From a redhat customers perspective this is bad. To many this is the exact reason they moved away from microsoft.
Redhat hasnt been my distro of choice for quite some time, but for many people it is the "only" linux they know of or use.
Personally i hope novell/suse take advantage of this and prevent people from moving back to the evil empire.
And although I personally use gentoo on my systems and I know people who use debian, I wouldnt recomend a non-experienced admin use either, and most linux admins are really windows admins which is why you see so many linux boxes that get broken into......
they want a vehicle from the 90's tha doesn't have all the electronics and sensors that 'just runs', and costs less to maintain and own in general.
Going to have to go back further than the 90's for that, their have been computers in cars for many many years.......
people want the simple, elegant mechanical watches instead of a wizz-bang digital watch.
Actually i think that also has a lot to do with the fact that most "wizz-bang" digital shit is also butt ass fucking ugly. Look at most newer watches, sunglasses and shit like that most "simple" stuff is old-fashioned and most digital shit is over the top gaudy. Even most Laptops are butt ass ugly with the exception of IBM and apple.
And dont even get me started with some of the cars that have and are coming out..... good lord.
I think that all products we like are harder to replace. Its the liking them part that will catch up to you in the end. I had my last cell for about 2 years, i had dropped it down stairs, drove over it and spilled liquids on it yet it stilled worked right up until the end, so i kept it even tho i could have replaced it with a newer "whizz-bang" phone, but now i feel the same way about my 6 month old phone.
Humans used to become attached to each other. Now we become attached to each others stuff.
I think your CEO has a better grasp on the situation than you. And since i come from a company that is mostly windows free (Sun) I can tell you that if your company wants to do this they will accomplish it.
I would also like to point out that i never said they should use 100,000 people to migrate apps. But two years is plenty of time to migrate the important stuff, and like most corporate IT they will tell the unimportant "small" people to deal with whats available until they get around to making the app work better. Which means your "little" group doesnt mean didly squat and if they want you migrated then migrated you shall be. weather you guys like it or not. And i hope lots of people over at IBM are stubborn about this and quit, I know lots of people who would love your job.
I also would like to point out that i proposed the solution that IBM will probably take: pay an OSS company or a small integration company money to write the app for them. this is what most people have done when migrating something from windows to linux.
the reality of the situation is that your CEO probably took a look at the bottom line and said something to the effect of "whats cheaper long term" and made the decision based on that.
And several hundreds of people running several hundreds of different little proprietary ($$$) apps will lead to $$$$$$$$$$$. If they migrate now they can get off the upgrade bandwagon and save a ton of money long term. Since IBM is profitable they have the ability to plan long term without sacrificing the "whole cow" so to speak.
sure they do. otherwise carly's bitch ass would have outsourced her own job and reaped the savings by saving her shares.... after all its only based on money.
this is the joy of open source. they dont need to build something from the ground up.
more likely it wont be that expensive when you take into effect the amount of money they would have to spend buying the microsoft tools. also worth noting is that this could probably be done relativly easily by paying an open source firm (woulda said ximian or the like) a chunk of change (at least to ibm) and saying "develop x".
just a side thought..... maybe the reason your apps are buggy is because the coders who wrote them sucked. or maybe its because the platform they were written on sucked.
not all upgrades are downgrades, thats an MS feature. of course if they have the same internal people working on the same internal apps your probably have the same problem.
No offense man but your on crack if you think that within 2 years a company the size of IBM couldnt get something built up to where visio is. and thats not even taking into affect the markey pressure buildup for bussiness quality replacements for many microsoft only tools, this will only grow as longhorn gets nearer and more people grow tired of being forced to upgrade, and hence forced to pay more money.
and since this migration has a whole isnt supposed to happen for another ~2 years there is plenty of time to deal with whatever minor problems are out there.
read about a recent study in Scientific American where they sent out a bunch of resumes to different companies. One group was highly qualified, but the names sounded 'ethnic,' like 'Tomika' and 'Latoya.' The other group was much less qualified but had 'white' names like 'Fred' and 'Dan.' The less qualified white guys got invited to interviews twice as often as the qualified minorities.
names of companies and the layout of the resume's as well as the information ON the resume's. You overlook many possible scenarios in this case esp. since some companies might view people as being "over qualified" especially if its a small or young company. I can assure you that these werent major companies since they dont "post" a CEO job, and usually try to promote from within for VP and Cxx level jobs.
How is your perception of being slighted different than minorities' and women's perception?
did i ever say it was any different ? perhaps the fact thats its not that different should tell you something.
rust me, you have far more opportunities as a white guy, even if you choose not to see it that way. Even with affirmative action you still have an advantage.
No i dont. I hate to break you the news but I dont work in a sector where the good ol' boys dominate like corporate management. I work down in the trench's. and since a large portion (not sure actual numbers but i would guess ~50%) of people at my outsourcing company are indian and black, i can prove your wrong. I have been denied on promotion because of race, i have been told this under the table by several HR people. This is not an uncommon practice with companies, the only problem is that when a white guy complains about this stuff he is viewed as a racist. And will ALWAYS have that stigma, true or not.
Affirmative action simply tries to make hiring proportional to population.
if that was true a company would be required to employ X amount of white guys. but they are not. They also wouldnt get higher tax breaks for hiring more minorities. which they do.
In some areas of California
California is not the whole country. It is as a matter of fact one of the more skewed sections of this country and might even be worse than the deep south. And that doesnt mean we shouldn't all look at california and say "PROBLEM", because their is one. But thats not true everywhere, the area where i live more than 50% of the cops are minorities, and if they are pulling minorities over perhaps their might actually be a reason for it. petty shit or not.
Lastly, if you really think things are so unfair to white men, would you trade places? Are you really saying that if you woke up a black woman tomorrow, in America, you'd get all the best jobs, get into the best scools, and get elected to high public office? I didn't think so.
No i wouldnt automatically get anything, but i never said that they did. However i would be more likely to get a break than i currently am. You might want to deny the obvious, like the fact that minorities get more scholarships, or get hired so a company can get a tax break. But I am not going to overlook that because of some PERCIEVED slight. and make no mistake it is a PERCIEVED slight, if for no other reason than the simple fact that you can't prove what caused something to happen. This is similar to a pendulum effect, if you push one group to favor another the group thats being pushed will start to push back, taking back what was given to the other group, causing that group to become upset, and so on and so forth.
If you want more minorities in office then lets start with the obvious - more minority canidates, there is nor requirement to run for office in most locations and although it costs money to run for higher level offices a minority should be more likely to get elected since there are so many minorities out there..... aren't there ? according to you there should be more minorities running companies and holding higher elected positions, but in order for that to happen they need to be:
A) qualified for the position. most CEO's either have YEARS (were talking 20+) of experience or started their own company. you can't just start replaceing people because of race. Try telling the shareholders of dell and microsoft to fire their CEO's and replace them with some underqualified person who happens to be a minority or a woman. won't fly anymore than telling them to replace the CEO with me.
B) Popular. In order to be elected for most ofices you have to be voted in by the majority population. In order for this to happed you have to appear to be in favor of helping them or siding with them on certain issues. If there are soooo many minorities then why not get them all to vote so they can have better representation. that shouldnt be a problem especially if they feel like they have been slighted (since slighted people are supposed to work harder.... right ?)
If you talk to side A about an issue you will get side A's opinion. young black men think they are being oppressed because some korean shop keeper follows them around her store, yet that same shop keeper follows ME (white 22yo) around her store. the difference being that I am not told by society that this is caused by race. I have enough common sense to know that if you LOOK like a hood rat or a skater punk your ass will be followed regardless of race.
Minorities also think they are targeted for profiling by authorities, and although this does happen from time to time (more often than it should) the police pull groups of people over more often than single people, and cars that play loud music more than silent cars, and cars that attract more attention than stock cars. I know this because I have been subjected to all of these things its not based on race, its based on probability.
You want to make affirmative action a good thing, make it REAL affirmative action not "help the minorities". Fucking me over because im white and have a dick is not fair, its no different than one of the good ol' boys down south grabbing some womans ass, or refusing to hire blacks.
Investors only invest in things that are likely to be profitable or low risk. unless you have a history of running your own bussiness and being successful at it your not likely to get someone to fund a "whim". And taking the time to come up with said "whim" is going to take money......
despite what your cushy white corn-fed ass seems to think:
It takes money to own a computer.
It takes money to hook it to the internet.
It takes money to have a house or apartment to store said-computer in.
I could go on, and I should just to shut you the fuck up. But I have much better things to do.
Nothing in this world is free, including starting a bussiness.
Cut the bullshit. Nobody should be penalized period, A or B. But its not right to penalize one just because the other "Might" be penalized or because of some hypothetical slight.
Im not rich. Never have been, niether of my parents went to college, nor did i. However that doesnt make me a better choice than someone who graduated harvard. nor does it make me any better than him (unless you believe some piece of paper and 100k in debt stands for something) So what if someone has had everything handed to them ? where does the issue lie in that ?
If you want to start making assumptions and pulling theories out of your ass how about this:
If an employee had to work for everything they have achieved in life perhaps they feel entilted to a "break" so they can "get ahead". perhaps that means they will screw the company over or hold them hostage for a raise.
the bullshit hypotheticals go both ways. You want affirmative action you should make it 100% affirmative, make women have men on their TV channels, make blacks have whites on theirs, make whites employ blacks and vice versa. right now the only thing the weak ass system in the US does is promote racism, hurding of wealth and increases incompotency by forcing people to promote an inferior product (athletics) or hire someone based on race/sex/religion/handicap rather than the "best employee" for the job.
and yes getting rid of affirmative action has drawbacks has well, but the current system has far more. the largest of which is promoting racial isolationism because of a percieved slight on both ends.
there are no "natural" assumptions, only assanine personally motivated ones.
person A and person B might both be fucking morons and go on to accomplish nothing no matter what. or maybe the "slight" that one of them suffers drives them to great things, or maybe the one who has everything handed to him/her wants to prove his worth and goes onto great things.
maybe we should borrow sombodies crystal ball so we can figure it out.
I agree with the balance statement. and I'm not to far removed from the moving home thing myself since there are rumors abound about my job being sent away as well
However the outsourcing of IT is still only two years old and as such you might not be seeing the full effect of it yet. I however do expect their to be some serious problems soon. people often overlook the one big thing with the american IT industry: its old and stable. whereas india is still out pacing its labor supply and as such has to employ low level impotents. i think this will come back to haunt us companies sooner or later.
So that would mean you live in some godforsaken section of east new york ?
I have looked many times at moving back to NYC and i just cant see it for less than 50k. maybe im wrong but i dont think you can work in the city and live in a decent place with a sub one hour commute. same goes for SF, seattle and any other big (non industrial) city.
If the IT people screw up it wont cost much. Virus's and worms and the damage from them only costs several billions worth of damage every year.
Now just imagine a company like all-state insurance losing a large chunk of their data because someone in the IT dept screwed up. or some oracle developer created a race condition. oops
the question isn't just the money saved. its also the money spent. is the IT team worth what they make ? is the CEO ? coming from someone who knows people who run fairly large companies, i dont think what a CEO does is all that special. you might have a Bill gates here, and a jack welch there. but most of these people shouldnt be making millions.
If you want to make a statement about backing outsourcing start sending the upper crust of "good ol' boys" jobs overseas. the VP's and Cxx's then come and talk to me about people with actual skills. People seem to think IT and IT workers are commodity. We aren't, or at least the good ones aren't. But paper pushers are. outsourcing 100 managers would save more money than outsourcing 100 programers, and would greatly reduce the "possible fuckup" factor.
If he doesnt have a job where does he get the money to start a company ? What can he do that wont cost money to create and distribute (that can actually make money for him) ?
I would love to move to the wilmington NC, or charleston SC area. However like most of the non major metro areas there are no jobs for Linux/Unix sysadmins or network admins. Dont ask me why since in my honest opinion the best way to avoid outsourcing is "rural sourcing" everything to smaller american markets since it is WAY WAY cheaper to live their than NYC, SFbay, seattle and the like.
I agree with the cutting costs thing. most people dont deserve a mercedes or a 140k house, let alone NEED one. However when the cost of living is five times higher than india and china there is only so much "wage sacrificing" you can do.
" And we are seeing afirmative action in sports. NFL teams had better be able to explain to the NFL Commissioner why they made no effort to interview African-Americans for head coaching jobs."
But that is also a racist policy. blindly favoring african americans because they complained the most about the situation. they are not required to interview women, latinos, asians or (GASP!) white men. As such that policy is bull shit. As were the people who complained so loudly to get it put into place.
That scenario takes way way to many assumptions into account. Not to even mention that student A shouldnt be punished because of where he was born, or who his parents were, that is discrimination plain and simple and it cannot be and is not tolerated by me or many other people.
Generally when you have many many more people Like india does. And far fewer universities Like india does, you MUST have a far lower acceptance rate. I cant speak for india but here in the USA there are several factors into how many people apply for what schools. Places like MIT are far far outside of the scope of what the average american could afford. So many kids dont even bother applying.
I work for A large tech company. I deal with India techs all the time both from my company and from others. They are (generally) bloody incompotent, but that makes them EXACTLY like most americans.
School quality does not have anything to do with the quality of employee you are dealing with. However i would like to point out that the forbes article you reference states that indian students spend far more time in class than doing actual research. which is IMHO a bad thing.
I would also like to see a direct comparison of quality between american and indian schools. but I'm to lazy to google it;-)
I hate to break you the news but we went 10 or so years between terrorist attacks the last time the WTC was attacked. And it was not BOMBED in 2001.
Why is it that bush shouldnt listen to foriegn gov't yet they should listen to him ? Bush didnt send the american jobs overseas, but he didnt STOP it from happening either. And sometimes inaction is worse than a bad action.
This nicely sums up your complete and total ignorance of history. I am sorry to be so blunt, and I really don't want to be rude, but there are so many examples of how wrong you are that it is just short of social negligence on your part to make this claim.
okay smart ass. PROVE ME WRONG ! rather than saying, "i could but i wont" just shut the fuck up and prove me wrong or rather TRY to prove me wrong.
All of the industries you mention were either on the downward angle OR have leveled off. the research sector for computers, medical supplies, nano technology, fiber optics etc... is all being sent overseas. This stuff is brand spanking new its a high growth area. farms, cars and all of the other crap you fellows are mentioning were not a high growth area. They also werent white collar jobs. they also didnt have 4 times the amount of workers currently enrolled in school than in the work force. The only other industry besides "high tech" that has anywhere near as many people in school for it is Law. and we arent out sourcing lawyers are we ?
The people did not drive the jobs overseas. Pick up a major financial publication and read. The reason for the jobs to be sent overseas was a demand for higher profits. not lower cost. and last time i checked prices WEREN'T dropping. cost of living wasnt going down.
The majority of people arent well versed in what affect these "blindly capitalist" actions are going to have long term. and thats the problem. I think most americans preffer some mindless constant stream of advertising in their lives, where all they have to do is choose a product. no action required by them. No fighting wars. No dodging bullets. just plain old hum-drum middle class suburbia. They dont care if people watch them have sex, or watch them take a shit, or read porn, or watch TV so long as they are not aware of being watched. which is why most people dont care about what the gov't is doing. its not "right there" like friends is, or that bottle of Coca-Cola (TM). its not that they dont understand. its that they are to fucking lazy to be informed enough for it to matter to them.
you know the last time someone in charge acted so blindly in favor of their country with high disregard to everyone else world war 2 happend.
All of us live here. All of us should listen to each other rather than having the us try and bully everyone else.
The UN is corrupt ? and US gov't isnt ? please. and what exactly is "real power" ? the ability to bomb something to shit ? in which case the UN has some very real power. If the US continues down this path world war 3 might errupt, possibly being the US and britian against france, germany, china, north korea, and iran. and please dont tell me you think the US would win that war. The problem with the US is that it restricts the hell out of countries it is freindly with and ignores the countries it is not friendly with, until its to late.
and if bush is supposed to support the constitution why have several laws he has approved been found to be unconstitutional ?
it would if the US gov't doesnt stand up to foriegn gov't about tarrifs and if it is prohibitivly expensive to buy american.
think about it like this. what country consumes nearly three times more goods and services than any other country on the planet ? america.
what country has an incredibly low export rate and an incredibly high import rate ? america. why does it have that rate ? its not out of real "need" its based on corporate greed, the same reason that american companies get screwed on tarrifs when exporting things, yet other countries have much lower penalties for importing things to the US.
Your theory might be something to the effect of "if we had only american products it would be to expensive to live here." but it already is to expensive, and we have very few american products (other than food) that we rely on. if you remove the foriegn goods eventually the market will level itself off. if you dont eventually the world market will outgrow its dependancy on the american "glutton" consumer. also known as "globilization".
Slashdot Mirror
From a redhat customers perspective this is bad. To many this is the exact reason they moved away from microsoft.
......
Redhat hasnt been my distro of choice for quite some time, but for many people it is the "only" linux they know of or use.
Personally i hope novell/suse take advantage of this and prevent people from moving back to the evil empire.
And although I personally use gentoo on my systems and I know people who use debian, I wouldnt recomend a non-experienced admin use either, and most linux admins are really windows admins which is why you see so many linux boxes that get broken into
they want a vehicle from the 90's tha doesn't have all the electronics and sensors that 'just runs', and costs less to maintain and own in general.
.......
..... good lord.
Going to have to go back further than the 90's for that, their have been computers in cars for many many years
people want the simple, elegant mechanical watches instead of a wizz-bang digital watch.
Actually i think that also has a lot to do with the fact that most "wizz-bang" digital shit is also butt ass fucking ugly. Look at most newer watches, sunglasses and shit like that most "simple" stuff is old-fashioned and most digital shit is over the top gaudy. Even most Laptops are butt ass ugly with the exception of IBM and apple.
And dont even get me started with some of the cars that have and are coming out
I think that all products we like are harder to replace. Its the liking them part that will catch up to you in the end. I had my last cell for about 2 years, i had dropped it down stairs, drove over it and spilled liquids on it yet it stilled worked right up until the end, so i kept it even tho i could have replaced it with a newer "whizz-bang" phone, but now i feel the same way about my 6 month old phone.
Humans used to become attached to each other. Now we become attached to each others stuff.
Lying Whores
Bunch of Assholes
Lying Whores
Bunch of Assholes
Lying Whores
Bunch of Assholes
Lying Whore
Bunch of Assholes
Lying Whores
The Google Bot should enjoy that. I wonder if this will help me get that sysadmin job at google I applied for ?
I think your CEO has a better grasp on the situation than you. And since i come from a company that is mostly windows free (Sun) I can tell you that if your company wants to do this they will accomplish it.
I would also like to point out that i never said they should use 100,000 people to migrate apps. But two years is plenty of time to migrate the important stuff, and like most corporate IT they will tell the unimportant "small" people to deal with whats available until they get around to making the app work better. Which means your "little" group doesnt mean didly squat and if they want you migrated then migrated you shall be. weather you guys like it or not. And i hope lots of people over at IBM are stubborn about this and quit, I know lots of people who would love your job.
I also would like to point out that i proposed the solution that IBM will probably take: pay an OSS company or a small integration company money to write the app for them. this is what most people have done when migrating something from windows to linux.
the reality of the situation is that your CEO probably took a look at the bottom line and said something to the effect of "whats cheaper long term" and made the decision based on that.
And several hundreds of people running several hundreds of different little proprietary ($$$) apps will lead to $$$$$$$$$$$. If they migrate now they can get off the upgrade bandwagon and save a ton of money long term. Since IBM is profitable they have the ability to plan long term without sacrificing the "whole cow" so to speak.
sure they do. otherwise carly's bitch ass would have outsourced her own job and reaped the savings by saving her shares .... after all its only based on money.
or is it ?
not has much has windows. chuckles ...... clueless bill gates fanboy.
this is the joy of open source. they dont need to build something from the ground up.
more likely it wont be that expensive when you take into effect the amount of money they would have to spend buying the microsoft tools. also worth noting is that this could probably be done relativly easily by paying an open source firm (woulda said ximian or the like) a chunk of change (at least to ibm) and saying "develop x".
just a side thought ..... maybe the reason your apps are buggy is because the coders who wrote them sucked. or maybe its because the platform they were written on sucked.
not all upgrades are downgrades, thats an MS feature. of course if they have the same internal people working on the same internal apps your probably have the same problem.
No offense man but your on crack if you think that within 2 years a company the size of IBM couldnt get something built up to where visio is. and thats not even taking into affect the markey pressure buildup for bussiness quality replacements for many microsoft only tools, this will only grow as longhorn gets nearer and more people grow tired of being forced to upgrade, and hence forced to pay more money.
;-)
and since this migration has a whole isnt supposed to happen for another ~2 years there is plenty of time to deal with whatever minor problems are out there.
kiss you MS goodbye !!!
read about a recent study in Scientific American where they sent out a bunch of resumes to different companies. One group was highly qualified, but the names sounded 'ethnic,' like 'Tomika' and 'Latoya.' The other group was much less qualified but had 'white' names like 'Fred' and 'Dan.' The less qualified white guys got invited to interviews twice as often as the qualified minorities.
names of companies and the layout of the resume's as well as the information ON the resume's. You overlook many possible scenarios in this case esp. since some companies might view people as being "over qualified" especially if its a small or young company. I can assure you that these werent major companies since they dont "post" a CEO job, and usually try to promote from within for VP and Cxx level jobs.
How is your perception of being slighted different than minorities' and women's perception?
did i ever say it was any different ? perhaps the fact thats its not that different should tell you something.
rust me, you have far more opportunities as a white guy, even if you choose not to see it that way. Even with affirmative action you still have an advantage.
No i dont. I hate to break you the news but I dont work in a sector where the good ol' boys dominate like corporate management. I work down in the trench's. and since a large portion (not sure actual numbers but i would guess ~50%) of people at my outsourcing company are indian and black, i can prove your wrong. I have been denied on promotion because of race, i have been told this under the table by several HR people. This is not an uncommon practice with companies, the only problem is that when a white guy complains about this stuff he is viewed as a racist. And will ALWAYS have that stigma, true or not.
Affirmative action simply tries to make hiring proportional to population.
if that was true a company would be required to employ X amount of white guys. but they are not. They also wouldnt get higher tax breaks for hiring more minorities. which they do.
In some areas of California
California is not the whole country. It is as a matter of fact one of the more skewed sections of this country and might even be worse than the deep south. And that doesnt mean we shouldn't all look at california and say "PROBLEM", because their is one. But thats not true everywhere, the area where i live more than 50% of the cops are minorities, and if they are pulling minorities over perhaps their might actually be a reason for it. petty shit or not.
Lastly, if you really think things are so unfair to white men, would you trade places? Are you really saying that if you woke up a black woman tomorrow, in America, you'd get all the best jobs, get into the best scools, and get elected to high public office? I didn't think so.
..... aren't there ? according to you there should be more minorities running companies and holding higher elected positions, but in order for that to happen they need to be:
.... right ?)
No i wouldnt automatically get anything, but i never said that they did. However i would be more likely to get a break than i currently am. You might want to deny the obvious, like the fact that minorities get more scholarships, or get hired so a company can get a tax break. But I am not going to overlook that because of some PERCIEVED slight. and make no mistake it is a PERCIEVED slight, if for no other reason than the simple fact that you can't prove what caused something to happen. This is similar to a pendulum effect, if you push one group to favor another the group thats being pushed will start to push back, taking back what was given to the other group, causing that group to become upset, and so on and so forth.
If you want more minorities in office then lets start with the obvious - more minority canidates, there is nor requirement to run for office in most locations and although it costs money to run for higher level offices a minority should be more likely to get elected since there are so many minorities out there
A) qualified for the position. most CEO's either have YEARS (were talking 20+) of experience or started their own company. you can't just start replaceing people because of race. Try telling the shareholders of dell and microsoft to fire their CEO's and replace them with some underqualified person who happens to be a minority or a woman. won't fly anymore than telling them to replace the CEO with me.
B) Popular. In order to be elected for most ofices you have to be voted in by the majority population. In order for this to happed you have to appear to be in favor of helping them or siding with them on certain issues. If there are soooo many minorities then why not get them all to vote so they can have better representation. that shouldnt be a problem especially if they feel like they have been slighted (since slighted people are supposed to work harder
If you talk to side A about an issue you will get side A's opinion. young black men think they are being oppressed because some korean shop keeper follows them around her store, yet that same shop keeper follows ME (white 22yo) around her store. the difference being that I am not told by society that this is caused by race. I have enough common sense to know that if you LOOK like a hood rat or a skater punk your ass will be followed regardless of race.
Minorities also think they are targeted for profiling by authorities, and although this does happen from time to time (more often than it should) the police pull groups of people over more often than single people, and cars that play loud music more than silent cars, and cars that attract more attention than stock cars. I know this because I have been subjected to all of these things its not based on race, its based on probability.
You want to make affirmative action a good thing, make it REAL affirmative action not "help the minorities". Fucking me over because im white and have a dick is not fair, its no different than one of the good ol' boys down south grabbing some womans ass, or refusing to hire blacks.
Investors only invest in things that are likely to be profitable or low risk. unless you have a history of running your own bussiness and being successful at it your not likely to get someone to fund a "whim". And taking the time to come up with said "whim" is going to take money ......
despite what your cushy white corn-fed ass seems to think:
It takes money to own a computer.
It takes money to hook it to the internet.
It takes money to have a house or apartment to store said-computer in.
I could go on, and I should just to shut you the fuck up. But I have much better things to do.
Nothing in this world is free, including starting a bussiness.
Cut the bullshit. Nobody should be penalized period, A or B. But its not right to penalize one just because the other "Might" be penalized or because of some hypothetical slight.
Im not rich. Never have been, niether of my parents went to college, nor did i. However that doesnt make me a better choice than someone who graduated harvard. nor does it make me any better than him (unless you believe some piece of paper and 100k in debt stands for something) So what if someone has had everything handed to them ? where does the issue lie in that ?
If you want to start making assumptions and pulling theories out of your ass how about this:
If an employee had to work for everything they have achieved in life perhaps they feel entilted to a "break" so they can "get ahead". perhaps that means they will screw the company over or hold them hostage for a raise.
the bullshit hypotheticals go both ways. You want affirmative action you should make it 100% affirmative, make women have men on their TV channels, make blacks have whites on theirs, make whites employ blacks and vice versa. right now the only thing the weak ass system in the US does is promote racism, hurding of wealth and increases incompotency by forcing people to promote an inferior product (athletics) or hire someone based on race/sex/religion/handicap rather than the "best employee" for the job.
and yes getting rid of affirmative action has drawbacks has well, but the current system has far more. the largest of which is promoting racial isolationism because of a percieved slight on both ends.
there are no "natural" assumptions, only assanine personally motivated ones.
person A and person B might both be fucking morons and go on to accomplish nothing no matter what. or maybe the "slight" that one of them suffers drives them to great things, or maybe the one who has everything handed to him/her wants to prove his worth and goes onto great things.
maybe we should borrow sombodies crystal ball so we can figure it out.
I agree with the balance statement. and I'm not to far removed from the moving home thing myself since there are rumors abound about my job being sent away as well
However the outsourcing of IT is still only two years old and as such you might not be seeing the full effect of it yet. I however do expect their to be some serious problems soon. people often overlook the one big thing with the american IT industry: its old and stable. whereas india is still out pacing its labor supply and as such has to employ low level impotents. i think this will come back to haunt us companies sooner or later.
So that would mean you live in some godforsaken section of east new york ?
I have looked many times at moving back to NYC and i just cant see it for less than 50k. maybe im wrong but i dont think you can work in the city and live in a decent place with a sub one hour commute. same goes for SF, seattle and any other big (non industrial) city.
If the IT people screw up it wont cost much. Virus's and worms and the damage from them only costs several billions worth of damage every year.
Now just imagine a company like all-state insurance losing a large chunk of their data because someone in the IT dept screwed up. or some oracle developer created a race condition. oops
the question isn't just the money saved. its also the money spent. is the IT team worth what they make ? is the CEO ? coming from someone who knows people who run fairly large companies, i dont think what a CEO does is all that special. you might have a Bill gates here, and a jack welch there. but most of these people shouldnt be making millions.
If you want to make a statement about backing outsourcing start sending the upper crust of "good ol' boys" jobs overseas. the VP's and Cxx's then come and talk to me about people with actual skills. People seem to think IT and IT workers are commodity. We aren't, or at least the good ones aren't. But paper pushers are. outsourcing 100 managers would save more money than outsourcing 100 programers, and would greatly reduce the "possible fuckup" factor.
okay I'll bite.
If he doesnt have a job where does he get the money to start a company ? What can he do that wont cost money to create and distribute (that can actually make money for him) ?
I would love to move to the wilmington NC, or charleston SC area. However like most of the non major metro areas there are no jobs for Linux/Unix sysadmins or network admins. Dont ask me why since in my honest opinion the best way to avoid outsourcing is "rural sourcing" everything to smaller american markets since it is WAY WAY cheaper to live their than NYC, SFbay, seattle and the like.
I agree with the cutting costs thing. most people dont deserve a mercedes or a 140k house, let alone NEED one. However when the cost of living is five times higher than india and china there is only so much "wage sacrificing" you can do.
" And we are seeing afirmative action in sports. NFL teams had better be able to explain to the NFL Commissioner why they made no effort to interview African-Americans for head coaching jobs."
But that is also a racist policy. blindly favoring african americans because they complained the most about the situation. they are not required to interview women, latinos, asians or (GASP!) white men. As such that policy is bull shit. As were the people who complained so loudly to get it put into place.
That scenario takes way way to many assumptions into account. Not to even mention that student A shouldnt be punished because of where he was born, or who his parents were, that is discrimination plain and simple and it cannot be and is not tolerated by me or many other people.
Generally when you have many many more people Like india does. And far fewer universities Like india does, you MUST have a far lower acceptance rate. I cant speak for india but here in the USA there are several factors into how many people apply for what schools. Places like MIT are far far outside of the scope of what the average american could afford. So many kids dont even bother applying.
;-)
I work for A large tech company. I deal with India techs all the time both from my company and from others. They are (generally) bloody incompotent, but that makes them EXACTLY like most americans.
School quality does not have anything to do with the quality of employee you are dealing with. However i would like to point out that the forbes article you reference states that indian students spend far more time in class than doing actual research. which is IMHO a bad thing.
I would also like to see a direct comparison of quality between american and indian schools. but I'm to lazy to google it
I hate to break you the news but we went 10 or so years between terrorist attacks the last time the WTC was attacked. And it was not BOMBED in 2001.
... is all being sent overseas. This stuff is brand spanking new its a high growth area. farms, cars and all of the other crap you fellows are mentioning were not a high growth area. They also werent white collar jobs. they also didnt have 4 times the amount of workers currently enrolled in school than in the work force. The only other industry besides "high tech" that has anywhere near as many people in school for it is Law. and we arent out sourcing lawyers are we ?
Why is it that bush shouldnt listen to foriegn gov't yet they should listen to him ? Bush didnt send the american jobs overseas, but he didnt STOP it from happening either. And sometimes inaction is worse than a bad action.
This nicely sums up your complete and total ignorance of history. I am sorry to be so blunt, and I really don't want to be rude, but there are so many examples of how wrong you are that it is just short of social negligence on your part to make this claim.
okay smart ass. PROVE ME WRONG ! rather than saying, "i could but i wont" just shut the fuck up and prove me wrong or rather TRY to prove me wrong.
All of the industries you mention were either on the downward angle OR have leveled off. the research sector for computers, medical supplies, nano technology, fiber optics etc
The people did not drive the jobs overseas. Pick up a major financial publication and read. The reason for the jobs to be sent overseas was a demand for higher profits. not lower cost. and last time i checked prices WEREN'T dropping. cost of living wasnt going down.
The majority of people arent well versed in what affect these "blindly capitalist" actions are going to have long term. and thats the problem. I think most americans preffer some mindless constant stream of advertising in their lives, where all they have to do is choose a product. no action required by them. No fighting wars. No dodging bullets. just plain old hum-drum middle class suburbia. They dont care if people watch them have sex, or watch them take a shit, or read porn, or watch TV so long as they are not aware of being watched. which is why most people dont care about what the gov't is doing. its not "right there" like friends is, or that bottle of Coca-Cola (TM). its not that they dont understand. its that they are to fucking lazy to be informed enough for it to matter to them.
you know the last time someone in charge acted so blindly in favor of their country with high disregard to everyone else world war 2 happend.
All of us live here. All of us should listen to each other rather than having the us try and bully everyone else.
The UN is corrupt ? and US gov't isnt ? please. and what exactly is "real power" ? the ability to bomb something to shit ? in which case the UN has some very real power. If the US continues down this path world war 3 might errupt, possibly being the US and britian against france, germany, china, north korea, and iran. and please dont tell me you think the US would win that war. The problem with the US is that it restricts the hell out of countries it is freindly with and ignores the countries it is not friendly with, until its to late.
and if bush is supposed to support the constitution why have several laws he has approved been found to be unconstitutional ?
it would if the US gov't doesnt stand up to foriegn gov't about tarrifs and if it is prohibitivly expensive to buy american.
think about it like this. what country consumes nearly three times more goods and services than any other country on the planet ? america.
what country has an incredibly low export rate and an incredibly high import rate ? america. why does it have that rate ? its not out of real "need" its based on corporate greed, the same reason that american companies get screwed on tarrifs when exporting things, yet other countries have much lower penalties for importing things to the US.
Your theory might be something to the effect of "if we had only american products it would be to expensive to live here." but it already is to expensive, and we have very few american products (other than food) that we rely on. if you remove the foriegn goods eventually the market will level itself off. if you dont eventually the world market will outgrow its dependancy on the american "glutton" consumer. also known as "globilization".