Slashdot Mirror
LinkedIn Study: US Attracting Fewer Educated, Highly Skilled Migrants
vinces99 writes The U.S. economy has long been powered in part by the nation's ability to attract the world's most educated and skilled people to its shores. But a new study of the worldwide migration of professionals to the U.S. shows a sharp drop-off in its proportional share of those workers – raising the question of whether the nation will remain competitive in attracting top talent in an increasingly globalized economy. The study, which used a novel method of tracking people through data from the social media site LinkedIn, is believed to be the first to monitor global migrations of professionals to the U.S., said co-author Emilio Zagheni, a University of Washington assistant professor of sociology and fellow of the UW eScience Institute. Among other things, the study, presented recently in Barcelona, Spain, found that just 13 percent of migrating professionals in the sample group chose the U.S. as a destination in 2012, down from 27 percent in 2000.
Africa and Latin America also saw an uptick in their share of the worldâ(TM)s professional migration flows.
If this is true, will we be seeing more high-tech startups opening shop in Africa and Central America?
I have highly educated friends that are getting kicked out of the country after losing the H1-B lotto, I don't think it's an issue with not being able to attract people.
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
In my experience (as a dev team lead and interviewer) foreign workers are generally more educated, more productive and more willing to got the extra mile than the local self-entitled bunch.
Now because of your whiny "teamstering" here on Slashdot, the visa numbers wil probably go down, hurting US business.
Considering that companies have been abusing the H1B process for some time now, perhaps we're just seeing a correction in-part inspired by greater success in potential migrants' home countries.
Salary is a supply/demand characteristic. The more people capable of doing a job, generally the less it pays. This holds true across the entire spectrum of employment until one reaches those that control the market in which they are paid from (ie, corporate executives). Desirability of a job is often not much of a deciding factor in the worth of that job either; janitorial services employees have awful jobs sometimes, but nearly every able-bodied worker could do those jobs, so the wages are particularly low because no individual worker is much in-demand.
This applies to H1B skilled-worker visas since more techncial workers means less demand per-worker, so wages fall. It's further excerbated by the H1B worker not being as free to exercise the free-market due to a real risk of deportation, so they can be paid less than the market average, which further helps to pull down the market average.
I expect the situation isn't as dire as the article makes it out to be.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
Pick any random university and go ask its foreign students how hard it is to get a green card. We don't just have skilled workers wanting in, they're already here and were trained here, and we send them back. It's really not worth the concession for access to their schools for our students (the government where the students are from want them to come home and "impart their knowledge to their countrymen"), the end result is that their best students come here and stay, and our best students stay here too.
LinkedIn Study: US Attracting Fewer Educated, Highly Skilled Migrants
LinkedIn Study: US Attracting Fewer Educated
LinkedIn Study:
LinkedIn Study
LinkedIn Study
LinkedIn Study
Seems legit. The levels of rigor, objectivity, and scientificness of this study are bound to be off the charts!
The study, which used a novel method of tracking people through data from the social media site LinkedIn
found that just 13 percent of migrating professionals in the sample group chose the U.S. as a destination in 2012, down from 27 percent in 2000.
Pretty impressive finding results from LinkedIn back in 2000, considering it didn't launch until 2003.
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
What do you expect when the tax system punishes performance and rewards failure.
This is not at all surprising to me.
Straight up, off the top-- we have a major sector of the US job market (which long ago moved away from manufacturing based jobs to services and technical skills based jobs) that seeks absurd paper requirements, and prices itself out of the domestic labor market, seeking to satisfy its absurd tastes in workers using H1B laborers, creating a market for H1B laborers.
This new market creates very lucrative opportunities in other countries to get desperate people suitably papered up, and foisted into very poisonous employment contracts, even when they really arent able to do the jobs their paperwork says they can.
Add to this that at least one of the countries implicated in industrialized H1B applicant farming also has notoriously bad problems with institutionalized cheating in university settings (coupled with straight up bribery for credentials)-- Seriously, did ANYONE expect ANYTHING OTHER than this?
That's just the tech side of the coin-- There's also the "Immigrant laborers are doing jobs americans dont want to do!" rhetoric. (The statement closer to the truth is that they are doing jobs at pay rates that americans cannot afford to take; The pay rate is below poverty line, and often below legally permitted wages when done above-board with legal citizen workers. This is again, little more than industrialized labor farming for the lowest pricepoint possible. That does NOT attract the "best and brightest".)
But hey-- What do I know. I'm just some guy, not a multi-billion dollar mega conglomerate seeking to continue financial growth in a world economy that cant grow because pay scales have not scaled with inflation. What do I know about the reason detre behind these phenomena!
Seriously.
Well, we treat them like crap. On top of that they come here and find that they have very few opportunities to advance any more. Why would they want to come here? They'd be better off going to a civilized first-world country rather than the third-world construct we are trying so hard to make the US into.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
Oh, I'm quite sure, we attract plenty. We just would not allow their education and other qualifications to help them gain entrance. Other countries use "points" systems to filter better candidates through, but the US deems the method discriminatory.
Meanwhile, the unwashed wogs keep getting through the open border — selected based on the lucky geography, rather than education or anything useful — and accommodating them takes all our energies.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Well, unless you secretly work for Google or some such, this is not about you. They're the ones who can afford to attract the best people from around the world.
The other people claiming to be in tech usually mean H-1B visa recipients. And the real reasons to hire them are:
1. They're cheaper than hiring US citizens.
2. They cannot change jobs as easily as US citizens. No matter how many hours you demand that they work.
3. They're easier to dispose of. You just send them back home. No need to worry about wrongful termination suits or such.
If you cannot afford to hire the people with the training necessary then you need to look at your business plan.
Complaining that the local people who will take the job at the pay you're offering lack the education necessary says more about your pay than about the skills of the local people.
The headline is one conclusion. The other is that workers looking to migrate to the US find LinkedIn less valuable compared to workers migrating to other countries. I'm sure there are numerous other conclusions you could draw from such a novel method.
It has been obvious for some time that the US is on the decline. As a worker in the late stages of my career, I find that saddening but I don't know what we can do about it. In the 60's it was all about technology and progress and science. Kennedy made a speech where he asked where the US would get all the Engineers that would be needed for the future. Nowadays it is all about financial instruments and inventing ways to manipulate the numbers to look like you have more money than you do. And it is also about rejecting science when it doesn't agree with your religious leanings (sort of sounds like some other religions in other parts of the world, doesn't it?). I don't personally see the will in this country to continue the leadership into the future. It will probably take a generation or two, but then we will be another Spain or UK which was once a dominant world power. Let's just hope that the next big power is benevolent, or it is likely not to be very pretty.
Ten points!
I'm one of said H1B visas, now with a green card. Been here almost exactly 10 years now, after Apple bought my company. I came here for the money and the weather, not for anything else. Frankly I don't think the US society is as "free" as people here seem to believe.
I've mentioned this here before, and (understandably, no-one likes bad news) I tend to get down voted for it, but the simple honest truth of the matter is that the USA isn't geared for looking after people, it's geared towards controlling people. There's things I like about it (the job is great, the weather is excellent, the people (as individuals who I meet day-to-day) are generally wonderful unless driving, the money is still good, I like my house and I met my wife here - my son is dual American/British).
There's things I don't like too, (the militarisation of the police, the lack of any reasonable healthcare, the "I'm alright Jack, screw you" attitude of a *lot* of people - weirdly enough those who often really *aren't* alright, the schooling system, and for lack of any better term, the country's soul). As time passes, and I get older, these seem to be more important. I can't see myself retiring here, and in fact I can't see myself here in another 10 years. That's not the attitude I came to the US with, it's something I've developed while I've been here.
Let's be frank here, I'm not trying to boast, but I'm one of the 'have's - I have a million dollar house (which sounds a lot more impressive than it really is in this neighbourhood) which is almost paid off, I have a high six-figure income, and I've money in the bank. I'm not a "1%er" but I'm up there with the rest... however, even with all of this, I'm not happy with the way the country is going. There's little-to-no safety net for joe public, and seemingly (*both* houses Republican, seriously ?) no desire for that. I think the USA is far closer to oligarchy than democracy, and the long-term trend just looks like it gets worse from here on out.
[sigh]
Simon.
Physicists get Hadrons!
In the IT sector, I can see a few things driving this:
- Infrastructure and dev jobs are increasingly being farmed out to cloud providers and outsourcers, meaning fewer on site jobs are needed, at least at the low end. (Which is a pity, because you don't get good high-end people if they can't start out at the low end like they used to.)
- In general, economic growth is still slow in most sectors, so a lot of the traditional demand for IT isn't there.
- Tech Bubble 2.0 is increasingly eating up resources building web-based services and phone apps. Startups want young hungry coders who are exactly like the founders, which may lead to fewer foreigners being employed.
- The US isn't exactly welcoming to foreigners these days, given the debate on immigration. Even if someone is the best and brightest, it's possible they would feel lumped in with everyone else.
In STEM, it's bigger trends that are probably driving it:
- Other countries are more science friendly -- they fund it well and there's less of a cultural bias against "smart people".
- Science in general is a bad career prospect given the imbalance of graduates and permanent research positions. Most big corporate labs are shells of what they once were, and academic institutions seem to want to keep everyone on permanent postdoc status. I would have to have a total passion for my work to accept tenuous circumstances like that, and would probably be nearly broke for most of my life.
This, plus the abuse of the H1-B program by IT companies, is probably a good starter list of reasons. For every great H1-B hire, there are many stories of junior guys with questionable skills and credentials being run through a large technology company's meat grinder churning out code or performing low end tasks. It's definitely a misuse of the program in this case, since it was designed to correct a critical skills imbalance.
One thing that might reverse the trend is the fact that fewer domestic people are going into STEM fields, given the cost and the fact that it's no longer a guarantee of gainful employment. It's counter intuitive given how well _successful_ STEM graduates do compared to the general population, but once a precedent is set, it's hard to change people's minds. Think about how many IT people you know who actively say they're telling their children to avoid following in their footsteps.
It has nothing to do with the US economy taking a hit or the fact that there is now more going on in other parts of the world. It is all because Slashdot complained about an H1B Visa program that exists to supply cheap labor.
Yes, I fed the troll. Sue me.
Democracy Now! - your daily, uncensored, corporate-free
>Nailed it. The land of the free has become the land of the free stuff.
No it hasn't, but the far-right-wing asshats that drove all the smart people out of the Republican party keep marginalizing themselves by making this claim. Keep it up idiots, your driving the Republican party off the deep end is going to make room for a new second party.
Here is a list of reasons why many Europeans won't come. You are not one of those socialist European countries with a public healthcare system. You have 12 times more people shot per year and per inhabitant then any EU country. There is a lot of racism in the US. Your immigration procedures and your fear of terrorism.
All in all your image sucks. You are no t the country of the free and brave. You are quite the opposite. There is also a lot if violence in your country. All causes not to come. And for EU citizens the lack of a welfare state shocks us even more than the high rate of gun possessions.
And another wingnut has spoken. It's a shame Fox shut down their comments and unleashed you idiots on the rest of the Internet.
ops I mean slaves I can say that I am not very interested staying here. This country has gone worse with every year I've been here, and it seems that the "American dream" went down the shitter sometime around ..umm. 1986 or something. Where to start - exorbitant prices for a couple of hundred pounds of 2x4 and plywood, houses, that don't cost more than 5-6k in materials, including the wiring, which I can build all by myself if about 3 weeks, even with the concrete slab. Rents getting 15% increase each year. Employers who hire a bund of incompetent folks and a few competent, but a too scared to get rid of all the incompetent guys, and end up dumping all on the competent (regardless of local or H1 status), forcing these competent people to work 16-20 hours a day, without being able to reject working overtime, and when complaining to HR to only get - you are exempt, so just work until works get done in time. Nobody checking if the managers don't commit things for tomorrow which are a weeks work, and expecting that you deliver. HRs that are turning to no more than a disciplinary squad. What else - people avoiding/hiding taxes, so local PDs and FDs are chronically understaffed, crime rates going up, neighborhoods getting worse; food being produced unsustainably, being bad for your health. People getting distant, stuck up, comparing your income with theirs, the clothes you wear, the car you drive, the club you are a member of then then deciding if they want to be your friends. Being unable to start a family or any kind of relationship, or do volunteer work, because your employer keeps you busy for 16 hours a day. Your employer forcing you to take half of your vacation because "company shutdown" then telling you, after you made plans for those days that you have to actually come to work, but they would not adjust your vacation balance, because they make you report your entire month's activity on the 19th. etc. A county so hell bent on surveillance and truing it's citizens into a mindless consumers (original meaning - eating without thinking about/needing it) from young age in school, school rooms without windows.. (brave new world anyone).
Much of those things affect local US workers as much as a foreign H1B worker. But for me the choice is clear, I would rather pack and take my chances in Singapore, Japan, Korea, China, than stay here and watch this once great country go down.
Only deeply stupid people who've internalized wingnut propaganda call Obama a "socialist." I can see why you derped as an AC.
We have millions of undermployed citizens and a future where there are not 300 million jobs. The last thing we need is a growing population. We need to educate the people without jobs to fill the ones that exist, not add more to the population for a future where they don't.
It's not bullshit, but a fact of life. A lot of people have jobs which can be done elsewhere. This entitlement you exhibit doesn't make you any more valuable or make employers pay you more.
The study, which used a novel method of tracking people through data from the social media site LinkedIn...
isn't this more a study on global use of the site LinkedIn, than on the migration of workers?
The only people I know that still use LinkedIn are desperate and unemployable. Their service got to be such an annoyance where I work that I personally entered their domain into our blacklist. It's the only domain that's specifically blacklisted. Pornhub and Xtube aren't even blacklisted (though I think they'd trip the TMG servers pretty quickly)
While I would agree on some of your early points, have you seen the xenophobia in Japan? A white person who speaks the language fluently can't even rent a place.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
The talent is already here, just that it resides with citizens (full and naturalized) of the United States of America. Where it does not exactly exist, citizens are more likely to start from a competent, trainable background - unlike the majority of guest workers. The only problem is that employers see freedom as a cost when someone else has it as opposed to a benefit when held by an employer.
More good would be done by repealing the 1965 Immigration Act and removing the regulations it enabled. Then if someone is really worth it, they will pursue citizenship. If we're lucky, pass a federal version of Arizona's SB1070 to put some fear into illegals and those who aid/abet/hire/contract them.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
Because there is not racism, xenophobia, bigotry, etc, in Europe, Asia, or anywhere else in the world...
XDInd
Keep it up idiots, your driving the Republican party off the deep end is going to make room for a new second party.
Oh, yes please. Replacing the Democrat-Lite party with a right-wing party is one of the best things that could happen to America.
We're becoming a backwater of bible thumping assholes.
We need to educate the people without jobs to fill the ones that exist
You can't educate people beyond their intelligence.
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
The USA has always been about beating and stealing from other people to sell to some else. If you believe otherwise I have a bridge in San fransicso I can sell.
Or do the names Rockefeller Vanderbilt or Carnegie mean nothing to you.
i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
Well, we treat them like crap. On top of that they come here and find that they have very few opportunities to advance any more. Why would they want to come here? They'd be better off going to a civilized first-world country rather than the third-world construct we are trying so hard to make the US into.
It might not be a cultural fit for you, but it is a good fit for over 300m citizens (less amnestied illegals).
Unlike other countries, US property is respected enough to not need legions of gated communities. Other countries have them in quantities large enough to suggest that property is not respected(SE Asia) or to show mass contempt for their citizenry(e.g. Russia).
In addition, citizens enjoy more personal freedoms (despite what some thinktanks would claim) than nearly any other country in the world. For example, self-defense with a firearm is encouraged in many parts of the country(not just Texas), when many parts of the world wish to restrict it. In addition, speaking up against politicians is not followed by a disappearance, house arrest, or defamation charge.
As for the complaints about non-citizens not being treated properly, that comes with any civilized country. Guest workers and illegals are just the next tiers below temporary/contingent/casual employment.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
When I went back to school to learn computer programming after the Dot Com Bust to re-focus my technical career, there were two long-term trends in my favor: baby boomers would retire and China/India would stop exporting workers. Pay for skilled I.T. workers will only increase as demand goes up and supply goes down. Alas, the Great Recession has postponed this by a few years. The great I.T. crunch is nigh!
I don't see anybody lining up to get into China or India.
As I understand it, foreigners can work in China much more easily than they can work in America, and some people I know have done so. The Chinese actually seem to want to attract the 'best of the best' to benefit their economy, rather than millions of unskilled illegals.
Of coure they'll probably kick most of those foreigners out when their own people can do the jobs just as well. But it's still probably less risky than an H1B.
You do realize that people can list their former places of employment and habitation, even prior to the site's founding? To say "I worked at company X in country Y in 2000" does not require that the website you say it on have existed in 2000.
"Anyone who [rips a CD] is probably engaging in copyright infringement." - David O. Carson
Everyone has jobs that can be done elsewhere. Just don't allow them to sell their output here for subsidized prices. That means tax imports, all imports, with a flat tax. (That side steps all trade agreement issues, as it's across the board).
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
While it may be a fact of life, entitlement is only part of the equation. The other is pure economic pragmatism, such patterns can only work so long before you cut off your feet. They tend to make a few people richer in the short term but as more and more companies/industries do it they start finding their customer base evaporating too, at which point earnings get eaten from the bottom up. It is a classic game theory problem, the economy is strongest with well paying jobs kept local, but any single company gets and advantage by getting rid of its well paid jobs while other companies still have them, so companies that have behaviors that are healthy for the overall economy (including themselves) are economically punished.
H1B average education is that of an USA associate degree - light years away from being the "best of the best".
China relies on indirect racism rather than laws to keep others away from the good jobs.
John D. Rockefeller basally created the modern petroleum industry, dramatically advancing technology, and reducing the price of oil for customers.
Cornelius Vanderbilt was an early steamboat and shipping entrepreneur, and dramatically improved the operation of railroad lines into New York City.
Andrew Carnegie greatly enlarged the US steel industry, including the first serious of the Bessemer process. Personally, Carnegie was a leader in the American Anti-Imperialist League, in opposition to the U.S. annexation of the Philippines. He also gave away 90% of his wealth to philanthropies.
All three of these men created companies that enhanced the lives of consumers.
The economy is not a zero-sum game. This is not a race to the bottom. As low cost-of-living places get more and more jobs, their standard of living rises and costs go up accordingly.
If your job doesn't require an in-person presence, then you're competing on a global market. Best get used to that fact - it's not going away, and isolationism spells certain death for modern economies.
And don't overlook the key fact that more people buy a given product than work to make it. If lower pay means lower costs, net advantage is had to the economy: that's been studied for e.g. Walmart selling lots of stuff made in China. The total amount saved by all Americans in buying these products is several times larger than the total lost wages. For business-to-business products, maybe it doesn't work that way, I don't know, but I wouldn't just assume it's bad for the economy.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Also run the stats over the entire 20th century and include the shootings by out of control government.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Are you high? The Democrats may be described as Republicans-light because they're also right-wing, but not extremists. The Republicans may be Stormfront-light, but that's about all they're less extreme than. How could you possibly think a party that replaces the Republicans because they're off the deep end right-wing lunatics would be more right-wing?
North Koreans are lined up to get into China. The only problem is the risk of getting lined up for having tried to get into China.
That means tax imports, all imports, with a flat tax.
Last time we tried that we got the Great Depression, and World War II. The problem with tariffs is that when we impose them on others, they retaliate, and impose them on our goods and services. So trade stops. Countries use their labor forces to do things that are more productively done elsewhere. Everyone loses. This has been well understood since at least the time of Adam Smith, and there are plenty of historical evidence that protectionism is really really stupid. But there are always plenty of morons looking for simplistic answers, especially when they can blame "foreigners" for their problems.
I await when CEO jobs can also be outsourced 'elsewhere' since I'm sure they can be paid a lot less for their leadership skills than they can in the U.S. Funny, outsourcing is only for the lower ranks but not in higher management. Are you saying that someone from these other countries can't do as good a job as a U.S. corporate management team?
Gosh, I must have ended up in the abuse department..
Well, we treat them like crap. On top of that they come here and find that they have very few opportunities to advance any more. Why would they want to come here? They'd be better off going to a civilized first-world country rather than the third-world construct we are trying so hard to make the US into.
It might not be a cultural fit for you, but it is a good fit for over 300m citizens (less amnestied illegals).
Unlike other countries, US property is respected enough to not need legions of gated communities.
And yet, the U.S. has legions of gated communities, despite not "needing" them! From the article: "By 1997, an estimated 20,000 gated communities had been built across the country. Approximately 40% of new homes in California are behind walls. In 1997, estimates of the number of people in gated communities ranged from 4 million in 30,000 communities up to around 8 million, with a ½ million in California alone." These are nearly all wealthy people, why are they seeking hidden enclaves?
Other countries have them in quantities large enough to suggest that property is not respected(SE Asia) or to show mass contempt for their citizenry(e.g. Russia).
Russia is the only country you can come up with by name I notice. Why not try one of the real industrial democracies?
In addition, citizens enjoy more personal freedoms (despite what some thinktanks would claim) than nearly any other country in the world. For example, self-defense with a firearm is encouraged in many parts of the country(not just Texas), when many parts of the world wish to restrict it. In addition, speaking up against politicians is not followed by a disappearance, house arrest, or defamation charge.
Let's unpack this bit. Last going first, in which industrialized democracies does speaking up against politicians cause "disappearance, house arrest, or defamation charge"? Your "Russia" example again?
So we are left with that all-essential freedom of unrestricted gun ownership - the freedom to easily murder others. Very, very few gun deaths each year are due to "self defense" killing: for each justified self-defense killing, there are about 35 fire-arm homicides.
Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
Indeed. Obama is more of an old time republican (which is fine, the whole country moved right) and not any kind of socialist. People just use that label to mean "bad", it literally has no meaning anymore. It doesn't refer to socialism at all because people don't really know what socialism is or what it stands for. Hell, I doubt they even know what capitalism is.
Unlike other countries, US property is respected enough to not need legions of gated communities
This is a joke right? The US must be the developed country with the highest proportion of gated community residents.
The other is pure economic pragmatism, such patterns can only work so long before you cut off your feet. They tend to make a few people richer in the short term but as more and more companies/industries do it they start finding their customer base evaporating too, at which point earnings get eaten from the bottom up.
There are two things to note here. First, developed world labor is going to experience that competition no matter what is done. Second, customer base isn't evaporating in the developing world. Those economies are doing just fine.
Same here. Not that I would want to go to the US though, for a number of other reasons.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Indeed.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
I apologise. I posted before I'd read your other posts here and realized you were just trolling.
Pretty much anyone who is calling Obama a "socialist" doesn't understand what Socialism means, doesn't understand just how skewed to the political right the US is politically, and doesn't understand that for a lot of us in the rest of the world, being at least a bit Socialist is a *good* thing. I am in Canada and we are sadly heading further to the right than we have been in the past and its proving to only be a bad thing for the country IMHO. As a Canadian, I view Obama as being pretty definitely Right-Wing in almost all regards. The Republicans qualify as "Batshit insane Right Wing" on the other hand :)
"The first time I got drunk, I got married. The second time I bought a chimpanzee, after that I stayed sober" Arian Seid
you have already a capable prison industry so you can employ some and put the rest inside. Problem solved.
Tariffs are entirely different than a flat tax. It appears that your references were true tariffs and the Great Depression was already underway. They did lead to retaliatory tariffs from our trading partners, and trade dropped by half in both directions. Currently, that would more than halve our trade deficit, not a terrible thing, however, applying it as a flat tax across the board for imports in most cases would only be evening up the playing field.
But you're right - I prefer a flat sales tax, with the border also being a point of sale. Instead of a VAT, this is just a simple flat tax model. Imports get taxed twice under this proposal. Replacing the current morass of tax law could only make this country better.
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
The great depression was caused by a stock market and real estate bubble which triggered a massive recession, not by tariffs. Actually with higher tariffs probably it wouldn't have spread abroad so much. And the crisis itself, which started in the most efficient markets possible (the stock exchanges) also proves that adam smith's theories are purely delirious....
OMFUG! An economic LITERATE amongst the Randian clueless clones.
When did the web start growing up?
I mean, idiots are still calling for lower taxes, like 34 years of 78% lower taxes on the top 10% somehow created a lasting peace time boom (not).
Of course it is a zero sum game.
you cannot profit unless someone else LOSES that profit to you
It is possible to 'grow the pie', but not by eliminating customers
There is evidence that Smoot-Hawley Tariff at least made the Great Depression worse. Particularly due to the retaliation tariffs around the world. If Norway is doing all right, it is more due to the fact that its market share of the market isn't huge, and the rest of the world is not retaliating. The US maintains a free trade policy, which if it changed, due to the size of the US market, might well cause a large ripple effect everywhere else, including Norway.
However, since the US is not retaliating against Norway, Norway gets its cake and eats it too. Because they can protect, their workers do well. Because the US is not protecting, Norway can still export their own goods without tariff barriers in US markets (or other free markets). Again, that only works because the balance of the world market isn't following the same policy as Norway. Norway, and the Scandinavian countries in general are edge cases that are often injected into arguments but using them in counterpoint to say, the US, is not an apples to apples comparison.
In any case, tariffs were not the single reason for the Great Depression, nor was the Stock Market crash or the financial policies. As with any disaster that could be called "Great", a lot needed to go wrong at the same time, and it did. Otherwise, you just get a much more minor event.
Nah, I can guarantee you that the reason is Bush and his regime. I'm an example myself, I was planning for a long time to apply at a US university and move to your lovely country, but Bush and his gang really did spoil the party.
I know some of you guys think differently, but across the pond Obama is more or less recognized like an overall very reasonable, if not a bit pale and too timid politician. Like, say, Jimmy Carter.
It is possible to 'grow the pie', but not by eliminating customers
That's exactly it. You grow the pie enormously, as China, India, and Brazil rise to "developed economy" standards of living (this has arguably already happened for S Korea). More than doubling the number of consumers is a massive gain for all of us, but most of all for all the people joining us at our standard of living!
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
I await when CEO jobs can also be outsourced 'elsewhere' since I'm sure they can be paid a lot less for their leadership skills than they can in the U.S. Funny, outsourcing is only for the lower ranks but not in higher management. Are you saying that someone from these other countries can't do as good a job as a U.S. corporate management team?
This happened in the 1980s when Japanese automakers began opening factories in the American midwest. In the 1990s Japanese electronics firms hired a lot of Americans to develop chips and software. Most of these ventures turned out very well for both the Japanese owners/managers and the American workers. China's population and economy are several times the size of Japan's, so maybe in a decade or two Chinese firms will be the largest source of new employment in the US.
You do not account for effort, talent, permanence, etc.
For instance, let's say you have three violin makers: one with a some wood little skill, another with some wood and some skill, and a third with some wood and a lot of skill.
Let's say the value of the wood by itself is $150. The value of our little economy is, therefore, $450.
Now each violin maker makes a violin.
The first person makes a violin worth $300.
The second person makes a violin worth $700.
The third person makes a violin worth $1500.
The value of that economy is now $2500- a massive increase over the starting $450. Not only that, but the value has gone up until those objects are destroyed.
That is why it's not a zero-sum game- that is also why inflation is not necessarily a bad thing. In order for the value of a currency to remain stable, it must accurately reflect the value within an economy. As things are produced, money should be printed proportionally.
If you still think it is a zero sum game, ask yourself the following: if that were true, how would we have so much infrastructure that didn't exist 100 years ago? Is the city of New York more valuable today than it was in 1914?
Norway is the third richest country in the world by per-capita GDP, it's highly protectionist
Norway has been a member of the WTO since 1995, and is a member of the EFTA. It is one of the least protectionist nations. Most of its imports are completely tariff free. But comparisons with Norway prove little, other than it is a REALLY good idea to find massive offshore oil deposits in your territorial waters.
There is evidence that Smoot-Hawley Tariff at least made the Great Depression worse.
Something we all should have learned from Ben Stein in Ferris Bueller's Day Off.
After 9/11 America became much less of a free country. True, this started earlier. The ramping up of the "police state" after the terrorism of the 1st Twin Towers bombing and the domestic threat demonstrated by a couple (or three?) kooks in Oklahoma City in 1995 didn't help. Treating strong encryption like munitions in the 1990s almost certainly scared off some scholars and computer professionals from wanting to make their careers in America.
I'm not saying things were better before then - the Red Scare era of the 50s and 60s had a domestic aura of "what is good for the government is good for the country" about it. Vietnam and the rest of the '60s saw that crumble at least in part. From a "you can come to America, research what you want, and not have to worry that the government will try to shut you down by any method other than cutting your government funding" perspective the 70s and 80s and maybe the 90s were probably better than the 21st century and better than the 50s and 60s for anyone working outside areas where the primary application would be military or national-defense.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
The great depression was caused by a stock market and real estate bubble which triggered a massive recession, not by tariffs. Actually with higher tariffs probably it wouldn't have spread abroad so much. And the crisis itself, which started in the most efficient markets possible (the stock exchanges) also proves that adam smith's theories are purely delirious....
OMFUG! An economic LITERATE amongst the Randian clueless clones.
When did the web start growing up?
I mean, idiots are still calling for lower taxes, like 34 years of 78% lower taxes on the top 10% somehow created a lasting peace time boom (not).
It didn't grow up much, I think. Looks like they modded you down.
I'm still waiting for that trickle-down prosperity myself. So far all the gold coming down smells like ammonia or something.
But I'm sure if we keep doing it over and over again, eventually it will all work.
The economy is not a zero-sum game. This is not a race to the bottom. As low cost-of-living places get more and more jobs, their standard of living rises and costs go up accordingly.
If your job doesn't require an in-person presence, then you're competing on a global market. Best get used to that fact - it's not going away, and isolationism spells certain death for modern economies.
And don't overlook the key fact that more people buy a given product than work to make it. If lower pay means lower costs, net advantage is had to the economy: that's been studied for e.g. Walmart selling lots of stuff made in China. The total amount saved by all Americans in buying these products is several times larger than the total lost wages. For business-to-business products, maybe it doesn't work that way, I don't know, but I wouldn't just assume it's bad for the economy.
You're missing a couple of key items.
When we started shipping those white-collar jobs that were supposed to replace the blue-collar ones that we automated out overseas, they went to people whose cost of living was ONE-TENTH of what ours is. We could literally starve competing against that kind of arbitrage.
It's true. They did get more prosperous, and they did demand more. Last time I computed, the arbitrage had shrunk from 10-to-1 to 8-to-1. Maybe more now, but not enough that bean counters care much yet. It's going to be many a long year before we all approach parity at this rate.
Because of this massive differential, we don't have a "global" enconomy, we have an outsourced economy. It's well that we've been at relative peace for the last several decades because I'm not sure where the US military gets their computer display screens if they don't get them from Communist China like the rest of us do.
There's another problem there. When you make 1/10th - or even 1/8th what the people you displace did, you're not going to be buying some of the things that those people bought. Because the global absolute price of a PC or an automobile is about the same anywhere. You're also shipping a lot of tax revenue over to someone else's tax authority so that local infrastucture has less income to pay for it. When the goverment is already in the hands of a crazed bunch of tax-cut-and-spend politicians, it isn't just the boondoggles that get hit - it's roads and schools and other stuff.
Every job I've had for at least 10 years is in competition with people in low cost of living areas. Even so, I remain employed, and well paid. There's value in working local, and there's value in being good at what you do, so there's some premium to be had vs the cheapest place available.
Meanwhile, home prices in Bangalore are higher than rural America now - I would expect other factors of cost of living to follow.
You can certainly compete in a global market, if you're talented. If, however, you're doing some mindless job that anyone who can fog a mirror can do equally well, from any place in the world, then there's just no valid moral reason for the job to stay here. Further, it's only a matter of time before no one, will have that job. Technology means automation, and automation is why technology improves everyone's standard of living. The future is bleak for unskilled labor, worldwide, but that's not an outsourcing issue.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
"And WWII was caused by a german guy who wanted to expand the territory of its country a little bit too much, not by tariffs."
Humm... no, big no. No man could start a world war back then. WWII started because that German guy was supported by quite a lot other German guys and even a higher number of Germans and other Europeans that did nothing to stop the avalanche at its beginings.
And once you start studying why it was so, you'll find tariffs playing quite a strong role in the whole equation.
"Norway is the third richest country in the world by per-capita GDP, it's highly protectionist and most of its biggest enterprises are even state-owned."
Norway is the way it is because of a temporal chance not to last long. Firstly, we are here talking about tariffs, not state ownership (which would lead to a very interesting conversation, given USA common points of views about it, but a different one). Secondly, Norway, while quite strong on their borders by current standards is far from a closed border, being an EFTA member. Thirdly, they are lucky in that they are oil rich and their tariff policies are assymetric (they close their borders but their business counterparts do not), but this will sooner than later change, since EU is starting to be fed up about that.
That's because you guys managed to get Harper re-elected again.. You need to make sure he is gone next election.
"The economy is not a zero-sum game. This is not a race to the bottom. As low cost-of-living places get more and more jobs, their standard of living rises and costs go up accordingly."
No, it is not a zero sum game, it is more like a steam engine: it requieres a hot (cheap producers) and a cold spot (rich consumers) to work.
Now, the game big corps are trying to play is to find if they are able to jump from hot spot to hot spot and the world will be big enough so by the time the travel it around (from Japan to Korea, from there to China, India and Philippines, from there to Brazil and Latin America, from there to Africa) old hot spots are already cold again (...and once Africa becomes hot enogh, back to, say, India, which by that time is again as poor as it was in the begining).
"And don't overlook the key fact that more people buy a given product than work to make it."
Just like in the steam engine example, you won't be able to extract more energy (wealth) than you put in. It is not a zero-sum game but it still is a closed-system one. More people buy a given product than it takes to produce it... provided they have the money to buy it, which comes in turn from the money those other people have earned by doing things that other people can and want to buy (which ones? the first ones? no, they don't have the money because all they have is just the portion the second group already gave him, which must be less than their own surplus, or else they'd be producing that themselves at an advantage).
"Walmart selling lots of stuff made in China. The total amount saved by all Americans in buying these products is several times larger than the total lost wages."
For one, it's not clear for that to be the case. For another, it is only savings if they were in the need of buying that even at a higher price, which for the most part is not the case. I'd call that the "promotional sale" fallacy.
It may not be a race to the bottom, but it sure appears to be a race to somewhere much closer to the Third World mean than the First World one.
"Let's say the value of the wood by itself is $150. The value of our little economy is, therefore, $450.
Now each violin maker makes a violin.
The first person makes a violin worth $300.
The second person makes a violin worth $700.
The third person makes a violin worth $1500.
The value of that economy is now $2500- a massive increase over the starting $450. Not only that, but the value has gone up until those objects are destroyed."
You still didn't explain who has both the $2500 and the will to buy those violins. Without this pesky detail no, there's no more wealth than at the begining.
"I'm more likely to die of being hit in a crosswalk."
Yes, you are right. Car accident rates are also that much higher than in Europe.
"Who wants to leave one socialist country to come to another?"
You can bet basically nobody from a properly run "socialist" (by your standards) country (i.e. Northern Europe) would want to go to what USA has become in the last 30 years.
And no, neither Obama nor USA is in danger of being anywhere near to be considered socialist.
"Socialist", despite of what you think, is not a swear word.
"used a novel method of tracking people through data from the social media site LinkedIn" -- [sarcasm]Yeah, that's really reliable data. Won't have any problems with skewed, self-selected data-sets at all.[/sarcasm]
"US property is respected enough to not need legions of gated communities."
Pardon me?
My bet is that USA has the biggest numbers and biggest percentage of population under gated (real or virtual) communities with doors opening both outwards (not to let them in, i.e. Bel Air style) and inwards (not to let them out, i.e. Washington suburbs style) in the whole first world.
... doesn't want educated, highly skilled migrants. He wants millions more of uneducated, unskilled migrants.
At least, that's what the proverbial man from Mars would conclude.
"I've always read that the reasons were the loss of WWI, the unfair Versailles treaty"
And you are, of course, right. But then, please, review the Versailles treaty. It basically holds down to "no tariffs will be allowed to Allies on German territory while German goods can and will be heavily tariffed on our borders".
"the massive war damages"
Yes, of course. And those damages and the hefty war repairings were being sustained with money borrowed from USA which all of a sudden stopped coming and debt reclaimed after 29' crash while, at the same time, basically no more imports were accepted by USA from Germany after the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act.
"Now the mistery has been revealed: germans just didn't want to pay the import tariff on their iPhones!"
Not exactly that but almost, only up-down: Germans couldn't buy enough iron to build their Mercedes because impossed import tariffs and then, they couldn't sell the little numbers of Mercedes they could produce because Smoot-Hawley Act would tax them 50% at USA borders.
All these led to poverty and hyperinflation, which led to discontent, which led to a crazy leader gaining power, which eventually led to a world war.
I'm two generations old and my wages have been climbing my whole life. Get some skills, you fucking hippie loser
Nonsense, users of linkedin do get something back from that system. Plenty of people who are more successful than you use it.
Make more money here in the GTA and the schools are better. The politics are also far less toxic.
Feels generally more immigrant friendly as well.
Have you noticed the thing about technology? It improves your standard of living. And no, "technology" doesn't mean iPhones, it means more efficient ways to produce everyday goods, cheaper in terms of labor, energy, and raw materials.
For 150 years now people have been complaining about how technology will make all the jobs go away and everyone will starve. Not so much, as it turns out. Making stuff cheaper always creates new job making more stuff, so the first world benefits, and the economies of India, China, and Brazil keeps growing (although China has it's own bubble to work through these days), and the middle class in each nation keeps expanding.
Again, it's not a zero-sum game. You want the course that makes the pie grow the fastest over time, rather than squabbling over who gets what slice. Exponential gains always trump linear gains over time.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
The flaw in that plan is that domestic production and imports are known to rise and fall with one another. Anything that dampens imports in any way likely results in domestic job losses. The Smoot-Hawley act proved that pretty decisively.
Likewise, tariffs, and indeed any taxation on foreign goods just for the sake of being foreign, are an incredibly stupid idea. The great depression wouldn't have occurred if there was no such thing as mercantilism. We've seen worse stock market crashes than what preceded the depression, and none of the "protections" added after the fact were even needed to prevent economic collapse. If you look at the unemployment statistics for that period, you actually see it stable for some time after the market crash, (it was about the same as the numbers that we saw in 2008) but it doesn't tank until just after Smoot-Hawley passes.
OMFUG! An economic LITERATE amongst the Randian clueless clones.
When did the web start growing up?
I mean, idiots are still calling for lower taxes, like 34 years of 78% lower taxes on the top 10% somehow created a lasting peace time boom (not).
You and AC are both wrong. Tariffs indeed caused it. Look at the unemployment rate for a good six months after the stock market crash. It was basically the same as what we saw in 2008. Not good, but not particularly bad. The depression didn't begin until Smoot-Hawley passed. Imports and domestic production rise and fall with one another. This is something even the most liberal economists agree with. So if you squelch imports, guess what happens to unemployment?
Look at the period between the market crash and Smoot-Hawley. It's relatively stable. Basically what we had during that period is comparatively the same as what we had in 2008. The jobless rate didn't really increase until after it passed.
Currently, that would more than halve our trade deficit, not a terrible thing,
It would also cut our GDP in half.
History has always shown that if you kneecap imports in *any* way, you also do the same to domestic production. It doesn't matter if the other trade partners retaliate or not; the whole purpose of imports is to acquire goods that can't be acquired domestically (either they flat out aren't available, or the domestic knowledge and/or infrastructure isn't present, so the foreign companies can create it cheaper.) These imported goods are then used as capital for domestic production.
If that wasn't true, it wouldn't ever be economical to import; we'd just rely entirely on domestic production.
Of course it is a zero sum game.
you cannot profit unless someone else LOSES that profit to you
It is possible to 'grow the pie', but not by eliminating customers
If you can grow the pie, then by definition it is NOT zero-sum. I don't mean to ad-hom, but what you said is just insanely stupid.
You still didn't explain who has both the $2500 and the will to buy those violins. Without this pesky detail no, there's no more wealth than at the begining.
It's simple, actually: The person who buys those violins created that value they used to purchase it elsewhere. Money is just a store of value used for trade, but in and of itself isn't valuable, and in fact is only worth whatever you think its worth.
Replicate the same analogy as GP did, only with somebody who makes shoes. That person who makes shoes buys a violin. Effectively he traded several pairs of shoes for a violin.
June 1930 was pretty close to the 1929 crash. Remember, we are looking for what made the Great Depression into what it was. Would the stock market crash have caused a recession? Sure, possibly even a depression, maybe. But the Great Depression lasted basically until WWII. The New Deal helped with morale, but the economic conditions of the depression only really ended with the war.
Something that happened in 1930 was well placed to help convert a downturn into a global disaster.
I personally know one American who works in China. Not for a Chinese company, though; he set up a software development business in the Midwest, bought something like a Skype call-in number (not Skype, but same thing), so his customers can call a local number and he can receive it anywhere in the world. Then he moved to Beijing, bought an apartment just before the prices sky-rocketed, and works nights. Makes a lot of sense to me.
Well, if Norway is protectionist, that's really new to me.
Norway, while not politically member of the EU is member of the European Economic Area, meaning that for all practical purposes (beside sending representatives to the European Parliament, Commission, and so on), it's member of the EU.
As such it's clearly in the free trade camp.
OTOH, as Americans might mix it up, yes they have a more communal society, which is a common for Scandinavian countries. But at the same time it's clearly free trade oriented. The fascinating part here is naturally, because they have a high technology industry, some natural resources and so on, so yes they can make the great benefits work, because overall their products remain competitive on the global market.
Hint: Even US companies tend to treat certain employees well (e.g. the ones that produces revenue, are hard to replace, ...).
The problematic employees are the one that are easy to replace, don't produce a great deal of money => these tend to end up outsourced. The big issue here is that there is no solution for these parts of the population, Norway seems to handle this with trying to maximize their human capital (Hint: Scandinavian schools, despite tiring sometimes with their continuous quest for improvement [I have a colleague there with kids], tend to be good, and not good just for a tiny slice of the pupils), and allowing the not so productive part of the population a somewhat dignified life.
Btw, while the free trade argument that every body does what he can do most effectively is usually accepted, free trade DOES have a number of issues that are starting to pop up in literature, e.g. Free Trade does not work for developing countries (probably mostly because of the same reason why it does not work for easy-to-replace workers), and then there are these ecological costs (transport costs are currently artificially kept low, as being taxed lower or completely exempt).
Please check your data, Norway is no way protectionist.
Well, the problem is that most jobs don't require an on-site presence. (Cynically put, a doctor remotely on-demand plus a nurse practitioner can handle most doctor's work. Most trade can be delivered remotely. Administration can done easily enough from everywhere as long as your internet connectivity is good enough, and don't start me on IT.)
Of course they're not - China doesn't make them wait in line. It says 'welcome, here are where you can find people to work at your company, we'll put you in touch with local suppliers, do you need any more investors?'
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
The US has gotten a bad image abroad that would make smarter people not want to immigrate here. Wretched social policies, too much poverty, a willingness to torture people, economic downfall and that all to real chance of being gunned down for next to no reason at all by poor people, the mentally ill and drug addicted, all tell a normal person to stay out of the US. European governments have actually had travelers warning zones for cities like Miami, Fl. due to excessive violence.
Is your mother dead yet?
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
Except Nepali, Buthani, Mongolians, Sri-Lankans...
How do you compare data from your model based on LinkedIn with data from several years before LinkedIn launched? Shouldn't we be comparing either (or both) data using the old methodology against itself, or LinkedIn data against itself?
I'd scrutinize very closely anything LinkedIn is pushing.
I'm aware this is anecdotal, but I and many of my friends and colleagues would qualify as the kind of "highly skilled migrants" that once would have placed the US as a top working destination. But not so much any more.
I do have a few friends who have ventured to the US for postgraduate study, and a few who have stayed or moved there to take academic positions, but only a handful who have moved for work, and most have come back within a few years. Most are happy just to stay here in Australia, or if they do move overseas long term, it's more likely to Asia (Singapore, Hong Kong, China are popular) or Europe.
My impression is it's not just the economy that has turned us away. It's a combination of things, including the culture.
First, on the economy, being in Australia, our economy is already strong, and we enjoy many benefits and protections you don't get in the US, like high quality and free or inexpensive health care, and a decent welfare safety net in case things go bad (and a sensible minimum wage if starting out, eg if you bring your kids), and high quality and relatively inexpensive education (although sadly our government is trying to change that). I'd speculate that the relative difference in economies between countries like Australia and the US in the 20th century might have inspired more to migrate, but that pull has ebbed.
Secondly, standard of living. You'll likely get paid more for the same job in the US, but you'll have to work longer hours with less holidays (i.e. vacations), and so less time to actually enjoy your salary. Perhaps it's my Australian values talking, but I work to live, not the other way around. And I can live pretty well here with the work I can get.
Third, the culture. I'm not sure if many Americans realise that a lot of the news that escapes their borders is pretty ugly. Political deadlocks and extremists like the Tea Party, mass shootings (and a baffling obsession with guns), religious quackery and anti-science, a tsunami of obesity and lifestyle diseases... it doesn't sound like a very attractive place a lot of the time. It's subjective, I know, but the guns thing has been enough to dissuade me from exploring work options in the US.
The world has changed a lot in the past century from when my father, born in England before WWII, was thrilled to have the opportunity to escape the post-war doldrums in Europe and move to the US. It's not only that the rest of the world has now caught up, but the US has by its own decisions lagged behind on social, governmental and cultural measures. There are still good reasons to live and work in the US, but just less of them.
Meanwhile the middle class in the United States contracts, and much of Europe is actually regressing. And there's still plenty of dirt-poor nations (including most of India and China) to drag everyone down.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
Casteism
http://wh.gov/iCfVS
Casteism
"Nobody has ever pointed out that it was actually a free trade agreement instead of a peace treaty"
You talked about that "unfair Versailles treaty". How, exactly do you think Germans found it to be unfair? "You should not engage in war against France" "Mein Gott! That's absolutly unfair!" Is that what you think?
"You might search for the (long) texts of the documents of the Versailles treaty and prove your hilarious statement."
I might...
Peace Treaty of Versailles
Articles 321-386
Ports, Waterways and Railways
ARTICLE 323.
[...]
Germany particularly undertakes not to establish against the ports and vessels of any of the Allied and Associated Powers any surtax or any direct or indirect bounty for export, or import by German ports or vessels, or by those of another Power, for example by means of combined tariffs. She further undertakes that persons or goods passing through a port or using a vessel of any of the Allied and Associated Powers shall not be subjected to any formality or delay whatever to which such persons or goods would not be subjected if they passed through a German port or a port of any other Power, or used a German vessel or a vessel of any other Power.
ARTICLE 330.
Import duties may be levied on goods leaving the free zone for consumption in the country on the territory of which the port is situated. Conversely, export duties may be levied on goods coming from such country and brought into the free zone. These import and export duties shall be levied on the same basis and at the same rates as similar duties levied at the other Customs frontiers of the country concerned. On the other hand, Germany shall not levy, under any denomination, any import, export or transit duty on goods carried by land or water across her territory to or from the free zone from or to any other State.
ARTICLE 365.
Goods coming from the territories of the Allied and Associated Powers, and going to Germany, or in transit through Germany from or to the territories of the Allied and Associated Powers, shall enjoy on the German railways as regards charges to be collected (rebates and drawbacks being taken into account), facilities, and all other matters, the most favourable treatment applied to goods of the same kind carried on any German lines, either in internal traffic, or for export, import or in transit, under similar conditions of transport, for example as regards length of route. The same rule shall be applied, on the request of one or more of the Allied and Associated Powers, to goods specially designated by such Power or Powers coming from Germany and going to their territories.
International tariffs established in accordance with the rates referred to in the preceding paragraph and involving through waybills shall be established when one of the Allied and Associated Powers shall require it from Germany.
[...]
et caetera.
I am Mexican expat. no I don't pick fruits. My background is IT but switched careers and now I work in Finance. yes joined the dark side i guess. Worked in the UAE for about 4 yrs, and now been in Switzerland for the last 2. In both these places you gett 30 days holidays, plus about 5 sick days. and in Switzerland it is mandated by law that I am able to take at least 2 weeks straight. employment laws were more flexible in the UAE than in the US, and in Switzerland are far more flexible than in the rest of Europe which means I can be hired/fired way easier, but notification is 3 months. so not pum! you are fired, security will escort you out of the building now, like it can happen in the US. Income tax was 0 in the UAE and in Switzerland it's very low. In both countries you are obliged by law to pay for private health insurance, which is very expensive when compared to the rest of europe, but not outrageous like in the US either and with good coverage. The education system in the UAE isn't that great, and certainly expensive, but in Switzerland, the public education system is excellent big focus on STEM, and even the tough of bringing "creationism" somewhere into the curriculum would get you laughed out of whatever room you are at. yes that would probably include a room in a lot of churches. (no school shootings here either) Crime is extremely low in both of these countries, as in practically nil, certainly violent crime. but probably the UAE even slightly safer. i've never felt safer in my life, yes that's in the middle east. (no asset forefeiture by the PO-lice in any of these countries btw) my commute here is about 25 min long (considered long) on a train that is very comfortable, clean, etc, that arrives ALWAYS on time... ok, ít's late every now and then by about 4 or 5 min. I like cars and driving, but here i don't own a car because i just don't need one. (and gas is taxed heavily to curb down greenhouse gases) I have a ride share for when i do need one or take uber. Because of my industry it would not be weird that one of my next career steps would take me to the US. which i'm not against, but it would have to make a lot of sense, but it could also take me to London, Singapur, maybe the UAE again or perhaps a developing market (and i would totally consider Africa). if I did go to the US I would not be comfortable with an H1-B visa as it basically ties me to that company and it makes my wife's job search extremely difficult (also a working professional, who earns slightly more than I do). so perhaps a green card, which I would probably give up, the MINUTE, I move out, and then it means I would still have to report to the IRS for several years even if i am no longer living there (nor would i aim to become an us citizen, which is a tax disaster if you are an expat) and most banks in developed countries would probably refuse to open a bank account because of the very tough and difficult IRS FATCA regulations... no country is perfect, of the ones i lived in, there are tons of things i like and tons I don't, and there's plenty of stuff i love about the US.(I studied a master's degre over there). but no, i'm not dying to go there, I would consider it, but it's not number one on my list. (the holiday and the likely long commute are probably my biggest turn offs) and I know plenty of expats who feel the same way about it. so that's my 2 cents.
Interesting link. Thanks. However, the question here is the image of the US which I tried to describe. So it is not necessarily necessary that all hold. Anyway, the bureaucratic mayhem which is involved when trying to get to the US is real (and it has nothing to do with the US citizens at all).
People in "dirt poor nations" are just as much "people" as here, and just as deserving of jobs. No moral wrong happens when a job moves from here to there - arguably the reverse given the safety net in each nation. But anyway, the point is that it's only short-term turbulence: China and India will eventually buy a lot more stuff than the US and EU, and will drive vastly more modern jobs worldwide as a result.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Yes, people in dirt poor nations are people. But if its them or me, I choose me every time.
So jobs for them and welfare for me? Except of course there's not actually a safety net for non-elderly people with no children. You're not making this any more attractive.
Before the short-term is over, I could be dead.
While I appreciate your greed and approve, if you're a software developer, or have some other highly skilled job as most /.ers do, it's not like you're at risk here. The jobs that have been scarce here because of outsourcing are in general low-skill jobs, from manufacturing to call centers, that are swiftly being replaced by robots anyhow.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
economists have to figure in the kind of low life that are rioting in Ferguson at the death of a thug; I don't, they don't count
"Actually you just proved exactly the OPPOSITE of what you had said before."
Exactly what I said was: "once you start studying why it was so, you'll find tariffs playing quite a strong role in the whole equation."
And you said: no, they don't.
And then I said: "the Versailles treaty. It basically holds down to "no tariffs will be allowed to Allies on German territory while German goods can and will be heavily tariffed on our borders"."
And you said: no, it doesn't.
And then I showed some articles stating the above.
So yes, you are right: it is not a True Scotchsman.
You cannot "grow the pie". You can only take from someone else.
Found more gold? Price of someone else's gold drops
Replace secretaries? Even you can figure that one out
Add cellphones? Where did the Landlines go?
There is NO 'grow the pie' outside of speculation and that always empties someone's pockets.
Lie, Lie, Lie. The crash AND ALL THE LOST CAPITAL came from Speculators.
The Depression began 8 years before the 29 crash, that is where all those Oakies came from
I suggest you read an actual history for once. The BOTTOM of the Depression occurred in 1933. The collapse of the market happened three years earlier!
Like I said, Economic literates among the idiots!
Ahh, no. Actually, Bundled Mortgage Instruments stole 12.3 T of that gold. And Deriviatives under Boeskey and Miliken took 4.9 T of the gold.
In fact, it all went to private SPECULATORS who gave no value in return.
And, since the market for Violins is under the control of a Commodities Broker, every last one of the makers gets $18.00 - costs.
Propitio Principii (begging the question), neither the will to buy nor the money to do the buying is in the hands of consumers thanks to the Speculators who produce nothing.
I think I found a reader here!!
WRONG, wrong, wrong, as the starving-to-death masses in India prove (Circa 12000 per DAY). China let's its poorest work for food inside barbed wire, and Brazilian shop owners PAY TO KILL homeless starving children.
THAT is why there is no net gain and why examples prove unrestricted Capitalism is unrestricted murder for profit.
Certainly not including Policemen who perjure themselves after assaulting an 'inferior citizen' and show off their little pencil point red spot as the excuse for murdering the citizen who was struck by the policeman with his car door.
And how fast is Japanese GDP growing again? Actually, you kind of prove my point.
The Japanese have followed the same path as American Republicanism has enshrined as the Reagan Doctrine
All it got them is a 40 year depression that just started up again.
O.M.F.U.G. OCTOBER 29, 1929 was all of 2 months and 2 days before 1930.
What made the great depression WORSE after the crash was the same thing that made 2009 worse than 2008
It takes TIME for the loss of buying power to spread!
Economic ILLETERATES on the right!!
Oh, and Ben Stein? The idiot who said "With science you get to killing people (as opposed myth based thinking)"? THAT is your source?
Actually, "studies" say exactly the opposite, that the loss of dollars in circulation came FIRST.