... but do business with them always."

      This particular variety incurs a cost that is greater than their added value - thus generating a loss. I'm sure that generating a net loss is a concept frowned upon in about any form of capitalism.

      --
      Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
    7. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by ackthpt · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They shouldn't be here in the first place if they're taking slots that belong to our own citizens.

      I'm not from the US, so I don't really know, but I always understood that a "slot" at a university in the US is reserved for the person that pays. If the citizens can't pay it, than the universities will just fill these slots by foreigners who can, no?

      No sense in not training our own versus helping the enemy.

      In light of what I said above, you might want to consider Ferengi aquisition rule N 177: "Know your enemies ... but do business with them always."

      Universities, as far back as I can remember, have been thrilled to take on best qualified entrants, no matter where they come from. They do pay for the honor, however, often as much as three times the tuition of an in-state resident. If you don't like it, bother your public university Trustees about limiting availibility or raising the Out of State/Out of Country tuition rates to your satisfaction.

      That said, the US has benefited tremendously from foreign-born university graduates, who have started companies who employ american citizens and enrich investors.

      Perhaps there'd be less xenophobia if American youth didn't feel being "cool" and "fitting in with the crowd" was more important than cracking a book open on the weekend. How often in a Monday class have I heard people in the back row parroting what was said on some show, or in some film, or how the 49ers did, rather than how they think they have the material for the class well covered.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    8. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by sethstorm · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, there's every reason to have Chinese and Indians and Iranians and Nigerians, etc come to this country to learn. Because they raise the average.

      Only as a additive complement to, not as a replacement for US citizens.

      National borders are artificial. Cultural borders are not. There may not be a reason to see research and development as some grand competition, or the moral equivalent of war, but there is every reason to start spending a lot more money, public money, on R&D. Not because we have to "beat" the Chinese, but because we have to beat a whole lot of problems right here at home, and over-come the increasing anti-intellectualism of many Americans. Of course, I don't think that's going to be an applause line at the South Carolina Republican debate tonight.

      By denying US citizens such education, you only reinforce the anti-intellectualism that you complain about.

      --
      Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
    9. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by s73v3r · · Score: 0, Troll

      There are other criteria for admissions than just cash.

      And citizenship should NOT be one of them.

    10. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by jd · · Score: 1

      If your own citizens are inept, uneducated and incapable of doing the work required, companies have to fill the skilled positions somehow. When I last posted anything on education on Slashdot, I was greeted to calls of "you can quit school at 15 and do anything". Well, apparently "anything" doesn't include anything that actually makes money, makes new products or makes new industries, and if there's a strong feeling amongst even the geeks in the US that being uneducated is cool and acceptable, then I can't say I can blame manufacturers for going to the geeks that think being educated is cool instead.

      We are also in a global economy now. A global village. There is no enemy but ourselves. If we, as individuals, elect not to be educated then that is our choice. The US should not be made to suffer for the choices the citizenry make for themselves. There are also a LOT of Americans, as I noted on the thread about the gifted amongst the homeless, who might want to go to university and be capable of high-class honours but can't because it is seen as socialistic and welfare to let them have that chance. Again, that's the choice the citizenry have made, the citizenry is entitled to make that choice, but you can't then blame Asia for choosing differently and supplanting America in consequence.

      We have the right to make our choices, even bad ones, but we have a responsibility to face the consequences of those choices. The consequence here is that global business cannot run on nationalism or pride, it needs talent. And it ain't finding that talent here. Blaming Asia for having better universities is idiotic and blaming businesses for preferring the results of the better-trained is futile.

      Having a "made in the US" label on every employee might sound cool to America in times of high unemployment but it would kill businesses or force them overseas. And that means losing even more jobs, not to mention both corporate and income revenue for the government.

      No, if you want Americans to dominate American industry, there is only one way to do it -- fix the problem at source. Abolish the entire existing educational system, rebuild it from the ground up to be maximally functional and produce agile minds capable of keeping pace with change over their entire working lives, and swallow your pride utterly when it comes to paying to do all this, when it comes to sacrificing sacred cows (American units should die, sporting scholarships should die, school games with high incidence of brain damage should die, student loans should die, standardized testing should die, GPA should die, education should be mandatory to age 21 with no exceptions for any group, etc) and when it comes to totally violating any political doctrine (and sacrificing the sacred cows will violate doctrine from all the major political philosophies out there).

      It will then take 20+ years to recover, but given that it took 40+ years to deteriorate to this point I'd call that a bargain.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    11. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      By denying US citizens such education, you only reinforce the anti-intellectualism that you complain about.

      You're gonna have to actually prove that such education is "denied" to US Citizens. You're going to have to show the rates of US Citizens that want to to go grad school, but are refused in favor of foreign students.

    12. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by Grishnakh · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That would make some sense if "our own" actually wanted to be trained for technical careers. Very few of them do; you can see this by walking into any American university's engineering classes.

      Of course, we can debate the causes for this (is it the jobs are unpopular because kids aren't interested in "hard" subjects? or is it that the jobs don't pay enough relative to the time and effort required and age discrimination is too common, so smart kids are avoiding these careers because the American companies have made them bad jobs, and they're going into finance and law positions instead?), but whether the cause is from the bottom or the top, or a combination of the two, it is what it is: Americans aren't interested in technical careers, while Asians are. The Asians aren't taking away anyone's jobs.

    13. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by blackraven14250 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      You should be granted citizenship here for graduating here. That's how you keep the talent trained here.

    14. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1

      If the cash is available, more slots are created. Money talks...

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
    15. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by airdweller · · Score: 0

      Who says anything about "By denying US citizens such education"?

    16. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      If you graduate high in your class and get a job, many, if not most, companies will sponsor you for citizenship.

    17. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      Having a "made in the US" label on every employee might sound cool to America in times of high unemployment but it would kill businesses or force them overseas.

      I don't buy this argument for a second.

    18. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by luis_a_espinal · · Score: 1

      I don't believe sethstorm stated anything about his complexion or anyone else's.

      So who is the enemy then? Or more precisely, who's sethstorm's enemy? And it is not necessary to explicitly mention about complexion. He's talking about Asians (people from Asia, the ones who, according to him are coming here to take our jobs), and implicitly labeling them as enemies. Complexion, nationality, origin, potatoes, tomatoes, take a pick, each is a by-product of such talk no matter how you cut the mustard.

    19. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by luis_a_espinal · · Score: 1

      You should be granted citizenship here for graduating here. That's how you keep the talent trained here.

      Assuming there is talent here that wants to be trained (in STEM in particular). They are not.

    20. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by luis_a_espinal · · Score: 1

      I'm not from the US, so I don't really know, but I always understood that a "slot" at a university in the US is reserved for the person that pays. If the citizens can't pay it, than the universities will just fill these slots by foreigners who can, no?

      There are other criteria for admissions than just cash. That, and it makes no sense in denying citizens education for lack of available slots.

      Which Americans are denied education for lack of available slots? In particular in STEM fields (much more in particular at the graduate level), it's a matter of cash - either student loans or scholarships for us US citizens, or cash paid up front by most foreign students (not mentioning that most of us US citizens pay state-level tuition whereas foreign students paid out-of-state fees mostly out of pocket). So what are you gripping about?

      In light of what I said above, you might want to consider Ferengi acquisition rule N 177: "Know your enemies ... but do business with them always."

      This particular variety incurs a cost that is greater than their added value - thus generating a loss. I'm sure that generating a net loss is a concept frowned upon in about any form of capitalism.

      Next time you use a USB device, google up who invented it. Unless you are a person who were denied a slot for an education in a STEM field at the graduate level, you have no ground to complain about. And I see your sig regarding globalization, and I agree with it. But if you are conflating your sentiments on globalization with allowing foreigners with STEM degrees to come and settle here (in light that most US citizens are not willing to pursue a STEM education), then you are just another illiterate moron who thinks the solutions to our problems is sporting a patriotic bumper sticker.

    21. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by jd · · Score: 1

      Why? Companies can't make money if they hire people who don't want to learn, who don't want an education and who don't want to adapt. The lifespan of a company in the S&P 500 is about 15 years because stagnation and rot kill them. The longest-living companies, both in Japan, are over 1,500 years old and have re-invented themselves every few years for the entirety of that.

      Hiring the least-qualified and least-flexible will never make a long-term profit.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    22. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by Hognoxious · · Score: 0

      I never knew anyone who didn't have the same complexion as you was considered 'the enemy'...

      I'm English, but a bit on the swarthy side. However I think frogs, wops and dagoes are utter cunts.

      Your analysis is perhaps a little over simplistic.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    23. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by Grishnakh · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Next time you use a USB device, google up who invented it.

      Ok, right after I finish bitching about the stupidity of the connector design. What idiot thought it'd be a good idea to have a connector that can only go in one way, but that is symmetrical?

      I just hope the guys who invented the electrical and software parts of the spec aren't the same as the moron who invented the mechanical part.

    24. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by luis_a_espinal · · Score: 1

      Next time you use a USB device, google up who invented it.

      Ok, right after I finish bitching about the stupidity of the connector design. What idiot thought it'd be a good idea to have a connector that can only go in one way, but that is symmetrical?

      I just hope the guys who invented the electrical and software parts of the spec aren't the same as the moron who invented the mechanical part.

      Well, if you feel that way, then show us how it should be done and make it a commercial success.

    25. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      By denying US citizens such education, you only reinforce the anti-intellectualism that you complain about.

      Who wants to "deny" US citizens such education? I think a college education or trade school (if the student prefers) should be absolutely free for any American student who has better than a C average or a very good explanation of why they don't have a C average.

      No, scratch that. I think the tuition should be free. Every student should have to pay a $100 technology and library fee and give $25 every semester to every teacher. That would mean that every single American student can get a college education for no more than $300 per semester. That's a low bar. There's not a single kid in the US who couldn't scrape up $300 to go to school even if it meant mowing lawns or putting a coffee can in the local convenience store. I have learned that people treat something that they pay for, even if it's only $1, differently than they treat things that they pay nothing for. If there were any kids who really couldn't get the $300 for a semester, and they had a really good story, the $300 should be waived. I like a good story.

      (Note: I put in the $25 for every teacher every semester in there because I spent 25 years teaching and I figure that if every one of the students that I've taught had given me $25 every semester for my entire career, I'd be able to buy myself a pair of hand-made shoes and new gaming rig and have enough left over for a mad week in Vegas. And that sounds nice, so I put it in.)

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    26. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by s.petry · · Score: 2

      If your own citizens are inept, uneducated and incapable of doing the work required, companies have to fill the skilled positions somehow. When I last posted anything on education on Slashdot, I was greeted to calls of "you can quit school at 15 and do anything". Well, apparently "anything" doesn't include anything that actually makes money, makes new products or makes new industries, and if there's a strong feeling amongst even the geeks in the US that being uneducated is cool and acceptable, then I can't say I can blame manufacturers for going to the geeks that think being educated is cool instead.

      Up to here, I'm with you. It is a problem to a point that some people don't want to be educated. The bigger area of concern is that in the US, if you are a scientist you make no money compared to a manager of some type. We have way to many Business graduates, and this has nothing to do with the desire to learn. It's the choice people are making because if you are a Science major.

      1. Extremely difficult to find a job

      2. Jobs are very low pay. The best paying science jobs are as teachers, not scientists. And no, unfortunately I'm not talking about College Professors, I'm taking required education.

      3. Constant threats of job loss because it's cheaper to send things overseas.

      The same exact problem that exists with Manufacturing also exists with Science. The difference is mainly that it does not cost you $100,000US to work on an assembly line. It will cost you that much to get a Masters in Math or a Doctorates in Psychology.

      We are also in a global economy now. A global village. There is no enemy but ourselves.

      Great rhetoric when you are stock holder or executive shipping jobs overseas to increase profits. In reality, the economy of a country must have space for all ranks, not just the upper class.

      The consequence here is that global business cannot run on nationalism or pride, it needs talent. And it ain't finding that talent here. Blaming Asia for having better universities is idiotic and blaming businesses for preferring the results of the better-trained is futile.

      Sorry, I call poppycock! It is not about not finding talent in the US. It's about not looking in the US because it's much cheaper to pay Asian rates for everything.

      As to the "Global" comment, if we are truly global and it's not about money: Why are US companies not paying the same rates to Asians as they would have to in the US, or for that matter more money because the talent pool is better? They don't, and they wont as long as there is a massive economic advantage for shipping jobs overseas.

      The people making money put out lots of BS justifying what they do. Politicians receive piles of cash from rich lobbyists to tell you the same crap. It's really to bad people are not smart enough to figure it out.

      Having a "made in the US" label on every employee might sound cool to America in times of high unemployment but it would kill businesses or force them overseas. And that means losing even more jobs, not to mention both corporate and income revenue for the government.

      *golf clap* more propaganda from the wealthy, I'm impressed that you buy in to it. As I said before, and economy must support all classes and not the wealthy. Want working proof of how Capitalism works? Q: Was Detroit poor when Ford hired Detroit workers at high wages? Answer: Hell no, it was booming and everyone and their mother wanted to be there. Q: Did Detroit start to go bankrupt after they decided to move everything possible to China and Mexico to increase profits? A: That pretty much sums up the collapse of the big 3 and Detroit.

      Before you start spewing garbage about how the Unions did it, here's one more question for you. Q: Outside of Lee Iacocca working for a dollar a year, can you show me 1 White Collar person at any of the big 3 that gave back or refused their hu

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    27. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      American university's engineering classes

      Engineering in Asia is lucrative. If you have any actual talent it can be very good for you. Things are happening and there are opportunities.

      Students aren't stupid. They see civil servants, lawyers, finance people in the US doing well, and they see US engineers can't afford their own education debt.

      The decline of R&D and engineering will continue and if your conditioning causes you to recoil in environmental hysteria at the thought of flourishing industrial activity in the US then quit complaining about it because you are the cause.

    28. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually many Americans are denied such educations. The reason is not foreign students, but rather cost. I would love to go back to school, but even with my company helping to pay (up to $3000 a year) it is out of reach unless I take on a massive debt load that I don't even want to think about. To get my first degree I had to sign my life over to the military for 3 years (8 if you count the entire length of the contract).
      Friends of mine who did not take that option are unable to even look at community college here. Two classes with books can run up to $1000 even with buying the books used online.

    29. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by pitzG · · Score: 4, Interesting

      No, absolutely not. Not until all American graduates in STEM actually receive good faith treatment by US employers, instead of having their resumes ignored. I'm a 2002, top quartile graduate of a top 20 school, in EE/CS. Sent out thousands of customized cover letters and resumes, only to receive, at best, a dozen responses over the years, and many of the phone interviews/inquiries weren't even in good faith (ie: it was obvious that at least a few were only intended to disqualify me). H-1B and guest workers have destroyed the industry, destroyed the job prospects of people in the industry, and destroyed lives like mine.

    30. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by pitzG · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Bullshit. There is plenty of talent that is here, and is already trained. Firms like Microsoft don't even bother looking at their resumes (Microsoft looks at fewer than 1% of resume submissions) before going overseas to find cheap guest workers. There's 15 million people in the USA with undergraduate STEM degrees, but only 5M STEM jobs. No shortage of STEM talent at all, but there is a huge shortage of honesty amongst those who claim a 'shortage' of STEM workers, or a shortage of students studying STEM.

    31. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Simple: look at the Firewire connector.

      I didn't say that all of USB was bad, just the mechanical bits. It'd probably be pretty easy to modify Firewire connectors to work with USB electrical standards, it just isn't feasible because it wouldn't be backwards-compatible (and people would confuse them with their FW connectors).

      I believe there actually is a bi-directional USB (A) connector out now, that solves this problem. The problem is, no one uses it because it costs more, so device makers don't bother except in limited applications. What's bad is that the USB B connector is actually a really nice connector, aside from being a little tall. It's the more-common A connector that sucks so bad.

    32. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      It is hard to deny that long term pegging currency exchange rates between a developing economy and a developed one could be seen as an aggressive economic act.

      It is also hard to deny that the developed county printing money like a madman could be considered an aggressive, though simultaneously self destructive, counter move to a currency peg.

      Looking at the last 20 years can you name the two major players of this economic 'war'? I thought you could.

      Extra credit: Can you propose hard and soft landing scenarios? (I can come up with a vague outline of a soft landing, it starts with rapid moves of the peg, not sure the Chinese economy can take it. Not sure US and Europe can live in a very tight credit economy.)

      What we (I) really need is a way to punish the Chinese for their peg via arbitrage. If I knew that I wouldn't be here.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    33. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      Ok, denied because of foreign students. I agree that cost can be a huge factor in deciding whether or not someone can actually go to school.

    34. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      Despite what others will try to have you believe, the US still offers a highly educated workforce.

    35. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by pitzG · · Score: 1

      Actually the vast majority of engineering students are US citizens. Maybe someone will post the actual numbers, but 90%+ comes to mind.

      Nearly my entire EE class was young, caucasian, domestic males. CS had a few Asians. But the suggestion that Americans don't study engineering is nothing but a fallacious myth.

    36. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by pitzG · · Score: 1

      Firms aren't even bothering to hire the most qualified, and most flexible workers. H1-B employees are paid at levels that are only typically entry-level. Top quartile domestic grads can submit their resumes to hundreds of jobs and receive very little in terms of response from employers. Even MIT and UCB grads suffer significant unemployment in the engineering disciplines.

    37. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by pitzG · · Score: 2

      The same companies often won't even consider the domestic graduates though. Because of a belief that these grads cost more, are harder to retain, and have greater demands for promotions and exciting opportunities.

      I've seen it with my own eyes. And the situation has literally ruined my life.

    38. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      While you blather about complexions and other politically correct nonsense, China is on the path to dominating the world. Your grandfathers would probably roll over in their graves if they knew that you were so naive as to accept that fact, while worrying about someone's perceived prejudices.

      Maybe you should look at some dictionaries, to find out what domination is all about. Then, look in some history books. The 1940's would be good, when Japan dominated most all of Asia.

      Imagine a world in which the Chinese own everything, and all the white, black, and brown people reside in ghettos, begging their Chinese overlords for scraps of food and clothing. Impossible, you say? Alright, you go on worrying about GGP's complexion.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    39. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bravo! Bravo!!

    40. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by artor3 · · Score: 1

      Somewhat humorously, the A and B connectors are different so that you know which device is upstream and which is downstream. So they keyed the direction of the cable, but not the way you plug it in.

    41. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Not exactly. Yes, they keyed the direction of the cable, but the B connector itself is also keyed: it's square, but the "top" corners are beveled, so it's obvious which way it goes in. This is similar to the FireWire cable, where two corners are also beveled, making the direction of insertion obvious (and also making it so it simply won't go in the other way, because of the outer metal casing). But the USB A connector doesn't have this, and it's easy to insert it the wrong way. The only thing stopping you is the inner plastic protrusion, but unlike the outer metal casings of these connectors, that inner plastic thing is easy to break off if you push too hard, which isn't that hard to do if you're fumbling around and it's dark. With the beveled-corner connectors, you can even insert them by feel, since it's hard to damage them, and you can feel the bevels to determine which way is "up" before even trying to insert them.

    42. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by Alex+Belits · · Score: 1

      We have way to many Business graduates, and this has nothing to do with the desire to learn.

      It has everything to do with a desire to learn. Business degree is not education (what MBA "learn" is nothing but trivial procedures and discredited beliefs) but networking, a promise of a cheap ticket into a good old boys club.

      Same applies to people who are pushed toward education by the formula "Doctors and lawyers". While medicine is a legitimate profession that requires education, pairing it with lawyers reveals how wrong the motivation and expectations are.

      --
      Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
    43. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by Hognoxious · · Score: 2

      That's because Jesus doesn't approve of STEM. Jesus loves lawyers, or he wouldn't have created so many of them.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    44. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by Xeranar · · Score: 1

      Why does this "Americans are lazy" anecdote get taken for truth when the realities of economics and class have a greater affect on who goes into STEM programs. Engineers in the US at the undergraduate level make slightly more than their fellow undergrads. At the graduate level they pull away but only until the PhD where they tend to level back out. So once you factor in economic benefit being an engineer isn't truly advantageous. Far more money in being a doctor or a financier.

      As for the major Tier-1 Universities being packed with asian national students. That has more to do with the vast foreign sums they'll pay for a first class education that our suffering middle class can't afford compounded by Tier-1/2 selectivity. But this is the kicker for me, the asian students you see in those classes are the most elite .01% of their society. If I were to gather up our MIT grads and pair them against the asian nationals we have coming in they would compete perfectly well. So why don't we stop trying to be egotistical against our own society and realize a society at our level of advancement isn't going to keep churning out tons of engineers.

    45. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      This is similar to the FireWire cable, where two corners are also beveled, making the direction of insertion obvious (and also making it so it simply won't go in the other way, because of the outer metal casing).

      Except it isn't beveled enough, so it is possible to insert it the wrong way round.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    46. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by sourcerror · · Score: 1

      Look at the mini or micro USB connector. Or the power supply connector in desktop PCs.

    47. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by Courageous · · Score: 1

      You don't have o push too hard to get it in wrong. Some USB connectors have just enough slack to let you put them in wrong. You can usually feel that something is wrong, but not always, and not if you're not paying close attention. You're right. USB is dumb.

      At least it's not as bad as the memory situation on late 80's era Sun motherboards. The memory wasn't keyed, could be put in backwards, and if done so could damage the memory.

    48. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by rwa2 · · Score: 2

      Hmm, sounds like I come from a similar background to you... have you tried simply maintaining a resume / profile at monster.com ? Sorry to sound like a shill, but I pretty much got every job from employers and recruiters looking for me, rather than the other way around.

      Even with a degree from an Ivy-League school, if the employer doesn't first have the position open (and not just because it's a formality when they're already trying to hire someone specific, which is the case with most official job postings), then your chances are pretty slim that they're going to create a position for you just because you have an awesome resume.

      Also, especially for engineers, you have that safe-haven in the military-industrial complex if you can land and maintain a position with a (job) security clearance. Sure, the standards and work ethic are often lower, but no H-1Bs there, go figure :-P

    49. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by tahyk · · Score: 1

      rwa2 is so right in each of his points. Especially about the citizen only job market. If what pitzG wrote all true and still can't get a job, than man, I have to say something is wrong with you. Maybe you have too high salary expectations, and this is why I took your job. :)

    50. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jumping in here - but you are deliberately setting the "proof" bar too high, in an effort to support your existing opinion.

      You're asking someone to prove individual cases of US citizens being denied education in place of foreign students.
      You're implying that the other poster is asserting a conspiracy, which must be proven.

      It's much simpler than that: it's called "supply and demand".
      If 30% of placement at MIT are foreign students (which is true), then those many slots are lost to Americans.

      Not that anyone should be entitled to an MIT education just because they are American - the prestige and honor and benefit should be determined by academic accomplishment and effort. The CHARTER of every public and not-for-profit academic institution is to educate and enrich the COMMUNITY. Community is not well defined, but relative to Cambridge, Mass we can all hopefully agree agree that wealthy families from Hong Kong or "royalty" from Dubai and Saudi Arabia.. they're not covered by the MIT charter (not to single out MIT here).

      There are many qualified people creating "demand", and supply of seats is finite.

      Fewer Americans can AFFORD education, and so the universities feel compelled to attract foreign students. Unfortunately this is a self-feedback loop, because they are going to have 100% enrollment, no matter what the price is.

      It's not just in the US... lots of western universities are being flooded with foreign Applicants, crowding out citizens. It's becoming like Hawaiian real estate (largely owned by wealthy Japanese ex-pats). It's not good for the long term, and it needlessly stews resentment which will trigger cases of backlash.

      The US is rapidly losing control of it's own destiny - by design - since western standards (like clean water) get in the way of unsustainable growth.

    51. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by s.petry · · Score: 1

      The question you avoid in your response (and what I guess I did not spell out well enough) is: "Why are people choosing Business and Law degrees over Science?"

      Answer: That is the only way to make lots of money in the current US scheme.

      Sure you can be a scientist and struggle to stay in the middle class. That's about the best you will get. Okay, Medical doctors can make a decent wage. But the guys making huge pay checks moving in to the upper class are the Lawyers suing them for malpractice, the Insurance executives raping everyone for Malpractice insurance, the stock holders for all of the above, and the Politicians making sure it's all a legal process.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    52. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by jd · · Score: 1

      The class pyramid can be raised in its entirety, with the base people (who currently greet at Walmarts or flip burgers) being in innovative, advanced, demanding jobs. It is the only way to resolve the paradox discovered by Ludd -- how to take care of the ENTIRE workforce whilst still being cheap and cost-effective. The only solution, the only workable solution, is to create just as many skilled jobs as you eliminate unskilled jobs.

      In other words, no, my suggestion isn't "for the rich". You can't destroy (as is currently happening) the base of the pyramid without it collapsing completely. It has to remain completely intact. Existing companies want greater profits, though often because they're MBAed into oblivion, they forget the difference between gross and net. (MBA is not a qualification, it's an excuse.) However, they're almost immaterial because my suggestion is to have many more companies, many more trades and greater diversity. This is the inevitable consequence of raising the pyramid, rather than destroying chunks of it.

      My proposal is simple. 100% of all students complete high school and complete EITHER a university degree OR a trade school course of equal educational standing. (Not "equivalent", which is usually the marketing way of saying "inferior, cheaper and we can con you into getting them", but genuinely of equal standing.) Make that the new baseline of the pyramid, with nobody at all below it. THAT will give you the muscle to succeed - threats and military might are paper tigers (and other nations know this), the brain is the true key to success.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    53. Re:Then change the preferences to lock Asia out. by jd · · Score: 1

      That is because there isn't any diversity. Overcrowding in the professions devalues them. My suggestion isn't to have 100x as many people in each profession, but to have 100x as many professions and a REDUCTION of the number of people in each. People with MBAs do not create wealth, nor do they create diversity. They manage, but do so badly. Frankly, abolishing the MBA entirely (and de-accrediting all previous awards of it) would be a vital step in raising standards across the board.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  12. to expensive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Most American parents can't or can hardly afford to send their children to University anymore.

    1. Re:to expensive by ackthpt · · Score: 1

      Most American parents can't or can hardly afford to send their children to University anymore.

      The educated ones can find a way .. there's such a thing as putting the money away for the pending college education, rather than buying an SUV, eating half your meals out and having a big screen TV, it's called Forward Planning.

      Something else ... send kids to the local Community College for the first two years then they can complete their studies at a State University in two more years. Amazing how many people overlook this option in favor of $150/credit and sitting in a lecture theatre of 600 other students, when you could be sitting in a CC classroom, for less $$ and have a ratio closer to 30 students to 1 teacher. Just make sure all credits taken are transferable into the targetted university.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    2. Re:to expensive by Bucky24 · · Score: 1

      At my university it was $200/credit...

      A lot of upper division classes either aren't offered at CC or are non-transferable... And it's a pain in the ass trying to get a prerequisite waived with a transferred class. It is a lot cheaper, but they make it as hard as possible.

      --
      All the world's a CPU, and all the men and women merely AI agents
  13. Sensationalist crap by vinayg18 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "well above half of all such degrees are awarded in Asia"

    Gee, I wonder if that has anything to do with Asia having well above half of the world's population.

    1. Re:Sensationalist crap by Baloroth · · Score: 2

      Yeah, after scanning the article my impression is just that Asia is finally starting to develop to the point where they are able to compete. While it is true that the US "dominance" is decreasing, that doesn't mean the US is not doing R&D anymore, or even that it isn't doing more and more, just that China (in particular) is heavily increasing their investment into it. What that means long-term... IDK, it'll be interesting to see.

      --
      "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
    2. Re:Sensationalist crap by Vijaysj · · Score: 4, Informative
      Comparing apples and Oranges here.... A degree from MIT, Berkeley or Stanford is not the same as an equivalent named degree from a community college.
      Indians have the following Option's for Higher Education.
      • 1. Get a scholarship seat at Central Institutes a.k.a free seat (The competition is extremely High e.g. MDS in AIIMS has 15000+ people competing for 2 or 3 seats)
      • 2. Get a scholarship seat at State college or private Institutes (The number of people competing is in the same ballpark the number of seats are around 20)
      • 3. Get your degree in some Institute abroad (UK, US, Australia & NZ are currently the hot destinations. This is considered to be the easiest option and is typically the response of the Upper class when they cannot compete in #1 & #2 and in some cases this is cheaper than #5)
      • 4. Get a non-scholarship seat at one of the private Institute.
      • 5. Get your degree in a private institute by paying a huge donation (a.k.a Management Quota)

      Typically if you have outsources your "Low skill high effort" work you are working with someone from Category 4 & 5 who could not get work in the "High skill" sector.

      --
      To Share Is To care
  14. R & D doesn't simply go to lower cost by ackthpt · · Score: 4, Interesting

    China and India have had massive, massive pushes to educate engineers, medical workers, technology workers, etc. The shift is the pay off.

    A couple decades ago my brother, an engineer with Dow Chemical related the project he was managing - an project would be begun in North America, passed to a team in Japan or Oceana, then passed to India, before passing along to Europe and back to North America - each location meeting its objectives as part of the project. That was two decades back. So you can see there are people capable of engineering, research, medical discoveries and such in abundance by now. No doubt someone in Thailand is waking up about now and will correct any spelling errors I have made in this post.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:R & D doesn't simply go to lower cost by Menkhaf · · Score: 1

      he was managing - an project would be

      a project

      You're welcome :) (although I'm not in Thailand, but in cold and dark Scandinavia)

      --
      A proud member of the Onion-in-Hand alliance
    2. Re:R & D doesn't simply go to lower cost by scamper_22 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Indeed. I've made this point several times.
      Generally people who think of the 'innovation' economy are largely ignorant colonial thinkers. They lurk in academia or places like Silicon Valley and by in large live in a bubble.

      They tend to think like 'I'm working on high-tech and it's a great living' so if everyone was as educated as me, everyone could have a good educated job! Of course it eventually hits home that there's no demand for so many educated people.

      It's great to be educated... but that doesn't mean people are going to pay you lots of money for it.

      The progressives especially have pushed the idea that education leads to jobs. Which is true... so long as there aren't that many educated people.

      But as more and more of the world becomes educated, in reality you run into the same problem that manufacturing hit. Its a commodity. Just like how being the only literate person in a village hundreds of years ago probably entitled you to a reasonable living. But today, in a Western country where pretty much everyone is literate... it means nothing.

      And yes a portion of that means that with free trade and globalization, R&D work will get pushed to the country with a lower standard of living. This is not just in terms of pay, but also in terms of quality of people. For example, given the pay scale in North America, a decent software engineer might make 100k. That's not going to attract the best and brightest. They've learned and now go into finance, law, medicine...
      Compare imagine what quality engineer you could buy in India/China for 100K? You're talking the best and brightest... and they're motivated.

      And people who now worry about high-tech moving offshore face a huge moral dilemma. They've spent the past 50 years with the following mentality.
      - farm work? let migrant workers do it.. our people will find other jobs
      - textiles? we can do it cheaper overseas. who cares about the western textile worker's job.
      - manufacturing? we can do it cheaper overseas. who cares about the western manufacturing worker.

      Now suddenly, their 'educated labor' is a commodity and can be done overseas... now suddenly you see people worrying.

      Why should the manufacturing worker or service sector worker should have to pay higher prices for western made R&D or pay taxes to support Western R&D?

      Yes, I'm educated and work in high tech, but I do get pretty annoyed at educated people be they coworkers or those in the public sector who seem to think education entitles them to a high standard of living. It's going to hit home pretty fast.

    3. Re:R & D doesn't simply go to lower cost by ackthpt · · Score: 1

      he was managing - an project would be

      a project

      You're welcome :) (although I'm not in Thailand, but in cold and dark Scandinavia)

      Ah, yes. But you didn't catch all my punctuation errors, which will be detected and forward to the next time zone - all part of the 24 hour continuous global project that is now an industry for /. posting! (c:

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    4. Re:R & D doesn't simply go to lower cost by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      I think the reason most people are annoyed at the loss of high tech/high education jobs is actually mentioned in one of your paragraphs: Smart people will decide not to go into engineering, or medicine, where they could actually make something of a positive impact on the world. No, now they'll go into finance, where they will orchestrate a global financial meltdown.

      With the loss of these jobs goes the loss of the incentive for the smart people to actually go into those fields.

  15. Then kill offshoring already. by sethstorm · · Score: 3

    If it is indeed so, get rid of any means to facilitate it - offshoring being the primary offender. No different than stopping blood from a wound versus allowing someone to bleed to death.

    This is one of the better cases for why we should train our own instead of everyone else. If there's any spare room after the least capable citizen has been trained, only then should the US consider friendly internationals - for which are not generally found in Asia.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
    1. Re:Then kill offshoring already. by White+Flame · · Score: 2

      And if the government wants to kill offshoring, they need to make it easier to hire & do business locally. Bust bad union control, bust badly constraining regulation, lower employment taxes, complete education system overhaul, etc.

      If all you do is ban offshoring, I'm not sure the current domestic climate is even capable of picking up the slack anymore.

    2. Re:Then kill offshoring already. by Rakishi · · Score: 1

      You seriously think that'd achieve anything? All it'd do is that foreign companies would offshore production themselves and then import their products into the US at a fifth the price US companies charge.

      Or are you proposing going full out protectionist and banning all foreign imports and products and devices and technology?

    3. Re:Then kill offshoring already. by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      Basically what you said is, "Make the US like China."

      No thanks.

    4. Re:Then kill offshoring already. by jbeaupre · · Score: 5, Interesting

      In a weird twist, I'm working for a company in China as an engineer. They couldn't find the talent there. Chinese engineers are missing a critical talent: the ability to fail.

      It works like this: in China, you are taught there is a correct answer for each problem. If A then B. If C then D. If E then F. Always deterministic. You never fail because there is always a tried and true path.

      Works great for copying, but not in improving or creating products. That takes going down unexplored paths. And failing. And recovering. And failing. And recovering.

      When starting a new project with my team, I was asked "What is the method for creating a new product?" They fully expected me to give them a recipe. Something deterministic.

      I'm underwhelmed by their engineering skills too. They jump on the first method/equation/model they find and refuse to budge even when I present them with physical evidence that their model is flat out wrong.

      Sorry for venting. I shouldn't complain. I'm getting very well paid to do something an entire department of 50 other engineers can't do: go out on a limb.

      --
      The world is made by those who show up for the job.
    5. Re:Then kill offshoring already. by White+Flame · · Score: 1

      Basically what you said is, "I'm fine with the USA stepping out of R&D, manufacturing, and innovation in general." These things do not happen in clean, isolated, academic-only think-tank utopias, they happen where there are boots on the ground doing productive things and seeing what comes of it.

      We do not need to become a China to pull this off, but we have way too many people with established interests preventing innovation for no other reason than their own entrenchment; ie, no environmental, human rights, etc basis. For starters, look at media interests, the corn industry, and union politicking.

    6. Re:Then kill offshoring already. by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      No, I didn't. However, I disagree with most of the shit you said. Busting unions? Busting "bad" regulation? Yeah, that's definitely not going to be abused by employers at all.

      If you're going to bitch about unions, then you need to be bitching about their employers as well. Most of them are just as bad, if not worse.

    7. Re:Then kill offshoring already. by sethstorm · · Score: 2

      Then the US would be waiting with a tariff for what it couldn't seize within the US's borders. You don't play by the rules in good faith, your goods don't enter the US.

      With as much unemployed as there are out there for US citizens, I'd wager a lot of them would assist. Not only would they be able to pay the bills, they would also be able to help go against someone that tried to send their job overseas.

      Finally, not every company could afford to go overseas or be able to move in time. The smaller ones would be easy to track while the larger ones would have issues with things they cannot move easily - if at all.

      --
      Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
    8. Re:Then kill offshoring already. by White+Flame · · Score: 1

      If there are laws protecting workers from their employers, and laws protecting employers from rogue workers, then we've got a better environment. Reduce the unions' lock-in entitlements and anti-competitive control; bust regulations that are nothing more than NIMBY, entrenchment, money-funneling, and/or monopolistic. (Keep decent environmental and working condition regulations, obviously. I shouldn't have to say that, but you don't seem to believe that there are any non-good regulations that can be separated out from those that should be kept.)

      We still need complete education overhaul, and a lower tax burden on hiring (which disproportionately affects small businesses), especially if the .gov is going to start poking more into health care.

      Our workforce is getting dumber, and we are allowing businesses to actually less and less business. This is not the right direction. We're going off on an extreme. China's off on a different extreme. Pulling back from our extreme does not make us "like China".

    9. Re:Then kill offshoring already. by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Will not happen unless root strikers is successful.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    10. Re:Then kill offshoring already. by s73v3r · · Score: 2

      Reduce the unions' lock-in entitlements and anti-competitive control

      And in the meantime, give even more power back to the employers. No thanks.

      I shouldn't have to say that, but you don't seem to believe that there are any non-good regulations that can be separated out from those that should be kept.

      No, there are. Its just that people like you who complain about regulation typically are hammering about the good regulation we have as well. For them, a regulation that causes a business to spend money is a bad one, regardless of whether it's effective or not. There are many who believe that safety regulations for coal mines (like the ones that were ignored in the Massey Energy mine collapse a few years ago) are "bad" regulation.

      We still need complete education overhaul

      I didn't argue this; I've been saying for years that we need to study the education systems of those countries that are kicking our asses and take what we can from them.

    11. Re:Then kill offshoring already. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And if the government wants to kill offshoring, they need to make it easier to hire & do business locally. Bust bad union control, bust badly constraining regulation, lower employment taxes, complete education system overhaul, etc.

      If all you do is ban offshoring, I'm not sure the current domestic climate is even capable of picking up the slack anymore.

      Quack, quack, quack. doubleplusgood duckspeak. No need to think, no need to research, just quack back what Big Brother Rush says and all will be fine. nothink is goodthink.

      Union membership has been dropping for decades. Hardly any industry is at the mercy of unions any more, and a lot of industries that were have long since relocated to "right-to-work" states.

      Taxes have been low for years. Our "job creators" are flush with cash. But they're not creating jobs like they were. OK, maybe we should just revert to the old tax rates and let the goddam gummit fritter it away. At least that way some money will get spent, and our holy Job Creators won't have to sit on their money "because they don't know what's going to happen". They'll know. Win/win.

      One of the best "education system overhauls" we could do is simply return to the days when formal education was the groundwork and the job trained you. Now employers expect their employees to arrive pre-trained. And why not? They're not valuable company assets any more, they're commodities to be freely disposed of. Why invest in something that you neither give loyalty to nor expect loyalty from?

      Get rid of all those pesky enviromental and safety regulations. They're just job killers. It's not like people who produce pollution scrubbers and safety equipment have jobs of their own. Let's all live in a hardard-filled toxic wasteland where we all die at age 15, but we'll all have jobs!

      I wish more conservatives were like Newt Gingrich. He may be moral slime, but he doesn't parrot the same circular conversation. He has ideas of his own, not someone else's. They may be terrifying ideas, but at least they're ideas and not just echoes.

    12. Re:Then kill offshoring already. by Rakishi · · Score: 1

      Then the US would be waiting with a tariff for what it couldn't seize within the US's borders. You don't play by the rules in good faith, your goods don't enter the US.

      So how much do you want taxes raised so the US can track and verify the pedigree of every product coming into it? Are companies manufacturing in China bad? What about a Chinese company that makes a product no one else does? What about manufacturing in Germany? What about Spain which has lower costs than Germany to a German company? Poland, an upstanding EU member?

      And in fifty years the US would be a shit hole separated from the global economy and running on technology decades behind everyone else.

      Look what happened to American car manufacturers when they had no competition. The Japanese manufactured cars in the US and still killed those companies. That's what your holy protectionism leads to.

      With as much unemployed as there are out there for US citizens, I'd wager a lot of them would assist.

      Then why do they all shop at Walmart? Why do none of them buy locally? Why do they all decide that cheaper is worth more than any other measure?

      Finally, not every company could afford to go overseas or be able to move in time. The smaller ones would be easy to track while the larger ones would have issues with things they cannot move easily - if at all.

      The US is not the center of the world, many other countries have companies perfectly capable of shipping goods into the US.

    13. Re:Then kill offshoring already. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have also heard that the term "engineer" is rather loosely applied in China as compared to more developed nations. Have you seen any evidence of this?

    14. Re:Then kill offshoring already. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is very East Asian, the younger generation are very submissive and the older generation have a high expectations. In South (East) Asia things are different.

    15. Re:Then kill offshoring already. by AEC216 · · Score: 1

      The cultural differences are what makes me not worry too much about this issue. When the Chinese start pumping out research that is actually verifiable and not stolen, I will start to worry. Unfortunately, by then, we have probably lost.

      --
      May I please have my frontal lobotomy if I bring back the ashtrays?
    16. Re:Then kill offshoring already. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fascinating. You have hit upon something I've come to understand in a completely different way. What you personally experienced with the inability to quantify a kind of meta understanding of human understanding(rules to determine how to build rules essentially), I have come across in considering abstract ideas in economics, and the inability to be prescient of future knowledge we might have.

      From the writings of Hoppe:

        If actions could indeed be conceived of as governed by time-invariantly operating causes, then it is certainly appropriate to ask: But what then about explaining the explainers? What about causally predicting their actions? They are, after all, the persons who carry on the very process of creating hypotheses and of verification and falsification.

      In order to assimilate confirming or falsifying experiences — to replace old hypotheses with new ones — one must assumedly be able to learn from experience. Every empiricist is, of course, forced to admit this. Otherwise why engage in empirical research at all?

      But if one can learn from experience in as yet unknown ways, then one admittedly cannot know at any given time what one will know at a later time and, accordingly, how one will act on the basis of this knowledge. One can only reconstruct the causes of one's actions after the event, as one can explain one's knowledge only after one already possesses it. Indeed, no scientific advance could ever alter the fact that one must regard one's knowledge and actions as unpredictable on the basis of constantly operating causes. One might hold this conception of freedom to be an illusion. And one might well be correct from the point of view of a scientist with cognitive powers substantially superior to any human intelligence, or from the point of view of God. But we are not God, and even if our freedom is illusory from his standpoint and our actions follow a predictable path, for us this is a necessary and unavoidable illusion. We cannot predict in advance, on the basis of our previous states, the future states of our knowledge or the actions manifesting that knowledge. We can only reconstruct them after the event.

    17. Re:Then kill offshoring already. by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      I didn't argue this; I've been saying for years that we need to study the education systems of those countries that are kicking our asses and take what we can from them.

      Sounds like a good idea. Of course, if we take that seriously, that might result in education overhaul of a type that might not be what some folks calling for changes in education might not have had in mind.

    18. Re:Then kill offshoring already. by jbeaupre · · Score: 1

      Nope. The men and women I work with are actual engineers.

      --
      The world is made by those who show up for the job.
    19. Re:Then kill offshoring already. by jwhitener · · Score: 1

      http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2001/0629globaleconomics_brainard.aspx

      Although it is probably more accurate to go back to Reagan as the 'start' of our policy changes, you should remember that the 1990's were close to unprecedented in terms of the lowering of tariffs and the signing of 'free trade' agreements.

      This, more than anything, is what set in place the 'race to the bottom' in terms of wages and manufacturing costs.

      We've never had lower union membership than we do today. It's around 12% of the workforce. Look at those numbers in the 70's and 80's. Much higher.

      We choose to not have child labor, polluted rivers, and choose cleaner air than our cheap labor competitors. Without tariffs in place that recognize this manufacturing costs difference between us and china, of course an international market is going to race to the bottom and build things in China.

      But that alone isn't the only issue. Another huge issue is that China directly subsidizes industries in order to drive out competition in other Countries. Take Solar panels for instance. The cost of labor is actually a pretty small part of the overall manufacturing cost. Yet China has overtaken US solar panel manufacturers. They produce and export something like 16,000 megawatts of panels per year, and only use 500 megawatts per year locally. They can do this, because the Chinese government directly uses tax payer money to massively subsidize solar panel production.

      And of course, you'll want to read up on China's currency manipulation....

      China isn't playing fair in our post 1990 "free market".

      If we want a "free market" without protective tariffs, then the only way to compete with China is to artificially lower the value of the dollar, remove environmental regulation so our cities look like Hong Kong, and directly subsidize key businesses with tax payer dollars so we can undersell below our cost of production.

    20. Re:Then kill offshoring already. by gregben · · Score: 1

      This behavior is a consequence of Chinese culture, namely the overriding importance of "saving face".

  16. Reporters not losing their sensationalism edge by antifoidulus · · Score: 1

    How many DECADES have reporters been saying that losing the edge has been "right around the corner". This is just another example of a reporter who is too lazy to do a real story drumming up some sensationalism to get page views. Next.

  17. Ummm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No.

    But it can happen sooner than we expect, if we allow people with radical ideologies to wage "War on Science."

  18. Who needs "intellectuals" anyway? by vell0cet · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Of course this has nothing to do with the anti science movement that took over when W was in office and is still a matter of fact for half the population.

    Half the american public are against "intellectuals", against evolution, deny climate change and think that investing in science is against God or is far to great a burden on the economy and you're surprised at this?

    1. Re:Who needs "intellectuals" anyway? by evil_aaronm · · Score: 1

      Oh, you mean Palin's "Real Americans."

    2. Re:Who needs "intellectuals" anyway? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are fucking dumb.

      This is about business decisions and the job market.

      Engineering isn't "intellectual" anyways. "Intellectuals" are the twats who come up with social justice, you know attempts at justifying theft.

    3. Re:Who needs "intellectuals" anyway? by s.petry · · Score: 1

      You got it! Don't you know that we are all supposed to be:

      a) Clergy

      b) Stock Brokers

      c) Politicians

      Okay, you can sneak in some support classes like Insurance Salesmen, or CEO but not a Science major! Science majors make horrible wages, work horrible hours, and receive no rewards.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    4. Re:Who needs "intellectuals" anyway? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Insightful? Hah.

      [citation needed]

    5. Re:Who needs "intellectuals" anyway? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Getting beyond your anti-religious rantings... do you think not being taught evolution is really the reason that kids aren't going for STEM degrees? Please. Most of the science in dispute has little to do with jobs and if you really think this trend started just about a decade ago then you've been asleep. Do you think the culture that "W" brought to the table is against creating people who can design and improve the technology of today? Your argument is a strawman who's at the beck and call of your bigotry.

    6. Re:Who needs "intellectuals" anyway? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh please, it didn't start wit "W". To say that ignores so many other factors. The nanny state is as much to blame as anything else. What do you expect people to do if someone else will care for them cradle to grave? I am not saying living off the government will be the lap of luxury, but it is easier.

      America became great, because people didn't have a choice; you worked hard, made a living, or you slowly died in squalor. Now it is only human nature to want your offspring to have a better life than you, but the pendulum has swung so far the other way in the west, that people are willing to riot if someone else isn't paying for their cell, cable, and broadband. Government safety nets should be three hots and a cot. You want more than that, you get out and bust your ass or find a private charity who will provide you more. Does seem like a crappy point of view, it sure does. But just as a small percent of the rich will exploit everything to get a free buck, a small percent of the poor will exploit everything to get a free buck as well. Both ends of that spectrum are crushing us under our own weight.

      “A democracy is always temporary in nature;
      it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government.
      A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover
      that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury.
      From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates
      who promise the most benefits from the public treasury,
      with the result that every democracy will finally collapse
      due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship”

      - Alexander Tytler 1787

  19. americans don't care about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    The low U.S. share of global engineering degrees in recent years is striking

    Americans don't want to learn science and engineering, because it's hard. It takes years of extremely hard work.

    I went through university with a business major. I saw the kind of work he did because he was asking me for tutoring help; the "hard" things he was learning were unbelievably trivial. I'd estimate his degree was a factor of 50 easier than mine; I could have taken all his classes, not studied for shit, and come out with straight A's, all with less effort than I was spending on a single difficult engineering class.

    Of course, he now makes more than I do. So why on earth would anyone want to go through what I did, when you could go through the far, far easier thing HE did, and be more financially rewarded for it?

    In the end American's lack of interest in science, technology, math, and engineering will sink the ship. You cannot compete in today's global world unless you (as a people) understand how that modern world works, and Americans don't wish to understand, because it's hard work. You reap what you sow. I've been saying this for the last 30 years, and now here we are, going down in flames to better educated countries. Surprise surprise. I used to give a shit, but then I learned there was nothing I could do to make people care, so I just gave up. No point in getting upset over it. I'm resigned to my country falling out of its former place as the world powerhouse of science and engineering. In the 50's, 60's, it was very much the USA, and everyone else a distant second. Now, that's reversing. So be it.

    1. Re:americans don't care about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's reversing, The smart part of the 1% club realizes this, and the are quite pleased because they have enough resources to be able to afford to move their resources to take advantage of the changes. They are the rats positioning them selves to leave the sinking ship but making sure that anything of value is extracted. The goal of "vouchers" for example, is to get the public education system off the backs of those who can afford better -- give vouchers at fixed dollar levels and let inflation take care of the rest -- in 20 years we'll be on par with Bangladesh for public education.

    2. Re:americans don't care about this by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 1

      Americans don't want to learn science and engineering, because it's hard. It takes years of extremely hard work.

      Why would they. All you have to do is get on a reality show,act like a moron, and "get paid". That's a hell of a lot easier than actually working for something. It's truly sad that aspiring to be something better is considered being a chump, by many, these days.

    3. Re:americans don't care about this by jd · · Score: 1

      Agreed, though there were a good few European nations in the 50s and 60s that weren't quite so distant -- at least, in very specialized fields. Britain's luxury goods and highly customized products were, at that time, still a force to be reckoned with. Germany had lost a lot of infrastructure, but was doing some very reasonable work in mechanical engineering, as were the Swedes. France had a wine industry that was a class (and glass) or three above anyone else.

      These specialized niches have been worn down for much the same reason - hyper-specialization is also extremely hard relative to other stuff and produces very low returns.

      People want quick, easy solutions that produce quick, easy profits. The good is often the enemy of the fast.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    4. Re:americans don't care about this by scottbomb · · Score: 4, Interesting

      For the most part, I don't think American students shy away from engineering degrees because it's hard. The students are just going to where the jobs are. When they hear about companies outsourcing engineering jobs to Asia and bringing in H1B visa holders by the boatload, it's no wonder they persue a different career path. Look at all the women going into nursing. There's a big demand for nurses and it pays very well. Nursing school isn't easy, either. But they're in demand, and that's the key.

    5. Re:americans don't care about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would anyone study hard for engineering or science anymore? To the business graduates you are treated as "Resources", "Headcount" etc. You are just there till they can find someone else cheaper to do the work and they get a nice bonus for saving the company money, while they spend most of their time in meetings or the golf course...

    6. Re:americans don't care about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Intellectual Satisfaction? Job Satisfaction? At least these are my answers.

    7. Re:americans don't care about this by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      They kind of are shying away from them because they're hard. Not because they're hard alone, but because they're hard and have little payoff. In contrast, someone who would do well in engineering could probably do just as well in finance, and be paid a whole lot more.

    8. Re:americans don't care about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have fun eating on either and raising a family, and deal with being "outsourced" every where you go.

    9. Re:americans don't care about this by sdguero · · Score: 2

      Heh yeah. That's why I changed my major and got a History degree. I could go to school stoned every day, do almost no work outside of sitting through lecture, and I graduated with a 3.7 GPA. As a CS major I was barely squeaking by and it was no fun. My fellow classmates were total lame asses too...

      Lucky for me I have some tech skills and grew up around computers so I really didn't need the degree to get into engineering. I already had most of the skills before I graduated high school and have learned everything else on the job (probably a more efficient way of learning than in a classroom at the pace of the slowest student in the room anyway).

      All that said, I think there are other things that are sinking this ship faster than lack of quality engineers. For one, the federal reserve. We are printing money so fast, there is no way the dollar will be able to hold it's value in the next 20+ years. Hard times, they are a comin'. I'm just glad I have some marketable skills that will always come in handy for a price (unlike say, a mortgage broker or sales guy). People will always need help with their computers...

    10. Re:americans don't care about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm just glad I have some marketable skills that will always come in handy for a price (unlike say, a mortgage broker or sales guy). People will always need help with their computers...

      I'm just glad I have some marketable skills that will always come in handy for a price (unlike say, a mortgage broker or sales guy). People will always need someone to repair their VCRs

      I'm just glad I have some marketable skills that will always come in handy for a price (unlike say, a mortgage broker or sales guy). People will always need need help with their typewriters

      I'm just glad I have some marketable skills that will always come in handy for a price (unlike say, a mortgage broker or sales guy). People will always need someone to fix their radios

      If you want your marketable skills to stay relevant for your entire life, fuck technology. Be a mortician.

    11. Re:americans don't care about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Case in point just look at what you can make in Financial programming if you have a PHD in math/comp sci, 400k-500k easy, just don't have any moral ethical code or you might have trouble sleeping at night.

    12. Re:americans don't care about this by pitzG · · Score: 1

      Good luck actually getting that job though. Those positions receive thousands of resumes, and entry is rather exclusive and based on criteria that has little nexus to one's qualifications (like connections).

    13. Re:americans don't care about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the smart kids have seen the ageism in industry... entire engineering departments offshored to avoid paying retirement benefits.

      Unfortunately, it probably won't come back to bite the decision makers. They have skillfully set things up to inherit wealth and live off capital gains and other investments with low tax rates. Doesn't matter where the workers are, as long as the multinational corporations are nicely profitable for the ownership class.

      And now they are doing their best to put physicians under the corporate thumb as well.

      The future is looking more like the past... barons and serfs. The smart and street savvy kids are learning to suck up to survive.

    14. Re:americans don't care about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Learn French. There's France, but also Quebec. Good healthcare, too.

    15. Re:americans don't care about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok, let me tell you my experience: People whine about H1B visas all the time, but I can tell you that of the four or five companies I've worked four lately, all of which whom are a household names, every one of them is looking for qualified U.S. citizens to hire. Whether it's ITAR or other restrictions, they are doing everything they can to hire qualified U.S. citizens, and the money is pretty damn good. We just can't find enough qualified graduates, and it's because American students just don't find STEM careers appealing.

      Today in class (at a top-20 university), most of the students sitting in the front half of the classroom were Asian or Indian, and most of the American students were sitting in the back half of the classroom. I'm just sayin'...

    16. Re:americans don't care about this by pitzG · · Score: 1

      Getting dual CS and EE degrees = 5 years out of my life, 14 hours a day studying/projects/labs/classes, 7 days a week.

      Trying to find a job = 10 years out of my life, sending out as many customized applications as I can possibly think of/find to apply to, keeping my skills current, with no success or even more than a handful of meaningful responses from employers.

      Nurses, doctors, lawyers, and other professionals don't have to put herculean efforts into trying to find jobs, only to find their employer is in financial difficulty. Yet this is par for the course for top quality engineering graduates. What a shame.

    17. Re:americans don't care about this by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Today in class (at a top-20 university), most of the students sitting in the front half of the classroom were Asian or Indian, and most of the American students were sitting in the back half of the classroom.

      Maybe because US optometrists are better.
         

    18. Re:americans don't care about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the 50's, 60's, it was very much the USA, and everyone else a distant second.

      In the 50's and 60's the the brightest people went to the USA. The USA still wants the brightest people; at half the price. So those bright people stay home and compete with the USA. Now the USA now goes to the bright people. At first for dumb things, like manufacturing but now for smart things like R&D.

    19. Re:americans don't care about this by Courageous · · Score: 1

      Of course, he now makes more than I do. So why on earth would anyone want to go through what I did, when you could go through the far, far easier thing HE did, and be more financially rewarded for it?

      While there are plenty of other articles in this thread discussing the salary situation and the like, consider one additional thing:

      You would be terribly bored.

      C//

    20. Re:americans don't care about this by evilviper · · Score: 1

      I'm resigned to my country falling out of its former place as the world powerhouse of science and engineering. In the 50's, 60's, it was very much the USA, and everyone else a distant second.

      To be fair, the US didn't have the title for very long. We got it in the 1930s as huge numbers of talented people were fleeing a 3-continent-wide war zone, and the US was just lucky enough to be a good distance away from the fight.

      If immigration policies these days were less strict and bureaucratic, we might continue the tradition of brain-drain, regardless.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  20. No surprise by ironjaw33 · · Score: 4, Informative

    I have a relative who works as a researcher for a major drug company. She had to move laterally in the company after they announced they were moving all new drug discovery work to China.

    As a senior Computer Science PhD student, this has me worried. I also know of a few recent American CS graduates that have gone to China to work as researchers for a particular American software company because that company's US research offices weren't hiring. I still know plenty of other graduates who had no difficulty finding research positions in the US, but it seems that a few major players are shifting their work to Asia. Hopefully the rest won't follow.

    1. Re:No surprise by entropy123 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I graduated with a PhD in engineering in 2006. At graduation, the President of the University told us to get to know our politicians. In the US it is every man for himself and engineering skills cost less in China. Between my stint as a postdoc and as an Adjunct I think it no joke that PhDs need to get representation and organize.

    2. Re:No surprise by Xacid · · Score: 1

      after they announced they were moving all new drug discovery work to China.

      Am I wrong for finding this to be absolutely frightening?

  21. U.S. Companies? by Lije+Baley · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We need a new standard for what a company has to be like to call itself a U.S. company and be eligible for any the benefits of such title. Multinationals with little U.S. corporate responsibility need not apply. If corporations are people, then let them take a citizenship test.

    --
    Strange things are afoot at the Circle-K.
    1. Re:U.S. Companies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Umm...to drive more companies out of the country? This will help with the R&D and engineer shortage...how, exactly?

    2. Re:U.S. Companies? by Ichijo · · Score: 1

      If corporations are people, then let them take a citizenship test.

      And that goes double for high school students! These quivering blobs of protoplasm need more than the ability to fog a mirror in order to vote.

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    3. Re:U.S. Companies? by Lije+Baley · · Score: 1

      I'm just suggesting that we take a hard look at these companies and if they are not providing a net benefit to the U.S. then, yes, let them go, because it's not like they were really "here" anyway. At the very least then congress would have a harder time cozying up to the corporations without the media exposing the "foreign" influences at work.

      --
      Strange things are afoot at the Circle-K.
    4. Re:U.S. Companies? by cbope · · Score: 1

      Are you actually implying that US-based multi-national corporations have corporate responsibility? I nearly snorted coffee out my nose when I read that.

      Sure, if you count making maximum profit while squeezing maximum work from minimum paid workers working in slave-like conditions in third world countries, you may have a point there...

  22. Losing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We're not losing out on anything. This is a deliberate corporate decision to put short-term profits ahead of long-term growth. As long as your options vest before the shit hits the fan, what could possibly go wrong?

  23. Priorities by overshoot · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Most American parents can't or can hardly afford to send their children to University anymore.

    That's what college loans are for: so that you can start your working life far enough in the hole that you could have bought a house with the money. It saves you from buying a house, freeing you to pay rent on top of the loans until you can finally buy a house later for your grandchildren to visit you.

    Or at least that seems to be the theory. Me, I paid for all of mine so they can start out clear. That's more important to me than retiring to a place within golf cart distance of the clubhouse.

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
    1. Re:Priorities by s73v3r · · Score: 2

      Loans also seem to be something against "SOCIALIZM!!!!1!!!". Many Scandinavian countries have free or extremely low cost tuition for their schools. Their populations are extremely educated as a result. But just mention the idea here, and you get branded a communist who wants to steal from the "job creators".

  24. Asians cheat alot and copy each other by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    Asian do group work on solo projects and there high / college is all about the test and cramming for it.

    1. Re:Asians cheat alot and copy each other by WhitePanther5000 · · Score: 1

      Businesses that cheat and copy... students that cram and collaborate on solo work... I think you just described the US.

    2. Re:Asians cheat alot and copy each other by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod parent +1 racist diatribe

    3. Re:Asians cheat alot and copy each other by naroom · · Score: 1

      As opposed to Americans. See, when Americans do it, it's called collaboration.

  25. Sarcastic rants aside... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, um, I guess that's all there is to post on this particular topic....

  26. Re:Without Jews those countries can't invent squat by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 1

    This troll brought to you by Scotiabank. You're lazier than you think!

    --
    Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
  27. Change Affirmative Action then by sethstorm · · Score: 2

    If that's the case, US citizens should be able to be given preference based on minority status - a statistical one - while the Asians would be stripped it.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
    1. Re:Change Affirmative Action then by s73v3r · · Score: 2

      Wouldn't matter. The numbers of US citizens (which include many people of Asian descent, so stop with the racism/exclusion) who are interested in getting into Grad School is still far, far lower, meaning you'd still have huge numbers of foreign students.

      And the only thing I can find wrong with that is the fact that US students aren't that much interested in getting graduate degrees anymore.

    2. Re:Change Affirmative Action then by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Last I heard (and this I think was back in the 90s when I was in school), Asians and Indians are NOT given any Affirmative Action preferences, as they are not "underrepresented minorities" (if anything, they're very overrepresented). Blacks and hispanics, OTOH, do get preferences; just walk into any university engineering class and count the number of blacks and hispanics there.

    3. Re:Change Affirmative Action then by Bucky24 · · Score: 1

      And the only thing I can find wrong with that is the fact that US students aren't that much interested in getting graduate degrees anymore.

      Personally I didn't want to go on to get a graduate degree because I didn't want to triple my student loans. And I hate research, but that's another matter.

      --
      All the world's a CPU, and all the men and women merely AI agents
    4. Re:Change Affirmative Action then by Grishnakh · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A lot of times, if you get a TA or RA assistanceship, your tuition is paid and you get a monthly stipend, in effect paying you to go to school. Yes, you'll have to do research (more likely do grunt work for your prof) or teach undergrad classes (more likely do grunt-work homework grading and study sessions), but it's better than tripling your student loans.

      The downside is that you're stuck in school for 2 more years, making no real money, while you could be going into industry and getting real-world experience while making close to 6 figures. You probably also would be building up more interest on those undergrad loans, though you can usually defer payment. Once you get out, you will get a higher salary generally for an MS degree, but not so much more that it makes it worth it, most likely (this is debatable). But for a PhD, it's much worse; it takes even more time than the MS (compounding those interest and no-pay factors), and you don't get any more salary for it except for a few select disciplines, and in fact it'll disqualify you from a lot of jobs because they'll think you want more money (which you will), and they don't want expensive workers, they want cheap ones. Generally, PhDs in engineering fields (and most others) are only useful if your career goal in life is to become a university professor.

    5. Re:Change Affirmative Action then by MattskEE · · Score: 1

      A lot of times, if you get a TA or RA assistanceship, your tuition is paid and you get a monthly stipend, in effect paying you to go to school.

      Although that has been the default for most engineering PhD students, it is getting harder and harder to find funding as a grad student due to universities shrinking their TA budget and government agencies and companies shrinking their R&D budget. Masters students always have a hard time getting funding for grad school because few professors want to pay a student who will be leaving soon anyway and has little experience yet, and universities want to save their TA funding for the students who will be getting PhD's and thus making the university look good.

      But for a PhD, it's much worse; it takes even more time than the MS (compounding those interest and no-pay factors), and you don't get any more salary for it except for a few select disciplines, and in fact it'll disqualify you from a lot of jobs because they'll think you want more money (which you will), and they don't want expensive workers, they want cheap ones.

      Since the original article is about R&D, I'm assuming we're talking about STEM (science, technology, engineering, math) PhD's, in which case you most certainly earn more once you have the degree. Of course somebody with a lesser degree and more experience might make a similar amount, but the same person with a higher degree will generally be paid more. And yes it disqualifies you from (or at least makes it harder to get) low-level jobs, because the company rightly assumes a PhD would be unhappy doing low-level work and would quit for a better job.

      Generally, PhDs in engineering fields (and most others) are only useful if your career goal in life is to become a university professor.

      Most engineering PhD's go into industry either in the field of their PhD or into new fields. Becoming a university professor is actually a very challenging and competitive career path, since a university professor is expected to be both a leader in research and teaching. Of course there are still other academic jobs such as assistant/associate prof, lecturer, and there are non-PhD granting colleges which are easier academic jobs, but still most PhD's are happy to leave academia for the higher paid and less stressful industry jobs.

    6. Re:Change Affirmative Action then by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Most engineering PhD's go into industry either in the field of their PhD or into new fields.

      Science, yes, engineering, no. In my 16 years of being involved in industry as an engineer, I have never, ever, met an engineer with a PhD, except for university professors. Maybe there's some other engineering fields where they have PhDs, but in the computer- and semiconductor-related fields I don't think they exist (note, while I've worked at a couple of semiconductor companies, I was never involved in the process side, only the RTL side, as well as software support, so it may be different over there).

  28. We have to many people in college tech apprentices by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 2

    We have to many people in college and a lot of the tech fled needs apprentices systems AS CS IS NOT IT. So colleges are being dumped down to fit in people who are not college material but can do good a apprentices system. Also lot's of jobs don't need college and alot of people don't belong there.

    I say have more tech schools / apprentices systems and for IT you need to people at all levels but CS for all does not work CS is to long and to much high level for most IT jobs when a apprentices / tech school is a much better fit.

  29. Yeah, but we are leading in lawyers by CO_gun_toter · · Score: 2

    When I got my master's degree (EE) back in '85, there were about 130 advanced technical degrees given. Compare that to the 370 jurisprudence degrees handed out, and I think you can see where we were heading. Now lawyers are everywhere, and especially in politics where they can pass laws written to assure full employment for the members of their profession.

  30. Role reversals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well it could be cheaper that way -- instead of China hacking into US companies for technology, in the future we'll have US hackers breaking into Chinese companies for technology. That was tongue in cheek, but I do wonder what the most vocal people on slashdot would say if that would ever happen, would they change their tune and accuse the US of unfair practice, or would they continue supporting which ever one is the underdog?

    1. Re:Role reversals by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Doubtful; Americans smart enough to pull that off will just move to China and go to work there, as the economy will be better and their pay will be better there.

      For a historical example, look at Britain and the US: back in the industrial revolution, the newly-formed US, not exactly friends with the British after a bloody revolutionary war, ignored British patents and copyrights, and blatantly pirated works and inventions from Britain. Over time, America became the strongest industrialized power, until by 1945 it was the only industrialized power that wasn't bombed-out, while Britain lost its empire. Now, what's happened? Have the tables turned, with Britain ignoring US IP protections and building up their economy that way? Nope, Britain is just a has-been that hasn't done anything significant in 50 years, and definitely isn't ascendant in any way.

  31. Just like the Soviets... by Snugglypoo · · Score: 1

    The Soviets produced many more engineers than the United States throughout the entirety of the cold war. Today it's India and China. Same old story. I don't think it really matters.

    1. Re:Just like the Soviets... by sd4f · · Score: 1

      There was a different policy in communist countries though, there wasn't much work, productivity was significantly lower and since education was paid for by the state, they made everyone go to university so that they stayed in school for longer, and placed less strain on the job market. Also, you'd have to check what exactly made an engineer, because even someone who shoveled coal or operated a lathe was called an engineer.

  32. China is good at copying stuff BUT then cheap out by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    Look at China high speed rail systems it's a cheaper but unsafe ripoff of the japanese system that has no passenger fatalities due to derailments or collisions.

  33. But US keeps its dominance in law! by kubusja · · Score: 1

    Technology is so XX century! What matters in XXI are patents and lawyers and US has an abundance of them... No one else has something like SOPA or PIPA! US is years ahead in laws race...

  34. Of course by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

    Of course the US is losing R&D ground to Asia. R&D takes money, but in the US huge salaries are paid out to executives and the rest tends to go out as dividends. R&D implies a company's management and owners have the ability to defer gratification. Something that is sorely lacking nowadays.

  35. Degrees are meaningless by Caerdwyn · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In my recent (and extensive) experience with interviewing people who are recent graduates, I am finding a very large percentage of people with bachelor's and master's degrees in computer science who can't write even the most simple scripts in any language... people with "expert in TCP/IP networking" in their qualifications, or who have three years testing routers and switches listed as experience who don't know what NAT means or what a MAC address is... people who don't know how to list running processes on any platform. These are people who are graduates. They have their degree. And those degrees are worthless. We've had half a dozen positions open where I work for a long while, the bar just isn't set that high, but we're not finding qualified applicants.

    It doesn't matter what nationality the school or the "graduate" is. Poorly-prepared graduates are a world-wide phenomenon. Sure, Asia is producing a large number of graduates, but the majority of them aren't going to be very useful. The U.S. is producing fewer engineering graduates, but they're just as useless.

    Yes, the universities are to blame. I don't know what they're teaching but it has little to do with reality and doesn't prepare the students to be employable. But the students are also to blame. Surveys show that between 75 and 98% of students admit to cheating, and don't feel particularly bad about it; the universities also don't seem to think that cheating is anything to get worked up over either. No wonder nobody is learning anything.

    All of this is why I don't think that it's a big deal that the US produces only 4% of engineering degrees; 4% of "nothing useful" is no worse than "35% of nothing useful". If those degrees actually meant something, or correlated in any meaningful way to success (both for the individual and for the employer), I'd be more concerned. My real worry is that Westerners aren't even interested in engineering any more; they all want to be in sales and marketing and other nontechnical fields (or "soft" majors like political science or humanities, followed by whining about how nobody will pay six figure salaries for their chosen field). I'm not sure why this is,,, given how little tech work someone with a tech degree seems to actually be required to do, it can't be because of academic workload. Mind you, the profound anti-intellectualism that is still the rule in Western society may have something to do with it.

    -sigh- Kids these days.

    --
    Everybody gets what the majority deserves.
    1. Re:Degrees are meaningless by pieisgood · · Score: 1

      As a Math student minoring in CS, I'm worried about my own job prospects. Even when I work hard and will leave with experience in several important fields. I feel like even when I am working in a difficult major I'm heading towards an uncertain employment future. Any advice?

      --
      Eat sleep die
    2. Re:Degrees are meaningless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe degrees are worthless to your field, but that isn't true across the board. I'm an Electrical Engineer, and degrees are pretty damned critical for that subject.

    3. Re:Degrees are meaningless by rand200069 · · Score: 1

      My anecdotal evidence lines up with yours fairly well. In my place of work, we've hired around 100 sales people in the last two years. From that number, a good chunk of them were new grads who had never had professional a job before. Others came from other industries. Many of them are still struggling to do their jobs today, two years later. Some of them even have a Masters degree and from what I can tell, are just as stupid as the next guy, with little work ethic, or drive to succeed. Almost all of them sure have a giant sense of entitlement, though.

    4. Re:Degrees are meaningless by rand200069 · · Score: 1

      Sorry to reply to my own post, but I hit submit before thinking to put in the rest of my point. On the other side of the coin, I see a few bright individuals without degrees that have a strong work ethic and genuinely want to do a good job. These people outperform and are rewarded for doing a great job. Luckily this company encourages, rewards, and promotes this behavior, regardless of the degree requirement. TLDR - stupid people can get degrees, smart people can succeed with or without a degree in almost any field. Degrees are useless, expensive, and a waste of time.

    5. Re:Degrees are meaningless by sdguero · · Score: 1

      Welcome to the club. We've been trying to hire some capable network engineers in San Diego for two years... And the pay is good! Probably a hundred resumes, dozens of phone interviews, and a few face to face interviews later and we still have only filled 2 out of 3 open positions.

    6. Re:Degrees are meaningless by rsagris · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Uh, how about you and your company try the novel idea of TRAINING people how to do their job, instead of expecting them to do your job for you by training themselves. If companies would quit expecting their employees to walk in already trained on their specific skill needs and actually get down to taking 1-2 months of training their employees, they might actually solve the problem of not having enough skilled candidates. Use their major and them having a degree as a screening criteria for work-ethic and overall ability to accomplish tasks put to them under a deadline, but don't expect them to be tailor made to suit your field. -rs

    7. Re:Degrees are meaningless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a Math student minoring in CS, I'm worried about my own job prospects. Even when I work hard and will leave with experience in several important fields. I feel like even when I am working in a difficult major I'm heading towards an uncertain employment future. Any advice?

      With Math major + CS minor, you can always find jobs in big tech companies as a software engineer, if that's where you want to go. As long as you are smart and can solve simple problems like this on the spot - compare if two binary search trees are equivalent in content (node values) - and write code to do it, you'd have a good chance. It's incredibly surprising to see just how many candidates, even those about to graduate with PhD, fail to do so.

    8. Re:Degrees are meaningless by sdguero · · Score: 2

      Note the title of the orig post. I'd focus on real world skills, and when you do see an opening you are interested in do the following:
      -Study up on the particular technologies they use at the job you are applying for - By this I mean, do more than read a wikipedia article. Go out and actually deploy something on your home network. Really get in there and mess with it.Figure out if it is something you are truly interested in or are just doing it to get a job.
      -Re-write you resume for that particular position - Have it reflect things that are related to the job description. And have SEVERAL other people look at your resume and use their input to make it good, but don't let them write it for you.
      -Actually know the things that are on your resume - This is a big one, and is referenced in the parent. As a college grad you are not an expert on anything so don't claim to be. Just explain clearly what you know and your previous areas of strength (that hopefully align with the job you are applying for).
      -Study more - This is kind of a cheap trick but it totally works to get into a job. Just like a series of tests at school, you need to study before each part of the interview process (see the job desc, do a phone interview, then multiple face to face interviews). Use the information that you glean from the different parts of the interview process to go out and do more research for the next round. Try to know more about the tech you will be quizzed on than the person asking the questions.
      -Relax - Seriously. Don't stress too hard about the whole interview process. Think of it as a learning experience for yourself, rather than some pressure situation that you must perform in. If you are well prepared and suited ot the job, things will go smoothly. If not, there is not point in stressing out during the process.
      -Don't forget that you aren't the only one being interviewed - You should have questions lined up for the people interviewing you. Ask the HR lady about time off benefits, 401k, dress code, etc. Ask the hiring manager about team dynamics, basic company financials (are they making money? investors? etc..) and management structure above them. This can be dangerous so be careful as some companies are different from others, but you should definitely go in with some question prepared.

      Anyway, that's pretty much all I got. I find that being prepared, being myself, making jokes etc, and not stressing out too bad has worked well for me. I have a good engineering job at a large company now, maybe it's all luck but I kinda doubt it. Also, there are a TON of open engineering positions in CA right now. People who say they can't get a job either don't have any skills or aren't trying.

    9. Re:Degrees are meaningless by Caerdwyn · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Be able to solve practical problems. More and more frequently, employers (like my company) are using quizzes as a filter. I can't speak to other industries; I'm in QA at a networking products company.

      Don't claim to be an expert in something you can't back up. If your resume says "Expert in TCP/IP networking", I'm going to be asking for more than just "describe the handshake at the start of a TCP session". If you claim to know Python, I'm going to ask you to write some code on the whiteboard that will involve process management, recursion and exception-handling. If you claim to know regular expressions, you're going to need to know how to extract phone numbers. If you say you know Linux, be prepared to tell me what the /proc filesystem is. And no matter what, I'm going to ask about the implications of the GPL in coding.

      Know what the company does and what its main products/services are. When I ask someone if they're familiar with what we do, there's little that is going to be more off-putting than "I didn't bother to find out".

      If you have a serious mad-on against Apple, Google, Oracle, Microsoft, or whatever, leave it at home. All operating systems suck. All phone suck. All database servers All business practices suck. They just suck in different ways, and I don't want to have doubts raised about whether someone is going to be disruptive, argumentative, or less than enthusiastic when they're asked to work on a particular port of a product. The more opinionated someone is, the less they actually know.

      For the love of Celestia, please spell-check your resume. Communication is important, and if someone can't be bothered to get it right on their application/resume, I'm pretty sure they're going to be even worse on the job. Resumes loaded with errors go straight into the trash can.

      In short, be able to demonstrate coding skills, initiative, and enough platform skills to convince folks of your basic competence. You do that and you're above about 80% of the folks out there right away.

      Ask questions. Remember, you're interviewing us right back! There are quite a few companies out there that you want no part of (stress-monkey coworkers,

      --
      Everybody gets what the majority deserves.
    10. Re:Degrees are meaningless by pitzG · · Score: 1

      A hundred resumes, and dozens of phone interviews, and you can only fill 2 out of 3 positions? Doesn't sound like you're very motivated to fill them. You're really trying to convince me that all these people wasted their time applying to your outfit?

    11. Re:Degrees are meaningless by pitzG · · Score: 1

      Really, can always find jobs? Why has my 2002 CS/EE resume, top quartile grad of a top-20 school, submitted thousands of times to various tech companies, not receive anything but a cursory response? Why is the same repeated amongst my peer group? Finding a job in the tech industry or in programming is not trivial. And assessing someone based on a 5 minute coding test on an interview really is denigrating the CS degree.

    12. Re:Degrees are meaningless by sdguero · · Score: 1

      They aren't qualified. Many came in through recruiters, most of the resumes didn't make it to phone interviews, those that did usually didn't know the things on their resumes. 4 out of 5 applicants are foreign nationals because there are so few qualified American engineers in San Diego that are looking for work. We have been looking for people that: understand the in and outs of HTTP and general network stack, have experience doing performance testing, and have QA experience, And we are motivated, unlike most of the people we end up talking too.

      I'm just saying that if you can't get hired in the tech industry in CA right now, you should probably find another career. Personally I have been recruited heavily the last 2-3 years just from a out dated linkedin page and former colleagues that are in the same position as we are, i.e. searching for decent people to do the work.

    13. Re:Degrees are meaningless by sdguero · · Score: 1

      Oh sorry, and we need people that can do some statistical analysis. That has been a stickler for several candidates and almost kept me out of this job... But I did some homework before the interview (unlike the majority of people we talk too).

    14. Re:Degrees are meaningless by pitzG · · Score: 1

      So you've considered new grads? Or you're demanding all this experience in topics that are relatively trivial to learn (ie: performance testing and QA), don't have a mentorship program, and are insisting solely on candidates local to San Diego? Also, on the topic of resumes, usually applicants will put all sorts of keywords on their resumes. Employers have been abusive by playing 'keyword bingo' and making ridiculous demands of employees with their laundry list of keywords. Applicants, just to get noticed, often are forced to do the same. Just because I can't answer an in-depth question about a programming language I last used 15 years ago, doesn't mean I'm not qualified to program in that language, or qualified overall. If the skill was/is relevant to a job, I could re-learn it all within a few days on the job.

    15. Re:Degrees are meaningless by pitzG · · Score: 1

      Anyone with a CS degree, almost by definition, has a statistics background or should be able to figure out most of it with relative ease. Maybe you're aiming too low on the talent pool and then complaining that the candidates don't measure up?

    16. Re:Degrees are meaningless by sd4f · · Score: 1

      This is true, as an engineering student, i'm generally being told that the bulk of learning is through experience, or on the job, they aren't attempting to teach us everything or anything to specialise in. I think the business decision to not train anyone is ultimately the big problem.

    17. Re:Degrees are meaningless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My real worry is that Westerners aren't even interested in engineering any more; they all want to be in sales and marketing and other nontechnical fields

      But how can you blame them? At my company, the engineering staff has no upward career movement, and no say in corporate matters regardless of seniority. They are also paid about a third what sales managers get paid after commissions. Sales also has application engineers to do the hard work for them while they take clients out for dinner and drinks. When corporate America places no value in the engineering, people won't do it.

    18. Re:Degrees are meaningless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Learn to solve problems -- not just book problems, any problems. Learn to estimate effectively -- you'll keep people from burning themselves. Figure out how to use the computer as a tool -- many CS people see the computer programming as the main thing -- they aren't; computers are a way to solve problems -- I'd much rather have a procedural programmer who can solve problems than a highly object oriented doof who thinks that refactoring his code that doesn't really solve the problems at hand is worthwhile. At the end of the day, it's about solving the problems that have to be solved today -- bonus points if you figure out how to position yourself for tomorrow, but a solution tomorrow that doesn't keep the lights on today will leave you out in the street.

      (We have one of those where I work -- the doof is headed for the exit door, but he can't wrap his head around the fact that this is not college, you are not graded on how "pure" and compliant the xml he is futzing around with turns out. At the rate he's going the application he's working on won't be needed -- he's been told this and it failed to light a fire under him. He keeps coming up with "I need someone to modify _____ so I can integrate it into my framework" -- where a) nobody will make the modifications because they aren't really needed for him to roll out his first release version and b) nobody else has the luxury of creating something new, c) nobody trusts him not to turn things back and play the "blame game" when his framework doesn't pan out -- he is, after all, just a misunderstood genius. )

      So get over yourself -- those "several important fields" may not line up with your job and if that happens you either have to figure out how to twist what you know around or acknowledge that they weren't so important.

    19. Re:Degrees are meaningless by pitzG · · Score: 2

      Indeed, and employers tend to exxagerate the value of experience as well, especially when it comes to new approaches to solving problems. Any idiot can solve the same old problems, by looking at stuff done in the past. It takes bright people, sometimes with little or no experience, to solve the truly interesting problems.

    20. Re:Degrees are meaningless by pitzG · · Score: 1

      "And no matter what, I'm going to ask about the implications of the GPL in coding. "

      So you expect your programmers to also come with law degrees?

      Seriously...

      "Expert at TCP/IP Networking" can imply a lot of things, ranging from knowing IP internals (ie: the handshakes you describe), to being a router configuration wizard. Test someone in an area not quite covered by their expertise, and you could end up throwing away a perfectly good candidate.

      Cynical hiring personnel are a real problem in the industry, and considering the depth and breadth of skills that many engineers have, its not fair to harp on the lack of a very few specific skills that can be relatively easily acquired.

    21. Re:Degrees are meaningless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Advice, yes..

      First, work out what you really want to be doing, and what drives you.

      Are you driven by money, Is it the 6 figure salary that you are looking for? Or are you out to make a difference to the world and leave it a little better than you found it? Are you out for excitement and the rush of gambling everything on a roll of the dice? These are not mutually exclusive, but you need to work out what makes you keen to get up in the morning.

      Once you have worked out what makes you tick, then try to find things that feed that desire. It might mean that you need to leave your town or even country, but keep trying different things until you find something that feels right to you. Once you find something that feels right, stay a while, then ask yourself again. What makes me tick? Is what I'm doing now, what I want to do for the next 5 years... If the answer is no, then it is time to move on.

      Overall be flexible. Try everything and anything, don't discount anything just because it looks like it might not pay enough, it may lead to things that do.

      You are in a position where you don't need to support anybody but yourself, you can take the time to find our what works for you before you "settle down". You don't need to be making megga bucks to survive, what you do need to be doing is gaining experience for when you do need to settle down.

    22. Re:Degrees are meaningless by pitzG · · Score: 2

      "People who say they can't get a job either don't have any skills or aren't trying."

      That's not true. I've personally, as a top quartile grad (unfortunately without a lot of insider connections), sent out thousands of resumes, to receive very little response from the employers. All of the stuff you mention is good general advice, but if interviews aren't even being granted by the employers, then all those preperatory steps aren't of much value.

      As you suggested, it really is all about luck. Tech firms receive hundreds, sometimes thousands of resumes for each job they have to fill, and many firms don't even bother considering applications in good faith.

    23. Re:Degrees are meaningless by pieisgood · · Score: 1

      the "important fields" being

      - Real analysis (Up to Stokes theorem and Lebesgue integration)
      - Abstract Algebra (up to Galois theory)
      - Probability theory (Stochastic processes)
      - Numerical Analysis (Matrices mostly)
      - GPU- Programming
      - Graphics Programming (Opengl + Direct3D)
      - Complexity theory (grad material)

      That's pretty nice if you ask me.

      --
      Eat sleep die
    24. Re:Degrees are meaningless by pieisgood · · Score: 1

      Thanks to all who replied, I appreciate it.

      --
      Eat sleep die
    25. Re:Degrees are meaningless by pieisgood · · Score: 1

      I'm graduating this June from UCSD, with a degree in Pure Math and a minor in CS with Probability theory knowledge up to and including stochastic process. What company is this for? I'd be interested in applying.

      --
      Eat sleep die
    26. Re:Degrees are meaningless by Caerdwyn · · Score: 1

      "And no matter what, I'm going to ask about the implications of the GPL in coding. "

      So you expect your programmers to also come with law degrees?

      Seriously...

      I expect programmers to know that it's not okay to just grab code off of a Google search and cram it into a product. That doesn't take a law degree. Seriously, programmers who don't recognize (or refuse to recognize) that licensing terms affect whether code can be used or how that affects where you split modules up, or why you can't just grab any code you want any time you want and put it anywhere you want are a hazard to the entire company. It doesn't matter whether you like it or not; that's how the real world works. "License 'unspecified' taints kernel" is a land mine.

      "Expert at TCP/IP Networking" can imply a lot of things, ranging from knowing IP internals (ie: the handshakes you describe), to being a router configuration wizard. Test someone in an area not quite covered by their expertise, and you could end up throwing away a perfectly good candidate.

      As I said, I work at a networking products company. If you claim to be an expert in the field in which we require expertise, then you bet I'm going to test you in that area. A "router configuration wizard" who doesn't understand the TCP handshake, for instance, is neither a router configuration wizard, nor a perfectly good candidate. They may do very well elsewhere, but not here. And resume inflation stinks of dishonesty.

      Cynical hiring personnel are a real problem in the industry, and considering the depth and breadth of skills that many engineers have, its not fair to harp on the lack of a very few specific skills that can be relatively easily acquired.

      I'm not cynical, but I am tired of being lied to by people who want me to depend on them to get work done. Ever met a "Python expert" who didn't know what a dictionary was or how to trap an exception in a try/except block? Well, I've interviewed a couple.

      Tech jobs often require skills which are not relatively easily required. I would consider a candidate who was lacking in one particular skill area, but only if they were strong in the others AND weren't trying to BS me about it. As I mentioned, the bar isn't that high; our positions require that you know a major scripting language (Python, Perl or TCL, your choice, we don't have a "one true language"), can automate simple tasks in that language, know TCP/IP networking well (hello! Networking infrastructure products company! THIS IS NOT OPTIONAL), be able to come up with good test cases, and has at least some awareness of how the real world works. I don't think that's at all unreasonable, nor do any of the other folks doing interviews at my company.

      --
      Everybody gets what the majority deserves.
    27. Re:Degrees are meaningless by pitzG · · Score: 1

      Sounds like you're caught up in your own environment, and have a real aversion to bringing people in, even if they need a little bit of mentorship in things like the GPL license.

      Outsiders aren't going to have detailled knowledge of your proprietary environment. If you write your job descriptions and try and recruit people whom would only be qualified if they had previously worked for your firm, then it is not surprising to me that you are dissappointed.

      I realize that you have a business model that probably runs pretty lean, but I would really have to question if your business model over the long term is viable if you do not have the resources to mentor, for instance, new graduates, on some of these areas in question for which they may be lacking. Otherwise you're going to be perpetually stuck searching for a needle in a haystack. Not to mention that your own business may be at risk if you lose a key engineer or two.

    28. Re:Degrees are meaningless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He didn't say anything about not hiring fresh graduates. He was complaining about lying on a resume, regardless of whether it was done by a graduate or a supposedly experienced engineer.

    29. Re:Degrees are meaningless by Caerdwyn · · Score: 1

      If you're getting no bites on your resume, it sounds like your resume isn't all that compelling, or you're applying for positions which your listed skills are not going to be considered relevant. Post an anonymized version of it somewhere (change the names of the companies and yourself), post a link here, and see what people think. Many engineers scoff at resumes. Don't. Your credibility depends upon it.

      What do I look for when I go through a stack of resumes? As I mentioned, decent editing skills do matter... if you're sloppy on your resume your code will be sloppy too. I also read the job descriptions; I want to know what the applicant did. What's wrong with this:

      • Gadgetronic, Inc. (May 2009-July 2011)
        Gadgetronic is a leading manufacturer of innovative USB-enabled sex toys. We have 75% of the North American market, and hold over 100 patents in anal stimulation. We have a proud 100-year history of excellent customer service, and have won numerous awards both within our field and for general business excellence. Our clients include the Republican National Committee, Michael Moore, Mel Gibson, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Boards of Directors of almost half of the Fortune 500. We have international sales offices in Frankfurt, Pyong-Yang, and Riyadh.
        I was a test engnieer.

      First, the vast majority of the entry describes the company, not what the applicant did there. Who cares about where the sales offices are, this is a technical applicant! Second, it reads just like a cut-and-paste from the company website; the applicant could have at least copy/pasted their actual job description. Third, the only part that WASN'T copy/pasted has an egregious misspelling. Fourth, I would have no idea what the applicant actually did. I'm not going to go any further with this resume. What would be better, then?

      • Gadgetronic, Inc. (May 2009-July 2011)
        Test lead for a line of USB-controlled personal stimulation devices. Responsible for testing of the scripting APIs which enabled scenario-based operations. Wrote test automation scripts in Python, including automated reporting and regression suites; tracked defects through their life-cycle; reviewed technical documents. Maintained a compatibility lab including Windows, Linux, OS/X and FreeBSD hosts. Responsible for WHQL certification, and was the point-of-contact with Microsoft. Promoted from intern to engineer to test lead within the first year of employment.

      OK, that's a little better. I know this candidate has done scripting work, both in Python and in whatever scripting language the vibrating scenarios are written in (probably TCL... get it? "Tickle'? Ahem). I know that the candidate takes reporting seriously enough to be entrusted with it (that "communication" thing), can deal with other departments (tech pubs and product management) and has a broad knowledge of operating systems. I also see a very specific skill (WHQL certification) that could be a critical keyword that might be the reason the recruiter brought this to my attention; if I needed a WHQL test lead for a video card, I might well think that this is a more relevant skill than video card knowledge. I might also be interested in someone with a good working relationship with Microsoft's WHQL group. There are no spelling errors, so maybe the candidate's feedback on technical documents is worth paying him/her/it for. I also can see that Gadgetronic thought well enough of our candidate to give greater responsibility over time.

      And you can bet your ass (heh heh) that I will verify every claim that I think is relevant. I will ask about the WHQL signing procedure. I will ask that the candidate write some Python code. I will ask questions about how FreeBSD handles device driver installation. I will ask how reporting was done (and sneak in a question about exit codes while doing so, as it's relevant to the claim). I will probe (heh heh) the candidate's knowledge of the differences between USB 1.1, 2.0 and 3.0, and how much po

      --
      Everybody gets what the majority deserves.
    30. Re:Degrees are meaningless by pitzG · · Score: 1

      Have a LinkedIn account. And my own website. My own custom email address. And even a Palo Alto phone number so calls to me are local. My resume definitely is filled with descriptions resembling your second quotation, not the first.

      As for the rest of your 'approach' to hiring people, you can get away with that because there are an insane number of candidates in the market. Maybe I can send out enough resumes to enough companies to get an exact match to requirements, maybe I can't. But firms that can't find their proverbial 'purple squirrel' need to be looking in the mirror and wondering if their own requirements are far too arbitrary.

      Like seriously, someone trained in hardware engineering can pick up the difference between USB 1.1/2.0/3.0. Software people are almost agnostic to the physical layer stuff. The in-depth technical details can be looked up in books on an as-needed basis.

      As for the suggestion that 'luck' is involved, if a tech firm receives 100, 1000 resumes for a position, certainly, being one of the dozen resumes the HR staffer draws to interview is largely a matter of luck. Do you really think tech firms look at literally all resumes received? Of course not. Therefore, there is a degree of randomness, hence, 'luck' in even having one's resume reviewed by a human. It is not an insult towards the individuals who are in the positions, but rather a comment on the overall process.

      Your firm, and your approach to reviewing all resumes may very well be different, and if actual technical people review all the resumes, and treat candidates in good faith, then you certainly are to be commended. If you can't find the talent you're looking for in the marketplace, do you provide feedback to the unsuccessful candidates? Maybe a bright hardware/firmware engineer just needs to spend some time brushing up on TCL, or on USB particulars. How will they ever know, if there's a lack of feedback?

    31. Re:Degrees are meaningless by pitzG · · Score: 1

      Just because someone can't answer a non-superficial question on an environment they previously worked with, doesn't mean that they're lying, being dishonest, or not in possession of a skill.

      Lawyers aren't tested in interviews on every last point of jurisprudence or point of law. They're tested on their ability to speak intelligently about an issue at hand, their previous legal experience, and their ability to intelligently research the issues at hand or refer such to other professionals (like the legal question about the GPL that was asked -- such should be referred to an IP attorney, not asked of a non-Law-trained SoftEng.). Does anyone call a tax lawyer who may not be able to recall a particular case of, for instance, tax law, off by heart, a liar? Of course not. Why then is the such treatment apparently acceptable when interviewing technology professionals?

      As long as "engineering" interviews are essentially glorified games of "Trivial Pursuit", employers are going to be dissappointed. Especially on the leading edges of technology, or when interviewing new graduates who may not be able to fall back on a diversity of experience.

    32. Re:Degrees are meaningless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't believe this is true. Or at least, i don't want to. But i keep hearing more and more clients and contacts talk about not being able to find people who can actually do anything.

      And i'm in graphics design and advertising mind you.

    33. Re:Degrees are meaningless by evilviper · · Score: 2

      Use their major and them having a degree as a screening criteria for work-ethic and overall ability to accomplish tasks put to them under a deadline

      Or better yet, don't. Getting a degree doesn't show you have a better work ethic or any other abilities than the general public... It just shows that you're bad at math... Get deep into debt by spending obscene amounts of money for years, rather than EARNING money full time for that same period.

      If you look at job listings, what do they always say? "BS in computer science OR equivalent experience..." So you get a choice between paying a University to give you busywork for years, or going out and earning money that whole time instead... Tough choice, I know.

      For the record, at work I have a Jr employee who has a double masters, has been here several years longer than I have, and yet can barely be trusted to handle the most basic tasks without incident. For work ethic and dependability, I'll take an honorable discharge from the US Army / Navy / Marines any day over a diploma, or just about anything else for that matter.

      Now, if they got their degree in half the normal time... that's something.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    34. Re:Degrees are meaningless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, the universities are to blame. I don't know what they're teaching but it has little to do with reality and doesn't prepare the students to be employable.

      What exactly do you expect? University != tech schools, and a degree != vocational training.

    35. Re:Degrees are meaningless by pitzG · · Score: 1

      You hit the nail right on the head. The tech industry is dominated by two types of people these days, those who abuse engineers, and engineers who are generally too stupid to realize that they're being abused by these sales/finance/'corporate' types.

      There's a lot of domestic people who simply want nothing to do with the dysfunctional business models (like money-losing trash like Groupon, or firms like Google that rely upon every tax avoidance scheme known to man to post their earnings, nevermind the extortion racket inherent in some of their practices). So they either withdraw themselves from the tech sector entirely, or they sit around and do stuff, like writing F/OSS software, that destroys the market for paid software.

    36. Re:Degrees are meaningless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe you should get with the very universities you can't understand the efforts of to assist them in reformulating their academic bases before you start chastising your potential employees for not knowing how to do something you probably can't do but come off conveniently as so due to being some jagoff who smiled his way past his screens (or who knew someone who knew someone)...

      I'll be laughing when you get knocked off your high horse.

    37. Re:Degrees are meaningless by Courageous · · Score: 1

      Go out and actually deploy something on your home network

      As a hirer of engineers, one of the things I like to do is ask what people do with their computers and networks on their own time.

      A surprisingly large number of folks answer "not much".

      Unless that have an established stellar work history (e.g., perhaps now they are married and don't have time to tinker at home any more), I won't hire them. If someone does not love technology, they're really not going to work out to my standard of expectation.

      Some things that are valuable of you are getting out of college, when you want to work in computer sciences: having contributed to or authored open source; having built your own computer from parts; having deployed a custom home network (DD-WRT anyone?), built linux kernel from sources, and so forth. I mean really, if you don't love technology, why are you in this business?

      C//

    38. Re:Degrees are meaningless by Caerdwyn · · Score: 1

      You know, I think I've figured out why you're having trouble getting a job.

      --
      Everybody gets what the majority deserves.
    39. Re:Degrees are meaningless by sdguero · · Score: 1

      We hired a new grad for one of the positions we filled. He is from Beijing and graduated from Indianna University. Only one of the positions was Jr level enough to do that

      Um yes, you need to live here to work here, cause you have too, you know, go into the office sometimes for meetings, get hands on in the lab, and like be part of a team of people that work together to get stuff done (poor team integration is a common trait in the people we have been talking too, engineers seem to think they can be loners, or naysayers, and still do their jobs well. That isn't the case on our team.).

      If the last time you programmed in a language that a dev position is hiring for was 15 years ago, you probably aren't qualified. I recommend doing some serious homework pre-interview if that's the case. If you can learn it in a few days, prove it by getting prepared before the interview. That's the best advice I can give...

    40. Re:Degrees are meaningless by sdguero · · Score: 1

      I'd have multiple people look at your resume. People with engineering jobs like the one you are trying to get. It can be a humbling experience (trust me, I know) and you don't have to necessarily take all their advice but it can make a huge difference.

    41. Re:Degrees are meaningless by sdguero · · Score: 1

      Heh. You'd be surprised how many people with CS degrees don't know what standard deviation means. I know I was after the first few interviews!

    42. Re:Degrees are meaningless by sdguero · · Score: 1

      Indeed.

    43. Re:Degrees are meaningless by sdguero · · Score: 1
    44. Re:Degrees are meaningless by pitzG · · Score: 1

      I've done all that stuff. My name can even be found on various Linux Kernel mailing lists and in newsgroups discussing some fairly technical topics and providing input on certain bug-related issues related to the Kernel. Still doesn't get me the 'time of day' from employers.

    45. Re:Degrees are meaningless by Courageous · · Score: 1

      Are you picky about where you're willing to work? By and large I've found a lack of good candidates is my primary hiring problem. The last round of job reqs I put out didn't even get that many responses. Anyway, high unemployment rates are a drag. Consider:

      You go to school and at that school there are 13 guys for every 10 girls. Odds are 13:10, right? Not so fast. Suppose that 9 of the girls are already hooked up with 9 of the guys. That leaves 4 guys to compete for 1 girl. That's some seriously unfriendly dating math there. And employment is a bit like that, unfortunately.

      Anyway, if you have a resume, I'll be happy to give you pointers.

    46. Re:Degrees are meaningless by pitzG · · Score: 1

      Yup, sounds like the calculus faced in the contemporary market.

      Google may have 10,000 very qualified engineers applying for their positions, sending in application each. But if they receive 1,000,000 applications in total, and only pull 10,000 of those applications out of the pile for human review -- they will come to the erroneous conclusion that there are only 100 very qualified engineers available in the marketplace. Hence, the cries of such firms, "we can't find qualified workers", or "the universities suck".

      Worse, the very qualified engineers tend to not be the sort of types that will send out enormous numbers of applications. So the chances of firms, such as Google, even seeing their resumes, are substantially less.

    47. Re:Degrees are meaningless by pitzG · · Score: 1

      What are you talking about?

      You really want your programmers to pretend that they have the knowledge to interpret legal contracts and license agreements?

      Did you know that the deletion or alteration of even a line or two in the GPL license can materially alter the nature of the license and your ability to use or not use the code in the product?

      A good software developer defers issues of contract and license interpretation to qualified legal counsel.

      As I told you, if you're having any trouble hiring people, maybe stop playing Trivial Pursuit with them on interviews and start trusting them. An attitude of cynicism isn't going to get you very far in business or in life generally.

    48. Re:Degrees are meaningless by pitzG · · Score: 1

      Why not try treating the applicants like professionals, instead of demanding performance of in-depth technical skills during interviews?

      The problem, at least from my perspective, is that employers will stick a dozen different languages and tech skills on their job description, and then pick one in particular to test on. How do I really know which one of those dozen to brush up on, if all I have is the job description infront of me? Why can't you just take my word for it, in combination with verifiable credentials like a CS degree, certain prior work experience, personal projects, etc.?

      As I said earlier, no lawyer is asked during an interview to discuss, in depth, a particular case. They're hired based on their credentials, their aptitude, and their past experience. We're talking about a field here that is all about learning, and the ability to acquire new skills, after all, because nobody will have the entirety of the specific skills required for a business unless they've actually worked in it.

    49. Re:Degrees are meaningless by Courageous · · Score: 1

      For my reqs, I see all the apps, except the "obviously disqualified," which excludes non-citizens, and non-technical, and some times, no degree. I don't see that many apps. There really aren't that many applicants. The practice is Data Center Engineering; the experience required a tawdry list of enterprise labels (Cisco certs "or equivalent experience, including with a competing vendor," EMC, NetApp, Linux and Windows operating systems, and so forth). Contrary to how you it, there's not a flood of resumes. This is also true (although is less true) for our programming jobs.

      Google would be a special case. That's almost like trying to get a date with the prettiest girl in the school, except it's worse, because she's also narcissistic and conceited.

    50. Re:Degrees are meaningless by pitzG · · Score: 1

      Demanding Cisco technican certificates of an engineer might pose a problem. Normally Cisco certificates would be acquired by a technician, not by an engineer.

      Maybe over-reliance on vendor certification keywords is your problem? I know that I won't bother to apply to jobs that list/demand every vendor certification known to man, because that shows me the firm is obsessed with vendor technician certifications, not actual engineering credentials, knowledge, skills, or aptitude.

      With firms not paying for much training these days, and the unemployeds not having huge money to spend on vendor certifications -- firms that insist on looking for guys with a lot of them, instead of just looking for bright, smart people with good aptitude are going to experience problems.

    51. Re:Degrees are meaningless by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      Your sig says it all. Hack up a coping mechanism, and hope you manage to leave something useful for the world, put one in for all us burnouts, this useless (and depressed if judging by choice of words) druggie doesn't know if he's going to live to 25, let alone anything else. I think it has to do with ever so suckier parenting these last generations, leaving scarred and cynical children, unable to give or accept emotional care. Without it, it's plenty hard to feel a push do to anything with your life if no one appreciates it (god knows mom and dad only ever cared about being "normal"). Put one in for me soldier, I know I'm just a random dude on the internet, but just keep going, when I die, I want to know I amounted to more than worm food, even if my worth is limited to this post. Lots of hugs (that no one would accept), a random suicidal stoner

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
    52. Re:Degrees are meaningless by Courageous · · Score: 1

      Nope. That's not the problem.We generally open tri level reqs: junior/college, medium, senior. They're written differently. The junior reqs never mention anything like certs.

      We often don't get that many junior reqs when they're open, either.

      The high level reqs always state clearly "or equivalent working experience, with similar product form other vendors" or similar such words. For the enterprise switching gear, you really need that. One small mistake can cripple a whole data center. Literally. It is that bad.

      As for our junior reqs, they read like this:

      We are seeking a systems engineer to work in a high-visibility data
      center technologies group that researches, designs, and tests
      large-scale compute infrastructure and virtualization solutions. The
      engineer should be highly self-motivated, and quickly work around
      roadblocks. Job duties will be as follows:

                    Configure and test new enterprise computing infrastructure
      technologies (e.g., enterprise storage, networking, virtualization,
      operating systems, clustering techniques, identity management
      systems). Timely and thorough documentation required.
                    Provide design services in the form of conceptual documents (Power
      Point) and design artifacts.

      Skills
                    Familiarity with Linux, Windows, and/or Unix Systems; command line
      experience REQUIRED
                    Familiarity with virtualization technology such as VMware, open
      source Xen/KVM, or other is preferred, but not required
                    Familiarity with Linux and Windows scripting
                    Download, configure, recompile and install open source packages

      You would think a req like that would flood us with so many resumes that it would be impossible to read them all, the way you tell it. Instead, I might get about 10/month (at best).

      Anyway, obviously not stated in the req is that if the phone interview finds them not a tinkerer, they are out. If they are a more senior applicant, there are other requirements (a different req).

      C//

    53. Re:Degrees are meaningless by pitzG · · Score: 1

      Okay, if I could find your job req on the Internet, then I'd like to send you my resume. Unless your job description was merely hypothetical. That looks extremely reasonable. I hope I haven't annoyed you, but I'll be firing you a msg (I'm new to this Slashdot stuff, so I don't know if there's a way of doing such though!).

    54. Re:Degrees are meaningless by pitzG · · Score: 1

      Hmmm. My PGP public key is at:

      http://pastebin.com/x57SCXNq

      You can use this if you want to send me the name of your company, so I can fire my resume in/contact you/whatever, without having everyone on Slashdot knowing your identity.

      Thanks..

    55. Re:Degrees are meaningless by Courageous · · Score: 1

      Says unknown pastebin. This job is in Defense, which I neglected to state previously, which would expose you to security questions about 1/3rd the population shy away from. If, however, that doesn't scare you, try sending you key again and I will encrypt you a link.

    56. Re:Degrees are meaningless by pieisgood · · Score: 1

      Alright I applied for an internship. Hoping this works out haha.

      --
      Eat sleep die
    57. Re:Degrees are meaningless by strikethree · · Score: 1

      What company do you work for? I am reasonably competent and better than average at solving problems. I am looking to change my status quo and might be interested in applying. :)

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
  36. Nuclear power and is a shit load of natural gas US by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    Nuclear power and is a shit load of natural gas in the US

  37. You're putting the cart before the horse by Travoltus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What is the point of cracking open a science textbook when you are going to be competing with people in Asia who can produce the same level of genius for pennies on the dollar?

    I don't care what you can learn here in America, someone in China can learn the same thing and apply that knowledge for far lower wages than you.

    These people are willing to live in cages. Literally. Look.
    http://www.weirdasianews.com/2009/11/21/hong-kong-citizens-living-cages-literally/

    --
    --- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
    1. Re:You're putting the cart before the horse by s73v3r · · Score: 2

      Well, there is that whole "Pursuit of Knowledge" thing. And while things might be on the move, they haven't left yet.

    2. Re:You're putting the cart before the horse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Er, those aren't engineers. Most engineers in China do pretty well, relatively speaking.

      This is like saying "Look, people in the US are willing to live in cardboard boxes!"

    3. Re:You're putting the cart before the horse by ackthpt · · Score: 3, Informative

      What is the point of cracking open a science textbook when you are going to be competing with people in Asia who can produce the same level of genius for pennies on the dollar?

      I don't care what you can learn here in America, someone in China can learn the same thing and apply that knowledge for far lower wages than you.

      These people are willing to live in cages. Literally. Look.
      http://www.weirdasianews.com/2009/11/21/hong-kong-citizens-living-cages-literally/

      There is a difference between knowning the maths and being clever enough to create something new out of them. This is the difference between Reseach & Development worker bees (who pretty much just do as they are told) and someone who says, "Hey, I could create a whole new product/service with this knowledge I've acquired!" (We'll be hearing, next, how all the innovation is leaving the US, too, because some people in Asia aren't simply content to perform repetitive analysis and form-filling. Good on them, I say.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    4. Re:You're putting the cart before the horse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Hell yeah. The article said it was striking that this was happening but honestly it takes a fool not to be able to see western engineers are under valued. If your smart enough to get through an engineering degree (and believe me it isn't easy) you can ace a lot of other degrees and end up with a cushy high paying job with a big office. The corporate world needs to recognize this and start making them super stars like doctors and lawyers, if they want more american engineers that is.

    5. Re:You're putting the cart before the horse by Ichijo · · Score: 1

      Outsourcing is not quite as cheap as it seems. Miscommunications and the wrong incentives (e.g. LOC per day) often result in a lot of rework.

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    6. Re:You're putting the cart before the horse by FrankHS · · Score: 1

      What is the point of cracking open a science textbook when you are going to be competing with people in Asia who can produce the same level of genius for pennies on the dollar?

      I don't care what you can learn here in America, someone in China can learn the same thing and apply that knowledge for far lower wages than you.

      These people are willing to live in cages. Literally. Look.
      http://www.weirdasianews.com/2009/11/21/hong-kong-citizens-living-cages-literally/

      The point is that if you have knowledge you will be way ahead of those that do not! Not all engineering jobs can or will be sent overseas. There is plenty of opportunity for intelligent engineers and techs here in the U.S.

      There are fewer good choices for the uneducated.

    7. Re:You're putting the cart before the horse by DigiShaman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      America, EU, and the rest of the "West" is currently caught up in a perfect storm. The problem is a culmination of many things that's leading us into stagflation.

      1. The West is a devloped nation compared to the East's status of developing. They need a high count of engineers at the local level whom can also sell their work and services cheaper to Western nations. So the West doesn't need much in the way of infrastructure and manufacturing construction. When we do, it gets outsourced anyways.

      2. Post WW2 baby boomers are retiring and taking their knowledge to the grave with them. They're also becoming a net drain on society instead of producers. Not that they don't deserve the payback, just stating a logical fact.

      3. Our national debt is rising while wages are dropping. Stagflation will force us into default.

      It will be quite some time spanning a generation or two before global economic equilibrium retains and grows our local industries and pull us out of high employment. It's a waiting game now. The East is now in control of the direction of global human development. Either way, the American culture as I knew it in the 80's and 90's will be radically different from now on. Seeing our zenith come and go in my lifetime is depressing to say the least.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    8. Re:You're putting the cart before the horse by hokeyru · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The real problem is that our modern economy most richly rewards bankers and lawyers.

    9. Re:You're putting the cart before the horse by ProfBooty · · Score: 3

      It is pretty wacky that our economy rewards those who don't actually create, more so than those who do. It doesn't seem like a formula for long term success.

      --
      Bring back the old version of slashdot.
    10. Re:You're putting the cart before the horse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A cage is handy is you want to be able to lock your shit up.
      Beats living under a bridge.

    11. Re:You're putting the cart before the horse by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 2

      Interesting link. Here is a sci-fi story about even-cheaper-than-foreign-labor AI and robotics leading to unemployed US Americans ending up in "Terrafoam" cages: http://marshallbrain.com/manna1.htm

      A great essay by Philip Greenspun on why US Americans, especially women, avoid science:
      http://philip.greenspun.com/careers/women-in-science
      "Summers was deservedly castigated, but not for the right reasons. He claimed to be giving a comprehensive list of reasons why there weren't more women reaching the top jobs in the sciences. Yet Summers, an economist, left one out: Adjusted for IQ, quantitative skills, and working hours, jobs in science are the lowest paid in the United States."

      Posts I made to the p2presearch list concerning education (it would take years to read through all the embedded links on Gatto, Holt, Goodstein, Schmidt, Honigman, Lewellyn, etc.):

      * [p2p-research] College Daze links (was Re: : FlossedBk, "Free/Libre and Open Source Solutions for Education")

      * [p2p-research] The Higher Educational Bubble Continues to Grow

      * [p2p-research] Rebutting Communique from an Absent Future (was Re: Information on student protests)

      --
      A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
    12. Re:You're putting the cart before the horse by iserlohn · · Score: 1

      Most Hong Kongers may be Chinese, but by no mean is Hong Kong reflective of Mainland China. In fact, it's a corporatist/capitalist regime that values monetary wealth beyond all else (the history behind this is too long to mention in a /. post). In fact the GINA (income disparity) coeffiecient for Hong Kong is worse than the mainland, with a small number of very very rich individuals, where the GDP per capita is the second-highest in the far-east (only behind Japan due to the strong Yen). Then you have these poor people living in high-rise slums.. it's sad.

      On the other hand, Hong Kong also leads the world pretty much in life expectancy, as there is universal healthcare supplied based on a system similar to the NHS (due to the British colonial influence) for emergency and hospital care, but with a larger private sector and private GPs/family doctors providing various frontline services.

    13. Re:You're putting the cart before the horse by artor3 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The only reason that's true is because of our veneration of the Most Holy Lord, Our God, The Dollar.

      Jobs and technology are being shipped overseas. Anyone with a brain can see where this road leads, but the people walking us down that path don't give a shit, because they'll retire and live like kings before we get there.

      Those same robber barons are simultaneously fighting tooth and nail for economic policies that favor the rich. Median wages have stagnated for decades while theirs have quadrupled. If the new wealth had been divided more equitably, median wages would have gone up ~33% since 1980 (that's post inflation).

      And in order for those robber barons to win the fight, they need hordes of easily manipulated people to vote their way. So they make sure that their media puppets and pocket politicians create plenty of wedge issues designed to make Americans despise one another, and that includes the vilification of intellectuals (now a pejorative in the US).

      So you're left with a populace that is poor, anti-intellectual, and so desperate for employment that they'll abandon all the workers' rights that their parents and grandparents won for them.

      The robber barons are a cancer on the nation. They're killing us. They have been for 30 years, and within another 30 the deed will be done.

    14. Re:You're putting the cart before the horse by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      I think you missed the part I mentioned with regards to a financial global equilibrium. At least comparatively to what we have now. The valuation of national currencies are lopsided. While people are arguing about trickle-up vs. trickle-down policies this election, the real elephant in the room is that we are in the midst of a trickle-out. We are hemoraging national wealth! Good news is that this is not sustainable. Eventually it will cost just the same if not more to outsource our labor and manufacturing overseas. How long it will take before we get to that point is anyone's guess. But it will happen like a force of nature. At that point, the robber barons will no longer have a self sustaining advantage. Let them eat each other alive.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    15. Re:You're putting the cart before the horse by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 0

      Ever had the thought that the contempt that intellectuals hold the rest of us in might be the cause of some of the bad feelings? How many intellectuals do you know who consider ordinary Americans to be 'dumbfucks'? What would you think about someone who considered you to be a dumbfuck?

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    16. Re:You're putting the cart before the horse by dkf · · Score: 1

      I think you missed the part I mentioned with regards to a financial global equilibrium.

      That's not as important as the GP's point. It's also more complex because economics isn't a zero-sum game overall (and it's difficult to measure because standard indicators tend to be coupled to floating things like currencies, and inflation — the key correction factor — is tricky to measure because the degree to which people value things changes over time too). I believe/suspect that the bad side of the current slump in western economies is that it is reducing the size of the real economy in those countries; the extent to which this is happening is hard to say for sure because of the number of confounding factors, and I have no idea whether this is counterbalanced by growth in the rest of the world. (Again, problems result from things like sentiment-based valuations, etc.)

      That said, if we're talking revolution then lynching the robber barons and seizing their assets is a good start. With that done, it might not be necessary to do too much about the pack of stooges in official politics. (Ah, if only I believed that a revolution would stop there, I'd be for it. I guess I'm too cynical.)

      --
      "Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
    17. Re:You're putting the cart before the horse by Ed+Bugg · · Score: 1

      The only reason that's true is because of our veneration of the Most Holy Lord, Our God, The Dollar.

      ...

      So you're left with a populace that is poor, anti-intellectual, and so desperate for employment that they'll abandon all the workers' rights that their parents and grandparents won for them.

      Your close but then you go off into the wrong direction. There's no reason why a company needs to do R&D when they can just come up with that one thing and patient it, or just buy a few patients and sit on them. Then rake in the royalties for years to come. Why divert all that money from the stock holders when the nest egg will be pumping out golden eggs.

      I think that if a govt. wanted to really push businesses to start really developing, they need to revamp the patient system to limit the amount of time a company has exclusive access (which granted will start driving companies away) and then add economic incentive's for developing new tech.

      --
      -- Ed Bugg --You have freedom of choice, but not of consequences.--
    18. Re:You're putting the cart before the horse by Vitriol+Angst · · Score: 1

      It's simpler than that;
      Educating engineers in this country requires SOMEONE to pay. Only people who don't need money right away can survive a 1 year internship to "sacrifice for opportunity."

      Since the Chinese engineer was educated on someone else's dime, he's the perfect "lowest cost input" for a globalist. The problem is that he's eventually going to take this knowledge and first hand experience back to his/her own country -- since the US is less tolerant now and not as attractive a become of hope that makes people want to stay.

      China's economy is doing everything the OPPOSITE of what our Globalist said to do; it pays for a lot of social things, it does government stimulus projects (but sure, they need the roads and dams), and it has very high tariffs on imports.

      The corporations that sold us the concept of "high efficiency and global competitiveness" will either move to China or be replaced by a start-up created by someone entrepreneurial that they trained instead of an American.

      America will be left with a generation of under-educated, or worse; expensively educated on their own dime people who have to pay off the debts the companies left when they shipped the assets and ownership but left the cost of the leveraged buyouts. It's not as bad as you put it -- it's going to be worse. This is like allowing a private company to own the rights to your sports team after your taxes paid the bill for the stadium they ran into the ground and never paid for. The Jersey fan is either going to pick up a new sport or move to Denver.

      --
      >>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
    19. Re:You're putting the cart before the horse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Robber barons ARE killing us... but there's hope! In another 30 years they will all be retiring to some tax haven. Maybe in an effort to avoid taxes, they'll renounce their US citizenship... and they we can get on with the business of rebuilding America. Except we'll be as poor and have as bad of infrastructure as Britain or France in 1947.

    20. Re:You're putting the cart before the horse by HiThere · · Score: 1

      What you should be hearing NOW is that much invention has already left the country.

      If people don't study STEM because the rewards are too low (which they are) and the costs are too high (which they are) then they aren't being stupid, they're being smart. Those who study STEM anyway are just those compulsively drawn to it, like I am. This doesn't make me think it was a smart choice, just the only one I could take, because that's where my interests lay. Fortunately, I was able to get through college without taking out student loans. That would be a lot more difficult this year, or last.

      Then they're the question of public universities giving preference to foreign students. They do, and they do it not because of qualifications, but because they pay a much higher tuition. The proportion of the age quartile of the population that the universities can serve has also declined, as the population has grown faster than the universities. (This could be local, but it's true locally.)

      So there are LOTS of reasons why the US share of R&D is declining. Secrecy and patent law are other reasons. There are more.

      Very few of the reasons have to do with "Orientals are more willing to work harder for less money". That's true, and it *is* a factor, but it's not a major factor when compared with the other ones. Lead researchers everywhere tend to work harder than is optimal for best results, because they are driven by internal prodding. But you won't get those "lead researchers" without training a large population to be qualified researchers, because you can't spot them ahead of time. And if most of the people you train as researchers can't get a job that repays them for the time and effort that they put into becoming so trained, then they won't pay to get trained. (Note here that the coin under consideration is not entirely monetary. Time and effort are also costs.)

      The US has long been profoundly anti-intellectual. So much so that nearly half the populace would have preferred supporting the axis prior to WWII. That changed when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, but if they hadn't Rooseveldt might not have been able to get the country to support Britain. (And he could have been impeached for breaking the law [specifically the "lend-lease law"], which he did by covertly supplying arms to Britain against the express wish of Congress.) This only changed briefly for a few years after Sputnik. But people en-mass today don't seem to be as alert to the danger signals. This may have to do with the presidential response. Kennedy immediately proclaimed that we needed to do better, and was seconded it this by Johnson, who pushed just as hard for "The Great Society". Currently the presidents have ignored the threat. I doubt that they don't see it, but they'd rather ignore it than try to inspire people, and propose bold plans of action. There may be other reasons, having to do with the aging of the population. But what it comes down to is "downplay the problem, or ignore it if possible". And it doesn't appear to matter whether one is talking about a Democrat or a Republican. Neither is willing to even admit that there's a serious problem.

      If society doesn't reward study and hard work, then intelligent people who aren't obsessive will do something else that will receive a better reward. I happen to be one of the obsessive ones, but this is a minority. (For that matter, look at all the physicists that became quants. Even after you've put in the time and effort in a STEM field, you may find that it pays better to do something else.)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    21. Re:You're putting the cart before the horse by khallow · · Score: 1

      It's worth noting that US research probably could be done for about an order of magnitude less as well. A bit of inefficiency is introduced from the way we fund scientific research via public funds.

    22. Re:You're putting the cart before the horse by Asklepius+M.D. · · Score: 1

      Engineering student here. Put most engineers in a room and you'll hear us slamming each other's education and ideas all the time. Heck, hang out long enough and you'll hear us admit our own stupidity equally often. The difference is that we have to be able to accept a valid counterposition without taking it personally. We deal with the physical world. If we're wrong, the bridge falls down, the building collapses, or some poor schmuck gets electrocuted. We understand that not everyone has either the inclination or the ability to grind through a rigorous STEM curriculum. Our disdain is reserved for those who refuse to admit they are wrong, refuse to learn from mistakes, and who are absurdly proud of their cultivated ignorance. What would I think about someone who considered me a dumbfuck? Happens all the time.....I'll listen to their position, define my own position, test their reasoning (this is what most laymen consider arrogance), and if their logic holds up, will say "Yep, you're right, I"m a dumbfuck". Of course, having admitted this and learned from the experience, I will no longer be a dumbfuck. Unfortunately too many people would rather feel good than say "I am wrong." I sincerely hope I never have to drive across a bridge designed by someone who can't admit to and correct a flaw because it makes them feel inferior.

      Food for thought: “Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”
        Isaac Asimov

      --
      He who would be a man, must be a nonconformist. -- Emerson
    23. Re:You're putting the cart before the horse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Solution: life extension R&D being done right here in California by the likes of SENS foundations and the Mprize foundations (look up aubrey de Grey, his book: ending aging and the book: 100 Plus: How the Coming Age of Longevity Will Change Everything, From Careers and Relationships to Family and Faith by Sonia Arrison). Also check the sites: http://www.mprize.org http://www.sens.org and http://www.fightaging.org for good introductions and educational intro into the current state of aging research, the breakthroughs happening now and in the near future.

      aubrey estimates that, 1 billion spent over the next 10 years could reverse aging in a mouse model, with humans shortly thereafter....the key is to develop science and technologies that repair the ongowing damage of aging, plus develop methods of repairing exsisting damage an older person already has.....the thing is, we as a species, have our priorities on wasting VAST amounts of money on developing exspensive and destructive war machines and wasting even more money mantaining these vast war manchines and arimes and then because of these giant constructs, are forced into waging endless wars because we are essentially a warrior society (I live in Canada, our current conservative priminister (Harper) wants us to become a warrior society, like the US which he admires because of its giant war machine, policies etc). Funny thing we humans, we are now getting the sciences of computer driven nanotech/biotech where we could easily understand and fix the biotech/nanotech processes of aging through eventually computer driven nanobots etc, yet we spend 1 billion (world-wide) on war R&D and building vast war machines that dictators like Hitler would have never dreamed off....yet if we were to employ just a fraction of our scentists/engineers/technicians/dreamers and artists etc, we could cure all diseases, aging and also, have nanomanufacturing/recycling of all existing thing we currently manufacture!!!!!

    24. Re:You're putting the cart before the horse by chihowa · · Score: 1

      Ever had the thought that the contempt that intellectuals hold the rest of us in might be the cause of some of the bad feelings? How many intellectuals do you know who consider ordinary Americans to be 'dumbfucks'? What would you think about someone who considered you to be a dumbfuck?

      Most of the population really are 'dumbfucks', but it's not contempt you're seeing. It's frustration. Most of the population are content making decisions, both big and small, based on emotional feelings rather than rational reasoning. Emotions are easily, and regularly, manipulated and can have huge society-wide consequences. The common man is treated like a sheep because he acts like a sheep. And because his every other action solely benefits the [shepherds?|wolves?], everyone else gets dragged down with him. This is frustrating, and watching people make the same stupid mistakes over and over boggles the mind.

      --
      If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
  38. and? by chronoglass · · Score: 1

    Really, we are a nation that wants a "free market" well.. unless it's working against us.
    I commend them for taking advantage.

    We don't need laws, or restrictions, or anything other than a reality check for the business majors. Supply and demand. We demanded high paying cush jobs without much on the requirements sides other than "a degree" regardless of what it was. So we got em.. specialized jobs went elsewhere, we were the "big picture" thinkers, don't talk to me about the pump being backwards, there are people for that.

    I've always noticed it in corporate america.. but it's been slamming me in my face more and more as I discover to be considered "good" at my job, I need to properly explain what something does, and direct questions about "how it does it" to people who will explain the "how", rather than learn the "how" myself.. if I learn/do it for myself.. I have failed, and probably won't be getting the next project I request.

  39. Face it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Be prepared to be ruled by GOOKS, JEEVES and TERRORISTS. Once the last alcohol metabolizing xanthochroid is eliminated from the species, all will be well, all you who bear PLAQUES ON THE WALL!

    Waste them mod points for the sake of being seen "doing the right thing"

    1. Re:Face it by Bucky24 · · Score: 1

      xanthochroid

      I learned a new word today!

      --
      All the world's a CPU, and all the men and women merely AI agents
  40. National borders are artificial? by Travoltus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Try moving to China to get a job. I dare you. Good luck with that. Then come back and tell me how artificial those borders are.

    --
    --- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
    1. Re:National borders are artificial? by Gadget_Guy · · Score: 2

      Try moving to China to get a job. I dare you. Good luck with that. Then come back and tell me how artificial those borders are.

      Wow! That's a lot of research to do for a slashdot post.

      But what is your point? That you cannot emmigrate to China? China has several types of visas that can be used for this purpose: short term visas for business (6 months, although this can actually be higher if you are coming from the US!), study visas and of course permanent immigration visas. Yes, you do have to show that you have legitimate business or a job that awaits you, but what country does not have some stipulation like this?

    2. Re:National borders are artificial? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can get whatever visa you want in china whenever you want. You just have to bribe the right person, which is the socially accepted norm.

    3. Re:National borders are artificial? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Try moving to China to get a job. I dare you. Good luck with that. Then come back and tell me how artificial those borders are.

      I'm not saying the border is not real, I'm saying it's artificial. Do you understand the distinction?

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    4. Re:National borders are artificial? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Are you a moron? There's literally tons of American expats living and working in China these days.

    5. Re:National borders are artificial? by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      I thought about moving to Shanghai with my wife to work. But such a decision should never be taken lightly. Sure, the cost of living will be better. But with whatever money you have left over to save in a bank account, will it be enough to move back to America assuming you wanted too in the future? You might find yourself with little or no retirement savings when deciding to come back. Being stuck in a financial rut does not seem appealing to me.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    6. Re:National borders are artificial? by walterbyrd · · Score: 5, Funny

      There's literally tons of American expats living and working in China these days.

      Well, yeah, but since they're Americans, that's only about a dozen people.

    7. Re:National borders are artificial? by Gadget_Guy · · Score: 1

      You can get whatever visa you want in china whenever you want. You just have to bribe the right person, which is the socially accepted norm.

      Really? Are you saying that bribery is the only way to get a visa in China? Is that based on your experience or did you just have a guess? Or maybe you read some other Anonymous Coward say the same thing, with the same lack of evidence. It seems to me that you have just replaced the first unfounded assumption that China would not allow people to emmigrate to their country with another assumption that you cannot do emmigrate without engaging in a bit of payola.

      As soon as someone mentions China, people come out of the woodwork to make every bad claim that they can think of - even if it is not relevant to the topic in hand or even true. Don't get me wrong, there is a lot to criticize about China, but that doesn't mean that we should have to go through the same tedious list of reasons why we all hate the country on each /. story.

    8. Re:National borders are artificial? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I think you seriously underestimate the number of American expats living and working abroad, in China and other countries too (particularly middle-eastern countries like Saudi Arabia and UAE).

    9. Re:National borders are artificial? by pcolson · · Score: 1

      I think you seriously overestimate the relevance of weight when trying to describe the number of people living and working abroad.

    10. Re:National borders are artificial? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Well played, sir.

    11. Re:National borders are artificial? by JP205 · · Score: 1

      Are you a moron? There's literally tons of American expats living and working in China these days.

      So... at least 4000 pounds then? Roughly more than 25 "expats"?

    12. Re:National borders are artificial? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, yeah, but since they're Americans, that's only about a dozen people.

      That's a bit of a generalization. Only some Americans are as large as a dozen people. The average is probably more like 5.

  41. Train the US citizens instead, thwart offshoring. by sethstorm · · Score: 2

    If your own citizens are inept, uneducated and incapable of doing the work required, companies have to fill the skilled positions somehow

    Then you train said people to correct for such deficiencies - should they really exist. Invoking the words global, competition and skilled are just code words for expressing contempt towards US citizens.

    Having a "made in the US" label on every employee might sound cool to America in times of high unemployment but it would kill businesses or force them overseas. And that means losing even more jobs, not to mention both corporate and income revenue for the government.

    Yet you underestimate the power of the US Government and its ability to make an overseas move unprofitably painful. Or if they wish to prevent an overseas arm from trying to make a transplant.

    Do you really love this country, or do you have some wish to have the US bow before the world?

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  42. Dirty Manufacturing by overshoot · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why would we want dirty manufacturing and industry in the US??

    Better that we have lawyers and doctors and movie directors and investment bankers and graphics artists and social workers and compliance officers and other good clean people like that.

    What makes you think that the world wants to buy the services of our lawyers? Or the doctors? Are you expecting the lawyers to sue the world to support the movie directors, even when the movies are made overseas (to save costs, if nothing else)?

    American investment bankers are not in great demand either lately. The world seems to value Japanese graphics artists more than American ones. The Government is cutting back on the social workers -- we need to save money. The rest of the world doesn't seem to want American compliance officers, either.

    However, the rest of the world does pay for American coal. We have the largest proven coal reserves on the planet, and if we don't manufacture finished goods to ship overseas to pay for our imports we'll just have to export coal. Well, that and cut our standard of living back to the level that we can afford as a country whose primary enterprise is digging holes in the ground.

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
    1. Re:Dirty Manufacturing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What makes you think that the world wants to buy the services of our lawyers? Or the doctors?

      US exports of private services exceed a half trillion dollars, and account for nearly one third of all US exports of goods and services. Growth in exports of services has outpaced the rise in imports. The US trade surplus in services rose to a total of $168.0 billion in 2010. The surplus has grown quickly since 2003, rising $101.2 billion.

      US exports of private services amounted to $526.6 billion in 2010, an increase of 8.8% from 2009. US service exports have grown an average of 9.2% per year since 1992.

  43. Prison Jobs by JSBiff · · Score: 1

    We can be prison guards, drive armored vehicles to transport prisoners, work building more prisons, cook food for the prisoners. There'll be plenty of jobs. Relax.

  44. wrong about law school. by decora · · Score: 1

    there are a lot of law school graduates who are overwhelmed with debt and cannot find a job. a lot of their work has been computerized and a lot of them wind up being 'click monkeys' making barely enough to ever pay back their loans.

    1. Re:wrong about law school. by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 1
      --
      A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
    2. Re:wrong about law school. by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 1

      Also, to go with my other post: http://www.lawyerswithdepression.com/

      http://www.google.com/search?q=lawyers+with+depression
      "About 20,200,000 results (0.10 seconds)"

      That said, there are a lot of lawyers out there fighting the good fight, building bridges between people, and doing the right thing.

      --
      A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
  45. Engineering, then research, follows manufacturing by Animats · · Score: 1

    After engineering something, then it has to be manufactured. This works better if the engineers are near the production facility. American industry used to know this.

    Who in the US studies production engineering today? How many people here even know what it is?

  46. Where they go, the US Gov't is ahead of them. by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    If these companies want to be a thorn in the side of the US and its citizens, the US Government can make a case to not flee.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
    1. Re:Where they go, the US Gov't is ahead of them. by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      No. We USED to be able to do that. Not any more. Companies like Dell, IBM and GE are simply soaking America, while gutting it from inside. It would be better for America to quit buying their products, since even in China, they require locally produced goods. And as odd as it sounds, I understand China's position. They are in a cold with the west and are using our laws as well as buying politicians (such as my congressman; Coffman), to destroy us from within. Hell, the manchurian candidate is NOT a president. It is a lot of CONgress. Much easier to get through. And with politicians that push for us to buy from China, or others that push for us to outsource to China, or others that push tax cuts that pretty much drive outsourcing to China, well, China has their rewards.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    2. Re:Where they go, the US Gov't is ahead of them. by sethstorm · · Score: 1

      Thankfully mine aren't on China's side.

      Sen. Sherrod Brown(D) - who has been quite the firebrand when it comes to things like China and trade

      Rep. Mike Turner(R) - his focus being national defense, as well as making sure Wright-Patterson AFB (as well as the associated contractor work) exists.

      --
      Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  47. Not Just Education. . . by JSBiff · · Score: 1

    Education is certainly a big concern, but it's also other things. We have lost a commitment to leadership in R&D in America. We've basically *voluntarily* shutdown some important research in America.

    As an example, from the 50's to the 90's there was a LOT of research going on in advanced nuclear reactor designs. Molten Salt Reactors, Liquid Metal Breeder Reactors, Pebble Bed Reactors, etc. We basically shut all that down, and when we were frustratingly close to having some practical, useable designs for truly "next generation" reactors.

    They're doing this because they have to live with the problems of coal plant pollution every day (people are *always* complaining about air quality problems in China) and they also face energy constraints on their economy the same as the U.S. They know the coal will only last them so long, and they need something else when the coal starts to get scarce.

    Now, China is leading the world on advanced reactor R&D. They're working on MSRs, Pebble Beds, and I think LMBRs too). In 20 years, we'll all be buying our meltdown-proof 4th Gen reactors from China. More than that, China will be selling small reactors to everyone - developing nations that just want a 100-200MW plant, developed nations that need many GWs of power.

    I'm pretty sure Nuclear is not the only area of R&D where this is true. Since much of the manufacturing has moved to China, I believe much of the manufacturing R&D has moved to China too.

  48. Expected by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What else would you expect? We have a dictator in the White House that just killed the possiblity for over 20,000 more jobs making an oil pipeline. They have fought Boeing tooth and nail to prevent them from opening a new plant in the Carolinas. Meanwhile, they are taking literally billions from those who are able to make anything and hand them to campaign donors who open solar companies to get the billions and suddenly go bankrupt the second they get the "loans".

    As long as the DNC thinks its ok to punish success and reward failures in such a spectacular fashion you would have to be a moron to put heavy investment into the US at this point (Unless you helped Obama get elected and he is going to pay you back with taxpayer money)

    I understand you /.ers are all liberals and the DNC can do no wrong, but how much purposeful destruction of the economy do you have to witness before you will even begin to question it?

  49. Surprised? by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    All of the manufacturing has moved to China because of the numerous cheats that China employs. As such, it is better to have engineering close by manufacturing. Yet, so few in the USA seem to understand this.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  50. Re:Train the US citizens instead, thwart offshorin by s73v3r · · Score: 1, Troll

    Do you really love this country, or do you have some wish to have the US bow before the world?

    Quit being an idiot. Pointing out problems does not give any indication as to whether someone doesn't like the country or not.

  51. What a tool u are by WindBourne · · Score: 0

    First, not a single bit of bravery in you. Must be a neo-con. Most of the companies have been moving to China over the last 30 years because of you GD neo-cons. I am not the least bit surprised. With your tax cuts combined with running deficits during good economic times. No doubt that jobs will go.

    You neo-cons are just as cowardly as ever.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  52. Re:Engineering, then research, follows manufacturi by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    A number of ppl still do. The problem is that tuition is slowly being raised, while stipends are being gutted. China then sends their ppl here, but they take American stipends and add their money to it to make it palatable to their citizens. Our politicians FROM BOTH MAJOR PARTIES are destroying America.

    We need ROOT STRIKERS.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  53. they're easily outsourced, too by dltaylor · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If the production (now), design (mostly now), and basic R&D (very soon) are all done in some part of Asia, how long before the shareholders realize that they can temporarily bump the stock price even more by paying some Asians 10% of the compensation that the American executive team is getting?

    1. Re:they're easily outsourced, too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, but you fail to see that a corporate structure is set up like an aristocratic fiefdom from the middle ages... most shareholders have little power, and those that do (by being on the Board of Directors) pay themselves well for being players in the game, and are often executives of other companies.

  54. No, R&D is alive and well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    R&D is alive and well, it just evolved.

    R&D exists to give you something new to sell. Actually being the creator isn't important. Come up with and patent ideas, then sue whoever later builds whatever you thought up, but not until they work the kinks out.

    Wait until a small startup makes something you like, then threaten legal action unless they sell, probably at an unfair price.

    The initial grunt-work to create is a cost for someone else, only the lawyers can do R&D cost-efficiently... in the eyes of those budgeting.

  55. And what do Americans do with advanced degrees? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I went through grad school at Cal Tech in the early 90's. Half of my department went straight to Wall St.

    1. Re:And what do Americans do with advanced degrees? by sd4f · · Score: 1

      I think this is the fundamental problem, engineering, for example, takes a specific sort of person, ie an intelligent one, only because the course material is pretty effective in keeping stupid people from finishing an engineering degree.

      So as a result, they're desirable as workers in other sectors, because they're smart, and if they're desirable they get paid well, everywhere except in engineering

      Anyone who says there's a shortage of engineers is quite stupid, there's a shortage of engineering work, if there was more of it, they'd get paid better, and that would attract more people into it. Getting more engineers in the current situation would only devalue engineering even more, and make more of them look for jobs in banks and finance companies.

      It happens here in australia as well, except for mining sector, which is making a lot of people very wealthy, most engineering work is fairly typical, and there isn't much around, unless you get average wages.

    2. Re:And what do Americans do with advanced degrees? by pitzG · · Score: 1

      There's no shortage of people in engineering, except in extremely specialized fields. Positions receive dozens, sometimes hundreds of resumes.

      Other sectors aren't generally keen to accomodate engineers either, believing that they will demand too much pay, or be retention risks over the long term. Which is unfortunate since engineers are needed heavily in a variety of industries, but simply not hired because of ignorance on the part of the business owners.

  56. you cant spend by nimbius · · Score: 1

    30+ years chiseling away at workers rights, outsourcing skilled trade to other countries, and eviscerating education funding only to reflect upon your work and remark, "gosh, people arent that smart and we dont do much with technology but consume it"

    you chose it as a model of hypercapitalism. when we agreed to shuffle the working class, the middle class, into early retirement, fast food dead end jobs, and bankrupted private pensions it was a choice. when we caved the stock market and drained dry the last cent from the 401k of the middle class, we did so knowing it could only make the rich richer, and the poor poorer. as we danced in our lemon socialism and hapilly bailed out the wealthiest conglomerates and banks, we were instructed that the hardship would be socialized and the profit would be privatized. "americans," the ones that do most of the living and working in our society, dont do much because they cant do much; this has been assured by the government of the people, for the people, and it has no right to question its work.

    we are reaping the benefit of generations of obscene wealth, fueled by trickle down reagonomics and stoked by politicians who consider market capitalism a golden calf that does no evil. Our society is driven by profit, and so long as the goal is profit, the outcome and returns will be consolidated to a plutocracy that doesnt care if little johnny learns to read or write, so long as he works enough hours at the walmart to consume the products at the walmart. --

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:you cant spend by pitzG · · Score: 1

      Yup, top tech grads can send resumes to prominent tech firms and not receive responses. A joke that goes around is that Linus Torvalds himself could apply at Google or Microsoft as a Kernel Engineer, and not receive the 'time of day' because Google/Microsoft is absolutely overwhelmed with qualified people looking to work for their firms.

  57. You're what is wrong with America. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Suck it up, quit your whining, and LEARN and WORK. If you have no faith in your ability to outperform anyone else, why do you think you deserve a higher quality of life than these people who are forced by economics to live in cages?

    1. Re:You're what is wrong with America. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not about that. If you live in america and are smart enough to get through engineering then you can do that, then get paid peanuts and work in a cubical or do statistics and get a high paying job with your own office at an insurance company. Maybe a lawyer, doctor whatever but you can't expect these young men (my class was 98% male, another downside to engineering) to choose engineering just so america's R&D dosn't go down the toilet. You need to make it look like a good proposition.

  58. Re:Train the US citizens instead, thwart offshorin by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    The ways that the US are being criticized are not constructive. They imply that the job is done when the US is finished off.

    What defects are alleged to exist with US citizens are not as deep or as wide to cast them aside.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  59. blind, chauvinistic stupidity by luis_a_espinal · · Score: 1

    They shouldn't be here in the first place if they're taking slots that belong to our own citizens.

    1. Those slots aren't being filled by native-born US Citizens.

    2. Those foreigners who come to fill those slots overwhelmingly become US Ciitizens.

    So, what's your gripe?

    Save the trip and help our own citizens.

    How, by telling them to study what they don't want to study (but that everyone else in the planet wants to study)? You can't help people who do not want to help themselves and who are more than content with a) either a HS degree (and without the ability to add fractions) or 2) pursue a degree in business, law or psychology.

    No sense in not training our own versus helping the enemy.

    1. You can't train people who does not want to be trained (after all 39% of US citizens do not believe in evolution, so how the hell do you think they'll wake up one day and say "gee, I want to study in a STEM field.")?

    2. People who come here (with either a STEM degree or to get one) and get a unfilled STEM slot (and who more often than not become US Citizens), they aren't the enemy. Our own people, those who know who Snooki is but Carl Sagan, they are the enemy, their own enemy.

    I remember one time I was having lunch with a fellow computer scientist at a mall, an Indian immigrant with multiple degrees who came to the US, got another one, 4.0 GPA, became a citizen and did a hell of a work. At the food court, one of the cooks was complaining rather directly towards my friend about "foreigners coming here to take our jobs". As if people like them were in direct competition with foreign-born professionals like the one I'm describing.

    Seriously, the stupidity is strong in this one.

  60. Eh, literacy pays? by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Then why was literacy so long the domain of Monks? Who were not known for their richness...

    Even back then an education was of limited wealth. A person needs a baker each and every day but how often do you need a letter written when you are a lumberjack or a small farmer?

    Star Trek never touched upon the problem of what all those billions of people making up the rest of humanity were doing. It had some episodes with miners in them but they made no sense if you wondered why people would mine for stuff in a world with replicator technology. Count the number of episodes where they still desperately need a part despite a working replicator sitting in every cabin.

    The simple fact is that the western economy post WW2 survived on the factory worker and the harvester (miners etc) when those jobs disappeared entire regions grew depressed and never really recovered. Meanwhile modern media kept showing "Friends" with people with jobs that never require them to simply be in from 9/5 doing just average not very interesting work. The entire economy (if you believe the media) runs on odd jobs paying enough to afford gigantic flats in the heart of New York and more time off then a Greek working for the state.

    Walmart is celebrated by these people as offering very cheap goods without anybody wondering that if nobody local gets payed to make these goods and if the people selling them don't get payed much either... then who can afford these goods in the long run?

    Go ahead, go to a store and try to buy western made goods... oh, they still exist, somewhat... e-reader. Name one made in the west. Tablets? MADE in the west? Where is the factory with the production line paying dozens if not of hundreds of people funding an entire large city producing iPads?

    It isn't just about engineers who make iPads, it is about engineers who make brake pads. Just as most scientist end up working in a production facility doing the same tests over and over, most engineers do not make ground breaking tecnology, but keeping that development on break pads going with all the production know how, that can keep an entire town in business. Jobs for the average person, a reason for the highly educated to come back to their home town.

    Remember a little game called SimCity? Fun game right? Do you remember how it was very easy to create slum areas by accident because there weren't enough jobs near by?

    Okay... now enlarge SimCity to SimWorld and remove all the factory from that little corner of the world called the west and put all the work and housing the "Asia"... what happens? Do the endless living areas with only shops become an affluent area or ,,, do they become Detroit? Manchester? De Bijlmer (pure living area now being torn down in Amsterdam Holland, do you think bad planning are a US problem only?)

    Douglas Adam spoke of three arks, what were the A and C arks again? And what ark are we keeping here? Think about it, we outsourced production (c ark) and now the research is following (a ark)... that makes us the B ark... better start collecting those leaves.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:Eh, literacy pays? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Star Trek never touched upon the problem of what all those billions of people making up the rest of humanity were doing. It had some episodes with miners in them but they made no sense if you wondered why people would mine for stuff in a world with replicator technology.

      You obviously didn't pay enough attention to Star Trek. Replicators weren't magical devices capable of synthesizing anything from nothingness, they had to have raw materials, just like a modern-day CNC machine needs some type of raw material (like a block of aluminum) to work on. The difference was that replicators could work with things at the molecular level. But if you're trying to synthesize a piece of gold jewelry, for instance, your replicator would still some raw gold to work with. They never said the replicators could transmute elements, in fact I think there were some episodes where the replicators ran out of certain things they needed.

      What Star Trek DID fail on was why people would mine for stuff in a society where apparently most people just pursue their intellectual whims, and most crappy jobs are done by machines, and there doesn't seem to be a need to work or else you'll starve; why would anyone bother doing the dirty, nasty jobs? They even showed dilithium miners in one of the Kirk episodes, and their standard of living was crap even by today's standards, living on a desolate world with sandstorms, and not even a dishwasher (one of Mudd's women they brought in figured out she could hang the frying pans outside to be sandblasted clean). They said many times that "money is obsolete" or similar, that people don't have to work to survive, but then they show that; it really doesn't make sense. If you're going to get a welfare check for doing nothing, why would you bother to take a job on a horrible planet doing a horrible, dirty, dangerous job? The starship jobs made more sense; maybe people took those jobs because of prestige, adventure, etc.; even if they were a lowly redshirt (and no one had warned them about the ridiculous mortality rate for Starfleet members wearing red shirts!), they still got to go to far-away places, take shore leave on Risa, and maybe work their way up to being an officer. But there's no prestige in being a miner. Star Trek entirely failed to explain how this futuristic non-capitalist society worked, probably because Gene hadn't figured that part out yet (and never did; Karl Marx thought he came up with a great alternative to a capitalist free-market economy, and look what an unworkable disaster that was).

      Remember a little game called SimCity? Fun game right? Do you remember how it was very easy to create slum areas by accident because there weren't enough jobs near by?

      The biggest thing I remember was how much people liked it when I created more parks.

    2. Re:Eh, literacy pays? by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      Obviously you were only half-paying attention when you watched Star Trek.

      The replicators worked on conversion of energy to matter, so in fact they did in NOT need raw materials.

      However, nobody every made the claim that they could make anything. Maybe dilithium crystals were something that replicators had particular difficulty in synthesizing.

      You also missed that about their economy. This is the way it worked (according to explanations that were given more than once during the life of the show):

      At some point, humanity found a way to get massive amounts of nearly free energy. (Above a certain point, if you're not talking about some very limited, unrenewable limiting resource, then energy does become free because you can use an excess to generate even more.) Unlimited energy effectively meant no more scarcity, because any resource that was available could be put to use. Our current economy is based on scarcity of goods. When there is no more scarcity, a money economy doesn't make much sense.

      So the unlimited energy in turn meant freedom from want. Now, only people who WANTED to work, had to work. If they didn't, they could improve themselves in other ways, like getting educations and volunteering for Starfleet (which was ostensibly a scientific, exploratory organization, remember).

      So... yeah, in a few episodes they did seem to forget about all that. But that was still supposed to be the background story.

    3. Re:Eh, literacy pays? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      The replicators worked on conversion of energy to matter, so in fact they did in NOT need raw materials.

      No, obviously you didn't read any of the technical manuals.

      Replicators used the same technology as the transporters: matter is disassembled at the molecular level, moved around in some kind of "beam", then reassembled.

      While obviously fictional, anyone with any knowledge of physics knows that the amount of energy needed for such a hypothetical device would be far, far less than the energy needed for a hypothetical device that could transmute elements (i.e., working at the subatomic level).

      See page 90 of the TNG Technical Manual by Sternbach and Okuda for more.

      At some point, humanity found a way to get massive amounts of nearly free energy.

      Yes, that's easy. We could do it today if we really wanted to. It's called "solar power". Just build a bunch of giant photovoltaic arrays and stick them in orbit, and you'll have all the energy you want. All you need is a convenient star. The only thing holding us back is short-term thinking, greed, and stupidity (all leading to a lack of willingness to invest in the R&D needed to make this a reality).

    4. Re:Eh, literacy pays? by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      "No, obviously you didn't read any of the technical manuals."

      Obviously I did not. I got those explanations from THE SHOW ITSELF. You can't say stuff from the after-market "technical manuals" is authoritative about the TV show. That's dumb.

      Whoever wrote the technical manuals just as obviously got it wrong: the transporters also worked on converting matter to energy and vice-versa. BUT there is only one slight difference: the replicators were not locked into creating the same matter from that energy, as the transporters were.

      It makes perfect sense, man, and is more consistent with the actual story line. As you, yourself, pointed out.

      "While obviously fictional, anyone with any knowledge of physics knows that the amount of energy needed for such a hypothetical device would be far, far less than the energy needed for a hypothetical device that could transmute elements (i.e., working at the subatomic level)."

      And that sentence was (I so hate to use the word "obvious" again so I won't) written by someone with only a shallow understanding of physics.

      Direct matter to energy conversion, which they claimed (many times in the series) to have achieved, depends only on the MASS of the matter. On the flip side, the matter you make from that energy is dependent, again, only on the MASS of the matter you are making. Not its chemical makeup. You could create a gram of gold, or a gram of water, and it f**ing DOESN'T MATTER. If you assume energy-matter transformation in the first place, your "transmutation" argument is completely moot. It makes absolutely no sense at all.

      "Yes, that's easy. We could do it today if we really wanted to. It's called "solar power"."

      Oh, Jesus H. Christ. I didn't see that until I was almost done here. OBVIOUSLY, you're one of those few Trekkies who is also a dumbshit.

    5. Re:Eh, literacy pays? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Whoever wrote the technical manuals just as obviously got it wrong:

      This just shows you're an idiot. The manuals were written by the very people who wrote the show. If you don't know who Michael Okuda is, you're a fool (at least if you're trying to act like an authority on Star Trek TNG matters).

      Fuck off.

    6. Re:Eh, literacy pays? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you kidding me? Monks lived way better than the illiterate serfs in the country side. Getting in to the church was seen as a great move upwards in terms of material comfort.

    7. Re:Eh, literacy pays? by Convector · · Score: 1

      no one had warned them about the ridiculous mortality rate for Starfleet members wearing red shirts!

      I actually tracked this once and I seem to recall that there was no statistically significant correlation between shirt color and mortality (on TOS at least). Lack of a first and/or last name was a far more significant risk factor.

    8. Re:Eh, literacy pays? by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      "This just shows you're an idiot. The manuals were written by the very people who wrote the show."

      No, you are simply demonstrating that YOU are an idiot. The show (or the early series at the very least) was written by many authors, typically a different writer for each episode. Gene Roddenberry might have had the concept. But he (and the producers and directors) did not WRITE the show, at all. And the later "manuals" were NOT written by those authors.

      This very much shows that you know absolutely nothing about what you are talking about.

      "Fuck off."

      Moron.

    9. Re:Eh, literacy pays? by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      Pardon me, I will correct myself to the extent of saying that Roddenberry did do some writing for the show, but his shows were never the more popular episodes.

      Most of the authors were then-famous science fiction and/or horror writers, like Robert Block, Theordore Sturgeon, Harlan Ellison, etc. More than you can shake a stick at. And those people did not write the "manuals".

    10. Re:Eh, literacy pays? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      You fucking moron, Michael Okuda was the show's technical director all through the show's existence. That means he was the authority for how anything worked. From his article on Wikipedia:
      "Okuda also served as a technical consultant on the various TNG-era Star Trek series along with Rick Sternbach, advising the script-writers on the technology used throughout the Star Trek universe such as the transporters and the warp drive. This work resulted in a technical manual which was distributed to prospective script-writers along with the series bible."

      Go fuck yourself.

    11. Re:Eh, literacy pays? by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      Who gives a damn? Not only is that "moving the goalposts", it is completely irrelevant, because Okuda did not start working there until the 1980s! He did NOT write any of the original shows, he did NOT come up with the original ideas or background, and he CANNOT be considered an authority on them.

      You are talking about somebody who came on the scene 20 years after the origination of the show, and well after the original ideas had already been written and articulated by others.

      Get your head out of your "if it didn't happen after I was 10 years old it didn't happen" ass and read some history, dimwit.

  61. Re:Train the US citizens instead, thwart offshorin by Bucky24 · · Score: 1

    Do you really love this country, or do you have some wish to have the US bow before the world?

    I'm more annoyed by those who wish the world to bow before the US.

    --
    All the world's a CPU, and all the men and women merely AI agents
  62. Re:Train the US citizens instead, thwart offshorin by jd · · Score: 1

    You cannot train people to correct for such deficiencies if (a) the universities aren't there and (b) the workers aren't interested. The original article states both problems exist, ergo training is not possible.

    I have no contempt towards US citizens, or citizens of any nation. We are all equal, even if some nations like to think of themselves as more equal than others. I have contempt for attitudes, inflexibility and the popular desire to remain ignorant.

    I have no desire to see any nation bow before any other. If I have a desire, it is that ALL nations of the world play to their strengths, develop themselves as fully as possible, and mutually form a mesh in trade of goods and knowledge that is impervious to the boom/bust cycles we see too often. That is my desire. It's wholly unrealistic - no, not impossible, it's perfectly achievable and requires no utopian dream to do, but it is unrealistic. Nationalism, greed and xenophobia are not subject to logic and no amount of rational explanation of why a heterogeneous world might be a good thing will ever reduce these.

    A more practical goal is to see at the very least the US, or SOME nation in the world, adopt the philosophy of doing best by their citizenry and have the citizenry respond by becoming as highly educated, as mentally flexible and as dextrous in work environments as possible. This would still be incredibly hard to achieve. Your own post shows why - you're not interested in being at the top of the heap by being the best. "you underestimate the power of the US Government and its ability to make an overseas move unprofitably painful" is another way of saying you're only interested in being at the top of the heap by impairing others.

    No. A competent athlete does not need to shoot his or her opponent in the foot in order to be competitive or to win. They compete by being the best they possibly can be against competitors who are also being the best they possibly can be. They win by virtue of merit, not by virtue of destruction.

    I want the US to be the best it can be on merit and merit alone. No harassment, no abuse, no government shenanigans, no strong-arm diplomacy, no gunboat diplomacy either. Merit. Your post makes it clear you do not believe that the US can compete on merit. If you did, you would not talk about the government needing to threaten people, or nations bowing to others. There are no threats in a system of merit and there is no power domain in a system of achievement.

    I, therefore, am not the one in contempt of US citizens. You are. You are the one who is holding that it is only at knife-point that the US can achieve a damn thing, that it cannot succeed by competency alone. I am the one who is saying that it CAN achieve everything through competency alone. That isn't contempt for Americans, that's admiration for their sheer potential intelligence, their potential guts and their potential determination. The only contempt is for why it's potential and not realized, and therefore contempt for your notion of superiority by force.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  63. Ah, another history failure by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1

    Once Japan was the cheap knock-off country copying the west.

    And don't you think it is VERY telling that China is copying the high speed trains for Japan... NOT from the USA.

    Oh, and how are those US trains doing by btw? Amtrak still the non-running joke?

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:Ah, another history failure by russotto · · Score: 1

      Once Japan was the cheap knock-off country copying the west.

      Indeed. And then came the Mitsubishi Zero and that was the end of that. But that doesn't mean China will follow the same pattern.

      Oh, and how are those US trains doing by btw? Amtrak still the non-running joke?

      No, it runs now, still a joke though. We had planes which did a much better job, but then along came the TSA to waste enough time to eliminate short flights.

  64. Re:Nuclear power and is a shit load of natural gas by frank_adrian314159 · · Score: 1

    Nuclear power and is a shit load of natural gas in the US

    This sentence sense no.

    --
    That is all.
  65. the US is setup for freight rail and local passeng by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    local passenger rail is good and has high ridership but all the stops limits speed (get's to about 69 MPH) (but it's easier and less to deal with then driving) and locally the only deaths lately have been from dumb ass diving around the gates and getting killed.

  66. Consumers, not Corporations, did it ... by drnb · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is simply the race to the bottom that corporate America is pursuing writ large. When we traded our democracy for a corporatocracy, this was the inevitable result.

    You are mistaken. It is Consumer America, not Corporate America, that is responsible for the race to the bottom. Corporations do not care where things are made or who makes them. All things being equal they would have things made locally by locals. There are coordination and transportation costs when you move manufacturing or development to some distant place. These additional costs would have to be offset somehow.

    Corporations primarily care about sales, costs are secondary to sales. Cost cutting is only desirable if it (1) generates new sales or (2) preserves existing sales but increases the profit margin. Now consider who controls the sales, it is the consumer.

    Consumers are responsible for the current situation because the consumer preference is for the lowest priced product or service, the consumer does not care where manufacturing or development takes place. **If** consumers did care where manufacturing or engineering took place and **if** this preference was reflected in buying decisions then corporations would not engage in off-shoring since it would hurt sales.

    In other words the U.S. experienced a lot of off-shoring because consumers rewarded those companies that off-shored with sales. **If** consumers had punished those companies but buying domestically manufactured/engineered products from competitors then off-shoring would have been a failed experiment and not have become a major trend. It was all in the hands of the consumer, it still is.

    While much manufacturing has moved off-shore the web has made it easier than ever to find domestically manufactured products. If consumers start showing a preference for such goods then off-shoring can be reversed. The power is in the hands of those making the buying decisions, the consumer, not the corporation.

    1. Re:Consumers, not Corporations, did it ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you! Finally people are seeing why WalMart nation is falling flat on its face.

    2. Re:Consumers, not Corporations, did it ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...assuming the consumer is getting paid enough to make the "hard" decision without significant impacts on his family. It's not that one view or the other is wrong in terms of consumer vs. corporation. It's that the two systems are related, and changes to one cause changes to the other in a feedback loop.

    3. Re:Consumers, not Corporations, did it ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not sure if this post is a troll, or how this got rated as "5, Insightful". There are so many things wrong on this post - the comments contradict themselves, the assumptions are bad... ugh. If this wouldn't be such a depressing time sink I would outline it all.

    4. Re:Consumers, not Corporations, did it ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps if I was paid more than next to nothing, I'd be able to AFFORD a shoe that costs 3 times as much being made in America.

      Also, things made in America tend to be shit quality as well.

    5. Re:Consumers, not Corporations, did it ... by thoth · · Score: 1

      All things being equal they would have things made locally by locals.

      I don't think this is true at all. Corporations maximize profits and one way to do that is decrease their cost(s) of production. This would have led to offshoring as a cost-savings measure eventually. What led to lower prices is competition with other corporations.

    6. Re:Consumers, not Corporations, did it ... by drnb · · Score: 1

      All things being equal they would have things made locally by locals.

      I don't think this is true at all. Corporations maximize profits and one way to do that is decrease their cost(s) of production. This would have led to offshoring as a cost-savings measure eventually. What led to lower prices is competition with other corporations.

      The methods used to cut costs must be acceptable to the buyers or sales will suffer. Off-shoring is not inevitable, buyers must be willing to accept domestic job losses in order to receive a lower price. So far they have been willing to do so. If buyers change their preference the tendency to off-shore would also change. First and foremost the corporation must have sales, costs are secondary.

    7. Re:Consumers, not Corporations, did it ... by scamper_22 · · Score: 1

      It's really not consumers or corporations.

      It is government and a deviation from a government based on the rule of law instead of the rule of men.

      Here's a practical example. The US federal minimum wage. How did it come about?
      Well individual states started implementing their own minimum wage. Of course this led to concerns that if say New York implemented a minimum wage and Alabama didn't, that all the jobs would flow to Alabama. This became an interstate-commerce issue and the federal government said, we'll make a federal minimum wage for any goods that cross state boundaries. Theoretically, at the time, if you lived in a state with no minimum wage and just ran a local pizza store, you could pay under the federal minimum wage. Now various interpretations over time and extension of what constitutes a business transaction affecting interstate commerce have essentially made the federal minimum wage the actual minimum wage, but the original rulings made a lot of sense.

      Now one wonders what the US government was thinking as it expanded trade with other countries. How can the US justify signing free-trade deals with countries with significantly different wage and labor laws?

      There are two ways to look at it.
      There are people who say its exploiting 3rd world labor. I generally dismiss this point because well it is an improvement in their life generally speaking. That's why they take those jobs. Life in rural china is worse than working in a factory.

      But more importantly, what it does is make American workers legally unable to compete for a job. The government is actually preventing them from competing for job. If they could earn less the minimum wage and have a low cost living in say a place like Alabama, many would take it. But they are legally prevented from competing against their Asian counterparts.

      Where did the great rational rulings around the US federal minimum wage go when they started doing international free trade deals?

      I don't care if you're a libertarian or a socialist, in both cases the current situation is unpalatable. As a libertarian, one is outraged the government is treating different people under an economic system with vastly different rules. Essentially forcing one out of work.

      About the only justification is from those who view government in the progressive sense (both on the left and right) ... that is to say... not as a government of rules, but one of men. So we optimize America better by leveraging the high dollar, getting cheap goods, living off debt, relying on monetary policy to eventually even out the world...

      If you look at it from a government based on rules, the current system in absolutely ridiculous.

      And in such a messed up system, both consumer and producers are going to make their rational choices on mass which lead to the current situation. Offshoring labor, wanting cheap goods...

    8. Re:Consumers, not Corporations, did it ... by jwhitener · · Score: 1

      And this is somehow different now than say, in the 60's or 70's or 80's why?

      Consumers have always, and will always, want the highest quality good at the lowest price.

      There are other factors at play besides consumer desire that have encouraged the erosion of certain US manufacturing jobs. One factor is that China is now a much more attractive place to set up a factory than it was 30 years ago. Another factor are all the 'free trade' agreements that happened in the 90's. Prior to the 90's we had tariffs in place to help protect American jobs from overseas low wages. Now we have no tariffs.

      And then there are policies that led to actually giving various tax breaks for overseas profits, despite being headquartered in the US. http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/21/us-usa-tax-wyden-idUSTRE78K1YB20110921

       

    9. Re:Consumers, not Corporations, did it ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At the same time though, consumers have noticed a significant reduction in their buying power, forcing them to choose based more on price than on other factors such as the ethicality of the business they are buying from.

      Corporate America dug it's own grave when it failed to enforce an actual standard of living for it's workers.

    10. Re:Consumers, not Corporations, did it ... by drnb · · Score: 1

      And this is somehow different now than say, in the 60's or 70's or 80's why?

      What is occurring today is part of the same trend that started back then. When I mentioned consumers rewarding/punishing those early adopters of off-shoring I was referring to the above time frame, not something more contemporary.

      Consumers have always, and will always, want the highest quality good at the lowest price.

      Correction, "cost" not "price". The problem is that consumers do not consider the true cost, a classic example of tragedy of the commons. This can change. As demonstrated by the increased awareness of external costs related to the environment. Consumers have show a preference for green products and suppliers have moved to meet this preference. Similarly consumers could show a preference for domestic production.

      There are other factors at play besides consumer desire that have encouraged the erosion of certain US manufacturing jobs. One factor is that China is now a much more attractive place to set up a factory than it was 30 years ago. Another factor are all the 'free trade' agreements that happened in the 90's. Prior to the 90's we had tariffs in place to help protect American jobs from overseas low wages. Now we have no tariffs. And then there are policies that led to actually giving various tax breaks for overseas profits, despite being headquartered in the US. http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/21/us-usa-tax-wyden-idUSTRE78K1YB20110921

      All that is largely irrelevant. Consumer preferences and buying decisions trump all that. As I said before, the decision by the consumer to purchase the lowest priced good regardless of all other considerations is primary. Everything you mention is secondary.

    11. Re:Consumers, not Corporations, did it ... by drnb · · Score: 1

      At the same time though, consumers have noticed a significant reduction in their buying power, forcing them to choose based more on price than on other factors such as the ethicality of the business they are buying from. Corporate America dug it's own grave when it failed to enforce an actual standard of living for it's workers.

      No, Consumer America dug that grave and initiated the feedback loop. Corporate America had little choice in off-shoring. The companies that experimented with it were rewarded. The remaining domestic producers could go along with the consumer preference or go out of business, or perhaps become a much smaller business serving the niche community who reads labels. Consumers overwhelmingly chose the short term gain of a lower price today over the long term downward spiral. Classic tragedy of the commons.

      The same is true for purely domestic situations. Consumers had the choice to reward or punish a manufacturer who paid unfair wages to its workers. The person making the buying decision is in control. Absent a monopoly of course.

    12. Re:Consumers, not Corporations, did it ... by drnb · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure if this post is a troll, or how this got rated as "5, Insightful". There are so many things wrong on this post - the comments contradict themselves, the assumptions are bad... ugh. If this wouldn't be such a depressing time sink I would outline it all.

      Show some balls, give it a try. I expect your logic would fail rather quickly. Perhaps that is the true motivation for your silence. ;-)

    13. Re:Consumers, not Corporations, did it ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The methods used to cut costs must be acceptable to the buyers or sales will suffer.

      This is where market theory starts to go haywire. You're making the assumption that supply and demand will meet at all possible points - in this particular example, that would mean the seller offers TWO versions of their product, clearly labeled, and at the same price: a "Bad for profits, good for workers" version, and a "Good for profits, bad for workers" alternative.

      Of course, no such choice will ever exist in the real world. Another corporation could offer a competing product they claim is good for workers. But without complete access to this corporation's operations and "real" accounting data (ie, management accounting, not financial accounting) who in their right mind would believe them?

  67. Get out while you can by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You'll just end up training your H1B replacement.

    Then everybody wonders why Americans don't want to study for STEM careers.

  68. LEARN to THINK by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

    Before the H1B flood, Americans built the computer industry, and the internet. So don't try to give us that pure bullshit that Americans are not willing, or able, to to do STEM work.

    Which of these companies started in India, or China: IBM, Apple, Microsoft, Cisco, Intel, Google, Oracle, or I could name dozens more.

    Seriously, other than cheap labor, what has China, or India, ever done?

    1. Re:LEARN to THINK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Give them some time; going from having smart people to producing competitive international companies isn't an overnight thing. (There seems to be competent companies in China, but the only ones I've heard of are ZTE and Lenovo.)

  69. Re:Train the US citizens instead, thwart offshorin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So with this we can conclude that you either are not a US citizen, or your statement is wrong. It can't be both.

  70. Why compete with 3rd world wages? by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

    Not all engineering jobs can or will be sent overseas.

    No, the rest will be filled by H1Bs are trained by the Americans the H1B's replace. Unless you have a top-secret clearance, or something.

    Why compete with 3rd world wages? Train for a job that won't be taken by a foreigner.

  71. Bullshit by walterbyrd · · Score: 2

    The Asians aren't taking away anyone's jobs.

    No American wants to compete with 3rd world wages. Other countries protect their workers, not the USA.

    1. Re:Bullshit by pitzG · · Score: 1

      No kidding walterbyrd, US citizens studied STEM (particularly EE/CS) in droves in the late 1990s and early 2000s, looking to join what was an exciting industry. Most of them, upon graduation, never were even given the courtesy of receiving the 'time of day' from employers who constantly claimed a 'need' for guest workers. Older workers, who built the Internet, created all of the magic, have been systemically kicked to the curb.

    2. Re:Bullshit by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

      Asians working at US firms as engineers aren't getting 3rd-world wages, they're getting paid 6 figures, far more than the average pay for American workers.

    3. Re:Bullshit by gtada · · Score: 1

      No American wants to compete with 3rd world wages. Other countries protect their workers, not the USA.

      3rd world wages? How much do Microsoft engineers make? How much do Google engineers make? There are still plenty of openings in the US, and they take the best candidates in order to stay competitive.

    4. Re:Bullshit by pitzG · · Score: 1

      Openings, perhaps, but the positions generally aren't accessible to bright Americans, as those firms receive 1000+ resumes for each "position" open, and the Googles and Microsofts only bother to look at less than 1% of resume submissions.

    5. Re:Bullshit by pitzG · · Score: 1

      A few thousand, at best, and those 6 figure wages for the H-1B's are almost entirely concentrated in the high cost centres where the cost of living and taxes make 6-figure wages barely even middle class in many cases.

    6. Re:Bullshit by Compaqt · · Score: 1

      >Googles and Microsofts only bother to look at less than 1% of resume submissions.

      Uhm, they have to look at a resume at once to decide if they want to "look" at it, right?

      Or do they just randomly throw away 99 resumes out of a 100?

      --
      I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
    7. Re:Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep, that's how HR works and why getting a job requires resume-spam.

  72. Re:Train the US citizens instead, thwart offshorin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are being trolled hard... I respond to this fuckwit as anon to blow off steam, but you're not going to make some fuckstick like this see the light.

    Funny that this fuckwit links to this site: http://www.ohioinfosec.org/ on his twitter..
    Wonder what he thinks about this "rule" they have: No discrimination or restriction based on sex, race, religion, or ethnic/national origin.

    Not impossible this guy was spurned by an Asian chick, or something equally pathetic that I can't imagine. Pity is probably the only response.

    Whatever, the global village is full of assholes, and slashdot (which for all its problems back then, is just not the same place as 12 years ago) is a skewed subset.

  73. Bullshit by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

    1. Those slots aren't being filled by native-born US Citizens.

    Bullshit. Americans are forced to train their H1B replacements all the time.

    2. Those foreigners who come to fill those slots overwhelmingly become US Ciitizens.

    Have a source on that? The H1B is a temporary work visa. According to experts, like Norm Matloff, and Ron Hira; H1Bs are used to help more jobs offshore.

    How, by telling them to study what they don't want to study (but that everyone else in the planet wants to study)? You can't help people who do not want to help themselves and who are more than content with a) either a HS degree (and without the ability to add fractions) or 2) pursue a degree in business, law or psychology.

    Bullshit. Americans would love to study for STEM careers, if Americans didn't have to compete with 3rd world wages. Americans built the computer industry, and the internet, before the flood of H1Bs. Do you think Americans just -all the sudden- lost interest in computer jobs, for no reason at all?

    How many major computer companies, or internet companies, where started in China, or India?

    How about the USA? Apple, Microsoft, Cisco, IBM, eBay, Google, Amazon, Intel, Dell, Oracle, and I could go on.

  74. Re:Nuclear power and is a shit load of natural gas by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

    Seems like a lot of Americans need to go back to school and take basic English classes. It's hard to be productive in an IP-driven economy if you can't handle the most basic communications in your native language.

  75. Tech industry needs to start hiring by pitzG · · Score: 1

    Top quartile 2002 EE/CS grad here, from a prominent top-20 school. US tech firms, for the past decade, haven't even bothered to give the 'time of day' to domestic grads who apply. Job descriptions have been subjected to a steady creep where even entry-level positions are demanding 5-10 years of experience. There is plenty of US tech talent; employers just need to open their eyes, look at more than 1% of their resume queues, and start using it. Instead of throwing away the resume submissions and merely going with low-bidder foreign guest workers.

  76. Knowledge is encumbered ... by PPH · · Score: 1

    ... by everything from US Taxes and ITAR to bogus patents. Its no wonder that corporations want to 'start over' in a clean room. Where they can sell their technology to whom ever they want and not have Uncle Sam's grubby fingers in it.

    It doesn't matter if there is sufficient US engineering talent or not. The fact is: its tainted. Even Americans, working overseas still fall under the thumb of the US judicial and tax system.

    Every few years, the IRS offers 'tax amnesties' for all the overseas earnings of multinational corporations if they would only declare them and bring them back in. And every time I hear that, I have to laugh. The goal is that the money is out where it can be invested and do some good. Knowledge is going the same way. Live with it.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:Knowledge is encumbered ... by sethstorm · · Score: 1

      With the NDAA, the US doesn't have to worry about the silly thing called jurisdiction.

      --
      Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  77. Not quite homeless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The U.S. doesn't have people living in cages... the homeless people live outside instead, and shit on the sidewalks.

    If you ask me, I would say I prefer the Hong Kong solution.

    1. Re:Not quite homeless by maple_shaft · · Score: 1

      I would rather live outside and retain what shreds of dignity I have remaining than subject myself to the humiliation of living in a cage like a fucking animal.

    2. Re:Not quite homeless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What dignity? If you were living on the street, you would be shitting openly on the sidewalk. How dignified is that?

    3. Re:Not quite homeless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What you rather be a wild beast that roams free or a caged beast?

    4. Re:Not quite homeless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The people in those Hong Kong cages go off to work each day. So tell me how they are imprisoned.

      As I said, living in a small boxy room is a hell of a lot better than shitting on the sidewalk like Americans do.

  78. Re:Train the US citizens instead, thwart offshorin by s73v3r · · Score: 2

    The ways that the US are being criticized are not constructive. They imply that the job is done when the US is finished off.

    Absolute bullshit.

  79. Not a big surprise by Walt+Sellers · · Score: 1

    If all your factories moved there,
    and all your component suppliers moved there,
    and all your raw materials suppliers moved there,
    and all your delivery stages moved there,
    and all your support efforts moved there,
    and all their managers moved there,
    and much of your R&D exists to improve all those,
    how much pressure is there to move R&D?

  80. Interesting times by mark_reh · · Score: 1

    I find it tragically amusing that the feds are talking about censoring the internet to crack down on piracy because "it costs American jobs", and you know, the congress is all about keeping jobs in America. Where was congress when the big corporations were shipping jobs overseas for the last 30 or 40 years? And who's been cutting education funding and even talking about closing down the Dept of Education?

    We need a CEO to run the government like we need more tax cuts for the rich.

  81. can see it in grad school by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In a top 10 univ, most of the profs for EE are foreign. And when it comes to admission selection for grad school, most that get selected and fully funded are foreign. At least 70% (according to ASEE) are foreign. I don't see how that isn't taking up slots from locals when theres only x amount of seats available. Sounds like a good way to keep the US down.

  82. Training vs Education by dbIII · · Score: 1

    A trade school is designed to give you exactly what you need. A University is for the guys that determine and write the standard operating procedures for the guys in the trade school to follow.
    OK, so I left University unable to use a milling machine effectively but I'd have a shot at designing one that could work. It's different thing so of course degrees are useless to you as an employer if you just want somebody that has a specific skill that isn't taught as part of the degree.

  83. I run a PCB company - here is the truth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If PCB design is indicative of the R&D done in the Electroncis Engineering world, then I say this article is full of s**t. In my business, I look through average of 2000 PCB designs each month . (70% from North America and 30% from the rest of the world) . As an EE in my past life, I can tell 80% confidence the end application of the PCB design. In my personal opinion the real innovators and true risk takers are North Americans. For example, back when RFID as rising technology , the only groups of people actively developing solutions for this technology are the Americans. If was not until RFID became *obviously profitable* (3-4 years later) that the Asian designers focusing on developing RFID solutions.

    Do I see Asian companies taking on R&D on unproven technology? Never in my 12 years running a PCB company . Do I see Americans doing R&D on unproven technology? All the time - they can spend upwards of USD 50k on just the PCB services, alone in the *prototyping phase* on unproven technology . So my conclusion is, without the all-out , risk-taking entrepreneurship spirit of American company bringing new techonlogies to commercial sucess (or failure) , there won't be so called R&D happening in Asian to commercialize already proven technologies. Just don't expect Asians to risk it all on unproven techonlogies. We don't do take risk , we only *copy*

    Gary
    Malaysian PCB factory owner.

  84. As an American with a PhD in Engineering... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    As an American with a PhD in Engineering I have to say that it is really easy to get a job. However, long term stability in those jobs is hard to find. Most companies in America either A) don't know the true value of having someone with an advanced degree who communicates clearly in English working for them and don't want to learn, or B) don't offer any opportunity for advancement, or C) are driven by bean counters who are constantly pushing to take your job away and ship it overseas to someone that cannot communicate technical ideas clearly. Often you'll experience all A, B, and C at the same time.

    I worked for a few companies where I was severely underutilized and the positions where I could have done some good were held by MBAs (who weren't going anywhere anytime soon). Another hired me on with the hopes that I could save a product that they were developing which they didn't understand at all, because the group was a bunch of 2 year engineering tech grads led by an MBA. The product was due to ship THE WEEK I WAS HIRED. I spent 3 months teaching them Engineering 101 course material so they could begin to comprehend how deeply flawed the product was, then I split before the company tanked. 2 other folks hired when I was followed me out the door. I read yesterday that they are having sweeping layoffs. The surviving functional groups are relocating to, wait for it, China.

    I finally landed a full time position teaching engineering at a state college. I love it - it is stable, socially interactive, and professionally interesting. My degrees really haven't gotten a great return on investment - the only thing my PhD did was enable me to become a professor which is a lifestyle decision, not a financial one. I really don't know what to suggest to my students for their careers. I lean toward NOT recommending that they pursue advanced degrees, as in general they don't buy them anything in the long term.

    The U.S. is dumbing down because it doesn't pay to do anything else.

    1. Re:As an American with a PhD in Engineering... by pitzG · · Score: 1

      Yup, you gotta wonder how/why stupid people ever were able to get their hands on the money to do stuff like that in the first place. Dumb MBA's/JDs/etc. have completely corrupted the system of capital allocation in this country, such that, idiots that don't even understand "Engineering 101" manage to find themselves in charge of significant amounts of capital, both financial and human.

      Maybe engineers don't deserve 7 figure salaries, but they'd probably do a lot better allocating excessive salaries within the economy, than many of the abortions (*cough* Groupon *cough* Webvan *cough*) that were funded by the MBA/JD types.

  85. Lots of math/bscs majors cannot find jobs by walterbyrd · · Score: 2

    I could not help but notice how many posts from seeker.dice.com forums, and elsewhere, are of the same nature. Below are just a few recent examples:

    (btw: dice did a relaunch of their message boards yesterday, so I am not sure if the links will work. But I promise you, these are all from 100% real posts).

    “Recently I graduated from the Network Engineering program at Trios College in Ontario, Canada in September of 2008.”
    “It's a shame that I spent $18,000 on this college program that should have guaranteed me instant employment in a very high demanding industry, yet I can't even find even a basic entry level position to start a new career.”
    http://seeker.dice.com/olc/thread.jspa?threadID=11819&start=0&tstart=0

    “I will graduate in 3 weeks with a AS degree in networking. and a MCP certified, I have been have trouble finding any kind of IT jobs.”
    http://seeker.dice.com/olc/thread.jspa?threadID=11290&tstart=0

    “The problem I'm having is that no matter how many jobs I apply for, and no matter how well-written my applications are, I can't seem to get further than the first interview. For some reason it seems a lot of employers will completely overlook my degree in computer engineering . . .”
    http://ask.slashdot.org/askslashdot/08/09/29/1926216.shtml

    “Being educated, with a 4 year bachelor's degree in engineering (non IT), I want to start a career in IT. I have been a learner all the time, educated myself on various computer subjects. I tried applying for various entry level positions, got two calls but failed to even get to the interview.”
    http://seeker.dice.com/olc/forum.jspa?forumID=5

    I graduated from the Universty of Missouri in May of this year, with Bachelor's Degrees in CS and IT (took me 5 years). . . And now here I am, 4 months/200 or so apps in. I'm trying to find a job in the Chicago area, or here in St. Louis as a backup. I've had one phone interview . . It's like I'm not even being considered, and I have no idea why.
    http://seeker.dice.com/olc/thread.jspa?threadID=10251&tstart=0

    “Not been able to find anything in the IT/ICT field since my graduation from Electrical Engineering and Computer Science (BS) in 2002.”
    http://seeker.dice.com/olc/thread.jspa?messageID=71731

    “I let my now ex-wife talk me into going to UoP for my BS in IT (circa 2002/2004). What a waste. $20k of debt and the degree is virtually worthless. Dumbest thing I've ever done!”
    http://seeker.dice.com/olc/thread.jspa?threadID=9209&tstart=0

    “B.S. Electrical Engineering, M.S. EE, and M.S. Applied Math(currently attending),last two form US University. GPA 3.55.
    “I came to US in 1998 , and I have been looking for the job 10 years,as you can see! Live in South New Jersey, where you cannot get a job without connection, even it is $9. Third shifts,$7-$9 they want to hire you, don't ask many questions but for everything else, it is a rocket science to get hired!!”
    http://seeker.dice.com/olc/thread.jspa?threadID=8949&tstart=0

    “He's a pretty sharp kid, just graduated from a small liberal-arts school that has a computing program. He just got a job in Chicago, $12/hr, no benefits . . . ”
    http://seeker.dice.com/olc/thread.jspa?threadID=8649&tstart=0

    “I have been looking for a full time job for about a year since I graduated from my college with a B.E. in computer engineering.”
    http://seeker.dice.com/olc/thread.jspa?threadID=8302&tstart=0

    “I graduated with a B.S. in Computer Science from New Jersey Institute of Technology (NJIT) back in January 2005. After I graduated, I was unable to find a job . . . so in order to pay bills and student loans, I had to get a temp job doing customer service, making $12 an hour”
    http://seeker.dice.com/olc/thread.jspa?threadID=6562&tstart=0

    “I have bachelors degree in computer science. I have 10yrs of experience in softwar

    1. Re:Lots of math/bscs majors cannot find jobs by pitzG · · Score: 1

      http://www.quarterlifecrisis.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7857

      "I graduated 12/2001 as an Electrical Engineer. I worked hard and even did my own work, a very novel concept I learned. (Who knew that wouldn’t be such a hot time to enter the work force?) A year earlier, people in my major could expect to be hired right out of school for about 50-60k a year. I spent about 6 months looking for an Engineering job in an area I actually knew something about, it went nowhere. After 6 months of climbing the walls at home, I enrolled in a community college to take some welding and automotive classes. I really enjoyed them, but never really expected to finish the program. In May 2004, I finished the Automotive Technology program. In July, I moved to the San Jose area in search of an entry level engineering job, I would have taken just about anything. When I did get a bite, I would get a call and said they would get back to me. They never did. I took a job at a car dealership fixing cars, it didn’t quite work out and after a couple of months, I decided to cut my losses (It ain’t cheap to live in San Jose), put all my stuff in storage, and moved BACK IN with my parents in lovely Phoenix, AZ. There is very little here for engineers and even less for engineers with my technical interests."

    2. Re:Lots of math/bscs majors cannot find jobs by pieisgood · · Score: 1

      For the ones you posted, if I can be a bit pedantic, none of them reference a Math degree except for one who references a master in applied math (PDE's ... eh). But I can tell that many people aren't getting what they expected from returning to college.

      --
      Eat sleep die
    3. Re:Lots of math/bscs majors cannot find jobs by pitzG · · Score: 1

      EE's learn a non-trivial amount of material concerning PDE's, as such is fundamental to stuff like the transmission line equations. Not to the same level of rigour that a PhD Math would receive, but certainly they do receive some exposure which can be built upon.

      PhD Math grads aren't 100% straight out of the box either.

    4. Re:Lots of math/bscs majors cannot find jobs by pieisgood · · Score: 1

      PDE's are a SMALL part of math. When considering the actual applicable maths involved in programming (note algorithms and not just computing some math function) it's limited to the algebras and discrete fields. Abstract algebra, Topology, Computability theory and complexity theory (which are math fields regardless of what any CS department would have you believe).... These are the tools used to approximate the PDE's with Finite element analysis and Eulers method. And saying "not to the same level of rigor that a PhD math would receive" is sort of misleading, engineers tend to be taught how to compute PDE's and reduce them to manageable diff eqs... this is no where near what is involved in PhD level work..... I had a PhD Mechanical engineer in my undergraduate Real analysis class, which is not required for grad engineers but is smiled upon.

      PhD Math grads probably wouldn't even consider just programming for a career... they get sent off to the NSA and Finance sectors to do some serious shit.

      --
      Eat sleep die
  86. And? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your average American, regardless of racial heritage, just copies everything from the smart kid.

  87. Be specific by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

    What qualifications? How much pay? Where did you advertise? Can you provide a link to the job ad?

  88. Banking is stealing all the smart folks in the US by paxundae · · Score: 1

    If you have the intelligence to be a decent engineer, you can make an order of magnitude more money by going into investment banking, creating some fancy new backwards upside down derivative swap, and milking the rest of us dry. The fact that this is centered in NYC makes it a real drain on smart people going into other sectors in the US at the moment...

  89. MBA, JD uber alles by harvey+the+nerd · · Score: 1

    MBA and JD are sinews of our economy. Scientists and engineers are the peons. Value is added with high prices, overpricing is optimal, and is an important wellspring of power. More laws can microscopically manage and improve our economy. The US elite will fake the world out and rule supreme. Pigs fly and s--- smells good.

  90. You want to know why? by p51d007 · · Score: 0

    Because the 20-30 something people that I run into day to day are MORONS. They can't say two sentences together without "bro" "dude", nor can they write anything down without using "@, 2, U" for words. Hats on backwards, baggy pants, an attitude that gives the impression they are entitled, no manors, an education system that is more involved with outcome based education, political correctness, and brainwashing kids into thinking that they are entitled to everything, capitalism is bad, and socialism is good, then what would you expect businesses to do?

    1. Re:You want to know why? by Frenchman113 · · Score: 1

      Hats on backwards, baggy pants, an attitude that gives the impression they are entitled, no manors, an education system that is more involved with outcome based education...

      Somehow, I think if they owned manors, they would have little or no need to be doing any kind of work.

    2. Re:You want to know why? by pitzG · · Score: 1

      The way the tech industry pays people these days, even most of its best and brightest participants can't afford garages in which to create the next generation of inventions that might propel a new revolution.

      Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak were able to work summer jobs at HP in the 1970s. The ultimate result; their pussies were wet with the excitement that was microelectronics/software and the rest is history.

      The low compensation of tech workers is a real problem out there, as well as the huge amount of risk that tech students take in the courses and in the job market. When top grads often spend years trying to just secure their first job, or when horror stories of top tech grads being locked completely out of the industry occur -- that's a giant problem for the future of innovation. How many best and brightest US tech workers has the H-1B visa destroyed because US tech firms don't even bother responding or treating US tech workers in good faith? Certainly the numbers are numerous.

  91. Does Not Matter by arthurpaliden · · Score: 1

    The US is graduating way more Ministers and Pastors which is the true measure of advancement for of a God fearing society.

    1. Re:Does Not Matter by lightknight · · Score: 1

      More Minister and Pastors than what?

      --
      I am John Hurt.
  92. Most of you are misdiagnosing... by UCSCTek · · Score: 1

    As far as I can tell, the news here is simply that "China is developing". The number of degrees being awarded in the US per capita is not changing significantly:

    http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/digest12/stem.cfm
    (graph 3)

    While when you look at the 2nd graph, you see how China's numbers are shooting up nicely. Given the population of China, and it's culture's relative favoritism of engineering and medicine over arts and humanities--bolstered by a generally high value placed on education (compared to US)--one might expect to see a developed China produces on the order of 10 times the engineering degrees of the US.

  93. Still have to pay the bills by erice · · Score: 1

    Well, there is that whole "Pursuit of Knowledge" thing. And while things might be on the move, they haven't left yet.

    For most people, the first priority is to pay the bills: food, clothing, housing, health care. While a good laymen's knowledge of science and technology is a good thing it is a challenge to get much beyond that with the time and energy that remains after working a full time job. And that's for the fields where it practical at all to pursue as hobbies. Many fields have no effective "cottege" form. Without a lot of money, a lot of time, and quite a few people, you can't build anything.

  94. Re:Banking is stealing all the smart folks in the by pitzG · · Score: 1

    The investment banking outfits only take a small trickle of the overall level of STEM talent out there. Outfits like Goldman Sachs receive thousands of resumes for each position they actually fill. It is rather misleading to suggest that the banks are sucking up all the talent. In fact, given the performance of the financial industry, they probably aren't hiring enough STEM talent.

  95. except for MBA and JD by harvey+the+nerd · · Score: 1

    "...The U.S. is dumbing down because it doesn't pay to do anything else."
    The sheeple.

    The US has increasingly rewarded talent diverted into MBA and JD for a generation to wring nominal profits from stagnant industries. I figure it will end badly over the next ten years in the US.

  96. No need to lock out, just embrace a free market. by pepty · · Score: 1
    No need to lock Asia out, just make a simple change to H1B and other work visas: make them completely portable. Once someone shows up in the US they're free to quit the company that sponsored them and go to whichever company they want. Or just hang out. Their visa is good at whichever company is willing to hire them, from day 1 til it expires, no petitions necessary. Companies sponsoring people for H1Bs would just have to balance the risk of losing their investments against actually paying them competitive rates for their services.

    Cause we're all about the free markets here, right?

  97. Re:No need to lock out, just embrace a free market by pitzG · · Score: 1

    No, locking the H-1B's out would be a far better thing to do, as it would force the US employers to actually open their resume queues and start considering US technology and engineering professionals in good faith, matching their qualifications to the positions they have open.

    H-1B's are generally used for entry-level, relatively low-skilled labour. H-1B pay is usually based on some of the lowest entry level professional rates.

    Once all the US STEM talent is absorbed into the sector, and all the domestic talent settles into jobs that fully make use of their talents, H-1B's may be considered, subject to the provision that firms interview and treat all US candidates for positions in good faith. Instead of doing the Microsoft or Google nonsense thing of throwing out 99% of resume submissions un-read by humans.

  98. Intel's ex-CEO warned of this problem by Tablizer · · Score: 1
  99. Re:Train the US citizens instead, thwart offshorin by ChatHuant · · Score: 1

    If your own citizens are inept, uneducated and incapable of doing the work required, companies have to fill the skilled positions somehow

    Then you train said people to correct for such deficiencies - should they really exist.

    This won't happen because correcting those deficiencies isn't in the interest of the establishment. An uneducated voter is easily swayed with bad arguments and silly wedge issues, and can be led to repeatedly vote against his own interest. That's why education is consistently attacked by the right-wing sound machine, and educated people are consistently presented as "elitists", "out of touch", and somehow not "true Americans". And it works. For a terrible demonstration, see how the Republican contenders had to affirm their disbelief in evolution at one of the first debates. For another, think about the way Romney and Huntsman were attacked for speaking more than one language (Chinese for Huntsman, French for Romney). That's why the situation won't be corrected anytime soon.

    Another result of the vilification of education is the loss of quality teaching. While most politicians express very vocally their support and concern for education, in reality quality education becomes more and more difficult to access. The salaries in teaching are already rather low (a quick check on Payscale.com shows K12 teacher median salaries to be under 45k, comparing unfavorably for example with a journeyman electrician's median income), and there is a nation-wide effort to reduce them even more (see how many of the cuts envisioned by the Republican candidates come from the Education budget). The social respect for teachers is also really low (compared to other countries). As a result, good performers don't go into lower education (maybe excepting a few really dedicated people who sacrifice their lifetime earnings for the responsibility of teaching, or the ones that manage to get a position at a high tier university).

     

    Invoking the words global, competition and skilled are just code words for expressing contempt towards US citizens.

    Not really - global competition is a reality. American companies need skilled employees, but can't get them in the USA because of the above. The establishment helps companies (via mechanisms like elimination of trade barriers) access skilled employees outside the country, where they won't vote in the US elections.

  100. Why should it be diff than manufacturing? by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    The laws of physics are the same in Asia, so it's cheaper to do engineering research there. The cost of brain-work-per-hour is simply lower there. It's not that America is "not producing enough engineers", it's that we cannot compete with brain-power on price.

    From a student's perspective, the non-STEM options look more attractive in US compared to STEM than in Asia.

    In math form:

        (as/ans) > (us/uns)

    Where:
    as = Asian STEM job pay
    ans = Asian Non-STEM job pay
    us = US STEM job pay
    uns = US Non-STEM job pay
    (For degreed workers)

  101. Adapting a quote from Huxley... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...litigating is better than innovating.

    Meh.

  102. bah... by hitmark · · Score: 1

    Corporations have no nationality any more. They wrap themselves in flags of convenience, and play nations against each other in much the same way as they did US states to get wider and wider charters.

    Face it, we are heading towards a time of corporate aristocracies.

    --
    comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
  103. % of profit by NewYork · · Score: 1

    Tell Chinese/Indian companies to share % of profit with their employees.
    Include that clause in your Outsourcing agreement and see the result.

  104. Re:We have to many people in college tech apprenti by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Wow, you're barely literate.

  105. Re:Train the US citizens instead, thwart offshorin by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    I'm proud to be a US citizen, and that statement can't be wrong.

    There's a difference between "there's a problem, fix it" and just saying that the US citizen can't do right.

    At least I'm willing to put a name to my words, and stand behind them. However bad some coward thinks they may be.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  106. Lack of R&D doesn't seem to have hindered Chin by gatkinso · · Score: 1

    They simply stole ours.

    We can (and will) do the same to them. It will be humorous to see the howls of how "Amewicans canna innovrate" from the Chinese here on Slashdot when Apple simply copies the cool new Chinese gadget (and has it manufactured in Brazil).

    --
    I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
  107. Re:Train the US citizens instead, thwart offshorin by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    Not really - global competition is a reality. American companies need skilled employees, but can't get them in the USA because of the above. The establishment helps companies (via mechanisms like elimination of trade barriers) access skilled employees outside the country, where they won't vote in the US elections.

    Only if national policy resigns to it. Once the US is willing, it can override the "global competition" herpderp.

    There needs to be a willingness to combat those that won't train US citizens for actual deficiencies (as opposed to those claimed by business).

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  108. Patent problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is there anyone that can invent anything in the US now outside of the huge companies, when you can expect getting yourself sued before you release anything? The US ia legislating themselves out of competition.

    Spend time on invention instead of legal battles and the young people will return and invent.

  109. One of those doesn't belong by SgtChaireBourne · · Score: 1

    Of those listed, Microsoft, provides a net drain on the economy. Lost data, malware, inferior productivity tools, all add up. The others on the list are quite good, in contrast and make the point. It's just that the one stands out as wrong.

    --
    Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
  110. Or the alternative of a mortician by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    Be the one that causes those deaths, preferably of those who send work offshore.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  111. Lol by lightknight · · Score: 1

    This is fun to watch. Technological dominance moves as a wave, from east to west, and has done so for quite some time. Occasionally, it tarries, but once the host country gets full of itself, it moves on.

    Asia is enjoying it now, and soon after, the Middle East will be enjoying it. Then Europe again. Then the Americas again.

    Which reminds me. I need to move out of this country before they decide to take revenge for the (pending) war on Iran.

    --
    I am John Hurt.
  112. Re:Train the US citizens instead, thwart offshorin by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    You cannot train people to correct for such deficiencies if (a) the universities aren't there and (b) the workers aren't interested. The original article states both problems exist, ergo training is not possible.

    The universities are there, and the workers are interested. It is business that is at fault.

    A more practical goal is to see at the very least the US, or SOME nation in the world, adopt the philosophy of doing best by their citizenry and have the citizenry respond by becoming as highly educated, as mentally flexible and as dextrous in work environments as possible. This would still be incredibly hard to achieve. Your own post shows why - you're not interested in being at the top of the heap by being the best. "you underestimate the power of the US Government and its ability to make an overseas move unprofitably painful" is another way of saying you're only interested in being at the top of the heap by impairing others.

    It's national defense, something the US does quite well at. If someone wishes to fundamentally destroy the US through some sort of departure - it should be thwarted.

    Merit is nice, but it's always good to have a backup when it fails or is structured to fail. Whether you consider that a negative or positive, is your opinion.

    I, therefore, am not the one in contempt of US citizens. You are. You are the one who is holding that it is only at knife-point that the US can achieve a damn thing, that it cannot succeed by competency alone. I am the one who is saying that it CAN achieve everything through competency alone. That isn't contempt for Americans, that's admiration for their sheer potential intelligence, their potential guts and their potential determination. The only contempt is for why it's potential and not realized, and therefore contempt for your notion of superiority by force.

    When businesses refuse to realize it in the US or cultivate it, they are at fault. I do not have the contempt for Americans in general, reserving it for those that hold back work or use the excuses of skill and competition to not build citizens up.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  113. University vs. Corporate R&D by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yesterday on NPR, a commentator talked about how in the US, R&D has moved from the corporate world to universities.
    Being a cynic, I would attribute this to the fact that R&D is expensive, requires a long-term investment, and doesn't increase profits in the short-term. This makes it unattractive to many public corporations, which must beat Wall St. expectations every quarter.

    My opinion is that this trend contributes to both a brain drain and a drain of ideas from the US. When the corporate world was funding more R&D, that R&D was protected as trade secrets and used to make the corporation more competitive. If the commentator is correct in that more if this research is moving to the academic world, then that R&D is easily adopted offshore either by foreign entities that don't suffer from the "not invented here" mindset, or by those that simply hire the international grad students that did the research in the first place.

  114. Silly Question! Of Course the US is Failing! by Frightened_Turtle · · Score: 2

    In over twenty years working in prototype development, I saved for being laid off instead of retirement. Anytime there was a hiccup in the economy, the first thing that management would cut from was R&D and product development. The mentality of a business focused management -- as opposed to a product focused management -- was since they were already manufacturing product, they could delay the release of new product for a while. As any idiot with half a brain can figure out, when you stop or delay developing new products or improvements to existing products, your company can quickly fall behind the competition and become irrelevant.

    As a testament to that, most of the companies I used to work for no longer exist. One was bought out by their primary competitor. Another still struggles to exist.

    Hand-in-hand with this was the fact that the moment they put someone with an MBA in the role of CEO, the company was doomed. Because these people had no concept of what it took to develop and manufacture product, they would start making cuts indiscriminately in order to increase the profit margin -- not profit -- of the company. They would cut a few thousand workers from the payroll in order to "save" $3 million and then pay the CEO a bonus of $5 million for saving the $3 million by putting a few thousand people out of work. Immediately after, the CEO would pull on his golden parachute and jump the company, leaving it to fail.

    Anyone in doubt of a business-focused CEO vs. a product-focused CEO need only look at the most perfect textbook example company: Apple Inc. After they ousted the product-focused Jobs from being CEO, they stuck business-focused men at the helm. Apple all but failed until product-focused Jobs retook command of the company. The first thing Jobs did when he returned was immediately put a stop to the financial dealings and focused the company on producing product again. The rest is history.

    Business people do not value their creative staff. I remember listening to a vice president complaining about the salary that a particular engineer was being paid, saying the guy brought in no business, didn't sell anything, didn't spend any time on the phone talking to customers and just sat quietly in a corner all day doing nothing. The VP felt that any engineer being paid more than $60K per year was being overpaid. The engineer in question was the very man who designed and developed the technology behind the product the company sold. The very reason the company existed! The VP made life very unpleasant for the engineer and eventually the engineer gave up and quit. Over a short period of time, most of the people who worked with him left as well. The VP reported to the Board of Directors that he had managed to save nearly $1 million in 'administrative costs' (the salaries of the people no longer there) and successfully campaigned this into a six-figure salary increase. What this VP actually did, without realizing it, was effectively scuttle the company. After I left the company, I learned from others it was well over a year before the CEO and board members of the company discovered what had happened. By then it was too late. Lack of improvements and enhancements to their product made them irrelevant in the market. Their competitors, on the other hand, suddenly exhibited a surge in improvements and enhancements to their products, as well as the introduction of new products.

    This was not an isolated case! One of the best examples of management not understanding or appreciating the true assets in the company was the case of Motorola vs. Intel. The Motorola PowerPC processor was the first mass produced CPU chip to break the 1 GHz barrier. The PPC was making inroads against Intel's Pentium line of processors and was rapidly moving ahead as the microprocessor of choice for new computers. Intel's line, on the other hand, had reached its theoretical maximum speed and was not moving ahead. Then, just as it seemed the PPC was about to truly gain momentum, things ca

    --


    Whew! This water sure is cold!
    1. Re:Silly Question! Of Course the US is Failing! by pitzG · · Score: 1

      Sounds a lot like the nonsense that's been unfolding with the less-than-competent H-1B workers that have infested much of the tech industry, rather than best and brightest Americans who apply to tech firms in droves, only to see their resumes to into a black hole, never to be responded to.

      Sure, the H-1B's save a little bit of money in the short run, but they're rarely at the top of their classes. Meanwhile guys who truly are at the top of their classes are often told by firms that they would be 'too expensive', or that they're 'under-experienced'.

      I've personally watched a lot of lives ruined this way. Top calibre grads in EE/CS, instead of contributing to the economy, essentially sitting on welfare. A classmate of mine, in the top quartile, actually became an ordained priest because he was sick of the nonsensical proposition of sending out thousands of resumes to tech employers not to receive the dignity of a response.

    2. Re:Silly Question! Of Course the US is Failing! by Frightened_Turtle · · Score: 1

      I can say that in all the cases I listed above, there were absolutely no H-1B workers involved. In fact, I never worked with anyone who was an H-1B until the last lab I worked. While they were all quite competent, it was abundantly clear that the management of the lab hired them as a tax dodge. (In fact, the management of the company were all H-1Bs as well!)

      In all my cases, one thing was obvious: the unabashed greed of the C-level management. By laying people off, they get a "bonus" that usually exceeded the money saved by the layoffs by at least 10%. Which means the company could easily have kept those people employed, rather than dumping them onto the taxpayers. The Republicans in the U.S. government gave huge tax breaks to the wealthy, claiming that these people were the ones in charge of companies and were the ones who would create jobs. As the ultimate insult to the American citizens, they started calling the rich the "Productive Class." They are NOT the productive class! They are the Parasitic Class. They have created no jobs whatsoever -- indeed, they have actually accelerated the job losses in order to take that money that could have gone to jobs and pocketed it themselves. All the parasitic class has done is suck wealth and productivity out of the economy.

      Another issue is that a lot of the business-focused, mid-level management doesn't like hiring true experts because they realize that the new hire could easily replace them in their job. And just as bad are the mid- to high-level management that goes into Save-My-Own-Ass mode. While in school, I worked for a retail chain called Lechmere -- a store chain that Best Buy modeled itself after. The individual who was the regional sales manager for their photography sales started pumping hundreds of cheap, awful photo albums on us to sell. We were going rapidly out of stock of the items that customers actually wanted to buy. We figured out how to game the computer system and force shipment of the vital things that customers wanted to buy. Our sales started skyrocketing. When reported there was a problem in the inventory system and how to work around it, he told our direct manager to stop it or she would be fired immediately. So we did so. As a result, the things people wanted disappeared from our inventory, and stores were flooded with these awful photo albums that no one wanted to buy. Then we discovered what was really happening.

      The photo albums had a margin of 45%. Things that people wanted, such as lens filters, lenses, and cameras, at best had markups of 15% to 20%. Lechmere was about to be bought out by a new owner. So, this individual was basically showing them a spreadsheet that demonstrated he was bringing in a 40% profit margin in sales. Sadly, that was 40% in margin in only a couple thousand dollars a week in sales, instead of 20% in margin on the over $75,000 per week that the department was capable of doing in that one store alone. That SMOA attitude was rampant among the mid- and high-level management in Lechmere. They gutted the very thing that made the store chain successful -- expert sales people -- in order to make themselves look good. It was so bad, Lechmere went bankrupt.

      Another nasty attitude that has become a plague in American businesses is the managerial attitude, "You can be replaced!" There is truth to that. Employees can be replaced. Business managers to think that employees who are afraid for their jobs are somehow more productive. But, an employee who is stressed over the possibility that he may lose his job is more likely to be sending out resumes than putting in extra effort. The attitude comes from the office where business trained people are easy to replace. Well, it is significantly easier and cheaper to replace someone in the business side of a company than it is to replace an engineer or designer. Then there are those individuals who can NOT be replaced. Nearly all of those who cannot be replaced are those who are in engineering or development. You lose one o

      --


      Whew! This water sure is cold!
  115. Re:Train the US citizens instead, thwart offshorin by jd · · Score: 1

    And where's the money going to come from? Government hasn't got any, consumers buy the best (and to hell with who makes it), so that leaves you with two choices -- be the best or rely on pixie dust.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  116. Re:Train the US citizens instead, thwart offshorin by ChatHuant · · Score: 1

    Only if national policy resigns to it. Once the US is willing, it can override the "global competition" herpderp.

    Well, that's exactly my point. The national policy doesn't just "resign to it", it pushes in this direction. The "US" that's willing is actually a comparatively small group; what I believe is a greater group is suspicious of educated people, and lots of politicians pander to them, by cuts to the education budget, by painting educated people as not "real Americans" and so on.

  117. Tipical Slashdot post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What the fuck is R&D ? typical Slashdot post: bunch of Letters piled together with some numbers and some percentages to look good. Why in the god's name editors don't use the common accepted fucking language? are you too lazy ? are you too self important ? do you even know the meaning of the letters you move from one article to another?
    I've been reading news on this site for 12 years but I had enough of the crap that lands in the mailbox, fuck you and good journey to the land of the short words, smaller brains and even shorter vocabulary, I'll just take the other road thank you.

  118. Re:Train the US citizens instead, thwart offshorin by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    Give business no option to go offshore, reward them with tax incentives for staying onshore, and then deeper incentives for retaining people on a directly hired, FTE basis.

    I'm sure there'd be plenty of room if the government didnt have to administer a guest worker program, much less worry about the obvious fraud and waste in it.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  119. In short, be a whore for your life. by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    N/T

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  120. Qualified is a weasel word. by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    Qualified to them could mean "non-US citizen described in a legally compliant way".

    That, and if they're really hard up for finding US citizens, train them.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  121. You sure try to by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    So how much do you want taxes raised so the US can track and verify the pedigree of every product coming into it? Are companies manufacturing in China bad? What about a Chinese company that makes a product no one else does? What about manufacturing in Germany? What about Spain which has lower costs than Germany to a German company? Poland, an upstanding EU member?

    All evaluated on their impact on the US. No impact, no tariff. Any front companies in the chain, as the US determines them, get evaluated as the worst possible country.

    And in fifty years the US would be a shit hole separated from the global economy and running on technology decades behind everyone else.

    Only in your dreams.

    Look what happened to American car manufacturers when they had no competition. The Japanese manufactured cars in the US and still killed those companies. That's what your holy protectionism leads to.

    Insufficient legal coverage. Had there been a push to include transplants/contracted manufacturing in the quotas, they'd be shut out.

    We'd have wonderfully large & reliable cars and you'd have to pay tons to get a golfcart - instead of the other way around.

    The US is not the center of the world, many other countries have companies perfectly capable of shipping goods into the US.

    They still have to play by the US's rules. That, and the legal toolbox that the US has is quite unfriendly to those opposing the US.

    The US has plenty of resources to prove you wrong.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.