So because somebody didn't lock their door, its okay to steal the things in their house?
No its more like, in a world where people decide to share each others houses, should we all get arrested if we refuse to lock our doors?
If the people choose to leave their doors open, and choose to let everyone in, who are you to tell us that we should lock our doors? Maybe the people actually WANT to share?
Maybe this is true in your dream world, but in the real world, your wage is based upon supply and demand. I may be "worth" X, but if there is nobody out there who will pay me X, then I'm not going to get it. The FACT is that the market wage in lower cost of living areas is lower than it is in higher cost of living areas. I mean, compare the average salary for a programmer in Boston (high cost of living) vs. Des Moines (low cost of living). People in lower cost of living areas tend to demand less, because they don't need as much to live on.
Ok you can say this, but its not true, Microsoft has more than enough money to pay everyone a fair wage. You say there might be no one willing to pay X? Ok so less companies would be making software, so what? I'd rather each job pay a person enough to survive, than have more jobs but have to work 2-3 jobs to survive. What good is a mc donalds job if you cannot survive on it? Useless to me.
Now, a programming job is a different situation, theres no shortage of programming labor, and there never will be, so I dont see the software industry having much of a future, Microsoft may not pay their programmers a fair wage if Microsoft were JUST a software company, but because Microsoft expands, they make money in other areas.
Think of the gaming industry, these programmers make millions of dollars in salary, not because they are worth it to the market, theres plenty of programmers who can make games, the reason they make so much is because making a game requires culture.
You cannot hire India programmers to write an American game and expect it to be done properly, you cannot hire American programmers to write a Japanese Anime RPG and expect it to be done properly, so the gaming industry has a smaller labor force but games like Tony Hawk produce massive amounts of money. This money goes down to the programmers, this is why John Carmack and other programmer people became so rich.
Now, if you make the game industry like the computer industry, well every programmer would be making about $5 an hour, there would be no rich programmers in Japan or the USA because we'd just hire cheap labor in India, so you see in certain industries like the game or movie industry the workers set the price, and in certain industries the consumers set the price, but then you have some industries like Microsofts who set the price for the entire industry so low that they force everyone else to hire cheap labor.
How do you compete with IE? Well you cant unless you go open source or hire slave labor in India.
How do you compete with Microsoft Word? Well you cant, so you see because Microsoft made the whole industry less valueable with their monopoly and offering everything for free, software companies cannot charge as much and thus the price of software goes down even if the demand is high!
So this is not supply and demand, this is certain monopolies manipulating the whole game and rigging it to destroy other smaller companies like Netscape. So the result? The small companies who were losing money in the competition were FORCED to hire people in India just to stay in business, because companies like Microsoft destroy the value of software by offering everything for free.
Microsoft packs in all this software with Windows, this is sorta like say if in the gaming Industry, Sony decided to pack in 50 games with their console so no one has to buy console games anymore, well now what do people like EA do? Well they fire all their expensive workers and they begin to make cheap games and sell them for $10 each, and this keeps them in the market.
Its very difficult to compete with free, and Microsoft is about to be priced out in the same way by linux.
You sound like somebody who has never actually BEEN to a third world country. What good is a computer if you don't have a reliable electrical grid? How do you get Internet access if you don't have a reliable phone system? And you can forget broadband... Also, they don't have the ed
The headphones most CDplayers come with are cheap peices of junk, so on a portible device people prefer mp3. You are right however for the home stereo people do prefer CD, but those same people who prefer CD over MP3 would also prefer a record player over a CD player because Vinyl sounds so much better.
See the problem I have and alot of others have is, we dont want to buy the whole CD which might only have one good song on it, but I will pay a fee to download an mp3 in public. I think 25 cent is reasonnable, its a price anyone will pay rich or poor.
I wont pay $3.99 for a single, I will pay $1 for a high quality vinyl single. I will pay 50 cent for a CD, and I will pay 25 cent for an mp3. Thats it.
Yes just like millions wanted cassette tapes, and how millions still use VHS instead of DVD, or how some people still use 8track players.
Face it, some people adapt faster than others, but college students are usually the first to embrace new technology.
We are talking about college students right? well most college students know what an mp3 is, and own a portible mp3 player along with a CD player, these people have the choice, carry one Mp3 player which can hold 100 gigs of music, or carry 20 CDs and a CD player which skips when you jog, run or move around too much. oh and dont forget about scratches.
When you download music you ARE learning. Why? Because you are learning about new types of music. You also have the choice or at least we should, to decide how much music is worth to us, we should not be forced to buy it.
The English wanted to force us to buy their Tea, remember? But we didnt want to buy their tea.
Perhaps we dont want to buy music? If the whole country decides they dont want to buy something, the laws should be based on what the country wants, thats how democracy works.
You and I both know that if we had a vote on this issue, the people would decide to make filesharing on the internet legal.
I dont think people would want true piracy to be illegal, meaning copying and then selling it, but most people in this country do not believe sharing is morally wrong and its going to take years to reprogram everyone in this country to somehow go against all they were taught. You see I dont think you can train or program a person to be selfish, and just because greedy guys in suits at the RIAA are selfish does not mean you can convince me or anyone else here to be selfish like you.
So here is what should be done, we can handle this in a democratic way, and have some kinda vote/discussion which involves the people, or they can sue us and put us in jail and cause us to riot and sue them and boycott.
But I think we can avoid conflict and solve this problem without it even going to such a level. I dont want to see people on college campuses all around the country rioting and protesting over something like this, but thats whats going to happen and while people may be divided on the war with Iraq, most college students SUPPORT filesharing and you can expect millions of people to have alot more power than the RIAA, whats the number now? 100 million people? Why the hell should some small hidden group of guys in suits and ties in some fucking office somewhere be allowed to decide what we can and cannot do, is this a democracy or are we in the new soviet union/China/Iraq?
We have troops fighting for our "Freedom" when in reality we dont have any? What the hell are we fighting for then? Fighting so some stupid goofballs in suits and other corperate types can rule the world behind closed doors?
I usually dont believe in shadow government BS, or illuminati garbage, but you know I'm starting to wonder if a group of businessmen actually do rule the world and want to make it seem like its a democracy when its really not.
Sure, have an election but keep it rigged so the vote doesnt even matter? And no matter who gets elected, money can be used to control them and if they get out of line well then you might have another john F kennedy kinda situation?
Well no, because people dont want CDs. People want mp3s. Perhaps if you gave them a discount on Mp3s I'd buy them, sell each mp3 for 10 cents each and I'd buy them, but I wont ever pay more than 25 cent per song.
Setup mp3 vending machines with new released songs on them that I cant get anywhere else and I might plug in my mp3 player and load a song or two, otherwise I'm not going to do it, I dont use CDs anymore, CDs arent as portible as mp3s, and we dont go backwards in technology on the college campuses.
If its cheap and if its all over the place, I'd buy it, otherwise no.
Here are my options, listen to music online, or dont listen to music at all, if the RIAA wants to make it so I cannot listen to their music, well then I wont listen to any of their music but I'll still listen to music online and guess what, They'll lose customers because I'll end up buying somethinng from an Indy Label.
The final solution for the RIAA will be to make all copying Illegal.
Remember, anyone who copies anything is a Pirate, just like anyone who uses Kazaa is a Pirate.
They want to turn the internet into something more controlled like the TV industry. Freedom isnt allowed in this country, some people have to control everything.
What ever happened to individual freedom? If the masses decide they want to share files, why should you be able to stop them? What happened to democracy? If the masses vote to have file sharing, that should end this, and from what I see (100 million people sharing files) well, the masses have spoken, so the laws should be changed.
Shutting off all the TVs to prevent minors from viewing violence.
I mean really, its not the RIAA's job to be our parents. Its should be left up to the college. Capitalism is important yes, but its not everything, money is not more important than education, if you cannot have freedom of speech even in the educational enviornment well then I'm going to move to China, I mean if we have to be monitored by the RIAA, whats the point of staying in the RIAA's country, Its not ours anymore, if we had a vote right now most people would be for piracy, and for filesharing, this reminds me of prohibition, or people who try to outlaw porn.
Look, it will never work, give it up, the people want to share music, the RIAA can adapt to the industry, or they can hiijack our government and change the laws. If they are allowed to change our laws, we arent a democracy.
Why should censorship be allowed at college? How is a person supposed to learn when censored? Most college students do not buy CDs, so its not really going to help their sales by doing this, because most college students except for the few who are rich are too busy buying books, going to parties, and paying tuition to have any money left for music CDs. So this isnt about money, its about control, the RIAA wants to be able to control everything we do on our computers, it also removes our privacy. Once the campus police start to monitor all internet trafic kiss your privacy goodbye. Whats the point of going to college if you are being watched 24/7 by men in black with RIAA logos?
We need to fight this somehow, and I dont mean just a stupid petition, we need to protest this instead of protesting the Iraq war.
Then Capitalism is working, the Americans have too much money to spend on shoes and Nike manufactures them in the cheapest place (with high unemployment and poor people). What's wrong with that? Should Nike be forced to make expensive shoes in Silicon Valley? How many Slashdotters would be willing to work in Silicon Valley making shoes for minimum wage when delivering pizza in Silicon Valley pays $15 per hour more than a C++ 20 years experience man?
Nike should be forced to make Shoes at a price the Market decides, not a price Nike decides. Meaning if their shoes sell a ton, then the price should go down. However I do not believe the value of peoples labor should be controlled by anyone but these people and these people do not like working in sweatshops, I'm sorry but no one likes slave labor. If you say people in Silicon Valley over in the USA dont want to do this labor what makes you think people in China want to do it? They dont want to do it either, no one wants to do slave labor, however theres plenty of people here in Ghettos and Trailer Parks who would gladly make shoes for a living, perhaps these people wouldnt be out selling drugs and robbing people if there were jobs for them too, of course theres no jobs for the uneducated poor lower class Americans who make up a significant percentage of the population.
Yes, monopoly is bad for prices. It's the job of the Monopolies & Mergers commission which is run by the Government to stop monopolies forming by the big company buying out all its competitors. There are massive fines when this occurs, and the company can be ordered by the Courts to break up because customers (voters) will have to pay artificially high prices. Personally I like Reebok so I think competition is working fine.
Competition is fine as long as its fair. I dont mind that Nike and Reebok compete, but I want the people working for them to make the money they deserve, someone shouldnt work for 12 hours and make less money than you just because of where they were born.
Incorrect. The Foreign Exchange mechanism works fine. China has a floating currency, so as the Chinese economy becomes stronger (which it will) their currency will rise. It's even possible that in a few decades one Yuan = one Dollar, and we will all be trying to immigrate to China
If its fine, why are we losing the jobs? Oh I know, because our dollar is too expensive, so whats the solution? Should we change our currency to the Chinese currency? How about the Euro? Or maybe the Indian Currency? Our problem is inflation, our dollar is too expensive to be useful to anyone. So until we have a global currency certain people will be priced out of the market based on location alone, forcing people to move to certain locations. I dont know if you are American or if you love your country but if you do, do you really want to see America die because of "Capitalism"?
The rich Chinese are VERY rich. As an example, they own the Hotel Mandarin in Singapore which has golden lifts, goldcoloured carpets, Gold-plated showers and Platinum waterfalls. Their inclusive breakfast is frankfurters, Chinese special fried rice with Jasmine, Eggs, Hash Browns. It is like a dream palace, and it's all Chinese. The Chinese are having the same problems - the businessmen are getting paid a lot more than the normal worker (big rich-poor gap) look at how much money Dung Xiao Ping's friends have made (hundreds of millions of dollars). The United States has the same problem. These businessmen make money in Dollars/Pounds from outsourcing and then CONVERT this money into Yuan to pay their workers. If there was a global minimum wage then the Chinese companies wouldn't
The problem is the Yuan is better than the dollar in every way. The USA needs more jobs, people are having problems finding jobs here. Alot of people like me, college students, will take the Nike or Reebok jobs which you say the average Silicon Valley rich CEO wont take. Look, I need a
Cost of living has EVERYTHING to do with wage. If the cost of living in an area is low, then a company can pay workers in that area in lower wage. Wage has nothing to do with cost of living, A doctor, lawyer or computer programmer may live in the projects or cheap apartment in brooklyn. Should their wage be based on where they live? So if you live in a ghetto you get the "ghetto wage" and if you live in Beverly Hills you get the "Beverly Hills Wage"? Hell no. Your wage should not be based on your cost of living, it should be based on how much you are worth. Your worth has nothing to do wit how much it costs for you to live, your worth is decided based on how much you are in demand and how much companies are willing to pay for your services. Thats the whole point of the American Dream, everyone can move up and get a raise, maybe you are thinking of communism.
Now you are refuting your own argument. This is exactly why programming jobs won't go overseas in the numbers that you claim they will. Even though wages are higher in the US, there are advantages to basing operations in the US - you even mention a few!! There is a reason why these countries are called "third world". They have minimal infrastructure (frequent brown outs and limited telcom capabilities), their economies are unstable (think double and triple digit inflation), their political systems are unstable and rife with corruption (even by US standards!), they don't have a strong educational system, their medical care is low by western standards, etc, etc, etc. And you forget probably the most important ingredient to a skilled work force, a strong middle class! I think you are wrong, first of all they dont need infastructure for programmers, they just need a bunch of computers and an internet connection, maybe an office. The third world may be poor but they a computer is all you need, its not likee you need all the stuff we have in silicon valley to be a programmer. IF what you said was true, there would be no programmers out of silicon valley and redmond because thats where all the infastructure is, funny but theres programmers all over the USA.
Why isn't it fair? To me a fair wage is the market wage. In simpler terms, it's fair I'm making about the same as the guy next to me for doing the same job. I've lived in both rural in urban areas and the fact is that wages are lower in rural areas. If this fair to me? I mean, I was probably making less than my collegues in NYC. However, I DID think it was fair because my bills were lower. If anything, I was probably coming out a little bit ahead. Also I had a nice quality of life (close to nature, no traffic, no crowds). Also, if you forced companies to pay the same wage, no matter what the area, then all of the jobs in the low cost of living areas would probably disappear. After all, why should a company locate its operations in a place with all the disadvantages of a rural area (no infrastructure etc) without any of the advantages (lower cost of labor)?
Fair wage is the wage you are worth, the market wage should be based on what the workers will accept, and what they demand, not what the companies want to pay. If workers arent in demand they have to accept less, and thats fair, but considering them acceptingn less means I'm out of a job, we should all have a global minimum wage or else the jobs leave the USA which is unfair. I wouldnt mind the programming jobs being cheap, but if I dont even have the option of being a programmer anymore, thats not fair.
Yes but how many of those billion Indians have the education, skills, and training to be programmers? And how many of those Indians are already here in the US earning US wages? If there are so many Indian/Chinese/African programmers chomping at the bit to take American jobs, then where were they back in the late 90's when anybody with a brain could get hired as a web programmer?
As many as needed, its cheaper for Microsoft to train Indians tha
" There is a serious flaw in your argument. Here in the U.S., we have a single currency (dollars) and a national min wage, but it is STILL cheaper to live in North Dakota than it is in New York City. I'm sure that companies in ND can pay wages that are a lot lower than a company in NYC. Why is this? After all, according to you, this shouldn't happen since both places use the same currency and the same min wage."
What does the cost of living have to do with your wage? That has nothing to do with it. Sure its cheaper to live in North Dakota, theres more land there, the land is cheaper, and so on. This has absolutely nothing to do with your wage though, If I hire you as a company located in New York, you'll get a New York wage even if you live and work in North Dakota, letting you keep the extra money.
Just like if you work in New York you can buy land in cheaper areas. What the Global companies are doing, is robbing the workers, instead of the Indians and Chinese keeping that extra money, that money goes to the CEO.
"Here's another thing to think about. If ND is that much cheaper for a company to operate in, then why haven't more companies moved to ND, and why are so many companies still based in NYC. Tax credits? Maybe but it had better be a REALLY BIG tax credit to make up the different. Perhaps the the realtor's mantra of "location, location, location" is really true. NYC has more potential employees, better infrastructure, proximity to a major economic center, and being in NYC carries a certain cache in some industries. "
Theres more people in New York City, population and infastructure. New York is a built up city, you cannot compare it to a place which is mostly grass and trees and wonder why companies dont want to be there.
As far as jobs going overseas goes, if the U.S. tech industry is go "gloom and doom", why do the best and the brightest from India, China, and other countries come to the U.S. (on H1-B visas) to work here? If the situation is so rosy in India, then why come here to work. You never hear of American workers deciding to emigrate to India or China by the thousands. Even adjusting for cost of living, living in the U.S. offers a better quality of life. They come here to work because for now we are the best country, but not for long, eventually they will have all the jobs and we will be the third world, and thats when we will all be going to India and China to find work. The quality of life is better in Tokyo Japan than in the USA, funny we arent all running to Tokyo, you know why? Tokyos economy is terrible just like ours.
Also, right now one of the reasons that it appears so much cheaper to hire an Indian programmer in India is because off-shore development really hasn't reached a critical mass. As more and more companies jump on the bandwagon, the demand for Indian programmers will increase, pushing up their cost
Thats assuming theres not an endless supply of Indian programmers, look theres a billion Indians, theres around 300 million Americans, so tell me how in the hell do you think programmers will somehow be in demand again? But even if a billion Indian programmers were hired, you have another Billion Chinese and Africans to hire before hiring the Europeans and Americans.
Anyway, economics isn't a static thing. It is a dynamic system where everything is inter-related, and it must be studied as such. Unfortunately, it seems like most people assume that one change or trend will continue indefinitely. You would think that Slashdot people would understand how to analyze dynamic systems, but I guess that only applies to digital ones!:-) I never said it will be like this forever, but currently our economic downturn benefits people in India. The economy is unstable because the people in India are being used as cheap labor, if you make their labor cost the same as our labor via a Global currency, thats when things will change for the better, thats when things
Then go to a flea market in an old US town and buy $5 unbranded sneakers. This money will go straight to the sweatshop. The fact is Americans want Nike for $500 because Michael Jordan wears them."
No, Americans want the best quality shoes, Nike makes better shoes, despite what you may say, You'll never find a pair of shoes more comfortable and more well made than a pair of $500 Nikes, the problem is the same problem with have with Microsoft, people dont WANT to spend $500 on Nikes, they spend $500 on Nike because Nike makes the best basketball/sports shoes and they happen to cost $500.
Sure marketing has alot to do with it, but I dont see any small shoe companies with anything better than the Nike Air Jordan sneakers, better meaning in terms of how they feel and how well they are made.
Sure other smaller companies can make good shoes, but Nike buys these companies out.
"It's not your place to comment on how Nike distributes or raises that money. I know McDonalds is crap, but then why does my stomach rumble whe I see one of their beautiful juicy Big Macs on TV mmmmmm? "
Who would choose Mc Donalds over a 5 star resturant? No one. Mc Donalds however is on every corner, and its cheap, until theres something better people are forced to eat there. When you are outside somewhere and every corner has a Mc Donalds, you dont go into Mc Donalds because you like their food, you go in because you are hungry and they have food thats in your price range.
Same with Nikes, People buy what they want, but it is my business to care how they make the food I consume, and how the product I buy is built. Even if I disagree I'm forced to buy a good pair of shoes and a good meal because theres no option, and if Mc Donalds and Nike are well known, and theres nothing else for miles, well thats what I'll buy.
" If China becomes one big sweatshop and Chinese employment rises to almost 100% then the Chinese economy will be stronger than the American economy after 100 years of redistribution. The Chinese will choose better and better sweatshops to work for, and then the best workers will go for perks like "Free jade vase when you join our company". Then the Chinese will be richer than the Americans."
This isnt about the chinese getting raises or having jobs, its about the fact they have a different currency than us, therefore the money isnt properly distributed
We do have a national economy, your dollar is worth the same in New York as it is in Florida.
" Not true - New York, Utah and South Carolina and California all use the same currency. Look where companies like Novell, RedHat and Caldera started up. It wasn't in Boston or New York. Guess why? "
Thats not the point, in New York you make money in dollars, in California you make money in dollars, everywhere you go your dollars are worth the same, the cost of living might vary but your money is worth the same for a REASON, it keeps things fair. No one would get hired in Boston if the money here was twice as expensive as the money down south, it doesnt matter what the job was or the situation, you could be a fisherman in Boston, but if your fish costs x10 as much money because your stupid dollar is more expensive, whos going to buy it? People will buy fish thats cheaper, meaning everywhere but from you, even if you produce most of the fish.
" It will always be about where you live. If you're a seafood wholesaler, you'll be better off in Boston than Des Moines. Why? Because there's no ocean near Des Moines. Even if your the best fisherman in the world, it's not going to do you any bloody good in Des Moines."
This doesnt apply to software, a fisherman is a trade, its like being a cole miner orfarmer, sure its harder to be a farmer in the inner city, but this has nothing to do with it, fact is anything you produce from any farm anywhere is from the same $ dollar system. Yes China will have the software development advantage because theres more Chinese, but if we are both the same price, it wont matter, people who live in the USA will buy mostly USA and people who live in Japan will buy mostly Japan.
Just like people in Boston usually buy from local companies in Boston. Sure some big global companies will sell stuff in China, but with a global dollar at least its fair, the Chinese will get paid a fair wage, I could go to China and make the same wage there and pay for my family in the USA.
Just like in the USA I can work in Boston and pay for a house in Texas.
" That's impossible. Check out the cost of living in Costa Rica. You can live quite nicely there for less than the US minimum wage. If you brought up the minimum wage to US standards, it would drive up the price of labor, which would drive up the price of everything else. The minimum wage in the US is a princely sum in Costa Rica. Most Costa Rican businesses couldn't afford to pay it. "
First if they use the same dollar system as me, why couldnt they afford to pay it? Americans in the USA who buy software made in Costa Rica would make the people who make software there rich, improving the whole economy, other businesses would form to allow these people to spend their money. Whats your point? In Maine, Idaho and other places the cost of living is kinda low, should these places never start businesses because somehow the businesses there cannot pay minimum wage? Bullshit, Businesses in these states sell to people in other states, making these states richer, thats how it works, you export your product, you make money, your economy improves, and you can pay minimum wage.
$5 is $5 everywhere regardless of the cost of living, $5 an hour here in Boston is $5 an hour in Texas, the money is the same, if you cannot live off the $5 an hour in Boston you move or you get another job, if you can live off $5 an hour in Texas and live rich but you cant live off $5 an hour in Boston, this is an issue of the states cost of living, not an issue of the currency, the global econnomy, etc.
When you have China, India, etc however not getting the same minimum wage because Microsoft you somehow believe cannot afford to pay them the same they pay us, thats absolutely Bullshit when you think about it, if they could pay us Minimum wage here in the USA they can pay everyone else.
It makes sense when you tell me people who start small businesses in China cannot pay minimum wage, perhaps not easily, but if th
AntiHanzoSan I'm not against competition, I'm not against globalism, I'm against how its being done.
Currently we dont have a Global Economy, because people in other countries dont get the same wages, You shouldnt be able to have seperate currencies yet still have a Global Economy, because when you convert the Yen to the Dollar, our money somehow is more expensive than their money, making their version of the dollar "BETTER" than ours, pricing our people out due to some kinda glitch in the system.
So I get priced out as a programmer because my dollar is inflated? Thats Bullshit, look, if we could convert the Chinese, the Japanese, and we are the USA, all converted to the Euro, no one would have a problem with Globalism, we would all make the same exact wages and the competition would be based on actual merit.
Instead, the competition is based on stuff we have no control over, its not even about merit, its about where you live, if you live in China you have a job, if you live in the USA you dont. So the solution? We should pick a fucking dollar/euro/yen and everyone use it.
We should set up a global minimum wage for EVERYONE, and then finally labor will cost the same in EVERY country. A programmer who makes $30,000 inn the USA would make $30,000 anywhere else in the world and then we will finally be able to compete without being forced to leave our home countries.
I'm all for competition, I'm convinced that the USA has enough of a headstart that I'll be just fine if we finally made things fair. But I dont agree with an unfair competition where I have to leave the USA because the jobs are being given to China, and from China to India, and from India to Africa, I mean what the hell, everyone will have jobs but us, why? Because we are the most expensive, so unless you are a Doctor, Lawyer or Teacher, be prepared to be without work.
First, Its impossible for me to compete with 6 billion people, we Americans may be smart but we certainly arent the smartest people on the face of the Earth.
I have enough competition here in the USA, do I really want to compete with people all around the fucking globe as well? You are right, competition will help in the long run, but in the short term the cheap labor is bad because only the CEOs benefit from it.
Look, I'm all for competition when its fair, if the world converts to the Euro, and we all have the same system, fine, I'd gladly compete against people in India, Pakistan, China etc, but as it is right now I cant compete at all because they dont even have money thats worth the same as me.
So their economy has less inflation, and our money is more expensive, this prices me out of the competition unless I move to China. SO I cannot even compete because the system is giving them an unfair advantage? Fuck that.
If we are going to have a global economy, we need a global minimum wage, a global dollar/euro/yen all worth the same, and a global tax system which follows American companies overseas. Meaning if an American company goes to China, they should pay Chinese and American taxes, they shouldnt be able to get out of paying taxes because they go over to China where the taxes arent so high.
Look I'm all for Microsoft building offices in China, but a programmer in China, USA, Europe, etc should cost the exact same, period because we all should be using the same dollar/euro system.
You cannot have a system thats out of balance and then let the CEO keep the change.
They were. They arent anymore, and thats exactly my point, the reason they arent is because they were allowed to develop their own companies without our big global companies taking over their country.
Wrong wrong wrong, Japan makes products and we buy them, so dont give me the "third world cannot survive" bullshit.
The third world can start their own software companies, we have our software companies, and the companies with better software sell all over the world. We dont need our big companies to get bigger, we need smaller companies to form in Japan to compete with our companies.
Sony vs Microsoft is a good example.
" And less people buy their product (barring a monopoly), and that equates to money lost"
How much money big corperations have does not matter, small corperations will form an make software, so who cares what happens to Microosft? Work somewhere else.
The gov will never give up the tarif? Fine, at least I'll have a job in 25 years.
So all of us have to get PHDs in Nano Technology now because big companies gave our jobs away? And then when the rest of the world catches up, we have to get another PHD? and another? Fuck that.
I should be able to keep a stable job for 5 years without having to worry about the third world catching up and robbing me of my job every 5 years. Not all of us can afford to be in college all our lives and not everyone in this country is smart enough, so theres going to be a problem.
Slashdot Mirror
So because somebody didn't lock their door, its okay to steal the things in their house?
No its more like, in a world where people decide to share each others houses, should we all get arrested if we refuse to lock our doors?
If the people choose to leave their doors open, and choose to let everyone in, who are you to tell us that we should lock our doors? Maybe the people actually WANT to share?
Its not, but if the college wants to monitor you, then you can go to another college, if the RIAA wants to monitor every college, well thats bullshit.
I think we deserve privacy.
Maybe this is true in your dream world, but in the real world, your wage is based upon supply and demand. I may be "worth" X, but if there is nobody out there who will pay me X, then I'm not going to get it. The FACT is that the market wage in lower cost of living areas is lower than it is in higher cost of living areas. I mean, compare the average salary for a programmer in Boston (high cost of living) vs. Des Moines (low cost of living). People in lower cost of living areas tend to demand less, because they don't need as much to live on.
Ok you can say this, but its not true, Microsoft has more than enough money to pay everyone a fair wage. You say there might be no one willing to pay X? Ok so less companies would be making software, so what? I'd rather each job pay a person enough to survive, than have more jobs but have to work 2-3 jobs to survive. What good is a mc donalds job if you cannot survive on it? Useless to me.
Now, a programming job is a different situation, theres no shortage of programming labor, and there never will be, so I dont see the software industry having much of a future, Microsoft may not pay their programmers a fair wage if Microsoft were JUST a software company, but because Microsoft expands, they make money in other areas.
Think of the gaming industry, these programmers make millions of dollars in salary, not because they are worth it to the market, theres plenty of programmers who can make games, the reason they make so much is because making a game requires culture.
You cannot hire India programmers to write an American game and expect it to be done properly, you cannot hire American programmers to write a Japanese Anime RPG and expect it to be done properly, so the gaming industry has a smaller labor force but games like Tony Hawk produce massive amounts of money. This money goes down to the programmers, this is why John Carmack and other programmer people became so rich.
Now, if you make the game industry like the computer industry, well every programmer would be making about $5 an hour, there would be no rich programmers in Japan or the USA because we'd just hire cheap labor in India, so you see in certain industries like the game or movie industry the workers set the price, and in certain industries the consumers set the price, but then you have some industries like Microsofts who set the price for the entire industry so low that they force everyone else to hire cheap labor.
How do you compete with IE? Well you cant unless you go open source or hire slave labor in India.
How do you compete with Microsoft Word? Well you cant, so you see because Microsoft made the whole industry less valueable with their monopoly and offering everything for free, software companies cannot charge as much and thus the price of software goes down even if the demand is high!
So this is not supply and demand, this is certain monopolies manipulating the whole game and rigging it to destroy other smaller companies like Netscape. So the result? The small companies who were losing money in the competition were FORCED to hire people in India just to stay in business, because companies like Microsoft destroy the value of software by offering everything for free.
Microsoft packs in all this software with Windows, this is sorta like say if in the gaming Industry, Sony decided to pack in 50 games with their console so no one has to buy console games anymore, well now what do people like EA do? Well they fire all their expensive workers and they begin to make cheap games and sell them for $10 each, and this keeps them in the market.
Its very difficult to compete with free, and Microsoft is about to be priced out in the same way by linux.
You sound like somebody who has never actually BEEN to a third world country. What good is a computer if you don't have a reliable electrical grid? How do you get Internet access if you don't have a reliable phone system? And you can forget broadband... Also, they don't have the ed
The headphones most CDplayers come with are cheap peices of junk, so on a portible device people prefer mp3. You are right however for the home stereo people do prefer CD, but those same people who prefer CD over MP3 would also prefer a record player over a CD player because Vinyl sounds so much better.
See the problem I have and alot of others have is, we dont want to buy the whole CD which might only have one good song on it, but I will pay a fee to download an mp3 in public. I think 25 cent is reasonnable, its a price anyone will pay rich or poor.
I wont pay $3.99 for a single, I will pay $1 for a high quality vinyl single. I will pay 50 cent for a CD, and I will pay 25 cent for an mp3. Thats it.
I'm not going to pay $5 for one song.
Yes just like millions wanted cassette tapes, and how millions still use VHS instead of DVD, or how some people still use 8track players.
Face it, some people adapt faster than others, but college students are usually the first to embrace new technology.
We are talking about college students right? well most college students know what an mp3 is, and own a portible mp3 player along with a CD player, these people have the choice, carry one Mp3 player which can hold 100 gigs of music, or carry 20 CDs and a CD player which skips when you jog, run or move around too much. oh and dont forget about scratches.
When you download music you ARE learning. Why? Because you are learning about new types of music.
You also have the choice or at least we should, to decide how much music is worth to us, we should not be forced to buy it.
The English wanted to force us to buy their Tea, remember? But we didnt want to buy their tea.
Perhaps we dont want to buy music? If the whole country decides they dont want to buy something, the laws should be based on what the country wants, thats how democracy works.
You and I both know that if we had a vote on this issue, the people would decide to make filesharing on the internet legal.
I dont think people would want true piracy to be illegal, meaning copying and then selling it, but most people in this country do not believe sharing is morally wrong and its going to take years to reprogram everyone in this country to somehow go against all they were taught. You see I dont think you can train or program a person to be selfish, and just because greedy guys in suits at the RIAA are selfish does not mean you can convince me or anyone else here to be selfish like you.
So here is what should be done, we can handle this in a democratic way, and have some kinda vote/discussion which involves the people, or they can sue us and put us in jail and cause us to riot and sue them and boycott.
But I think we can avoid conflict and solve this problem without it even going to such a level. I dont want to see people on college campuses all around the country rioting and protesting over something like this, but thats whats going to happen and while people may be divided on the war with Iraq, most college students SUPPORT filesharing and you can expect millions of people to have alot more power than the RIAA, whats the number now? 100 million people? Why the hell should some small hidden group of guys in suits and ties in some fucking office somewhere be allowed to decide what we can and cannot do, is this a democracy or are we in the new soviet union/China/Iraq?
We have troops fighting for our "Freedom" when in reality we dont have any? What the hell are we fighting for then? Fighting so some stupid goofballs in suits and other corperate types can rule the world behind closed doors?
I usually dont believe in shadow government BS, or illuminati garbage, but you know I'm starting to wonder if a group of businessmen actually do rule the world and want to make it seem like its a democracy when its really not.
Sure, have an election but keep it rigged so the vote doesnt even matter? And no matter who gets elected, money can be used to control them and if they get out of line well then you might have another john F kennedy kinda situation?
I dont like it.
Well no, because people dont want CDs. People want mp3s. Perhaps if you gave them a discount on Mp3s I'd buy them, sell each mp3 for 10 cents each and I'd buy them, but I wont ever pay more than 25 cent per song.
Setup mp3 vending machines with new released songs on them that I cant get anywhere else and I might plug in my mp3 player and load a song or two, otherwise I'm not going to do it, I dont use CDs anymore, CDs arent as portible as mp3s, and we dont go backwards in technology on the college campuses.
If its cheap and if its all over the place, I'd buy it, otherwise no.
Here are my options, listen to music online, or dont listen to music at all, if the RIAA wants to make it so I cannot listen to their music, well then I wont listen to any of their music but I'll still listen to music online and guess what, They'll lose customers because I'll end up buying somethinng from an Indy Label.
The final solution for the RIAA will be to make all copying Illegal.
Remember, anyone who copies anything is a Pirate, just like anyone who uses Kazaa is a Pirate.
They want to turn the internet into something more controlled like the TV industry. Freedom isnt allowed in this country, some people have to control everything.
What ever happened to individual freedom? If the masses decide they want to share files, why should you be able to stop them? What happened to democracy? If the masses vote to have file sharing, that should end this, and from what I see (100 million people sharing files) well, the masses have spoken, so the laws should be changed.
Shutting off all the TVs to prevent minors from viewing violence.
I mean really, its not the RIAA's job to be our parents. Its should be left up to the college. Capitalism is important yes, but its not everything, money is not more important than education, if you cannot have freedom of speech even in the educational enviornment well then I'm going to move to China, I mean if we have to be monitored by the RIAA, whats the point of staying in the RIAA's country, Its not ours anymore, if we had a vote right now most people would be for piracy, and for filesharing, this reminds me of prohibition, or people who try to outlaw porn.
Look, it will never work, give it up, the people want to share music, the RIAA can adapt to the industry, or they can hiijack our government and change the laws. If they are allowed to change our laws, we arent a democracy.
Why should censorship be allowed at college? How is a person supposed to learn when censored? Most college students do not buy CDs, so its not really going to help their sales by doing this, because most college students except for the few who are rich are too busy buying books, going to parties, and paying tuition to have any money left for music CDs. So this isnt about money, its about control, the RIAA wants to be able to control everything we do on our computers, it also removes our privacy. Once the campus police start to monitor all internet trafic kiss your privacy goodbye. Whats the point of going to college if you are being watched 24/7 by men in black with RIAA logos?
We need to fight this somehow, and I dont mean just a stupid petition, we need to protest this instead of protesting the Iraq war.
Cost of living has nothing to do with the worth of your dollar. Buy stuff online and have it shipped to you to avoid state taxes.
Then Capitalism is working, the Americans have too much money to spend on shoes and Nike manufactures them in the cheapest place (with high unemployment and poor people). What's wrong with that? Should Nike be forced to make expensive shoes in Silicon Valley? How many Slashdotters would be willing to work in Silicon Valley making shoes for minimum wage when delivering pizza in Silicon Valley pays $15 per hour more than a C++ 20 years experience man?
Nike should be forced to make Shoes at a price the Market decides, not a price Nike decides. Meaning if their shoes sell a ton, then the price should go down. However I do not believe the value of peoples labor should be controlled by anyone but these people and these people do not like working in sweatshops, I'm sorry but no one likes slave labor. If you say people in Silicon Valley over in the USA dont want to do this labor what makes you think people in China want to do it? They dont want to do it either, no one wants to do slave labor, however theres plenty of people here in Ghettos and Trailer Parks who would gladly make shoes for a living, perhaps these people wouldnt be out selling drugs and robbing people if there were jobs for them too, of course theres no jobs for the uneducated poor lower class Americans who make up a significant percentage of the population.
Yes, monopoly is bad for prices. It's the job of the Monopolies & Mergers commission which is run by the Government to stop monopolies forming by the big company buying out all its competitors. There are massive fines when this occurs, and the company can be ordered by the Courts to break up because customers (voters) will have to pay artificially high prices. Personally I like Reebok so I think competition is working fine.
Competition is fine as long as its fair. I dont mind that Nike and Reebok compete, but I want the people working for them to make the money they deserve, someone shouldnt work for 12 hours and make less money than you just because of where they were born.
Incorrect. The Foreign Exchange mechanism works fine. China has a floating currency, so as the Chinese economy becomes stronger (which it will) their currency will rise. It's even possible that in a few decades one Yuan = one Dollar, and we will all be trying to immigrate to China
If its fine, why are we losing the jobs? Oh I know, because our dollar is too expensive, so whats the solution? Should we change our currency to the Chinese currency? How about the Euro? Or maybe the Indian Currency? Our problem is inflation, our dollar is too expensive to be useful to anyone. So until we have a global currency certain people will be priced out of the market based on location alone, forcing people to move to certain locations. I dont know if you are American or if you love your country but if you do, do you really want to see America die because of "Capitalism"?
The rich Chinese are VERY rich. As an example, they own the Hotel Mandarin in Singapore which has golden lifts, goldcoloured carpets, Gold-plated showers and Platinum waterfalls. Their inclusive breakfast is frankfurters, Chinese special fried rice with Jasmine, Eggs, Hash Browns. It is like a dream palace, and it's all Chinese. The Chinese are having the same problems - the businessmen are getting paid a lot more than the normal worker (big rich-poor gap) look at how much money Dung Xiao Ping's friends have made (hundreds of millions of dollars). The United States has the same problem. These businessmen make money in Dollars/Pounds from outsourcing and then CONVERT this money into Yuan to pay their workers. If there was a global minimum wage then the Chinese companies wouldn't
The problem is the Yuan is better than the dollar in every way. The USA needs more jobs, people are having problems finding jobs here. Alot of people like me, college students, will take the Nike or Reebok jobs which you say the average Silicon Valley rich CEO wont take. Look, I need a
Cost of living has EVERYTHING to do with wage. If the cost of living in an area is low, then a company can pay workers in that area in lower wage.
Wage has nothing to do with cost of living, A doctor, lawyer or computer programmer may live in the projects or cheap apartment in brooklyn. Should their wage be based on where they live? So if you live in a ghetto you get the "ghetto wage" and if you live in Beverly Hills you get the "Beverly Hills Wage"? Hell no. Your wage should not be based on your cost of living, it should be based on how much you are worth. Your worth has nothing to do wit how much it costs for you to live, your worth is decided based on how much you are in demand and how much companies are willing to pay for your services. Thats the whole point of the American Dream, everyone can move up and get a raise, maybe you are thinking of communism.
Now you are refuting your own argument. This is exactly why programming jobs won't go overseas in the numbers that you claim they will. Even though wages are higher in the US, there are advantages to basing operations in the US - you even mention a few!! There is a reason why these countries are called "third world". They have minimal infrastructure (frequent brown outs and limited telcom capabilities), their economies are unstable (think double and triple digit inflation), their political systems are unstable and rife with corruption (even by US standards!), they don't have a strong educational system, their medical care is low by western standards, etc, etc, etc. And you forget probably the most important ingredient to a skilled work force, a strong middle class!
I think you are wrong, first of all they dont need infastructure for programmers, they just need a bunch of computers and an internet connection, maybe an office. The third world may be poor but they a computer is all you need, its not likee you need all the stuff we have in silicon valley to be a programmer. IF what you said was true, there would be no programmers out of silicon valley and redmond because thats where all the infastructure is, funny but theres programmers all over the USA.
Why isn't it fair? To me a fair wage is the market wage. In simpler terms, it's fair I'm making about the same as the guy next to me for doing the same job. I've lived in both rural in urban areas and the fact is that wages are lower in rural areas. If this fair to me? I mean, I was probably making less than my collegues in NYC. However, I DID think it was fair because my bills were lower. If anything, I was probably coming out a little bit ahead. Also I had a nice quality of life (close to nature, no traffic, no crowds). Also, if you forced companies to pay the same wage, no matter what the area, then all of the jobs in the low cost of living areas would probably disappear. After all, why should a company locate its operations in a place with all the disadvantages of a rural area (no infrastructure etc) without any of the advantages (lower cost of labor)?
Fair wage is the wage you are worth, the market wage should be based on what the workers will accept, and what they demand, not what the companies want to pay. If workers arent in demand they have to accept less, and thats fair, but considering them acceptingn less means I'm out of a job, we should all have a global minimum wage or else the jobs leave the USA which is unfair. I wouldnt mind the programming jobs being cheap, but if I dont even have the option of being a programmer anymore, thats not fair.
Yes but how many of those billion Indians have the education, skills, and training to be programmers? And how many of those Indians are already here in the US earning US wages? If there are so many Indian/Chinese/African programmers chomping at the bit to take American jobs, then where were they back in the late 90's when anybody with a brain could get hired as a web programmer?
As many as needed, its cheaper for Microsoft to train Indians tha
" There is a serious flaw in your argument. Here in the U.S., we have a single currency (dollars) and a national min wage, but it is STILL cheaper to live in North Dakota than it is in New York City. I'm sure that companies in ND can pay wages that are a lot lower than a company in NYC. Why is this? After all, according to you, this shouldn't happen since both places use the same currency and the same min wage."
What does the cost of living have to do with your wage? That has nothing to do with it. Sure its cheaper to live in North Dakota, theres more land there, the land is cheaper, and so on. This has absolutely nothing to do with your wage though, If I hire you as a company located in New York, you'll get a New York wage even if you live and work in North Dakota, letting you keep the extra money.
Just like if you work in New York you can buy land in cheaper areas. What the Global companies are doing, is robbing the workers, instead of the Indians and Chinese keeping that extra money, that money goes to the CEO.
"Here's another thing to think about. If ND is that much cheaper for a company to operate in, then why haven't more companies moved to ND, and why are so many companies still based in NYC. Tax credits? Maybe but it had better be a REALLY BIG tax credit to make up the different. Perhaps the the realtor's mantra of "location, location, location" is really true. NYC has more potential employees, better infrastructure, proximity to a major economic center, and being in NYC carries a certain cache in some industries.
"
Theres more people in New York City, population and infastructure. New York is a built up city, you cannot compare it to a place which is mostly grass and trees and wonder why companies dont want to be there.
As far as jobs going overseas goes, if the U.S. tech industry is go "gloom and doom", why do the best and the brightest from India, China, and other countries come to the U.S. (on H1-B visas) to work here? If the situation is so rosy in India, then why come here to work. You never hear of American workers deciding to emigrate to India or China by the thousands. Even adjusting for cost of living, living in the U.S. offers a better quality of life. They come here to work because for now we are the best country, but not for long, eventually they will have all the jobs and we will be the third world, and thats when we will all be going to India and China to find work. The quality of life is better in Tokyo Japan than in the USA, funny we arent all running to Tokyo, you know why? Tokyos economy is terrible just like ours.
Also, right now one of the reasons that it appears so much cheaper to hire an Indian programmer in India is because off-shore development really hasn't reached a critical mass. As more and more companies jump on the bandwagon, the demand for Indian programmers will increase, pushing up their cost
Thats assuming theres not an endless supply of Indian programmers, look theres a billion Indians, theres around 300 million Americans, so tell me how in the hell do you think programmers will somehow be in demand again? But even if a billion Indian programmers were hired, you have another Billion Chinese and Africans to hire before hiring the Europeans and Americans.
Anyway, economics isn't a static thing. It is a dynamic system where everything is inter-related, and it must be studied as such. Unfortunately, it seems like most people assume that one change or trend will continue indefinitely. You would think that Slashdot people would understand how to analyze dynamic systems, but I guess that only applies to digital ones!
I never said it will be like this forever, but currently our economic downturn benefits people in India. The economy is unstable because the people in India are being used as cheap labor, if you make their labor cost the same as our labor via a Global currency, thats when things will change for the better, thats when things
Then go to a flea market in an old US town and buy $5 unbranded sneakers. This money will go straight to the sweatshop. The fact is Americans want Nike for $500 because Michael Jordan wears them."
No, Americans want the best quality shoes, Nike makes better shoes, despite what you may say, You'll never find a pair of shoes more comfortable and more well made than a pair of $500 Nikes, the problem is the same problem with have with Microsoft, people dont WANT to spend $500 on Nikes, they spend $500 on Nike because Nike makes the best basketball/sports shoes and they happen to cost $500.
Sure marketing has alot to do with it, but I dont see any small shoe companies with anything better than the Nike Air Jordan sneakers, better meaning in terms of how they feel and how well they are made.
Sure other smaller companies can make good shoes, but Nike buys these companies out.
"It's not your place to comment on how Nike distributes or raises that money. I know McDonalds is crap, but then why does my stomach rumble whe I see one of their beautiful juicy Big Macs on TV mmmmmm? "
Who would choose Mc Donalds over a 5 star resturant? No one. Mc Donalds however is on every corner, and its cheap, until theres something better people are forced to eat there. When you are outside somewhere and every corner has a Mc Donalds, you dont go into Mc Donalds because you like their food, you go in because you are hungry and they have food thats in your price range.
Same with Nikes, People buy what they want, but it is my business to care how they make the food I consume, and how the product I buy is built. Even if I disagree I'm forced to buy a good pair of shoes and a good meal because theres no option, and if Mc Donalds and Nike are well known, and theres nothing else for miles, well thats what I'll buy.
" If China becomes one big sweatshop and Chinese employment rises to almost 100% then the Chinese economy will be stronger than the American economy after 100 years of redistribution. The Chinese will choose better and better sweatshops to work for, and then the best workers will go for perks like "Free jade vase when you join our company". Then the Chinese will be richer than the Americans."
This isnt about the chinese getting raises or having jobs, its about the fact they have a different currency than us, therefore the money isnt properly distributed
We do have a national economy, your dollar is worth the same in New York as it is in Florida.
"
Not true - New York, Utah and South Carolina and California all use the same currency. Look where companies like Novell, RedHat and Caldera started up. It wasn't in Boston or New York. Guess why? "
Thats not the point, in New York you make money in dollars, in California you make money in dollars, everywhere you go your dollars are worth the same, the cost of living might vary but your money is worth the same for a REASON, it keeps things fair. No one would get hired in Boston if the money here was twice as expensive as the money down south, it doesnt matter what the job was or the situation, you could be a fisherman in Boston, but if your fish costs x10 as much money because your stupid dollar is more expensive, whos going to buy it? People will buy fish thats cheaper, meaning everywhere but from you, even if you produce most of the fish.
" It will always be about where you live. If you're a seafood wholesaler, you'll be better off in Boston than Des Moines. Why? Because there's no ocean near Des Moines. Even if your the best fisherman in the world, it's not going to do you any bloody good in Des Moines."
This doesnt apply to software, a fisherman is a trade, its like being a cole miner orfarmer, sure its harder to be a farmer in the inner city, but this has nothing to do with it, fact is anything you produce from any farm anywhere is from the same $ dollar system. Yes China will have the software development advantage because theres more Chinese, but if we are both the same price, it wont matter, people who live in the USA will buy mostly USA and people who live in Japan will buy mostly Japan.
Just like people in Boston usually buy from local companies in Boston. Sure some big global companies will sell stuff in China, but with a global dollar at least its fair, the Chinese will get paid a fair wage, I could go to China and make the same wage there and pay for my family in the USA.
Just like in the USA I can work in Boston and pay for a house in Texas.
" That's impossible. Check out the cost of living in Costa Rica. You can live quite nicely there for less than the US minimum wage. If you brought up the minimum wage to US standards, it would drive up the price of labor, which would drive up the price of everything else. The minimum wage in the US is a princely sum in Costa Rica. Most Costa Rican businesses couldn't afford to pay it. "
First if they use the same dollar system as me, why couldnt they afford to pay it? Americans in the USA who buy software made in Costa Rica would make the people who make software there rich, improving the whole economy, other businesses would form to allow these people to spend their money. Whats your point? In Maine, Idaho and other places the cost of living is kinda low, should these places never start businesses because somehow the businesses there cannot pay minimum wage? Bullshit, Businesses in these states sell to people in other states, making these states richer, thats how it works, you export your product, you make money, your economy improves, and you can pay minimum wage.
$5 is $5 everywhere regardless of the cost of living, $5 an hour here in Boston is $5 an hour in Texas, the money is the same, if you cannot live off the $5 an hour in Boston you move or you get another job, if you can live off $5 an hour in Texas and live rich but you cant live off $5 an hour in Boston, this is an issue of the states cost of living, not an issue of the currency, the global econnomy, etc.
When you have China, India, etc however not getting the same minimum wage because Microsoft you somehow believe cannot afford to pay them the same they pay us, thats absolutely Bullshit when you think about it, if they could pay us Minimum wage here in the USA they can pay everyone else.
It makes sense when you tell me people who start small businesses in China cannot pay minimum wage, perhaps not easily, but if th
Taiwanese companies cannot compete with Nike, Nike just buys them.
AntiHanzoSan I'm not against competition, I'm not against globalism, I'm against how its being done.
Currently we dont have a Global Economy, because people in other countries dont get the same wages, You shouldnt be able to have seperate currencies yet still have a Global Economy, because when you convert the Yen to the Dollar, our money somehow is more expensive than their money, making their version of the dollar "BETTER" than ours, pricing our people out due to some kinda glitch in the system.
So I get priced out as a programmer because my dollar is inflated? Thats Bullshit, look, if we could convert the Chinese, the Japanese, and we are the USA, all converted to the Euro, no one would have a problem with Globalism, we would all make the same exact wages and the competition would be based on actual merit.
Instead, the competition is based on stuff we have no control over, its not even about merit, its about where you live, if you live in China you have a job, if you live in the USA you dont. So the solution? We should pick a fucking dollar/euro/yen and everyone use it.
We should set up a global minimum wage for EVERYONE, and then finally labor will cost the same in EVERY country. A programmer who makes $30,000 inn the USA would make $30,000 anywhere else in the world and then we will finally be able to compete without being forced to leave our home countries.
I'm all for competition, I'm convinced that the USA has enough of a headstart that I'll be just fine if we finally made things fair. But I dont agree with an unfair competition where I have to leave the USA because the jobs are being given to China, and from China to India, and from India to Africa, I mean what the hell, everyone will have jobs but us, why? Because we are the most expensive, so unless you are a Doctor, Lawyer or Teacher, be prepared to be without work.
First, Its impossible for me to compete with 6 billion people, we Americans may be smart but we certainly arent the smartest people on the face of the Earth.
I have enough competition here in the USA, do I really want to compete with people all around the fucking globe as well? You are right, competition will help in the long run, but in the short term the cheap labor is bad because only the CEOs benefit from it.
Look, I'm all for competition when its fair, if the world converts to the Euro, and we all have the same system, fine, I'd gladly compete against people in India, Pakistan, China etc, but as it is right now I cant compete at all because they dont even have money thats worth the same as me.
So their economy has less inflation, and our money is more expensive, this prices me out of the competition unless I move to China. SO I cannot even compete because the system is giving them an unfair advantage? Fuck that.
If we are going to have a global economy, we need a global minimum wage, a global dollar/euro/yen all worth the same, and a global tax system which follows American companies overseas. Meaning if an American company goes to China, they should pay Chinese and American taxes, they shouldnt be able to get out of paying taxes because they go over to China where the taxes arent so high.
Look I'm all for Microsoft building offices in China, but a programmer in China, USA, Europe, etc should cost the exact same, period because we all should be using the same dollar/euro system.
You cannot have a system thats out of balance and then let the CEO keep the change.
They were. They arent anymore, and thats exactly my point, the reason they arent is because they were allowed to develop their own companies without our big global companies taking over their country.
Sony was founded, along with all the others.
Wrong wrong wrong, Japan makes products and we buy them, so dont give me the "third world cannot survive" bullshit.
The third world can start their own software companies, we have our software companies, and the companies with better software sell all over the world. We dont need our big companies to get bigger, we need smaller companies to form in Japan to compete with our companies.
Sony vs Microsoft is a good example.
"
And less people buy their product (barring a monopoly), and that equates to money lost"
How much money big corperations have does not matter, small corperations will form an make software, so who cares what happens to Microosft? Work somewhere else.
The gov will never give up the tarif? Fine, at least I'll have a job in 25 years.
If you charge too much people wont buy your shit, problem solved.
Tax them, use the tax money to fund our schools and colleges so our students can be better educated than the third world.
So all of us have to get PHDs in Nano Technology now because big companies gave our jobs away? And then when the rest of the world catches up, we have to get another PHD? and another? Fuck that.
I should be able to keep a stable job for 5 years without having to worry about the third world catching up and robbing me of my job every 5 years. Not all of us can afford to be in college all our lives and not everyone in this country is smart enough, so theres going to be a problem.
More powerful speakers. Grado headphones are state of the art, they are better than $5000 speaker systems that most people buy.