I agree only partially that locality is the factor in this.
Doctors and Lawyers benefit from a system of licensing that prevents just anyone from getting into the doctoring or lawyering business. That helps to protect their industries and ensure a livable wage - similar to the way a union ensures that an uneducated dock worker on the west coast can earn much more than the real value of his labor. So there are the two class extremes of people that use self instituted collective systems to protect the group at the expense of everyone outside. You don't think that lawyers and doctors effect a union through liscencing? Who do you think regulates their respective liscenses? Doctors have threatened to strike to affect legislation regarding malpractice awards. Think that locality is the main issue? Why hasn't contract law, trust law, etc moved overseas? With digital sigatures there is no reason that you and your lawyer ever have to be in the same room, unless you are in court. Even trials can be handled electronicly if there is not a jury presentation that relies on grandstanding or empathy.
Our industry is in the middle and wide open. In the computer industry, any idiot can read a book to learn buzzwords in 24hrs and that qualifies them to apply for jobs in our industry. Look at what happened 5 years ago. Engineering and programming (and yes there is a differnce) jobs were available and wages were rising. That attracted alot of people to join the industry and that grew a lucrative training industry that turned out more and more people who were little more than technicians. And the universities were also reaching out for tuition and expanding their engineering departments. Ok, well good for those people, they rose to something better. But they also caused a glut in the market.
Over the last three years, the market has spit many of them back out. And there also are very well educated and highly skilled people that are also out on their asses because the jobs they had five years ago fell under pressure of the market forces and those jobs are staffed by some of the people who climbed on board the gravy train and found a niche in which to hide or were actually good.
If there were a license required to practice software design and development, there would be fewer candidates because hiring would screen based on licenses held. If there were a union, then the ability to strike would at least lend a collective voice. I'm only slightly in favor of the former, because I prefer the open marketing of skills. And I oppose the latter because I believe that unions encourage waste and attempt to cheat natural selection.
Also, I don't believe that we have really lost all the technical jobs that the news reports claim. Those jobs were never really permanent positions. They were temporary jobs in the same way that Florida has lots of construction jobs after a hurricane. After the town is rebuilt, there is a glut of workers. Some of the temps who migrated for the work stay and displace those who were there before. Yet no one considers that jobs have been lost in that situation.
The issue of doing work overseas is somewhat of a red herring. In India now they are having concerns about losing jobs that are outsorced to contries of lower cost labor. Whoever is at the top of the economic food chain is always going to see migration of common skills type of work to places where labor is less expensive.
I remember dicussions (maybe 15 years ago) about engineered bacteria that would eat toxic waste and produce nontoxic by-products. They would be used to clean toxic spills and were to be self regulating in that when the toxic "food" was all gone, the organism population would starve and be gone.
Among the problems with this included the possibility that the organisms would evolve to consume other than the toxic target. Another issue, as you suggest, is terrorism. If the organisms were designed to consume an oil spill, they could be easily introduced to an oil field and potentially eliminate the resource.
I was being a smart ass.
Our policy towards Cuba differs from our policy toward China only because China has missiles and money. And possibly because the U.S. government is still embarassed about Bay of Pigs.
Isolation/protectionism has rarely been a solution to anything. I agree with your original comment that we should embrace an opportunity to build a closer partnership. That's the only way to gain real influence.
Slashdot Mirror
and yes I know that I spell for shit.
I agree only partially that locality is the factor in this.
Doctors and Lawyers benefit from a system of licensing that prevents just anyone from getting into the doctoring or lawyering business. That helps to protect their industries and ensure a livable wage - similar to the way a union ensures that an uneducated dock worker on the west coast can earn much more than the real value of his labor. So there are the two class extremes of people that use self instituted collective systems to protect the group at the expense of everyone outside. You don't think that lawyers and doctors effect a union through liscencing? Who do you think regulates their respective liscenses? Doctors have threatened to strike to affect legislation regarding malpractice awards. Think that locality is the main issue? Why hasn't contract law, trust law, etc moved overseas? With digital sigatures there is no reason that you and your lawyer ever have to be in the same room, unless you are in court. Even trials can be handled electronicly if there is not a jury presentation that relies on grandstanding or empathy.
Our industry is in the middle and wide open. In the computer industry, any idiot can read a book to learn buzzwords in 24hrs and that qualifies them to apply for jobs in our industry. Look at what happened 5 years ago. Engineering and programming (and yes there is a differnce) jobs were available and wages were rising. That attracted alot of people to join the industry and that grew a lucrative training industry that turned out more and more people who were little more than technicians. And the universities were also reaching out for tuition and expanding their engineering departments. Ok, well good for those people, they rose to something better. But they also caused a glut in the market.
Over the last three years, the market has spit many of them back out. And there also are very well educated and highly skilled people that are also out on their asses because the jobs they had five years ago fell under pressure of the market forces and those jobs are staffed by some of the people who climbed on board the gravy train and found a niche in which to hide or were actually good.
If there were a license required to practice software design and development, there would be fewer candidates because hiring would screen based on licenses held. If there were a union, then the ability to strike would at least lend a collective voice. I'm only slightly in favor of the former, because I prefer the open marketing of skills. And I oppose the latter because I believe that unions encourage waste and attempt to cheat natural selection.
Also, I don't believe that we have really lost all the technical jobs that the news reports claim. Those jobs were never really permanent positions. They were temporary jobs in the same way that Florida has lots of construction jobs after a hurricane. After the town is rebuilt, there is a glut of workers. Some of the temps who migrated for the work stay and displace those who were there before. Yet no one considers that jobs have been lost in that situation.
The issue of doing work overseas is somewhat of a red herring. In India now they are having concerns about losing jobs that are outsorced to contries of lower cost labor. Whoever is at the top of the economic food chain is always going to see migration of common skills type of work to places where labor is less expensive.
Thats a poor example. Lark's Vomit is a feature, not a bug.
I like the idea of launching Lance Bass into space.
I remember dicussions (maybe 15 years ago) about engineered bacteria that would eat toxic waste and produce nontoxic by-products. They would be used to clean toxic spills and were to be self regulating in that when the toxic "food" was all gone, the organism population would starve and be gone. Among the problems with this included the possibility that the organisms would evolve to consume other than the toxic target. Another issue, as you suggest, is terrorism. If the organisms were designed to consume an oil spill, they could be easily introduced to an oil field and potentially eliminate the resource.
wouldn't you pick the person who had gone out of their way to produce an attractive reporting of their accomplishments, interests, and background
Isn't that the point? Very few people with personal web pages produce an attractive report and often their accomplishments/interests are inane.
I was being a smart ass. Our policy towards Cuba differs from our policy toward China only because China has missiles and money. And possibly because the U.S. government is still embarassed about Bay of Pigs. Isolation/protectionism has rarely been a solution to anything. I agree with your original comment that we should embrace an opportunity to build a closer partnership. That's the only way to gain real influence.
"...serves no purpose other than to isolate China, which only makes things worse, not better."
Well, it's a policy that has served us well in Cuba.