Got news for you- the story I just related happened in Seattle in 1970. The only company involved that survived is quite well known today- it's called Microsoft. The entreprenuer's estate sold the company, it's still around too but in a much smaller form and owned by a totally different group of people- Caldera.
From 1974 to 1997 unemployment was higher than it is now. For example in 1982, the US has over 10% unemployment.
And from 1941 to 1945 it was MUCH LOWER than it is now.
By historically, I mean in the period since women entered the workforce in large amounts. Unemployment before the 1970's is really a different world (with a much lower total labor force participation).
Then that's the world we need to return to if we're going to continue to have a middle class.
You are correct that unemployment was very low during WWII, and labor force participation was very high. It was not sustainable, and required federal debt to approach 125% of GDP.
With taxes to match. But we're currently embroiled in a much larger conflict (the economic war combined with the war on terror), and we're losing on both fronts because we no longer have the will to be "not sustainable". This is an emergency situation, and it's damned high time we acted like it.
MOD PARENT UP. Still, by your numbers- what is the current real unemployment rate? My guess is that it's closing in on 50%. NOT LOW BY ANYBODY'S STANDARDS.
That's like saying "True, gravity is the law NOW, but I say that it shouldn't be!" Supply and demand isn't something artificially imposed on society.
Really? Then why for 1000 years did it not exist in a Guild economy with price controls? The economy is engineered whether you like it or not: supply and demand is just an excuse for cheating your employees on one side and your customers on the other.
Dude, put down the Chomsky, go outside, and breathe the air. We don't have mass murder of entrepreneurs going on.
No- because most entrepreneurs KNOW this is what will happen and sell out at the first sign of such trouble.
That's absurd. It doesn't make any sense to conclude that that the profit motive has an inverse effect on value. Companies profit by providing the most value for the cost. Value != cheap.
Companies have not profited by providing the most value for the cost since Wal*Mart created their second store. Look at Wal*Mart- cheap up front prices for crap that falls apart three times as fast as the other guy. Companies profit by having the highest prices the market will bear for the lowest production cost. If they can get away with selling something that is worthless and cost $.01 to make for $5000, they will profit MORE than the guy selling something of great worth that cost him $1 to make but he can only sell for $1.01.
Profit is Market Price - Cost, value has NOTHING to do with it.
This is nothing more than growing pains, and in the long run, capitalism SHOULD (unless someone screws it up) raise everyone's standards up.
Somebody has already screwed it up- the WTO is working VERY hard to keep that from happening. The capitalists in charge don't want it to happen. They'd much rather have all the workers sink to India's level than rise to Europe's. The market itself enforces this- because the more profitable a company is, the less likely it is to go out of business.
You get pay raises based on ability? I've been working in IT 10 years, and I've never gotten anything more than a paper certificate or an e-mail saying "nice job, you saved the company". I've NEVER gotten a pay raise because of merit.
Minimum wage. When you can give people a living wage in the United States for $2.50/hr, you'll be able to compete with India. At the rate the dollar is sliding under Bush, that should be about 5 years from now.
Since when is 5% historically low? LOW unemployment in the United States is the 0%, beg houswives to come out an work, that we experienced during WWII. You've got a strange definition of "Historically low", buddy.
Um -- you're not paid based on how much money you generate for a company, you're paid based on how replaceable your job is.
True- but the question isn't what is currently true, but is what is currently true JUSTICE? I say it isn't- and the fact that this is true is proof that the higher ups are nothing but a bunch of crooks.
Want to be the one who collects the money at the top? Easy. Start your own company and create some jobs of your own.
Too bad if you try to do this in the United States without enough money for complete financial security and independance, one of the bigger guys will come and offer to buy out your company. If you refuse, your safe full of company secrets will myseriously disappear to a fire. If you persist in continuing to threaten the big guy's business, his thugs will come and offer to blow out your brains. And NOTHING can be done to stop them- because they've already bought the politicians, lawyers, and judges.
Companies are out for profit. It is not immoral or wrong for them to seek service and products at the lowest cost.
Which is why I say it's immoral and wrong for companies to be only about profit to begin with. Lowest cost=lower quality=that nice new IBM blade server blowing up the first time it gets slashdotted.
More profit for the company ALWAYS means less value for the consumer and lower wages. And that- is immoral.
I did miststate it- but the end result is the same. Here's why: the pills and the jet turbines are PHYSICAL ITEMS. A diskette is a physical item. What's on the diskette is information only- and that's the realm of copyrights, not patents.
But if I write a novel- you have to purchase the rights to make a movie of that novel- so your example is somewhat flawed. Historically, though, patents have been for hardware, and copyrights for software. Westinghouse patented air brakes- Douglas Adams had the copyright on The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. Seems pretty clear to me.
The basic difference between a copyright and a patent is the same as the basic difference between software and hardware- one is for ideas, the other is for physical items. Since software processes are NOT physical items, the idea of patenting them is ludicrous at best- and really stupid at worst.
And how close to reality do you have to get before it's real? I saw magnetic pulse guns demonstrated in my physics class in college- with the 555 timer turned down of course so that you could actually see the induction pull the projectile through the stages.
But yes- 15 mm between gun and target is awfully short range...any knife with at least a 15mm blade could beat it.
The difference being I can't find anybody loyal to people underneath them. Loyalty today has become one-way; in investing of either time (through the employer-employee relationship) or money (through the stock market) you are asked to trust and be loyal to a group of people who by and large do not return either the trust or the loyalty. An exception to this rule MUST exist somewhere- but every time I think I've found one those more interested in profit than truth have a tendency to remove them from power quite quickly, because such loyalty is expensive.
Not everybody, just a very small percentage- and apparently, far fewer just based on average life expectancy than the Capitalist for-profit health care system in the United States does. If Canada's health care system is so bad, why do they have a longer life expectancy rate than we do?
And, even if you had the money to pay for care, it would be illegal for you (if you were a Canadian citizen) to do so.
And yet, for the rich in Canada, flights to other countries for medical procedures are common. Apparently this is about as illegal as what Enron did in the United States- not at all based on who gets punished for it, and what the punishment is. It's kind of like saying that insider trading is illegal- technically it is, but the chance of getting caught and the low fines when you do make it a no brainer to break the law. (And now- with a Cox in the henhouse, nobody will get caught at all because the SEC won't prosecute anymore).
Part of the catch 22 in all of this is that nobody who would change the rules is able to run- at least not on a major party ticket. Heck, nobody who would enforce the rules is able to run on a major party ticket- the Democrats all are like you say the Canadians are, and feel for the illegals and the rule breakers, the Republicans all own stock in the companies that are breaking the rules and thus have a direct financial gain from not enforcing the rules.
In some ways you're lucky- I'd jump at the chance to be a Canadian H-1b worker right now. Heck, I'd jump at the chance to be an INDIAN H-1b worker right now. Half a paycheck is better than a quarter of one.
As for changing the rules- I'd suggest only one very simple change: Any citizen applying for a job should be able to complain to his STATE government for being passed over (not federal, the federal government is too corrupt). The State should impose a $60,000 fine PER EMPLOYEE for hiring foriegn for a lower than market rate. $20,000 of that should go to the State Police for hiring the extra investigators. $28,000 of it should go to the unemployment insurance account of the American who was passed over for the job, to pay for another year of job searching. The remaining $12,000 should go to American high schools to pay for advanced placement math, science, and low-skilled work study programs, thus reducing the need for foreign workers directly.
If they'd do all of that- I'd have NO PROBLEM WHATSOEVER with the games they want to play with undocumented or cheap labor- because it'd guarantee that EVERY American who wants a job could either have one, or worst case scenario, would essentially be hired by the employment office as a stooge looking for rule breakers, as long as they are successfull at finding one rule breaker a year.
Of course, this wouldn't stop schemes like Coders at Sea or true offshoring- but it would end the loophole of good people spending months and even years out of work for no reason other than that they're "too expensive to hire".
I was out for 26 months- and have yet to have 26 months of employment since then (February next year I'll hit 50%). Part of it was being unwilling to move- but that urge left after 14 months. Through selling off all my investments and cashing out of retirement I was able to keep the house, and the marriage (my wife is very tied to this area- she would NOT have followed on a cross-country move, or in one case that fell through, a move to India which apparently required a $3 million investment just to get one visa). But it will be 10 years before I recover from this- IF I stay employed. I'm downright paranoid about that now.
It burns me when some foreigners or unscrupulous employers cheat or bend the INS rules -- it gives all of us a bad name. I've always been paid well above the local market wage, have satisfied the "there is no American that can do the job" test for the LC (even with the present glut). I would suggest denouncing employers that abuse the market rate requirement for LCAs.
I kind of doubt that any Canadian would be willing to take less than market wage- it's the third worlders we have to worry about. Heck- you could do NOTHING on welfare in Canada and earn more/have a better standard of living than what I've seen some Indians in the Silicon Forest (Beaverton/Hillsboro, Oregon) take. And it's a good deal for them, even if they have to share a bed with two other people sleeping in shifts- after 6 years of that they retire in India in luxury.
One can't blame the immigrants- one CAN blame a stock market that concentrates on the three month bottom line and CEO compensation that is based on short-term profits. The people outsourcing will be long gone with their bonuses by the time the industry feels the effects of cheap labor. And it's the employees of the company that will have to suffer when their jobs disappear.
Though- bad schools? Maybe if you're forced to stay in Canada, you should think about the University of Alberta for him. They seem to be beating out MIT at research these days- the most I've seen come out of MIT lately has been robots and wearable computers, where Alberta students have had interesting studies and perfected the single-molecule transistor...then again, given the fact that multinational corporate disrespect for anything resembling REAL brains and innovation is bound to infect Canada sooner or later, that might not exactly be the best education after all. Certainly not the most profitable.
The law requires that an American be preferred over a foreigner, that the foreigner be paid a market wage (so as to not depress the market). While some unscrupulous employers will cheat, I've never worked for one.
Actually- the law requires 95% of a market wage, and it doesn't say where that market wage has to come from. Intel's LCAs are full of 95%+$1 to Alabama wage quotes. And thanks to Sun, case law in the United States has wiped out the preference for citizens as well- there's precedent against anybody suing on age or wage discrimination standards.
You just haven't worked for one of these bigoted scum YET- and a good many good programers won't be as lucky as I have to get a nice government contract with no benefits to survive on in the mean time.
That's ok- 5 years from now private industry will all be paying for this, both with the crappy code that comes from outsourcing (I know what you mean, I've had to maintain some both in private industry AND here at Oregon Department of Transportation- it's universally bad code) when nobody trusts them enough to bother to get a science or technology degree of any sort in the United States. Why bother when you're going to spend 2 years out of every 4 unemployed? I feel like a fool feeding my adiction to programming when I've got a wife and child and home life to think about- if I had even 1/100th the talent at anything else, I'd be doing that instead. But I don't- and so I'm on the loser side in all of this, technically competant at the good software engineering, but often ignored unless I am willing to work for under $25/hr (just 5 years ago I was consulting also- and getting $75/hr).
I can't blame the younger generation at all- they've seen what has happened in this industry- and rather than put up with the abuse, they'd rather abandon the industry. It all comes back to the bad management, doesn't it? Abuse your workers, and you will end up with substandard workers in other countries- because that's all you can find to put up with your crap.
Near as I can tell "the incompetents" means anybody who failed to realize (like I did) that they should not trust investors/management, then, from your point of view. From my point of view, it looks an awfull lot like anybody born in the United States and get a college diploma and is foolish enough to want to see a return on the investment of getting a college diploma is "incompetent" and due to be replaced.
I'm to the point that despite the fact I know I'm not incompetent- I have several shareware and open source products in public domain; I've given up on private industry entirely. Near as I can tell, anybody who can get money from the venture capitalists in the first place is an incompetent manager who can't be bothered with real programmers- and thus outsource all the work they can offshore. It's gotten to the point where hiring American means you won't get venture capital funds to begin with- and that's just pure bigotry, not merely "replacing the incompetents".
I have a tendency to agree- in my experience with my autism, I started out trusting everybody. I had problems understanding that maybe people had different experiences, and therefore didn't know what I knew. As that trust was often betrayed (mainly because other people DO have other experiences and don't know what I know), my trust eroded away- and now I trust nobody. I certainly don't invest- because that requires previous knowledge of a track record- and I can't trust that previous knowledge unless I gained it myself (for all I know, the media is being paid under the table to lie to me, records can be altered, people could be lying about what their companies do). I find no way to do business in such an environment at all. It's ALL gambling near as I can tell.
And if you can do all that, and don't have any luck picking employers- you'll get replaced by some code monkey in India who doesn't waste time with good software design and for that matter, even making sure their code runs correctly.
And then, if you're like me, the product will hit the customer- who will then hire your sorry ass for 1/4th what you were making during the.COM boom to debug and rewrite all of that junk code that comes out of India.
Some companies only hire people that lie on their resume. My original assertion is that for an unpaid internship- and an intention of NEVER working for other people and just starting a series of businesses instead- that the kind of company you want to get an internship at is the kind of business that will respect the guts it takes to lie on your resume. You'll learn far more about politics and manipulation of both investors and employees at such a company than at the type of company that will blacklist you for lying on your resume- and you don't give a rip about the blacklisting anyway because you'll never work for another company again anyway.
This is a great way for the young person in question to learn the real way the game is played in American business today- and avoid a wasted internship at a company that always "plays by the rules". You're not getting any money for the internship- so there's no wages to repay. You're there to learn, and be abused by the salaried bosses- so why not go for an environment where you will get maximum learning experience?
Some companies only hire people that lie on their resume. My original assertion is that for an unpaid internship- and an intention of NEVER working for other people and just starting a series of businesses instead- that the kind of company you want to get an internship at is the kind of business that will respect the guts it takes to lie on your resume. You'll learn far more about politics and manipulation of both investors and employees at such a company than at the type of company that will blacklist you for lying on your resume- and you don't give a rip about the blacklisting anyway because you'll never work for another company again anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
Got news for you- the story I just related happened in Seattle in 1970. The only company involved that survived is quite well known today- it's called Microsoft. The entreprenuer's estate sold the company, it's still around too but in a much smaller form and owned by a totally different group of people- Caldera.
From 1974 to 1997 unemployment was higher than it is now. For example in 1982, the US has over 10% unemployment.
And from 1941 to 1945 it was MUCH LOWER than it is now.
By historically, I mean in the period since women entered the workforce in large amounts. Unemployment before the 1970's is really a different world (with a much lower total labor force participation).
Then that's the world we need to return to if we're going to continue to have a middle class.
You are correct that unemployment was very low during WWII, and labor force participation was very high. It was not sustainable, and required federal debt to approach 125% of GDP.
With taxes to match. But we're currently embroiled in a much larger conflict (the economic war combined with the war on terror), and we're losing on both fronts because we no longer have the will to be "not sustainable". This is an emergency situation, and it's damned high time we acted like it.
MOD PARENT UP. Still, by your numbers- what is the current real unemployment rate? My guess is that it's closing in on 50%. NOT LOW BY ANYBODY'S STANDARDS.
That's like saying "True, gravity is the law NOW, but I say that it shouldn't be!" Supply and demand isn't something artificially imposed on society.
Really? Then why for 1000 years did it not exist in a Guild economy with price controls? The economy is engineered whether you like it or not: supply and demand is just an excuse for cheating your employees on one side and your customers on the other.
Dude, put down the Chomsky, go outside, and breathe the air. We don't have mass murder of entrepreneurs going on.
No- because most entrepreneurs KNOW this is what will happen and sell out at the first sign of such trouble.
That's absurd. It doesn't make any sense to conclude that that the profit motive has an inverse effect on value. Companies profit by providing the most value for the cost. Value != cheap.
Companies have not profited by providing the most value for the cost since Wal*Mart created their second store. Look at Wal*Mart- cheap up front prices for crap that falls apart three times as fast as the other guy. Companies profit by having the highest prices the market will bear for the lowest production cost. If they can get away with selling something that is worthless and cost $.01 to make for $5000, they will profit MORE than the guy selling something of great worth that cost him $1 to make but he can only sell for $1.01.
Profit is Market Price - Cost, value has NOTHING to do with it.
This is nothing more than growing pains, and in the long run, capitalism SHOULD (unless someone screws it up) raise everyone's standards up.
Somebody has already screwed it up- the WTO is working VERY hard to keep that from happening. The capitalists in charge don't want it to happen. They'd much rather have all the workers sink to India's level than rise to Europe's. The market itself enforces this- because the more profitable a company is, the less likely it is to go out of business.
You get pay raises based on ability? I've been working in IT 10 years, and I've never gotten anything more than a paper certificate or an e-mail saying "nice job, you saved the company". I've NEVER gotten a pay raise because of merit.
Minimum wage. When you can give people a living wage in the United States for $2.50/hr, you'll be able to compete with India. At the rate the dollar is sliding under Bush, that should be about 5 years from now.
Since when is 5% historically low? LOW unemployment in the United States is the 0%, beg houswives to come out an work, that we experienced during WWII. You've got a strange definition of "Historically low", buddy.
Um -- you're not paid based on how much money you generate for a company, you're paid based on how replaceable your job is.
True- but the question isn't what is currently true, but is what is currently true JUSTICE? I say it isn't- and the fact that this is true is proof that the higher ups are nothing but a bunch of crooks.
Want to be the one who collects the money at the top? Easy. Start your own company and create some jobs of your own.
Too bad if you try to do this in the United States without enough money for complete financial security and independance, one of the bigger guys will come and offer to buy out your company. If you refuse, your safe full of company secrets will myseriously disappear to a fire. If you persist in continuing to threaten the big guy's business, his thugs will come and offer to blow out your brains. And NOTHING can be done to stop them- because they've already bought the politicians, lawyers, and judges.
Companies are out for profit. It is not immoral or wrong for them to seek service and products at the lowest cost.
Which is why I say it's immoral and wrong for companies to be only about profit to begin with. Lowest cost=lower quality=that nice new IBM blade server blowing up the first time it gets slashdotted.
More profit for the company ALWAYS means less value for the consumer and lower wages. And that- is immoral.
I did miststate it- but the end result is the same. Here's why: the pills and the jet turbines are PHYSICAL ITEMS. A diskette is a physical item. What's on the diskette is information only- and that's the realm of copyrights, not patents.
But if I write a novel- you have to purchase the rights to make a movie of that novel- so your example is somewhat flawed. Historically, though, patents have been for hardware, and copyrights for software. Westinghouse patented air brakes- Douglas Adams had the copyright on The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. Seems pretty clear to me.
The basic difference between a copyright and a patent is the same as the basic difference between software and hardware- one is for ideas, the other is for physical items. Since software processes are NOT physical items, the idea of patenting them is ludicrous at best- and really stupid at worst.
And how close to reality do you have to get before it's real? I saw magnetic pulse guns demonstrated in my physics class in college- with the 555 timer turned down of course so that you could actually see the induction pull the projectile through the stages.
But yes- 15 mm between gun and target is awfully short range...any knife with at least a 15mm blade could beat it.
The difference being I can't find anybody loyal to people underneath them. Loyalty today has become one-way; in investing of either time (through the employer-employee relationship) or money (through the stock market) you are asked to trust and be loyal to a group of people who by and large do not return either the trust or the loyalty. An exception to this rule MUST exist somewhere- but every time I think I've found one those more interested in profit than truth have a tendency to remove them from power quite quickly, because such loyalty is expensive.
Canada's waiting period will kill you, literaly.
Not everybody, just a very small percentage- and apparently, far fewer just based on average life expectancy than the Capitalist for-profit health care system in the United States does. If Canada's health care system is so bad, why do they have a longer life expectancy rate than we do?
And, even if you had the money to pay for care, it would be illegal for you (if you were a Canadian citizen) to do so.
And yet, for the rich in Canada, flights to other countries for medical procedures are common. Apparently this is about as illegal as what Enron did in the United States- not at all based on who gets punished for it, and what the punishment is. It's kind of like saying that insider trading is illegal- technically it is, but the chance of getting caught and the low fines when you do make it a no brainer to break the law. (And now- with a Cox in the henhouse, nobody will get caught at all because the SEC won't prosecute anymore).
Part of the catch 22 in all of this is that nobody who would change the rules is able to run- at least not on a major party ticket. Heck, nobody who would enforce the rules is able to run on a major party ticket- the Democrats all are like you say the Canadians are, and feel for the illegals and the rule breakers, the Republicans all own stock in the companies that are breaking the rules and thus have a direct financial gain from not enforcing the rules.
In some ways you're lucky- I'd jump at the chance to be a Canadian H-1b worker right now. Heck, I'd jump at the chance to be an INDIAN H-1b worker right now. Half a paycheck is better than a quarter of one.
As for changing the rules- I'd suggest only one very simple change: Any citizen applying for a job should be able to complain to his STATE government for being passed over (not federal, the federal government is too corrupt). The State should impose a $60,000 fine PER EMPLOYEE for hiring foriegn for a lower than market rate. $20,000 of that should go to the State Police for hiring the extra investigators. $28,000 of it should go to the unemployment insurance account of the American who was passed over for the job, to pay for another year of job searching. The remaining $12,000 should go to American high schools to pay for advanced placement math, science, and low-skilled work study programs, thus reducing the need for foreign workers directly.
If they'd do all of that- I'd have NO PROBLEM WHATSOEVER with the games they want to play with undocumented or cheap labor- because it'd guarantee that EVERY American who wants a job could either have one, or worst case scenario, would essentially be hired by the employment office as a stooge looking for rule breakers, as long as they are successfull at finding one rule breaker a year.
Of course, this wouldn't stop schemes like Coders at Sea or true offshoring- but it would end the loophole of good people spending months and even years out of work for no reason other than that they're "too expensive to hire".
I was out for 26 months- and have yet to have 26 months of employment since then (February next year I'll hit 50%). Part of it was being unwilling to move- but that urge left after 14 months. Through selling off all my investments and cashing out of retirement I was able to keep the house, and the marriage (my wife is very tied to this area- she would NOT have followed on a cross-country move, or in one case that fell through, a move to India which apparently required a $3 million investment just to get one visa). But it will be 10 years before I recover from this- IF I stay employed. I'm downright paranoid about that now.
It burns me when some foreigners or unscrupulous employers cheat or bend the INS rules -- it gives all of us a bad name. I've always been paid well above the local market wage, have satisfied the "there is no American that can do the job" test for the LC (even with the present glut). I would suggest denouncing employers that abuse the market rate requirement for LCAs.
I kind of doubt that any Canadian would be willing to take less than market wage- it's the third worlders we have to worry about. Heck- you could do NOTHING on welfare in Canada and earn more/have a better standard of living than what I've seen some Indians in the Silicon Forest (Beaverton/Hillsboro, Oregon) take. And it's a good deal for them, even if they have to share a bed with two other people sleeping in shifts- after 6 years of that they retire in India in luxury.
One can't blame the immigrants- one CAN blame a stock market that concentrates on the three month bottom line and CEO compensation that is based on short-term profits. The people outsourcing will be long gone with their bonuses by the time the industry feels the effects of cheap labor. And it's the employees of the company that will have to suffer when their jobs disappear.
Though- bad schools? Maybe if you're forced to stay in Canada, you should think about the University of Alberta for him. They seem to be beating out MIT at research these days- the most I've seen come out of MIT lately has been robots and wearable computers, where Alberta students have had interesting studies and perfected the single-molecule transistor...then again, given the fact that multinational corporate disrespect for anything resembling REAL brains and innovation is bound to infect Canada sooner or later, that might not exactly be the best education after all. Certainly not the most profitable.
The law requires that an American be preferred over a foreigner, that the foreigner be paid a market wage (so as to not depress the market). While some unscrupulous employers will cheat, I've never worked for one.
Actually- the law requires 95% of a market wage, and it doesn't say where that market wage has to come from. Intel's LCAs are full of 95%+$1 to Alabama wage quotes. And thanks to Sun, case law in the United States has wiped out the preference for citizens as well- there's precedent against anybody suing on age or wage discrimination standards.
You just haven't worked for one of these bigoted scum YET- and a good many good programers won't be as lucky as I have to get a nice government contract with no benefits to survive on in the mean time.
That's ok- 5 years from now private industry will all be paying for this, both with the crappy code that comes from outsourcing (I know what you mean, I've had to maintain some both in private industry AND here at Oregon Department of Transportation- it's universally bad code) when nobody trusts them enough to bother to get a science or technology degree of any sort in the United States. Why bother when you're going to spend 2 years out of every 4 unemployed? I feel like a fool feeding my adiction to programming when I've got a wife and child and home life to think about- if I had even 1/100th the talent at anything else, I'd be doing that instead. But I don't- and so I'm on the loser side in all of this, technically competant at the good software engineering, but often ignored unless I am willing to work for under $25/hr (just 5 years ago I was consulting also- and getting $75/hr).
I can't blame the younger generation at all- they've seen what has happened in this industry- and rather than put up with the abuse, they'd rather abandon the industry. It all comes back to the bad management, doesn't it? Abuse your workers, and you will end up with substandard workers in other countries- because that's all you can find to put up with your crap.
Near as I can tell "the incompetents" means anybody who failed to realize (like I did) that they should not trust investors/management, then, from your point of view. From my point of view, it looks an awfull lot like anybody born in the United States and get a college diploma and is foolish enough to want to see a return on the investment of getting a college diploma is "incompetent" and due to be replaced.
I'm to the point that despite the fact I know I'm not incompetent- I have several shareware and open source products in public domain; I've given up on private industry entirely. Near as I can tell, anybody who can get money from the venture capitalists in the first place is an incompetent manager who can't be bothered with real programmers- and thus outsource all the work they can offshore. It's gotten to the point where hiring American means you won't get venture capital funds to begin with- and that's just pure bigotry, not merely "replacing the incompetents".
I have a tendency to agree- in my experience with my autism, I started out trusting everybody. I had problems understanding that maybe people had different experiences, and therefore didn't know what I knew. As that trust was often betrayed (mainly because other people DO have other experiences and don't know what I know), my trust eroded away- and now I trust nobody. I certainly don't invest- because that requires previous knowledge of a track record- and I can't trust that previous knowledge unless I gained it myself (for all I know, the media is being paid under the table to lie to me, records can be altered, people could be lying about what their companies do). I find no way to do business in such an environment at all. It's ALL gambling near as I can tell.
And if you can do all that, and don't have any luck picking employers- you'll get replaced by some code monkey in India who doesn't waste time with good software design and for that matter, even making sure their code runs correctly.
.COM boom to debug and rewrite all of that junk code that comes out of India.
And then, if you're like me, the product will hit the customer- who will then hire your sorry ass for 1/4th what you were making during the
Some companies only hire people that lie on their resume. My original assertion is that for an unpaid internship- and an intention of NEVER working for other people and just starting a series of businesses instead- that the kind of company you want to get an internship at is the kind of business that will respect the guts it takes to lie on your resume. You'll learn far more about politics and manipulation of both investors and employees at such a company than at the type of company that will blacklist you for lying on your resume- and you don't give a rip about the blacklisting anyway because you'll never work for another company again anyway.
This is a great way for the young person in question to learn the real way the game is played in American business today- and avoid a wasted internship at a company that always "plays by the rules". You're not getting any money for the internship- so there's no wages to repay. You're there to learn, and be abused by the salaried bosses- so why not go for an environment where you will get maximum learning experience?
Some companies only hire people that lie on their resume. My original assertion is that for an unpaid internship- and an intention of NEVER working for other people and just starting a series of businesses instead- that the kind of company you want to get an internship at is the kind of business that will respect the guts it takes to lie on your resume. You'll learn far more about politics and manipulation of both investors and employees at such a company than at the type of company that will blacklist you for lying on your resume- and you don't give a rip about the blacklisting anyway because you'll never work for another company again anyway.