nbauman wrote: "Why should you be forced into an irrevocable career choice at 16?" ...
Because time's a wastin'! The widely accepted rule of thumb is that developing a high level of talent requires 10K hours or more of properly guided practice. If you don't put in the focused time, or your efforts are more random, your odds of success drop. (Tiger Moms and Dads rule!... kind of)
Most Nobel prize work is done by people at about age 25, and athletes pass their primes earlier. They need to have socked away all of the founational knowledge required by then. Then again, that's in part because only people about that age are put into a situation where they have a chance to do Nobel prize work.
I think in Germany it at least used to be a few years younger than 16. You were tested for aptitude and steered accordingly.
Now, if you're a killer software designer and developer in the USA, you're dumped at about age 35.
Then again, as people age, there are more undesirable mutations in their children and other complications. Those are strong incentives to have a family between the ages of 18 and 40. But while you're raising a family you're not so free to work your schedule around classes in algorithms and how they were developed (so you've got more insight in how to develop yours), or the next new buzz-word (frame-work, source repository, IDE, arcane OS features...), or subject area expertise to which to apply your software dev skills (e.g. mechanical engineering, biochemistry, economics, genetics...), or learning how to write a paper to submit to a journal so that it has a chance to be published.
"But the only prerequisite for those subjects is reading. And whatever you get up to, you are not going to lose the ability to read text, because text is all around us ...
Math based stuff is easy to forget the prereqs for. If you forgot the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, it's unlikely you'll be reminded of it in your everyday life. Come across a quantum physics course, and you'll need to brush up again..." ...
Well, once you've learned how, you can always read... until you have an attack of aphasia. (Heh, learned that in a couple neurophysiology texts.)
And yes, math is poorly taught, often poorly learned, and thus very difficult to remember. I mean, how mnemonic is the term "Cauchy-Schwarz", or "fundamental theorem"? Really. I mean, "Cauchy-Schwarz" would be OK in a book of biographies of mathematicians, but for learning and remembering the actual math, it's a total loss.
Mathematicians don't know about mnemonics, don't care about them. I know more than one who claims he doesn't remember any math at all... right before he shows that he's remembering whole strings of definitions and procedures. It's automatic, so he's not even aware that he's doing it. I have to analyze what he's just said to make him aware that he's doing it. It doesn't count, as far as he's concerned, and doesn't quite understand why everyone is not the same.
For others, who don't automatically remember those many details -- seemingly floating, arbitrary, disjointed, abstract details -- it requires dropping back to some things they do remember and working forward, using web searches, reference books and such, and a lot more time to reach the goal.
That quantum physics text requires even more time and research because they have this bad habit of changing notation every few pages, to abbreviate, or because those pages were written down at a different time when their thinking was different, or just because they felt like it.
Math does not have to be difficult. Mathematicians make it difficult.
And besides, mathematicians tend to be terribly lazy. Still haven't gotten around to defining division by zero, and we've been waiting for over a century. (Hear that, mathematicians? No more videos, no more comic books or German pulp fiction or Manga or Tolkein or Edgar Rice Burroughs or Sherlock Holmes until you get back to work!)
Both the thread title and your comment are correct as far as they go. But that equation works both ways. ...
I've known excellent software product developers who had PhDs and excellent software product developers who were still in high school.
I've known excellent software product developers (and sys admins, and data-base analysts, and system performance specialists) who had degrees in music, in classical (Greek, Latin) literature, psychology, or no degree at all.
And I've known bad programmers who had degrees in computer science.
And who hasn't run across an incompetent dentist or doctor or professor?
OTOH, "qualification" and "qualified", being arbitrary terms, one can honestly claim that someone who does not have a certificate, or degree, or who is of a race or sex or age of which you do not approve is "unqualified". But someone able to do a good job is able to do a good job, regardless of his or her "qualifications".
Ask them what the result of division by zero is and they'll tell you they've been goofing off, that they still haven't gotten 'round to defining it. da bums
Yes, the main-stream media should use equations, and words, and diagrams, and graphs/charts, and pictures, and videos.
Quantum mechanics, OTOH, can get nasty. Look at Pauling and Wilson's book. They couldn't bring themselves to choose one style of mathematical notation and stick with it... instead, silently slipping from one to another every few pages, with absolutely no bridging.
"And you would be using your own bias directly against the law. Pay is not something you can consider when going for H1Bs, in fact you are required to pay them the USA market rate." ...
No, there is no requirement to pay the market rate, only to pay the legal fiction "prevailing wage", which empirical data and statements of bodyshoppers and foreign ministers indicate to be 10% to 35% below local market compensation.
Hmm, I wonder how many of those 1,000 US citizens Tata promised to employ at their Milford/Cincinnati "North American Headquarters" by 2010 were ever hired. I did read that they'd hired "400 people recruited from colleges in the region", but they didn't define the "region", and they adamantly refuse to say how many of those were US citizens, how many have been hired and fired already, or how they're doing toward the promised 1,000 US citizen employees. Siemens (German) bought out SDRC which neighbored the Tata Milford office, and I recently learned that a lot of the people they employed were from India and Germany (just as they did in their Lake Mary, FL office), while I know good STEM pros in the Cincy area are begging for work.
"So if someone writes a desktop application that accesses data from a database, performs some business validation on it, and presents it to the user, then they are a programmer. ...
But if they do exactly the same thing and present it to the user in a web page, they are not?"
No, none of those are "programmers". They're data-base USERS.
Certainly there's some potential for overlap. Scripting in web pages can trigger programs on the server which do significant work. ...
But calling insertion of HTML tags "programming" is reminiscent of earlier waves of title infation like calling mere USERS of, e.g. statistical software packages, or data-base management systems, or spread-sheets* "programmers" instead of merely configurers and formatters and accessors. In reality, they're not quite programs, not quite doing "real programming". Maybe moderately-savvy, advanced- or super-user might be appropriate for some of them, but they're still "just users". Putting together a macro or a script is not equivalent to programming, though, e.g. Python kind of bridges the divide.
I've even seen/heard using a text editor referred to as doing "programming".
* After hearing a radio interview of the pres. of the local juco talking about their STEM programs a few days back, I went to check their courses and certificates. Sure enough, they have "certificates" in using a spread-sheet and word processor, FCOL -- something any bright computer programming student (or even minimally bright 4th or 5th graders) could figure out in a flash. And they're classifying this as "science, technology, engineering and math".
"Right now, a reasonable programmer or IT professional who complains about not being able to find a job sounds like" someone who is finally catching on.
Some great software product developers are in the autism spectrum, and thus are very likely to be categorized as not "socially adept" but can get along fine with people if they've been trained about specific things, and the people with whom they work are similarly capable of adjusting their expectations appropriately.
Many great software product developers are quite willing to wear 3-piece suits (and great-coats in the frozen north)... if you pay them enough to be able to afford buying several such, cover the dry cleaning bills, as well as the usual mortgage/rent, local food prices, local taxes, local transportation costs, their own on-going education and training, their family's education, insurance, etc. And certainly so for the rare meetings with customers or investors.
Still, there's nothing wrong with wearing jeans and T-shirts and comfy shoes to work in a cave or cubicle in the vast majority of software product development firms most days of the year.
Actual reasonable human beings don't have to put up with people who initiate force or fraud, or engage in belligerent PC nonsense.
"Or how about f h1b and just let them immigrate?" ...
That sounds even worse. At least with an H-1B visa some of them leave after just a few months or years. Thus, after a cartain point, they don't further worsen the talent glut, the over-population, the over-crowding, and the over-regulation and over-taxation and artificially jacked-up costs of living which result (especially in Sili Valley).
Now, if we required "a great skill set" and high intelligence, to get an H-1B visa, and the H-1B visa were valid for 9-10 months before it had to be renewed, and every visa applicant had to pass a proper background investigation, and green cards were limited to 100K per year, and student visas were limited to 40K-50K of the very best per year... THAT would be a satisfactory improvement. But the fact is that the USA federal government doesn't even require "a great skill set" or even average intelligence for the supposedly much more exalted O visas.
""Must known c++, python, asp.net, linux kernel internals, windows 2012 hyper-V, vmware VCP, Masters in CS, VB, and minimum 5 years as a scrum master."" ...
"Ideally under 25 with 10+ years of java 37 on Windows 10."
and 12 years on Mac 10.10.3 (10.10.1 or 10.10.4 simply won't do), 5 years on iOS, plus accounting, marketing, graphic arts, data-base analysis and design...
Meanwhile, 2,375 US citizens who would have been able to do well on the real job that needs to be done (individually or in a team of people with complementary knowledge and talents) would be rejected out of hand as "unqualified".
Yes, "WaywardGeek", H-1B would be fine if it were truly limited to the purpose of bringing in the genuinely "best" or "brightest", and there would have been a lot less friction if that is what it had been.
"My company recently adopted a no H1-B visa policy because we're doing a bit of military work, or so I assume (they really don't tell me anything). We've had a rec open for a hot-shot algorithms geek since January, and trust me, the applicants are not beating a path to our door." ...
There are algorithms and then there are algorithms. It depends on the area of the application you want him to help develop: algorithms for scientific applications, engineering, mathematical, word processing, statistics, GIS...? Do they want a mathematician/biophysicist/screen-writer/PR or marketing expert/accountant/software engineer, i.e. a purple squirrel, or a real software product developer? Or are they not seeking a product developer but a throw-away "data processor"/"IT" clone they will dump once this project is over?
Where are they advertising? Are they advertising where an algorithms person would be most likely to see it? Display ads or teeny little classifieds or Munster only or Dies only? Do the ads include the hiring manager's e-mail address and the number for the telephone on his office desk? Are they willing to fly in candidates from around the USA for interviews? Are they willing to relocate new-hires? Are they willing to invest in 2-12 weeks of new-hire training and 2-4 weeks per year of retained employee training?
The H-1b laws and regs do not require them to hire the able and willing American applicant(s), so that's not the angle here. ...
She's claiming that (a) she has specific certificates in what were declared to be the "requirements" or "qualifications" for the job, (b) in the interview, she believed she gave great answers about those specific "skills", so it appears she was obviously able and willing to do the work,
but (c) they continued to interview for 2 more months and then gave the job to a non-American who may or may not have had the certificates, may or may not have shown as much savvy in the interview, and that they did so in a way that was illegally discriminatory based on her nationality.
"Qualified" is the ghost of a wisp of the memory of a dream; it has no solid, objective meaning that anyone could be held to.
What are the best/worst results likely to come from the law-suit? I'm not a shei ster, so I'm just speculating here: It could be transformed into a class-action, drawing other US citizens (and people who have green cards). It could result in penalties against the specific firm, which penalties could be mere tokens or significant enough to discourage other such firms from engaging in discrimination against US workers. It could be that the judges will wave aside the evidence gathered so far, the affidavits and testimony, or even disallow much of it, and require her to pay the court costs and reimburse the firm.
"Don't the laws of supply and demand state that if the overall wage goes down, purchasing power goes down, and then prices must fall to match?" ...
There is no "overall wage". When we talk about supply and demand, we're usually taking about the supply of and the demand for some particular product or service, or "market basket" or products and services. In practice, we use statistical averages or medians, income quintiles... and use longitudinal studies to track a sampling of individuals or families over time.
But, if the supply of currency goes up, by quantitative easing a.k.a. old-fashioned debasing a.k.a. inflation, for instance, then the amount of currency required to purchase goods will increase, i.e. prices will rise. But they don't all rise at once, nor by exactly the same amount or percentage, because some people get the new currency earlier than others. Some people don't become aware of the increase in currency (directly or indirectly) until late in the sequence.
Those who get the new currency first are usually able to buy at pre-inflation/pre-devaluation/pre-QE prices, while those who catch on late, find themselves buying at the higher prices.
Debasement of the currency hurts poor and wealthy alike, but those with closest ties to the issuers of the currency, those who receive the new money first, come out better than most. Those who keep savings through the period lose as its value is eroded. Those with debts win because they can pay their debt with the lower-valued currency.
In this case, the supply of labor is being expanded, the compensation of those in the affected fields drops, their "purchasing power", savings, and retained wealth are eroded (as stuff wears out and they cannot afford to maintain or repair or replace).
OTOH, the reason given for moving manufacturing off-shore was to be "competitive" (with whom?), to hold down or reduce prices. But prices went up from the 1970s to present, and profits and compensation to many executives, and some investors rose. But, at the same time, the Fed and US (and other) governments were debasing the currency and competing for finances, and playing weird games with regulation of financial institutions, so the financial waters were muddied. During which quarters did debasement predominate? During which did reduction in quality of goods predominate? Which goods increased in quality and which decreased? During which did retail price rises predominate?
"In fact, I'm one of those meritocratic boogeymen that thinks our borders should be open with nothing more than a background check into your criminal record before you're granted entrance to the United States" ...
Meritocracy would be a big improvement, but the execs (business and academia) have been resisting that mightily. They don't want any solid, objective, enforceable minimal (intelligence, knowledge, work experience...) standards for the low-skill E-3, H-1B, J, and L visas for cheap, young, pliant labor with flexible ethics.
None of the cheap labor crowd want proper background investigations of visa applicants. A lot of politicians think it's wunnnnderful that the US government has signed onto "visa waiver" pacts.
While reading the EPI report Low-skill H-1B guest-workers in the US STEM job market I was prompted to dig up the latest DoS statistics. 135,991 H-1B (including the H-1B1s set aside for Chile and Singapore) were issued through consular offices in FY2012 (so much for all the propaganda of an annual limit of 65K or 85K). My main complaint with the EPI report is that they fail to include a precise definition of "IT work-force" and "IT occupations" that they're using, though they talk around it a bit.
What is the current resident USA population density?
What is the current unemployment rate for USA STEM professionals?
How does the current unemployment rate for USA STEM professionals compare with historical unemployment rates in times of full employment?
What percentage of USA STEM grads land STEM work?
How does that compare with historical records?
Are the claims that H-1B recipients are "best and brightest" or "high-skilled" supported by any evidence whatsoever?
Are the executives involved in the campaign for more cheap, young, pliant foreign labor with questionable ethics engage in ethical or unethical enterprises? (In this case, NO.)
"University, even in engineering, has always taught relatively esoteric theory" ...
I recall thinking that a lot of the freakie theoretical academic CS material was not very interesting, just something we had to slog through... but, even when I was working at the U, and then later in various jobs, I found I was using every bit of it*.
And every few years someone comes up with more that gets published in some obscure journal that turns out to be useful on the job, and after 5 years or so makes its way into the text-books and such.
* Well, OK, I never did actually find a use for the various GCD algorithm examples and "proofs"/"validations" that Wirth and Knuth seemed to wax so enthusiastic over, but my mathematician friend assured me, just a few months back, that uses exist.
"The first job is by far the hardest to get. After that first job though, if you're good, you'll be sought after by former bosses and colleagues as they move around in the industry." ...
That works fine... until you reach the ripe old age of 35 or 40, depending on your specialty. Then, the "candidate management systems" will guarantee no human hiring manager ever learns of your existence, because the software and configuration by the HR clones designate you as too expensive regardless of your intelligence, knowledge, productivity, industry, etc. That's what the data suggest, anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
...
Because time's a wastin'! The widely accepted rule of thumb is that developing a high level of talent requires 10K hours or more of properly guided practice. If you don't put in the focused time, or your efforts are more random, your odds of success drop. (Tiger Moms and Dads rule!... kind of)
Most Nobel prize work is done by people at about age 25, and athletes pass their primes earlier. They need to have socked away all of the founational knowledge required by then. Then again, that's in part because only people about that age are put into a situation where they have a chance to do Nobel prize work.
I think in Germany it at least used to be a few years younger than 16. You were tested for aptitude and steered accordingly.
Now, if you're a killer software designer and developer in the USA, you're dumped at about age 35.
Then again, as people age, there are more undesirable mutations in their children and other complications. Those are strong incentives to have a family between the ages of 18 and 40. But while you're raising a family you're not so free to work your schedule around classes in algorithms and how they were developed (so you've got more insight in how to develop yours), or the next new buzz-word (frame-work, source repository, IDE, arcane OS features...), or subject area expertise to which to apply your software dev skills (e.g. mechanical engineering, biochemistry, economics, genetics...), or learning how to write a paper to submit to a journal so that it has a chance to be published.
...
The way they're formatted, who knows which of your posts you're talking about, or what you were responding to?
...
Math based stuff is easy to forget the prereqs for. If you forgot the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, it's unlikely you'll be reminded of it in your everyday life. Come across a quantum physics course, and you'll need to brush up again..."
...
Well, once you've learned how, you can always read... until you have an attack of aphasia. (Heh, learned that in a couple neurophysiology texts.)
And yes, math is poorly taught, often poorly learned, and thus very difficult to remember. I mean, how mnemonic is the term "Cauchy-Schwarz", or "fundamental theorem"? Really. I mean, "Cauchy-Schwarz" would be OK in a book of biographies of mathematicians, but for learning and remembering the actual math, it's a total loss.
Mathematicians don't know about mnemonics, don't care about them. I know more than one who claims he doesn't remember any math at all... right before he shows that he's remembering whole strings of definitions and procedures. It's automatic, so he's not even aware that he's doing it. I have to analyze what he's just said to make him aware that he's doing it. It doesn't count, as far as he's concerned, and doesn't quite understand why everyone is not the same.
For others, who don't automatically remember those many details -- seemingly floating, arbitrary, disjointed, abstract details -- it requires dropping back to some things they do remember and working forward, using web searches, reference books and such, and a lot more time to reach the goal.
That quantum physics text requires even more time and research because they have this bad habit of changing notation every few pages, to abbreviate, or because those pages were written down at a different time when their thinking was different, or just because they felt like it.
Math does not have to be difficult. Mathematicians make it difficult.
And besides, mathematicians tend to be terribly lazy. Still haven't gotten around to defining division by zero, and we've been waiting for over a century. (Hear that, mathematicians? No more videos, no more comic books or German pulp fiction or Manga or Tolkein or Edgar Rice Burroughs or Sherlock Holmes until you get back to work!)
...
I've known excellent software product developers who had PhDs and excellent software product developers who were still in high school.
I've known excellent software product developers (and sys admins, and data-base analysts, and system performance specialists) who had degrees in music, in classical (Greek, Latin) literature, psychology, or no degree at all.
And I've known bad programmers who had degrees in computer science.
And who hasn't run across an incompetent dentist or doctor or professor?
OTOH, "qualification" and "qualified", being arbitrary terms, one can honestly claim that someone who does not have a certificate, or degree, or who is of a race or sex or age of which you do not approve is "unqualified". But someone able to do a good job is able to do a good job, regardless of his or her "qualifications".
Yes, the main-stream media should use equations, and words, and diagrams, and graphs/charts, and pictures, and videos.
Quantum mechanics, OTOH, can get nasty. Look at Pauling and Wilson's book. They couldn't bring themselves to choose one style of mathematical notation and stick with it... instead, silently slipping from one to another every few pages, with absolutely no bridging.
...
No, there is no requirement to pay the market rate, only to pay the legal fiction "prevailing wage", which empirical data and statements of bodyshoppers and foreign ministers indicate to be 10% to 35% below local market compensation.
Hmm, I wonder how many of those 1,000 US citizens Tata promised to employ at their Milford/Cincinnati "North American Headquarters" by 2010 were ever hired. I did read that they'd hired "400 people recruited from colleges in the region", but they didn't define the "region", and they adamantly refuse to say how many of those were US citizens, how many have been hired and fired already, or how they're doing toward the promised 1,000 US citizen employees. Siemens (German) bought out SDRC which neighbored the Tata Milford office, and I recently learned that a lot of the people they employed were from India and Germany (just as they did in their Lake Mary, FL office), while I know good STEM pros in the Cincy area are begging for work.
...
But if they do exactly the same thing and present it to the user in a web page, they are not?"
No, none of those are "programmers". They're data-base USERS.
"Bidness validation" ptui!
...
But calling insertion of HTML tags "programming" is reminiscent of earlier waves of title infation like calling mere USERS of, e.g. statistical software packages, or data-base management systems, or spread-sheets* "programmers" instead of merely configurers and formatters and accessors. In reality, they're not quite programs, not quite doing "real programming". Maybe moderately-savvy, advanced- or super-user might be appropriate for some of them, but they're still "just users". Putting together a macro or a script is not equivalent to programming, though, e.g. Python kind of bridges the divide.
I've even seen/heard using a text editor referred to as doing "programming".
* After hearing a radio interview of the pres. of the local juco talking about their STEM programs a few days back, I went to check their courses and certificates. Sure enough, they have "certificates" in using a spread-sheet and word processor, FCOL -- something any bright computer programming student (or even minimally bright 4th or 5th graders) could figure out in a flash. And they're classifying this as "science, technology, engineering and math".
And MSFT Javascript is evil. Eschew Javascript.
"Right now, a reasonable programmer or IT professional who complains about not being able to find a job sounds like" someone who is finally catching on.
...
Some great software product developers are in the autism spectrum, and thus are very likely to be categorized as not "socially adept" but can get along fine with people if they've been trained about specific things, and the people with whom they work are similarly capable of adjusting their expectations appropriately.
Many great software product developers are quite willing to wear 3-piece suits (and great-coats in the frozen north)... if you pay them enough to be able to afford buying several such, cover the dry cleaning bills, as well as the usual mortgage/rent, local food prices, local taxes, local transportation costs, their own on-going education and training, their family's education, insurance, etc. And certainly so for the rare meetings with customers or investors.
Still, there's nothing wrong with wearing jeans and T-shirts and comfy shoes to work in a cave or cubicle in the vast majority of software product development firms most days of the year.
Actual reasonable human beings don't have to put up with people who initiate force or fraud, or engage in belligerent PC nonsense.
...
That sounds even worse. At least with an H-1B visa some of them leave after just a few months or years. Thus, after a cartain point, they don't further worsen the talent glut, the over-population, the over-crowding, and the over-regulation and over-taxation and artificially jacked-up costs of living which result (especially in Sili Valley).
Now, if we required "a great skill set" and high intelligence, to get an H-1B visa, and the H-1B visa were valid for 9-10 months before it had to be renewed, and every visa applicant had to pass a proper background investigation, and green cards were limited to 100K per year, and student visas were limited to 40K-50K of the very best per year... THAT would be a satisfactory improvement. But the fact is that the USA federal government doesn't even require "a great skill set" or even average intelligence for the supposedly much more exalted O visas.
...
"Ideally under 25 with 10+ years of java 37 on Windows 10."
and 12 years on Mac 10.10.3 (10.10.1 or 10.10.4 simply won't do), 5 years on iOS, plus accounting, marketing, graphic arts, data-base analysis and design...
Meanwhile, 2,375 US citizens who would have been able to do well on the real job that needs to be done (individually or in a team of people with complementary knowledge and talents) would be rejected out of hand as "unqualified".
"But we must have a purple squrrel! Right now!"
Yes, "WaywardGeek", H-1B would be fine if it were truly limited to the purpose of bringing in the genuinely "best" or "brightest", and there would have been a lot less friction if that is what it had been.
...
There are algorithms and then there are algorithms. It depends on the area of the application you want him to help develop: algorithms for scientific applications, engineering, mathematical, word processing, statistics, GIS...? Do they want a mathematician/biophysicist/screen-writer/PR or marketing expert/accountant/software engineer, i.e. a purple squirrel, or a real software product developer? Or are they not seeking a product developer but a throw-away "data processor"/"IT" clone they will dump once this project is over?
Where are they advertising? Are they advertising where an algorithms person would be most likely to see it? Display ads or teeny little classifieds or Munster only or Dies only? Do the ads include the hiring manager's e-mail address and the number for the telephone on his office desk? Are they willing to fly in candidates from around the USA for interviews? Are they willing to relocate new-hires? Are they willing to invest in 2-12 weeks of new-hire training and 2-4 weeks per year of retained employee training?
If not, they're not seriously trying.
...
She's claiming that (a) she has specific certificates in what were declared to be the "requirements" or "qualifications" for the job, (b) in the interview, she believed she gave great answers about those specific "skills", so it appears she was obviously able and willing to do the work,
but (c) they continued to interview for 2 more months and then gave the job to a non-American who may or may not have had the certificates, may or may not have shown as much savvy in the interview, and that they did so in a way that was illegally discriminatory based on her nationality.
"Qualified" is the ghost of a wisp of the memory of a dream; it has no solid, objective meaning that anyone could be held to.
What are the best/worst results likely to come from the law-suit? I'm not a shei ster, so I'm just speculating here: It could be transformed into a class-action, drawing other US citizens (and people who have green cards). It could result in penalties against the specific firm, which penalties could be mere tokens or significant enough to discourage other such firms from engaging in discrimination against US workers. It could be that the judges will wave aside the evidence gathered so far, the affidavits and testimony, or even disallow much of it, and require her to pay the court costs and reimburse the firm.
What is the most likely outcome?
...
There is no "overall wage". When we talk about supply and demand, we're usually taking about the supply of and the demand for some particular product or service, or "market basket" or products and services. In practice, we use statistical averages or medians, income quintiles... and use longitudinal studies to track a sampling of individuals or families over time.
But, if the supply of currency goes up, by quantitative easing a.k.a. old-fashioned debasing a.k.a. inflation, for instance, then the amount of currency required to purchase goods will increase, i.e. prices will rise. But they don't all rise at once, nor by exactly the same amount or percentage, because some people get the new currency earlier than others. Some people don't become aware of the increase in currency (directly or indirectly) until late in the sequence.
Those who get the new currency first are usually able to buy at pre-inflation/pre-devaluation/pre-QE prices, while those who catch on late, find themselves buying at the higher prices.
Debasement of the currency hurts poor and wealthy alike, but those with closest ties to the issuers of the currency, those who receive the new money first, come out better than most. Those who keep savings through the period lose as its value is eroded. Those with debts win because they can pay their debt with the lower-valued currency.
In this case, the supply of labor is being expanded, the compensation of those in the affected fields drops, their "purchasing power", savings, and retained wealth are eroded (as stuff wears out and they cannot afford to maintain or repair or replace).
OTOH, the reason given for moving manufacturing off-shore was to be "competitive" (with whom?), to hold down or reduce prices. But prices went up from the 1970s to present, and profits and compensation to many executives, and some investors rose. But, at the same time, the Fed and US (and other) governments were debasing the currency and competing for finances, and playing weird games with regulation of financial institutions, so the financial waters were muddied. During which quarters did debasement predominate? During which did reduction in quality of goods predominate? Which goods increased in quality and which decreased? During which did retail price rises predominate?
...
Meritocracy would be a big improvement, but the execs (business and academia) have been resisting that mightily. They don't want any solid, objective, enforceable minimal (intelligence, knowledge, work experience...) standards for the low-skill E-3, H-1B, J, and L visas for cheap, young, pliant labor with flexible ethics.
None of the cheap labor crowd want proper background investigations of visa applicants. A lot of politicians think it's wunnnnderful that the US government has signed onto "visa waiver" pacts.
While reading the EPI report Low-skill H-1B guest-workers in the US STEM job market I was prompted to dig up the latest DoS statistics. 135,991 H-1B (including the H-1B1s set aside for Chile and Singapore) were issued through consular offices in FY2012 (so much for all the propaganda of an annual limit of 65K or 85K). My main complaint with the EPI report is that they fail to include a precise definition of "IT work-force" and "IT occupations" that they're using, though they talk around it a bit.
2013-04-21
_KGO San Francisco CA_/_AP_
executives oppose privacy
Steven Harmon: San Jose CA Mercury News
The data show that enrollments and degrees earned are responsive to job market conditions.
The irony here is that the software engineer/screen-writer who originally created/coined the line "Show me the money!" was never paid for it.
...
What is the current resident USA population density?
What is the current unemployment rate for USA STEM professionals?
How does the current unemployment rate for USA STEM professionals compare with historical unemployment rates in times of full employment?
What percentage of USA STEM grads land STEM work?
How does that compare with historical records?
Are the claims that H-1B recipients are "best and brightest" or "high-skilled" supported by any evidence whatsoever?
Are the executives involved in the campaign for more cheap, young, pliant foreign labor with questionable ethics engage in ethical or unethical enterprises? (In this case, NO.)
...
Yes, because this is another transparent attempt to find pretexts on which to declare all US job appplicants to be "unqualified".
...
I recall thinking that a lot of the freakie theoretical academic CS material was not very interesting, just something we had to slog through... but, even when I was working at the U, and then later in various jobs, I found I was using every bit of it*.
And every few years someone comes up with more that gets published in some obscure journal that turns out to be useful on the job, and after 5 years or so makes its way into the text-books and such.
* Well, OK, I never did actually find a use for the various GCD algorithm examples and "proofs"/"validations" that Wirth and Knuth seemed to wax so enthusiastic over, but my mathematician friend assured me, just a few months back, that uses exist.
...
AY1992-1993 (earliest enrollment figures I could find)
CS 927K
engineering 1.229M
physical sciences 254K
AY2007-2008 (latest I could find by field)
CS 702K
engineering 690K
physical sciences 180K
So, yes, it appears enrollments are down, quite reasonably enough considering the dysfunctional US job markets for STEM fields.
...
That works fine... until you reach the ripe old age of 35 or 40, depending on your specialty. Then, the "candidate management systems" will guarantee no human hiring manager ever learns of your existence, because the software and configuration by the HR clones designate you as too expensive regardless of your intelligence, knowledge, productivity, industry, etc. That's what the data suggest, anyway.