It seems to me that offshoring and H1B wage-lowering strategies are not going unnoticed by those in school and choosing a career.
They never are... the engineering enrollments are down, but if you look you'll see the business and law school applications are not. Not too many financiers or lawyers getting their salary structures usurped by H1B/L1 immigrants, now are there?
Absolutely, totally, and completely spot-on
on
High Tech High 2.0
·
· Score: 1
You always can tell when the IT/software labor market is getting tight: the first indication is Uncle Bill going to Washington asking for more cheap, imported tech labor. I guess he still hasn't made enough money.
If you pay them they will come (and not from overseas, either). There's a reason why more bright students end up being lawyers than engineers and scientists; it's the emm-oh-enn-ee-wye. So long as companies are allowed to import cheap H1B/L1 visa labor (sorry Uncle Bill, but that's what you really want) thereby usurping the salaries that have to be paid to attract native, intellectual talent to scientific fields (and making the job markets in those fields more unstable in the process), there will always be a diminished interest in those careers... and rightly so.
Let the free market work, and it will. Cheap labor is not a necessity for U.S.-based companies like Microsoft to survive... rather only to maximize their profit margins. Hey Uncle Bill, don't be such a tightwad... feel free to spread some of that wealth to the rest of your countrymen.
It really sounds as though the FBI needs a real IT department of their own, not the isolated geeks helping out Mulder and Scully.
It's actually quite worse than that; the average FBI agent/employee doesn't even know how to use a computer, let alone hire qualified people for an IT department.
And, if some "CIO" type waddles in and recommends another outsourcing, maybe the sidearm arguement should be used.
What's infinitely more powerful in the government alphabet agency world than a sidearm is someone's pay grade. The more time you spend with the tip of your nose stuck squarely in your boss's rectum, the more likely you are to move quickly up the ladder. Technical expertise is not a requirement.
Outsource, and this is what you get.
The government doesn't have a choice; if you think the commercial world pays poorly, try working for the government as a govie. Nobody who's any good would work for the government, they couldn't afford to live in D.C.
Really, sensitive government data projects like this one should never be outsourced, if only for national security reasons.
Actually there are government alphabet agencies with much higher clearance requirements than the FBI who are looking to "outsource" their software development. They think by doing so they can decrease the cost of the development itself. What they don't realize is that they could attract talented developers for what they pay per hour for a developer if they'd streamline their contract vehicles they use to get the labor in-house. Too much of what they pay goes in the pockets of layers of contracting companies rather than the developers' pockets. They pay $200/hr for a J2EE developer, and by the time all the hands in the queue get greased the guy being hired gets $40-60/hr of that $200. They come in, work for awhile, then quit for something better. Most of the developers have less than 2 years of experience, and then the govt. wonders why 90% of their software projects fail. D'Uh!!
By the way, the VCF project failed because the FBI was defrauded by people SAIC (who was the prime on the software development part of the contract) brought in to "lead" the project. The people the FBI sent in to "manage" it were too technically incompetent to know what was going on before it was too late.
I can honestly say that most engineers that come out of schools today are pretty poorly prepared for the work environment. Of the 4 engineers I have working for me now, all of them came out of school not knowing how to write a report, or do autocad. It generally takes me at least one year for me and the office manager to take some one raw out of school, and make them billable.
I can understand this being the case, but it begs the question why your company chooses to hire college grads rather than people with a few years of experience. Typically the trade-off is that while the college grads are less-well prepared for productive work, they work for significantly less money than people with a couple years of experience under their belt. If you don't want to train/prepare them for the workplace, the obvious choice is to not hire them.
Right now at work I am dealing with an engineer whom has a master's degree specializing in water resources, and yet I took 2 hours trying to explain to her how to do basic rational method hydrology.
That would seem to indicate that perhaps you might not want to hire any more advanced degree candidates from the institution that produced her.
If I had one request for engineering school, it would be...
While I can understand the desire of employers to have grads ideally trained (at least in the employer's mind) to be productive the day they start work, there is always a choice... pay more to actually get the experience from the marketplace of labor. It seems to be a little self-serving for employers to expect people freshly minted from the halls of colleges to be able to hit the ground at full stride their first day on the job. If that's what you want from a potential hire, it's reasonable to expect that you'd have to pay more to get that.
It is amazing how the constant influx of Irish, Polish, German, Italians, and other aliens in the past didn't suck the life of our economy but somehow the current influx is.
First of all, there is no "constant constant influx of Irish, Polish, German, Italians, and other aliens in the past"; seriously, you think people would learn a few things from their high school English texts.
The major differences between those European immigrants who came to this country early in the 20th century and the mass wave of Mexican/South American immigration that's been invading the country during the last decade are that a) that the European immigrants were not subsidized by the people already living here when they arrived, and b) the immigrants from Europe weren't almost entirely poor and unskilled. The current crop of illegals benefit from subsidized welfare on several levels including both federal- and state-sponsored substinence and medical care all at the taxpayer's expense. The Europeans who came here received none of that. A lot of the Europeans who came here had skills that they wanted to put to work in the U.S.; that's not the case with the overwhelming majority of illegals coming here today.
Influxes of immigrants have always proven positive for our country,...
Really? Seen the tax burden in Kalifornia lately (which is due in large part to providing education and health care for illegals)? How about the financial burden on states like New Mexico and Arizona who are desperately trying to keep their hospitals open for their legal residents? The only positive impact the current overwhelming influx of illegals (and the legal H1B/L1 visa holders) are making is for businesses who don't want to increase what they pay to attract and retain native workers.
Also, just because a trend has been positive in the past doesn't mean that will continue into the future, especially when it's pushed to extremes. That ought to be a major lesson learned from history.
while the immigrants themselves are treated poorly and the established populations always fear losing jobs and downfall of civil society.
The notion that most immigrants, legal or otherwise, are treated "poorly" in the U.S. is patently false. They may not be treated as well as some people think or might like but that doesn't mean they're treated poorly.
As far as the loss of jobs goes, you might want to talk to someone who was actually in the Engineering/IT field during the 2000-2002 period. After the government artificially engorged the IT labor market with H1B/L1 visa to try and keep the dot-coms booming, those who were left after it all went bust were lucky to stay (poorly) employed. A lot of people were pushed out of the market entirely and left unemployed for extended periods or had to change careers entirely. It's easy to talk in patronizing (and erroneous) generalizations when it hasn't happened to you or people you know.
As far as the loss of civil society goes, you ought to take a trip to Mexico sometime given that's who's culture and "civil society" is getting (illegally) infused into the U.S. through all the illegal immigration. If your idea of "civil society" is living out of a broken-down car, then you've got nothing to worry about.
Open Source has nothing to do with this and I would suggest that you actually do some research instead of parroting the usual "Open Source will fix all problems" mantra.
Spot-on, and I second that motion. Open source is great for some things, but it's nowhere near the answer for a lot of business's issues.
Having someone from Oracle piss and moan about the state of patching software is the pot calling the kettle black. Their MetaLink site is mostly about what patch fixes problem X with version Y of Oracle product Z. Oh, and let's not forget about Oracle's "consulting" business which (tries to) provide the people who you have to hire (and tremendously inflated hourly rates) to actually figure out how to correctly apply the patches to their products (and in what order) for the fix to (hopefully) work.
The people in question consult banks, governments, large corps and cannot actually recommend them a working security policy because Oracle cannot get its head out of its arse and patch a security problem for multiple years after it has been reported to them.
That's one of the wonders of doing your software development in In-juh; it makes it hard to turn around critical changes in a hurry (or even to really understand the problem in the first place). It's also hard to find people who have a clue and can speak the language to support the customers in the field, especially if you're in the government sector.
As a result people who used to work on Oracle problems and reported them in private to Oracle have started posting them openly "0 day" style or giving Oracle a 1 month fixed notice of an impending posting regardless of does it have a patch or not.
With the amount of money Oracle is pulling in from their product base there's no reason to expect more than a one-month turn around on even a major patch. If that's not what you're getting when you buy a product from a company like that, then there's a lot less reason to pay the money in the first place.
First of all it breaks all of their marketing bollocks about unbreakability and security to bits.
Anyone who believes that rubbish about Oracle being "unbreakable" code has never, ever, ever worked with any of their software products (i.e., managers).
Second it is threatening their sales to customers in regulated markets where security issues must be addresses within a fixed term after being known.
Bingo! That's the big issue. If Oracle can't do it, maybe it's time to look at DB2 or Sybase or some other company's product stack... probably makes the Oracle sales reps retch.
This is the reason for them to rattle the "regulation" sabers and moan about a "patch culture".
Oracle ought to shove their sabers where the sun doesn't shine. When they don't need a MetaLink site anymore, then they can bitch about a "patch" culture.
Yes, if anyone can save science education in the US it's going to be Dubya.
Why sure he will! He'll save science in America by importing more cheap H1B and L1 visa workers into the country just like all his friends from Meh-hee-co so that we can further depress the wages of those few brave souls who decide (errantly) to go into a career in the sciences.
Kids don't work hard in school because they know they don't have to and that if they do it's pretty much effort wasted. If they're really smart they'll wait for MBA or Law school to work hard.
There's an easy answer to that one- allow the IRS to seize and auction 100% of the assets of any business or individual caught cheating on taxes and USE THAT MONEY DIRECTLY TO CATCH MORE TAX CHEATS.
It's an easy answer because it's so unrealistic. The fact is that Congress, not the IRS, would have to change the laws to make this possible and they won't do it because both sides of the aisle are lobbied so heavily by business. Fuhgetaboudit.
In other words, make auditing profitable, and make being a tax cheat so unprofitable as to be a bad business decision.
Again, an easy answer, but the whole tax preparation industry lives on getting people through the tax code maze by shaving corners. The problem is not people paying no taxes, it's people using loopholes (as put into the code by Congress) in new and "constructive" ways. That typically means a trip to court and a guarantee of plenty of added expense in pursuing the case but no guarantee of a legal win and added revenue. Even if you do win in court, you may have spent so much money as to make the added revenue you gain irrelevant.
I support a similar draconian solution to the immigration problem- hire an illegal, lose your business assets and citizenship. Before too long, nobody will hire illegals anymore.
As much as I might like to see that happen, it falls into the same category as the tax code (unrealistic). Not only do the laws have to exist (or get changed) but they have to be enforced, (which we've seen has been quite lacking). In fact, given the immigration "overhaul" coming out of the Senate, the opposite is happening.
Start looking for a good CPA and a Spanish instructor.
How competant do you have to be to punch numbers into a computer that has an expert system that compares those numbers to the law? Don't think COMPETANCE, think AUTOMATION!
I should have expected that you would be TOTALLY clueless regarding how big government (which you love so much) really works.
The fact is that the IRS is automated, and in fact they don't compare numbers on returns to the law, but rather they compare them to IRS policy which they interpret from the law as handed down by Congress. The big problem with that is that the IRS's take on the law may not be the same as a particular judge's if and when the filer forces it into court. So anytime they push a particular filing into court, they risk losing not only the case but the cost of taking it to court (plus no extra return money). The fact is they don't have enough people to fight every case, and they have to figure all that into the criteria they use to audit returns.
Which they shouldn't be. 90% of selecting returns to audit should be done by computer these days.
In fact that is the case. The problem is that auditing a return costs the IRS money just by doing so. If the audit doesn't result in the filer paying any additional taxes, then the IRS loses the cost in terms of man-hours spent in the audit plus any additional fees (like court and attorney's fees) if it goes to court and they lose. They have to figure that into which cases they audit, which is why they simply can't audit a lot of them (a fact which just about everyone takes advantage of).
True enough- but that's because they've failed to automate.
Wrong (for the reasons I've stated above); in fact, their level of automation has increased significantly in the last decade.
Who do you think pays the money to donate to the political campaigns? I say a pox on both their houses- yes we need to simplify government and the tax code, but we also need more engineers and fewer business types.
No, we don't... in fact, we don't need as many engineers as we have now. According to most employment statistics, the IT industry has about as many professionals in it than there are jobs. If you look at the money getting paid out for most engineering types, it really hasn't totally recouped (yet) since the dot-com bust five or six years ago. That dirth of available people has increased (albeit slightly) over the last few years, but until the cost of doing business overseas goes up to the point where it's no longer cost-advantageous to outsource the work, there probably won't be a strong demand for more engineering types. I've made a six-figure-plus salary since my twenties, and I'd never recommend engineering to a career to anyone; if you're intellectually talented there are a lot more lucrative ways to make a living with a lot less uncertainty.
Seems to me that the way out would be to simplify the tax code and then REALLY agressively go after these businesses that send private information offshore (as most of the tax CPAs do).
Don't hold your breath waiting for the tax code to get simplified; just remember that there are more leftist demosocialist millionaires in Congress then there are Republicrats. A beautiful example is Teddy "Submarine Capt." Kennedy, who denounces the abolishment of the "death tax" but who has benefitted from the bulk of the Kennedy clan's weath being exported to places like the Cayman and Fiji islands (where the U.S. tax code can't touch it) where it can propagate through the family generations. At least the Republicrats aren't quite so hypocritical.
Oh, and where is the IRS going to get all the manpower and money to "go after" all these people? They can't even close all the cases that they open now. Looks like more taxes need to get raised to pay for a bigger IRS so they can collect more money... to pay for a bigger IRS so that they can collect more money
I'm just saying that given the recent corruption of degreed business people, from Arthur Anderson CPAs to MBAs like Ken Lay, if I were working for the IRS I'd be looking very closely at ANY return signed by a CPA.
And where would you hire all of the competent people to do this? The whole reason why the IRS doesn't do exactly what you say is because they're very limited (in terms of resources) on whose returns they investigate/audit and which ones they don't. They stay away from the CPA-prepared returns (typically) given that they know they'll have to fight both the filer and the CPA firm if they decide to audit; given that, there's a much higher probability of increased cost to the IRS to conduct the audit and less chance it will be successful (i.e., the filer will have to pay more than the original amount). Because the IRS has limited resources, they have to be very judicious about which returns they audit (a fact that everyone else takes advantage of).
If your goal is to reduce fraud and make revenue collection easier, then a sweeping simplification of both the business and personal tax codes is in order... but neither party will do that given they both curry favor with the business sector (which has the money to donate to political campaigns). So in reality the corruption is not with the degreed business people, but rather inherently with the government itself which makes the tax laws in the first place (which is an excellent argument to have less of both government and tax laws).
But of course, Congress thinks differently- the only returns the IRS EVER audits are ones claiming Earned Income Tax Credits.
Of course, why would you expect otherwise? Those who file such returns are far less likely to be able to afford tax preparation professionals and/or attorneys so they make easy pickins. That's the IRS just being (as) efficient (as they can be, anyhow). The last thing they want is to audit someone with a lot of professionals standing beside them, spend a lot of money in an audit, have it go to court and then lose (both the case and all the money spent in pursuing it). It's much easier for them to pick the low-hanging fruit. That's big government at it's best though (another good reason to have less of it).
Giving them vi is a guarantee for your students to hate sw development.
I couldn't agree more. I had to struggle through a Motorola 68k class in my senior year of college and it was more of a struggle to learn the ins-and-outs of Unix and vi (both which I had to deal with for the first time in this class) than it was to do the assembly programming. Since then I've come to love vi/Vim, but there was a pretty long learning curve. To put the learning of vi in the way of having to learn some other technical material is really kind of cruel.
And personally I would spend one lesson on CLI based compiling and linking of 'hello world', to show what happens under the water of an IDE and then I would quickly move on to something like Netbeans.
I would agree again. I'd say keep the students as close to the metal at the start until they understand the mechanics of the process to get to a working program, but don't make them break stones with a sledgehammer after that. Some programmers won't ever learn the science of programming in favor of the mechanics; don't keep the rest of the class's collective head under water because of that.
I consider them to be an utter scam- and their use should be a sign for the IRS that this person needs to be audited.
In actuality, my experience has shown that having a good CPA firm sign your returns with you pretty much gives you a free pass, given the IRS is made up of typical government people who "need" their jobs. Viva la Accountant!!
Yep, and there's a name for that: Despot.
I can see how in the Land of the Leftist La-La Losers that would be considered to be the case. Sorry about your luck.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't really believe the "leftist socialist democrats" are the ones who actually hire and pay them.
Oh I'm sure some of the ones who hire and pay them are; however, it was the leftist socialist democrats who were working all of the illegal alien "protests" signing up new voters (remember, most of those people are, by definition, not citizens) even though they are not lawfully allowed the right to vote.
It's the businesses who feel the need for cheap Mexican labor, and they are the ones paying for their trnsport in the real majority of cases. The guys we see jumping the fence on the news is but a tiny part of the people being brought in by smugglers.
I think you mean it's the businesses who want the cheap labor (let's not confuse "need" with "want"); I would definitely agree.
I'm not trying to start an arguement, but I believe the Mexicans go to the states for economic opportunities, and the "lefties" are hardly in a position to provide that.
The illegals are here for a better standard of living than they can get in whatever country they come from. Keep in mind that if you're an illegal and you're living here in this country getting social services at the taxpayer's expense, that constitutes an "economic opportunity" for you (even if you don't actually have a job or have one that won't pay all your bills).
The lefties provide this "economic opportunity" through their refusal to deny government services to these people who have no right to them. Remember Prop. 209 in Kalifornia? Proposed by Republicans, approved by the voters, but declared "unkonstitutional" by the leftist socialist judiciaries there.
That said, the Republicrats don't much better, especially with Bush pandering to the labor industries cry for "cheaper" labor. If you look at what happened in the 60's when they cut back the importation of farm workers from Mexico, the farmers ended up investing in a whole new generation of machinery to replace them. No business needs these workers, but they want them (at the taxpayers' expense) because it's cheaper in the short term than reinvesting in their businesses.
I believe that if nobody hired them, they wouldn't be rushing across the border. They see "gold", and they're going to gravitate towards it, just like anybody else would.
Some still would, but in general I agree. Of course both parties have been keeping the laws that prevent businesses from having to verify citizenship of anyone they employ from being enforced, along with the corresponding penalties for those businesses who don't.
Certainly hope that the "lefties" aren't telling anybody that the businesses owe them a job, because they definitely don't.
But the lefties do tell the illegals that, once they're here, they're entitled to all the rights and social supports that should be reserved for citizens (i.e., like the right to vote). I really believe that the Republicrats just want them here so that their labor business interests can make more money; the demosocialists want them here so that they can turn this country into an elitist oligarchy like Meh-hee-co (where 4% of the population controls 88% of the wealth).
Besides, MH42 wnats to close the border, if I'm interpreting his posts and journals correctly.
That's fine, but then he wants to turn the country into a copy of Meh-hee-co, just without the Mexican imports. Sorry, but I don't see the sense in that (or in MH42, for that matter).
But that's just fighting the symptoms. They need to take a look at the demand, just like in drug prohibition.
I would certainly agree, although effectively closing the border would at least stop the ocean from pouring in and reduce it to more of a leak. That'd provide some respite to deal with the ones already here illegally without constantly falling behind. So long as they're streaming across the border, both parties can claim "oh, there's nothing we can do about it". That's just nonsense.
You have no sympathy for anybody other than yourself, obviously, so why would you have any sympathy for the needs of your neighbors, unless forced to feign it at gunpoint?
I have no sympathy for people who think they deserve my sympathy (for whatever reason) or a bigger share of what's in my wallet.
Well, no- I'm a pretty good liar too- there just are better liars than me out there, and they have the money to hire large Italian men to come to my door and insist that I sell my inventions for a pittance.
Sure, sure, sure... sounds like you should have voted for Bush.
It isn't a fantasy, it's obvious-
Only in the world of Leftist La-La Land.
If everyone could make everything nobody'd buy anything from anyone... and we'd all be starving, leftist socialist paupers. Sounds like your kind of place, eh?
Actually the people who work for me get paid more with me than they would anywhere else (which is why they work for me in the first place). In fact, I could make a whole lot more money by trying to squeeze them, like most other companies do.
Well, I've yet to see any wealth created without depending completely on the government for a huge number of items.
Haven't been to too many places other than Leftist La-La Land, now have we?
None of which you seem willing to actually bother to pay for.
I've paid more for them than you have, I just haven't paid as much as you would like (and I intend to do everything I can to keep it that way). Sorry about your luck.
There is ONLY hard work- everybody works equally hard. Hard work means nothing.
Wow... how many illegal narcotics did you have to ingest to reach that galaxy in Leftist La-La Land?).
None of them would have any business if it wasn't for government contracts- I've yet to see anybody build a freeway on their own.
That's because nobody needs (or wants) a freeway of their own, obviously.
Fine, then take up my challenge- disconnect your business from all of the above institutions. No commuting- you can't use the roads. No mail- you can't use the postal system, that's a socialist institution. No Internet- it uses ARPANET backbones. Oh yeah, and no money printed by the Government at all. Can you still do business?
Of course. The business model will simply change. Maybe I won't provide software, maybe I'll provide replacement organs generously donated from leftists (minus the brain, obviously, those are defective by definition). I'll take the eternal gratitude of all the people with sense as payment.
The mistake is being financially successfull at the cost of the next generation.
The cost to the next generation will be to learn Spanish thanks to the demosocialists (and the manual labor businesses) who are importing poverty to foster their ends.
The punishment is dying alone in a nursing home instead of at home with your grandkids.
I'd rather die in a nursing home that I pay for than a home that I stole from hardworking people because I thought I had a right to it.
Work on your Spanish, 'cause that's what your grandkids will be speaking thanks to your fellow leftists.
If you're incorporated, you've already taken my tax money for your business.
And rightly so, given it's obvious you can't do much with it.
$15,000 last year. But actually you do- corporations are all about sucking off the public tax money and not giving anything in return.
I'm glad to hear you paid $15k last year; I'll enjoy spending the next $15k that I write off a whole lot more now.
Maybe that's true in Lefty La-La Land, but the people who a) buy from the company, b) invest in the company, and c) work for the company all think differently.
Hey, at least I pay taxes- when your entire business is about avoiding them.
You must really hate H&R Block and accounting firms.
The hospital (St. Vincent's) is a part of my tribe, unlike you.
Obviously you've never stopped to consider the fact that most societies that are based on tribes are either extinct or going that way. Good to hear you have a tribe, sounds like you need one.
My guess is that it's only the Californicators buying it.
The Kalifornicators can't afford it, and never have been able to. Your demosocialist friends have already returned that state to Meh-hee-co and are spending their money paying for Mexicans to live there (at your expense)... and rightly so.
Well, since you've admitted to selling crap products to people who don't need them, and apparently can't tell the difference between need and want anyway, why should I bother with you?
I can see now why you failed economics and history; you're too busy reinventing as you go along.
Except maybe as a potential target in the revolution. IF you were worth the bullet.
Oh yes, that's right... you suffer the life of the "indentured" but you'll take part in the "revolution". Don't hold your breath waiting for it to show up; you're better off working on your Spanish, amigo.
People who are launch and run successful businesses wage a revolution one man at a time... not that you'd know anything about that. Better keep on waiting for yours.
Unfortunately for you, not many people care about what whiny, "indentured servant" losers have to say (and rightfully so).
Then don't expect US to support you- don't do business with us.
I don't do business with you; I do business with people who have sense. You're quite the arrogant leftist thinking that you speak for the entire country.
Your so-called "hard earned wealth" wouldn't exist without a government- burn your money because you don't want to pay for having money.
I'm sure it makes you feel better to think that; that'd make you out to be not quite the loser in your own eyes.
People who don't share that opinion of civilization deserve to be exiled.
Ah yes, we see at the base of all leftist socialism is that wonderfully self-serving stench of elitism; poorly placed, of course, given your proported circumstances.
Well, personally I don't appreciate you taking my tax dollars to support your business.
I don't take your tax dollars; given how much you whine I'm surprised you make enough to pay any.
You mean kind of like you're doing by using OUR roads that you're not willing to pay for?
Ah yes, that self-serving elitism and arrogance again. Your roads, you say? I'm sure I've paid more toward them then you ever will. The real issue is that you want anyone with more than you to give it to you because you think you deserve it. Like I said, sorry about your luck.
If it can't be found anywhere else, I can readily live without it.
Ah, so next time you will do the natural birth thing and stay away from the hospital? Good show! That'll spare the rest of us your insipid whining and self-pity next time around.
Kindly do not sell in my state or use my road system.
Ah yes, the self-serving (but desperately misplaced) leftist elitism again... your state, your road system. Interesting that socialists want everything for everyone, but are quick to cut anyone they don't disagree with off all by themselves. Typical of demosocialists and more than a little hypocritical.
Sorry about your luck, but that's not how it works. And oh, by the way, your state wants what I'm selling pretty badly right now... enough for me to make more money than I ever have before.
If it can't be found anywhere else, then I don't need it.
I guess you didn't think that way about the hospital, now did you?
I only spend money on what I NEED, not what I WANT like some whimp consumer.
What you need is a store that sells clues... sounds like a business opportunity for you. Oh that's right, you're "indentured" based on institutions that you "didn't need".
Thanks for admiting that I don't need to support your business or allow your business to operate in my country.
Indeed, please have the natural birth next time and spare us the all the trouble and annoyance.
I'm not complaining about the NATURAL consequences, I'm complaining about the ARTIFICIAL consequences.
The natural consequences were that some idiot put himself in a position (by choice) to be affected by artificial consequences. Sorry, no sympathy here for that.
Well, that's an error in the Constitution, isn't it?
That and the obvious omission of a continuous leftist hunting season with no bag limit.
There is no such thing as hard earned wealth- all wealth comes by lying to customers and employees about the true value of labor.
Which conveniently explains why you have none? What a wonderfully elitist, self-serving and self-fulfilling rationalization. I'm sure it makes you feel much better about yourself to believe that fantasy to be true.
I don't care about your wallet- but the dollar bills inside belong to the government of the United States. The Treasury Secretary signed them- they belong to that department. Whatever they choose to do with those dollars is government business...
Let me alleviate your ignorance of the monetary system: the currency belongs to the government, the wealth that it represents does not. I guess if you're a demosocialist and envision a society where nobody actually has any wealth and depends completely on the government for everything, that distinction is rather small.
... and we live in a democracy, not a capitocracy (supposedly).
You must have failed economics AND history in the same semester. The United States is a democratic republic, not a democracy, which prevents all of the sore, whiny "I-can't-make-it-on-my-own" losers from making bad decisions for the rest of the people who actually have some sense (and initiative). Your friends the Demosocialists are doing a good job in trying to change that, though, by trying to import Mexico into the country a few million people at a time.
That's funny- so you believe that ignorance, failure, and lies should be rewarded? Bet you voted for Bush!
True ignorance is the inability to distinguish what's important and what isn't; failure is what results from ignorance. For leftists the only thing that's important is their own unrealistic, elitist, and egocentric perspective of reality which is why they do so poorly in the real world (unless they're filling their pockets with other people's hard-earned wealth, of course). Oh, but that's right, nobody works hard to earn anything that they have (in the leftist's view of the world), so it's perfectly okay to take it from them if you're lazy or have some excuse why you can't earn any for yourself.
As a matter of fact, I did not vote for Bush.
Well, my perspective says that without a government providing a stable money supply, roads, an internet (paid for with Department of Defense dollars!), a system of defense (now breaking down, since we can't seem to control a simple border), disease control, police, fire protection, corporate contract law mediation, copyright law, patent law, incorporation, and an educated workforce, your business couldn't exist.
You're perspective is unrealistic, elitist and egocentric, not to mention incorrect. By the way, it's probably news to you but there are a lot of very successful businesses that are used to implement all of the functions in your (rather flawed) perspective.
I'm sure it makes you feel better to think that somehow other peoples' success is tied to those institutions which you socialists love so much, but the truth is that some people make it without (and sometimes in spite of) them.
Is that why you're so busy re-creating the mistakes of the past?
I realize it's a "mistake" to be financially successful in the leftist world, but some of us prefer that to being "indentured servant" loser whiners.
No, that's the homosexual movement. You really have a problem differentiating the different groups that you see as "left" don't you?
Sorry, I don't distinguish between different angle measurements of left. Leftist groups, like feces, all smell in the sunlight regardless of shade.
Uh, no, that's your boy "W" and the democrats. I'm in the American First party because I want closed borders- no trade with other countries at all. You really are an idiot aren't you? Don't even know who your enemies are.
Sorry, neither "W" nor the Demosocialists are my "boys", and my enemies are anyone who wants to put their hands in my pocket and redistribute my hard-earned wealth to other, undeserving people because they want to buy their political favor or think it's "civilized" to do so. As far as I'm concerned that's all of the above (including idiots who want me to pay for their losing at the "hide-the-sausage" game).
Likely by being a traitor and offshoring, or using H-1b slaves.
Actually not, which I must say I take great satisfaction in stating. The people who work for me are people I've all worked with before who I know to be good, solid software people who are well above the average dolt pounding a keyboard. I pay them 2-sigma or 3-sigma salaries because they posess that level of skillset and I know them to be so before I even think about hiring them.
Since the intent of living in a city, or being civilized, is to band together to compensate for individual shortcomings and misfortunes, correct.
Obviously that's your opinion which, I'm sure it will shock you to find, is not necessarily shared. Personally I think that definition went out the window with the Great Wall or the Crusades. It's very convenient though for people who want to put their hands in other people's wallets albeit very, very quaint and more than a little dated.
Now here's the $1,000,000 question: Why the hell should I buy from you if the only thing you're for is yourself?
And you accuse me of failing economics? This is just so typical of the liberal socialist mentality: regurgitate useless facts and not get the whole point. Given you've demonstrated you're an idiot at economics as well as being a whiner, I'll educate you:
The best business to have is one where you sell a product or service that can't be found (readily) anywhere else. That's the way it is when you're really good at what you do, something you obviously have no clue about. You can charge outrageous money, and guess what? People will pay it because they can't buy what you're selling anywhere else (sometimes at any price). That's all the economics that you need to know, if you're good at something (other than whining, of course).
No, we didn't "opt for the natural birth", we had the baby induced a week early due to preclampsia, then when the baby wouldn't come out...
I'll give you a quick clue: the person who put the baby in there in the first place (and is now complaining about the consequences) is the one who qualifies as the real idiot. As I said before, the Constitution does not ensure you the right to breed. Sorry about your luck, but don't even think for a moment that your misfortune entitles you to my hard earned wealth. Kindly keep your hands off my wallet.
I see you failed basic macroeconomics as well. Businesses in the modern form have only existed since the Corporation Act of 1845. By that law, they exist for one reason only- to make profit. NOT create jobs- unless creating jobs is a part of that profit. In fact, if a business provides jobs without making profit, it's called embezzlement, and the C-level executives can and will be prosecuted and sent to jail. So you really are an idiot, aren't you?
Considering your complaining about being an indentured employee, perhaps you should have considered failing Macro as well.
What constitutes business in a "modern" form depends on your perspective and context, something you obviously didn't pick up. If you only had as much technical (and small business) talent as you do regurgitating useless history lessons, you wouldn't be nearly so indentured.
Ah, but that's the plight of the poor, downtrodden liberal socialist isn't it? Stuck in a hole despite your intellectual superiority not by you're own doing but by the collective malfeasance of others, which gives cause to call for forced redistribution of others hard earned wealth. The self-serving smell is so familiar.
Now you're really the idiot- you don't even know the basic cause of Cerebral Palsy is Hospital Error. (hint: there's only ONE way to get brain damaged during birth).
So another words, you're bitter because you played "hide-the-sausage" and a third party (or so you claim) caused you to lose. I guess you should have opted for natural birth, eh? Did someone force you to go to the hospital at gunpoint? I didn't think so.
You took the risk when you rolled the dice moron. The rest of the world doesn't owe you anything because of that, so get over it and move on. Stop expecting everyone else to feel sorry for you.
And apparently you libertarians have forgotten the entire reason civil marriage is endorsed by the state to begin with: to create the next generation of workers. Has been for about 5000 years now.
Is that why you leftist socialists want to legalize "gay" marriage? Someone desperately needs that biology lesson, and it's not me. I guess that's why you leftist socialist democrats want all the cheap mexican labor here, so your gay "married" friends don't have to worry about procreating.
I'm through with you- you obviously don't know the first thing about living in civilization.
I know enough to do better financially in the IT business than 99.98% of all the other people who post here, of which obviously you are one. If you mean by "civilization" a place where other people are going to (or be forced to) sacrifice their standard of living to compensate for someone else's shortcomings or misfortunes, then you're right.
If you don't want to pay taxes, here's a hint: they can't tax what they can't find. Go live as a hermit.
If I were a stupid socialist, I might think that way. The reason that businesses exist is so that they can generate jobs for the sorry-assed losers like you who "need" them. Has been for about 5000 years.
By the way, I don't have to hide it; I earn it and then write it off in just about every way imaginable. That's what you can do when you're good enough (and work hard enough to be good enough) at what you do. That's step two of being successful. Step one is not letting excuses prevent you from getting to step two. Too bad you'll never get past step one. But hey, wallowing in self-pity and forcing others to compensate for "wrongs" committed against you is liberal socialist nirvana, now isn't it?
When you have a kid with CP, or any other illness that can't be insured because it's "preexisting", and your insurance is tied to your employer, let me know. Until then, you're the moron.
Unless your kid appeared out of thin air, the moron is the one who stuck his hard-on in a hole and got the process rolling. I realize that you're a stupid socialist whiner, but I'm betting with some coaching in biology even you could figure out who THAT is. I realize that socialists don't like to hear this, but you have no right under the U.S. Constitution to play "hide-the-sausage" and have society protect you from the outcomes when you lose at that game.
No amount of skills will change the system in the United States that makes employment more indentured servitude than employment.
As it so happens, I have both a spouse with "preexisting" conditions as well as an in-law that I help financially care for out of my own pocket, and that's not stopped me from "right-sizing" my employer (it happened just last week as a matter of fact) to the tune of a 300% increase in pay (and I left behind a six-figure plus salary). Excuses won't get you a better job; better skills (and their marketing) do.
As I said, you're not worthy of any sympathy; you are worthy of loathing however. Get off your sorry whining ass.
I can't afford the $3 million India charges for a guest worker visa- so I'm trapped.
You're definitely trapped... in your own incompetence and self-pity. Stop using your kid as an excuse, it's really pathetic.
How about C) Teach people to save money and avoid debt, so that bouts of unemployment or career change don't ruin their lives.
Every so often (but not too often, and not nearly often enough) I read a post on this site that is wonderfully direct, insightful, and spot on... thank you for restoring some of my lost confidence in the sense of the collective posters here.
Slashdot Mirror
It seems to me that offshoring and H1B wage-lowering strategies are not going unnoticed by those in school and choosing a career.
... the engineering enrollments are down, but if you look you'll see the business and law school applications are not. Not too many financiers or lawyers getting their salary structures usurped by H1B/L1 immigrants, now are there?
They never are
You always can tell when the IT/software labor market is getting tight: the first indication is Uncle Bill going to Washington asking for more cheap, imported tech labor. I guess he still hasn't made enough money.
... and rightly so.
... rather only to maximize their profit margins. Hey Uncle Bill, don't be such a tightwad ... feel free to spread some of that wealth to the rest of your countrymen.
If you pay them they will come (and not from overseas, either). There's a reason why more bright students end up being lawyers than engineers and scientists; it's the emm-oh-enn-ee-wye. So long as companies are allowed to import cheap H1B/L1 visa labor (sorry Uncle Bill, but that's what you really want) thereby usurping the salaries that have to be paid to attract native, intellectual talent to scientific fields (and making the job markets in those fields more unstable in the process), there will always be a diminished interest in those careers
Let the free market work, and it will. Cheap labor is not a necessity for U.S.-based companies like Microsoft to survive
It really sounds as though the FBI needs a real IT department of their own, not the isolated geeks helping out Mulder and Scully.
It's actually quite worse than that; the average FBI agent/employee doesn't even know how to use a computer, let alone hire qualified people for an IT department.
And, if some "CIO" type waddles in and recommends another outsourcing, maybe the sidearm arguement should be used.
What's infinitely more powerful in the government alphabet agency world than a sidearm is someone's pay grade. The more time you spend with the tip of your nose stuck squarely in your boss's rectum, the more likely you are to move quickly up the ladder. Technical expertise is not a requirement.
Outsource, and this is what you get.
The government doesn't have a choice; if you think the commercial world pays poorly, try working for the government as a govie. Nobody who's any good would work for the government, they couldn't afford to live in D.C.
Really, sensitive government data projects like this one should never be outsourced, if only for national security reasons.
Actually there are government alphabet agencies with much higher clearance requirements than the FBI who are looking to "outsource" their software development. They think by doing so they can decrease the cost of the development itself. What they don't realize is that they could attract talented developers for what they pay per hour for a developer if they'd streamline their contract vehicles they use to get the labor in-house. Too much of what they pay goes in the pockets of layers of contracting companies rather than the developers' pockets. They pay $200/hr for a J2EE developer, and by the time all the hands in the queue get greased the guy being hired gets $40-60/hr of that $200. They come in, work for awhile, then quit for something better. Most of the developers have less than 2 years of experience, and then the govt. wonders why 90% of their software projects fail. D'Uh!!
By the way, the VCF project failed because the FBI was defrauded by people SAIC (who was the prime on the software development part of the contract) brought in to "lead" the project. The people the FBI sent in to "manage" it were too technically incompetent to know what was going on before it was too late.
I can't argue with that. You guys even elect them! ;-)
We thought that, in the spirit of world community, we'd try to be more like the European and Middle Eastern countries.
I can honestly say that most engineers that come out of schools today are pretty poorly prepared for the work environment. Of the 4 engineers I have working for me now, all of them came out of school not knowing how to write a report, or do autocad. It generally takes me at least one year for me and the office manager to take some one raw out of school, and make them billable.
...
... pay more to actually get the experience from the marketplace of labor. It seems to be a little self-serving for employers to expect people freshly minted from the halls of colleges to be able to hit the ground at full stride their first day on the job. If that's what you want from a potential hire, it's reasonable to expect that you'd have to pay more to get that.
I can understand this being the case, but it begs the question why your company chooses to hire college grads rather than people with a few years of experience. Typically the trade-off is that while the college grads are less-well prepared for productive work, they work for significantly less money than people with a couple years of experience under their belt. If you don't want to train/prepare them for the workplace, the obvious choice is to not hire them.
Right now at work I am dealing with an engineer whom has a master's degree specializing in water resources, and yet I took 2 hours trying to explain to her how to do basic rational method hydrology.
That would seem to indicate that perhaps you might not want to hire any more advanced degree candidates from the institution that produced her.
If I had one request for engineering school, it would be
While I can understand the desire of employers to have grads ideally trained (at least in the employer's mind) to be productive the day they start work, there is always a choice
It is amazing how the constant influx of Irish, Polish, German, Italians, and other aliens in the past didn't suck the life of our economy but somehow the current influx is.
...
First of all, there is no "constant constant influx of Irish, Polish, German, Italians, and other aliens in the past"; seriously, you think people would learn a few things from their high school English texts.
The major differences between those European immigrants who came to this country early in the 20th century and the mass wave of Mexican/South American immigration that's been invading the country during the last decade are that a) that the European immigrants were not subsidized by the people already living here when they arrived, and b) the immigrants from Europe weren't almost entirely poor and unskilled. The current crop of illegals benefit from subsidized welfare on several levels including both federal- and state-sponsored substinence and medical care all at the taxpayer's expense. The Europeans who came here received none of that. A lot of the Europeans who came here had skills that they wanted to put to work in the U.S.; that's not the case with the overwhelming majority of illegals coming here today.
Influxes of immigrants have always proven positive for our country,
Really? Seen the tax burden in Kalifornia lately (which is due in large part to providing education and health care for illegals)? How about the financial burden on states like New Mexico and Arizona who are desperately trying to keep their hospitals open for their legal residents? The only positive impact the current overwhelming influx of illegals (and the legal H1B/L1 visa holders) are making is for businesses who don't want to increase what they pay to attract and retain native workers.
Also, just because a trend has been positive in the past doesn't mean that will continue into the future, especially when it's pushed to extremes. That ought to be a major lesson learned from history.
while the immigrants themselves are treated poorly and the established populations always fear losing jobs and downfall of civil society.
The notion that most immigrants, legal or otherwise, are treated "poorly" in the U.S. is patently false. They may not be treated as well as some people think or might like but that doesn't mean they're treated poorly.
As far as the loss of jobs goes, you might want to talk to someone who was actually in the Engineering/IT field during the 2000-2002 period. After the government artificially engorged the IT labor market with H1B/L1 visa to try and keep the dot-coms booming, those who were left after it all went bust were lucky to stay (poorly) employed. A lot of people were pushed out of the market entirely and left unemployed for extended periods or had to change careers entirely. It's easy to talk in patronizing (and erroneous) generalizations when it hasn't happened to you or people you know.
As far as the loss of civil society goes, you ought to take a trip to Mexico sometime given that's who's culture and "civil society" is getting (illegally) infused into the U.S. through all the illegal immigration. If your idea of "civil society" is living out of a broken-down car, then you've got nothing to worry about.
Open Source has nothing to do with this and I would suggest that you actually do some research instead of parroting the usual "Open Source will fix all problems" mantra.
... probably makes the Oracle sales reps retch.
Spot-on, and I second that motion. Open source is great for some things, but it's nowhere near the answer for a lot of business's issues.
Having someone from Oracle piss and moan about the state of patching software is the pot calling the kettle black. Their MetaLink site is mostly about what patch fixes problem X with version Y of Oracle product Z. Oh, and let's not forget about Oracle's "consulting" business which (tries to) provide the people who you have to hire (and tremendously inflated hourly rates) to actually figure out how to correctly apply the patches to their products (and in what order) for the fix to (hopefully) work.
The people in question consult banks, governments, large corps and cannot actually recommend them a working security policy because Oracle cannot get its head out of its arse and patch a security problem for multiple years after it has been reported to them.
That's one of the wonders of doing your software development in In-juh; it makes it hard to turn around critical changes in a hurry (or even to really understand the problem in the first place). It's also hard to find people who have a clue and can speak the language to support the customers in the field, especially if you're in the government sector.
As a result people who used to work on Oracle problems and reported them in private to Oracle have started posting them openly "0 day" style or giving Oracle a 1 month fixed notice of an impending posting regardless of does it have a patch or not.
With the amount of money Oracle is pulling in from their product base there's no reason to expect more than a one-month turn around on even a major patch. If that's not what you're getting when you buy a product from a company like that, then there's a lot less reason to pay the money in the first place.
First of all it breaks all of their marketing bollocks about unbreakability and security to bits.
Anyone who believes that rubbish about Oracle being "unbreakable" code has never, ever, ever worked with any of their software products (i.e., managers).
Second it is threatening their sales to customers in regulated markets where security issues must be addresses within a fixed term after being known.
Bingo! That's the big issue. If Oracle can't do it, maybe it's time to look at DB2 or Sybase or some other company's product stack
This is the reason for them to rattle the "regulation" sabers and moan about a "patch culture".
Oracle ought to shove their sabers where the sun doesn't shine. When they don't need a MetaLink site anymore, then they can bitch about a "patch" culture.
Yes, if anyone can save science education in the US it's going to be Dubya.
Why sure he will! He'll save science in America by importing more cheap H1B and L1 visa workers into the country just like all his friends from Meh-hee-co so that we can further depress the wages of those few brave souls who decide (errantly) to go into a career in the sciences.
Kids don't work hard in school because they know they don't have to and that if they do it's pretty much effort wasted. If they're really smart they'll wait for MBA or Law school to work hard.
There's an easy answer to that one- allow the IRS to seize and auction 100% of the assets of any business or individual caught cheating on taxes and USE THAT MONEY DIRECTLY TO CATCH MORE TAX CHEATS.
It's an easy answer because it's so unrealistic. The fact is that Congress, not the IRS, would have to change the laws to make this possible and they won't do it because both sides of the aisle are lobbied so heavily by business. Fuhgetaboudit.
In other words, make auditing profitable, and make being a tax cheat so unprofitable as to be a bad business decision.
Again, an easy answer, but the whole tax preparation industry lives on getting people through the tax code maze by shaving corners. The problem is not people paying no taxes, it's people using loopholes (as put into the code by Congress) in new and "constructive" ways. That typically means a trip to court and a guarantee of plenty of added expense in pursuing the case but no guarantee of a legal win and added revenue. Even if you do win in court, you may have spent so much money as to make the added revenue you gain irrelevant.
I support a similar draconian solution to the immigration problem- hire an illegal, lose your business assets and citizenship. Before too long, nobody will hire illegals anymore.
As much as I might like to see that happen, it falls into the same category as the tax code (unrealistic). Not only do the laws have to exist (or get changed) but they have to be enforced, (which we've seen has been quite lacking). In fact, given the immigration "overhaul" coming out of the Senate, the opposite is happening.
Start looking for a good CPA and a Spanish instructor.
How competant do you have to be to punch numbers into a computer that has an expert system that compares those numbers to the law? Don't think COMPETANCE, think AUTOMATION!
... in fact, we don't need as many engineers as we have now. According to most employment statistics, the IT industry has about as many professionals in it than there are jobs. If you look at the money getting paid out for most engineering types, it really hasn't totally recouped (yet) since the dot-com bust five or six years ago. That dirth of available people has increased (albeit slightly) over the last few years, but until the cost of doing business overseas goes up to the point where it's no longer cost-advantageous to outsource the work, there probably won't be a strong demand for more engineering types. I've made a six-figure-plus salary since my twenties, and I'd never recommend engineering to a career to anyone; if you're intellectually talented there are a lot more lucrative ways to make a living with a lot less uncertainty.
... to pay for a bigger IRS so that they can collect more money
I should have expected that you would be TOTALLY clueless regarding how big government (which you love so much) really works.
The fact is that the IRS is automated, and in fact they don't compare numbers on returns to the law, but rather they compare them to IRS policy which they interpret from the law as handed down by Congress. The big problem with that is that the IRS's take on the law may not be the same as a particular judge's if and when the filer forces it into court. So anytime they push a particular filing into court, they risk losing not only the case but the cost of taking it to court (plus no extra return money). The fact is they don't have enough people to fight every case, and they have to figure all that into the criteria they use to audit returns.
Which they shouldn't be. 90% of selecting returns to audit should be done by computer these days.
In fact that is the case. The problem is that auditing a return costs the IRS money just by doing so. If the audit doesn't result in the filer paying any additional taxes, then the IRS loses the cost in terms of man-hours spent in the audit plus any additional fees (like court and attorney's fees) if it goes to court and they lose. They have to figure that into which cases they audit, which is why they simply can't audit a lot of them (a fact which just about everyone takes advantage of).
True enough- but that's because they've failed to automate.
Wrong (for the reasons I've stated above); in fact, their level of automation has increased significantly in the last decade.
Who do you think pays the money to donate to the political campaigns? I say a pox on both their houses- yes we need to simplify government and the tax code, but we also need more engineers and fewer business types.
No, we don't
Seems to me that the way out would be to simplify the tax code and then REALLY agressively go after these businesses that send private information offshore (as most of the tax CPAs do).
Don't hold your breath waiting for the tax code to get simplified; just remember that there are more leftist demosocialist millionaires in Congress then there are Republicrats. A beautiful example is Teddy "Submarine Capt." Kennedy, who denounces the abolishment of the "death tax" but who has benefitted from the bulk of the Kennedy clan's weath being exported to places like the Cayman and Fiji islands (where the U.S. tax code can't touch it) where it can propagate through the family generations. At least the Republicrats aren't quite so hypocritical.
Oh, and where is the IRS going to get all the manpower and money to "go after" all these people? They can't even close all the cases that they open now. Looks like more taxes need to get raised to pay for a bigger IRS so they can collect more money
I'm just saying that given the recent corruption of degreed business people, from Arthur Anderson CPAs to MBAs like Ken Lay, if I were working for the IRS I'd be looking very closely at ANY return signed by a CPA.
... but neither party will do that given they both curry favor with the business sector (which has the money to donate to political campaigns). So in reality the corruption is not with the degreed business people, but rather inherently with the government itself which makes the tax laws in the first place (which is an excellent argument to have less of both government and tax laws).
And where would you hire all of the competent people to do this? The whole reason why the IRS doesn't do exactly what you say is because they're very limited (in terms of resources) on whose returns they investigate/audit and which ones they don't. They stay away from the CPA-prepared returns (typically) given that they know they'll have to fight both the filer and the CPA firm if they decide to audit; given that, there's a much higher probability of increased cost to the IRS to conduct the audit and less chance it will be successful (i.e., the filer will have to pay more than the original amount). Because the IRS has limited resources, they have to be very judicious about which returns they audit (a fact that everyone else takes advantage of).
If your goal is to reduce fraud and make revenue collection easier, then a sweeping simplification of both the business and personal tax codes is in order
But of course, Congress thinks differently- the only returns the IRS EVER audits are ones claiming Earned Income Tax Credits.
Of course, why would you expect otherwise? Those who file such returns are far less likely to be able to afford tax preparation professionals and/or attorneys so they make easy pickins. That's the IRS just being (as) efficient (as they can be, anyhow). The last thing they want is to audit someone with a lot of professionals standing beside them, spend a lot of money in an audit, have it go to court and then lose (both the case and all the money spent in pursuing it). It's much easier for them to pick the low-hanging fruit. That's big government at it's best though (another good reason to have less of it).
Giving them vi is a guarantee for your students to hate sw development.
I couldn't agree more. I had to struggle through a Motorola 68k class in my senior year of college and it was more of a struggle to learn the ins-and-outs of Unix and vi (both which I had to deal with for the first time in this class) than it was to do the assembly programming. Since then I've come to love vi/Vim, but there was a pretty long learning curve. To put the learning of vi in the way of having to learn some other technical material is really kind of cruel.
And personally I would spend one lesson on CLI based compiling and linking of 'hello world', to show what happens under the water of an IDE and then I would quickly move on to something like Netbeans.
I would agree again. I'd say keep the students as close to the metal at the start until they understand the mechanics of the process to get to a working program, but don't make them break stones with a sledgehammer after that. Some programmers won't ever learn the science of programming in favor of the mechanics; don't keep the rest of the class's collective head under water because of that.
I consider them to be an utter scam- and their use should be a sign for the IRS that this person needs to be audited.
In actuality, my experience has shown that having a good CPA firm sign your returns with you pretty much gives you a free pass, given the IRS is made up of typical government people who "need" their jobs. Viva la Accountant!!
Yep, and there's a name for that: Despot.
I can see how in the Land of the Leftist La-La Losers that would be considered to be the case. Sorry about your luck.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't really believe the "leftist socialist democrats" are the ones who actually hire and pay them.
Oh I'm sure some of the ones who hire and pay them are; however, it was the leftist socialist democrats who were working all of the illegal alien "protests" signing up new voters (remember, most of those people are, by definition, not citizens) even though they are not lawfully allowed the right to vote.
It's the businesses who feel the need for cheap Mexican labor, and they are the ones paying for their trnsport in the real majority of cases. The guys we see jumping the fence on the news is but a tiny part of the people being brought in by smugglers.
I think you mean it's the businesses who want the cheap labor (let's not confuse "need" with "want"); I would definitely agree.
I'm not trying to start an arguement, but I believe the Mexicans go to the states for economic opportunities, and the "lefties" are hardly in a position to provide that.
The illegals are here for a better standard of living than they can get in whatever country they come from. Keep in mind that if you're an illegal and you're living here in this country getting social services at the taxpayer's expense, that constitutes an "economic opportunity" for you (even if you don't actually have a job or have one that won't pay all your bills).
The lefties provide this "economic opportunity" through their refusal to deny government services to these people who have no right to them. Remember Prop. 209 in Kalifornia? Proposed by Republicans, approved by the voters, but declared "unkonstitutional" by the leftist socialist judiciaries there.
That said, the Republicrats don't much better, especially with Bush pandering to the labor industries cry for "cheaper" labor. If you look at what happened in the 60's when they cut back the importation of farm workers from Mexico, the farmers ended up investing in a whole new generation of machinery to replace them. No business needs these workers, but they want them (at the taxpayers' expense) because it's cheaper in the short term than reinvesting in their businesses.
I believe that if nobody hired them, they wouldn't be rushing across the border. They see "gold", and they're going to gravitate towards it, just like anybody else would.
Some still would, but in general I agree. Of course both parties have been keeping the laws that prevent businesses from having to verify citizenship of anyone they employ from being enforced, along with the corresponding penalties for those businesses who don't.
Certainly hope that the "lefties" aren't telling anybody that the businesses owe them a job, because they definitely don't.
But the lefties do tell the illegals that, once they're here, they're entitled to all the rights and social supports that should be reserved for citizens (i.e., like the right to vote). I really believe that the Republicrats just want them here so that their labor business interests can make more money; the demosocialists want them here so that they can turn this country into an elitist oligarchy like Meh-hee-co (where 4% of the population controls 88% of the wealth).
Besides, MH42 wnats to close the border, if I'm interpreting his posts and journals correctly.
That's fine, but then he wants to turn the country into a copy of Meh-hee-co, just without the Mexican imports. Sorry, but I don't see the sense in that (or in MH42, for that matter).
But that's just fighting the symptoms. They need to take a look at the demand, just like in drug prohibition.
I would certainly agree, although effectively closing the border would at least stop the ocean from pouring in and reduce it to more of a leak. That'd provide some respite to deal with the ones already here illegally without constantly falling behind. So long as they're streaming across the border, both parties can claim "oh, there's nothing we can do about it". That's just nonsense.
Personally, I would recommend Chinese. Spanish will become as irrelevent as French in due time :-)
;) Let's deal with the current invasion though before we deal with the next one.
Point well taken.
You have no sympathy for anybody other than yourself, obviously, so why would you have any sympathy for the needs of your neighbors, unless forced to feign it at gunpoint?
... sounds like you should have voted for Bush.
... and we'd all be starving, leftist socialist paupers. Sounds like your kind of place, eh?
... how many illegal narcotics did you have to ingest to reach that galaxy in Leftist La-La Land?).
I have no sympathy for people who think they deserve my sympathy (for whatever reason) or a bigger share of what's in my wallet.
Well, no- I'm a pretty good liar too- there just are better liars than me out there, and they have the money to hire large Italian men to come to my door and insist that I sell my inventions for a pittance.
Sure, sure, sure
It isn't a fantasy, it's obvious-
Only in the world of Leftist La-La Land.
If everyone could make everything nobody'd buy anything from anyone
Actually the people who work for me get paid more with me than they would anywhere else (which is why they work for me in the first place). In fact, I could make a whole lot more money by trying to squeeze them, like most other companies do.
Well, I've yet to see any wealth created without depending completely on the government for a huge number of items.
Haven't been to too many places other than Leftist La-La Land, now have we?
None of which you seem willing to actually bother to pay for.
I've paid more for them than you have, I just haven't paid as much as you would like (and I intend to do everything I can to keep it that way). Sorry about your luck.
There is ONLY hard work- everybody works equally hard. Hard work means nothing.
Wow
None of them would have any business if it wasn't for government contracts- I've yet to see anybody build a freeway on their own.
That's because nobody needs (or wants) a freeway of their own, obviously.
Fine, then take up my challenge- disconnect your business from all of the above institutions. No commuting- you can't use the roads. No mail- you can't use the postal system, that's a socialist institution. No Internet- it uses ARPANET backbones. Oh yeah, and no money printed by the Government at all. Can you still do business?
Of course. The business model will simply change. Maybe I won't provide software, maybe I'll provide replacement organs generously donated from leftists (minus the brain, obviously, those are defective by definition). I'll take the eternal gratitude of all the people with sense as payment.
The mistake is being financially successfull at the cost of the next generation.
The cost to the next generation will be to learn Spanish thanks to the demosocialists (and the manual labor businesses) who are importing poverty to foster their ends.
The punishment is dying alone in a nursing home instead of at home with your grandkids.
I'd rather die in a nursing home that I pay for than a home that I stole from hardworking people because I thought I had a right to it.
Work on your Spanish, 'cause that's what your grandkids will be speaking thanks to your fellow leftists.
If you're incorporated, you've already taken my tax money for your business.
... and rightly so.
... you suffer the life of the "indentured" but you'll take part in the "revolution". Don't hold your breath waiting for it to show up; you're better off working on your Spanish, amigo.
... not that you'd know anything about that. Better keep on waiting for yours.
And rightly so, given it's obvious you can't do much with it.
$15,000 last year. But actually you do- corporations are all about sucking off the public tax money and not giving anything in return.
I'm glad to hear you paid $15k last year; I'll enjoy spending the next $15k that I write off a whole lot more now.
Maybe that's true in Lefty La-La Land, but the people who a) buy from the company, b) invest in the company, and c) work for the company all think differently.
Hey, at least I pay taxes- when your entire business is about avoiding them.
You must really hate H&R Block and accounting firms.
The hospital (St. Vincent's) is a part of my tribe, unlike you.
Obviously you've never stopped to consider the fact that most societies that are based on tribes are either extinct or going that way. Good to hear you have a tribe, sounds like you need one.
My guess is that it's only the Californicators buying it.
The Kalifornicators can't afford it, and never have been able to. Your demosocialist friends have already returned that state to Meh-hee-co and are spending their money paying for Mexicans to live there (at your expense)
Well, since you've admitted to selling crap products to people who don't need them, and apparently can't tell the difference between need and want anyway, why should I bother with you?
I can see now why you failed economics and history; you're too busy reinventing as you go along.
Except maybe as a potential target in the revolution. IF you were worth the bullet.
Oh yes, that's right
People who are launch and run successful businesses wage a revolution one man at a time
Funny, I say the same about Randroids like you.
... your state, your road system. Interesting that socialists want everything for everyone, but are quick to cut anyone they don't disagree with off all by themselves. Typical of demosocialists and more than a little hypocritical.
... enough for me to make more money than I ever have before.
... sounds like a business opportunity for you. Oh that's right, you're "indentured" based on institutions that you "didn't need".
Unfortunately for you, not many people care about what whiny, "indentured servant" losers have to say (and rightfully so).
Then don't expect US to support you- don't do business with us.
I don't do business with you; I do business with people who have sense. You're quite the arrogant leftist thinking that you speak for the entire country.
Your so-called "hard earned wealth" wouldn't exist without a government- burn your money because you don't want to pay for having money.
I'm sure it makes you feel better to think that; that'd make you out to be not quite the loser in your own eyes.
People who don't share that opinion of civilization deserve to be exiled.
Ah yes, we see at the base of all leftist socialism is that wonderfully self-serving stench of elitism; poorly placed, of course, given your proported circumstances.
Well, personally I don't appreciate you taking my tax dollars to support your business.
I don't take your tax dollars; given how much you whine I'm surprised you make enough to pay any.
You mean kind of like you're doing by using OUR roads that you're not willing to pay for?
Ah yes, that self-serving elitism and arrogance again. Your roads, you say? I'm sure I've paid more toward them then you ever will. The real issue is that you want anyone with more than you to give it to you because you think you deserve it. Like I said, sorry about your luck.
If it can't be found anywhere else, I can readily live without it.
Ah, so next time you will do the natural birth thing and stay away from the hospital? Good show! That'll spare the rest of us your insipid whining and self-pity next time around.
Kindly do not sell in my state or use my road system.
Ah yes, the self-serving (but desperately misplaced) leftist elitism again
Sorry about your luck, but that's not how it works. And oh, by the way, your state wants what I'm selling pretty badly right now
If it can't be found anywhere else, then I don't need it.
I guess you didn't think that way about the hospital, now did you?
I only spend money on what I NEED, not what I WANT like some whimp consumer.
What you need is a store that sells clues
Thanks for admiting that I don't need to support your business or allow your business to operate in my country.
Indeed, please have the natural birth next time and spare us the all the trouble and annoyance.
I'm not complaining about the NATURAL consequences, I'm complaining about the ARTIFICIAL consequences.
...
... and we live in a democracy, not a capitocracy (supposedly).
The natural consequences were that some idiot put himself in a position (by choice) to be affected by artificial consequences. Sorry, no sympathy here for that.
Well, that's an error in the Constitution, isn't it?
That and the obvious omission of a continuous leftist hunting season with no bag limit.
There is no such thing as hard earned wealth- all wealth comes by lying to customers and employees about the true value of labor.
Which conveniently explains why you have none? What a wonderfully elitist, self-serving and self-fulfilling rationalization. I'm sure it makes you feel much better about yourself to believe that fantasy to be true.
I don't care about your wallet- but the dollar bills inside belong to the government of the United States. The Treasury Secretary signed them- they belong to that department. Whatever they choose to do with those dollars is government business
Let me alleviate your ignorance of the monetary system: the currency belongs to the government, the wealth that it represents does not. I guess if you're a demosocialist and envision a society where nobody actually has any wealth and depends completely on the government for everything, that distinction is rather small.
You must have failed economics AND history in the same semester. The United States is a democratic republic, not a democracy, which prevents all of the sore, whiny "I-can't-make-it-on-my-own" losers from making bad decisions for the rest of the people who actually have some sense (and initiative). Your friends the Demosocialists are doing a good job in trying to change that, though, by trying to import Mexico into the country a few million people at a time.
That's funny- so you believe that ignorance, failure, and lies should be rewarded? Bet you voted for Bush!
True ignorance is the inability to distinguish what's important and what isn't; failure is what results from ignorance. For leftists the only thing that's important is their own unrealistic, elitist, and egocentric perspective of reality which is why they do so poorly in the real world (unless they're filling their pockets with other people's hard-earned wealth, of course). Oh, but that's right, nobody works hard to earn anything that they have (in the leftist's view of the world), so it's perfectly okay to take it from them if you're lazy or have some excuse why you can't earn any for yourself.
As a matter of fact, I did not vote for Bush.
Well, my perspective says that without a government providing a stable money supply, roads, an internet (paid for with Department of Defense dollars!), a system of defense (now breaking down, since we can't seem to control a simple border), disease control, police, fire protection, corporate contract law mediation, copyright law, patent law, incorporation, and an educated workforce, your business couldn't exist.
You're perspective is unrealistic, elitist and egocentric, not to mention incorrect. By the way, it's probably news to you but there are a lot of very successful businesses that are used to implement all of the functions in your (rather flawed) perspective.
I'm sure it makes you feel better to think that somehow other peoples' success is tied to those institutions which you socialists love so much, but the truth is that some people make it without (and sometimes in spite of) them.
Is that why you're so busy re-creating the mistakes of the past?
I realize it's a "mistake" to be financially successful in the leftist world, but some of us prefer that to being "indentured servant" loser whiners.
No, that's the homosexual movement. You really have a problem differentiating the different groups that you see as "left" don't you?
Sorry, I don't distinguish between different angle measurements of left. Leftist groups, like feces, all smell in the sunlight regardless of shade.
Uh, no, that's your boy "W" and the democrats. I'm in the American First party because I want closed borders- no trade with other countries at all. You really are an idiot aren't you? Don't even know who your enemies are.
Sorry, neither "W" nor the Demosocialists are my "boys", and my enemies are anyone who wants to put their hands in my pocket and redistribute my hard-earned wealth to other, undeserving people because they want to buy their political favor or think it's "civilized" to do so. As far as I'm concerned that's all of the above (including idiots who want me to pay for their losing at the "hide-the-sausage" game).
Likely by being a traitor and offshoring, or using H-1b slaves.
Actually not, which I must say I take great satisfaction in stating. The people who work for me are people I've all worked with before who I know to be good, solid software people who are well above the average dolt pounding a keyboard. I pay them 2-sigma or 3-sigma salaries because they posess that level of skillset and I know them to be so before I even think about hiring them.
Since the intent of living in a city, or being civilized, is to band together to compensate for individual shortcomings and misfortunes, correct.
Obviously that's your opinion which, I'm sure it will shock you to find, is not necessarily shared. Personally I think that definition went out the window with the Great Wall or the Crusades. It's very convenient though for people who want to put their hands in other people's wallets albeit very, very quaint and more than a little dated.
Now here's the $1,000,000 question: Why the hell should I buy from you if the only thing you're for is yourself?
And you accuse me of failing economics? This is just so typical of the liberal socialist mentality: regurgitate useless facts and not get the whole point. Given you've demonstrated you're an idiot at economics as well as being a whiner, I'll educate you:
The best business to have is one where you sell a product or service that can't be found (readily) anywhere else. That's the way it is when you're really good at what you do, something you obviously have no clue about. You can charge outrageous money, and guess what? People will pay it because they can't buy what you're selling anywhere else (sometimes at any price). That's all the economics that you need to know, if you're good at something (other than whining, of course).
No, we didn't "opt for the natural birth", we had the baby induced a week early due to preclampsia, then when the baby wouldn't come out ...
I'll give you a quick clue: the person who put the baby in there in the first place (and is now complaining about the consequences) is the one who qualifies as the real idiot. As I said before, the Constitution does not ensure you the right to breed. Sorry about your luck, but don't even think for a moment that your misfortune entitles you to my hard earned wealth. Kindly keep your hands off my wallet.
I see you failed basic macroeconomics as well. Businesses in the modern form have only existed since the Corporation Act of 1845. By that law, they exist for one reason only- to make profit. NOT create jobs- unless creating jobs is a part of that profit. In fact, if a business provides jobs without making profit, it's called embezzlement, and the C-level executives can and will be prosecuted and sent to jail. So you really are an idiot, aren't you?
Considering your complaining about being an indentured employee, perhaps you should have considered failing Macro as well.
What constitutes business in a "modern" form depends on your perspective and context, something you obviously didn't pick up. If you only had as much technical (and small business) talent as you do regurgitating useless history lessons, you wouldn't be nearly so indentured.
Ah, but that's the plight of the poor, downtrodden liberal socialist isn't it? Stuck in a hole despite your intellectual superiority not by you're own doing but by the collective malfeasance of others, which gives cause to call for forced redistribution of others hard earned wealth. The self-serving smell is so familiar.
Now you're really the idiot- you don't even know the basic cause of Cerebral Palsy is Hospital Error. (hint: there's only ONE way to get brain damaged during birth).
So another words, you're bitter because you played "hide-the-sausage" and a third party (or so you claim) caused you to lose. I guess you should have opted for natural birth, eh? Did someone force you to go to the hospital at gunpoint? I didn't think so.
You took the risk when you rolled the dice moron. The rest of the world doesn't owe you anything because of that, so get over it and move on. Stop expecting everyone else to feel sorry for you.
And apparently you libertarians have forgotten the entire reason civil marriage is endorsed by the state to begin with: to create the next generation of workers. Has been for about 5000 years now.
Is that why you leftist socialists want to legalize "gay" marriage? Someone desperately needs that biology lesson, and it's not me. I guess that's why you leftist socialist democrats want all the cheap mexican labor here, so your gay "married" friends don't have to worry about procreating.
I'm through with you- you obviously don't know the first thing about living in civilization.
I know enough to do better financially in the IT business than 99.98% of all the other people who post here, of which obviously you are one. If you mean by "civilization" a place where other people are going to (or be forced to) sacrifice their standard of living to compensate for someone else's shortcomings or misfortunes, then you're right.
If you don't want to pay taxes, here's a hint: they can't tax what they can't find. Go live as a hermit.
If I were a stupid socialist, I might think that way. The reason that businesses exist is so that they can generate jobs for the sorry-assed losers like you who "need" them. Has been for about 5000 years.
By the way, I don't have to hide it; I earn it and then write it off in just about every way imaginable. That's what you can do when you're good enough (and work hard enough to be good enough) at what you do. That's step two of being successful. Step one is not letting excuses prevent you from getting to step two. Too bad you'll never get past step one. But hey, wallowing in self-pity and forcing others to compensate for "wrongs" committed against you is liberal socialist nirvana, now isn't it?
When you have a kid with CP, or any other illness that can't be insured because it's "preexisting", and your insurance is tied to your employer, let me know. Until then, you're the moron.
... in your own incompetence and self-pity. Stop using your kid as an excuse, it's really pathetic.
Unless your kid appeared out of thin air, the moron is the one who stuck his hard-on in a hole and got the process rolling. I realize that you're a stupid socialist whiner, but I'm betting with some coaching in biology even you could figure out who THAT is. I realize that socialists don't like to hear this, but you have no right under the U.S. Constitution to play "hide-the-sausage" and have society protect you from the outcomes when you lose at that game.
No amount of skills will change the system in the United States that makes employment more indentured servitude than employment.
As it so happens, I have both a spouse with "preexisting" conditions as well as an in-law that I help financially care for out of my own pocket, and that's not stopped me from "right-sizing" my employer (it happened just last week as a matter of fact) to the tune of a 300% increase in pay (and I left behind a six-figure plus salary). Excuses won't get you a better job; better skills (and their marketing) do.
As I said, you're not worthy of any sympathy; you are worthy of loathing however. Get off your sorry whining ass.
I can't afford the $3 million India charges for a guest worker visa- so I'm trapped.
You're definitely trapped
How about C) Teach people to save money and avoid debt, so that bouts of unemployment or career change don't ruin their lives.
... thank you for restoring some of my lost confidence in the sense of the collective posters here.
Every so often (but not too often, and not nearly often enough) I read a post on this site that is wonderfully direct, insightful, and spot on