if you let commercialization of education, after a point it goes haywire, trying to maximize profits at all costs.
they can sell you whatever they can, at whatever cost they can and do advertising and spread fud to that effect. all kinds of courses, programs, seminars and whatnot.
no sir. just putting 80 k into something does not entitle you to anything.
the act of learning is for being useful with the knowledge that you learn. if that knowledge is not needed, you cant come claim rights on grounds that you spent effort for it.
the education system is stupid. it teaches stale knowledge and loads up predefined programs to students instead of teaching them how to learn and think.
at our time and age, its better to ditch all conventional programs of 'professions' and 'degrees' and instead teach people how to learn fast and efficient, so they can actually learn whatever that is needed after they get out of school, and adapt to new times as times change and learn anew.
your world view is quite limited. you apparently think the concept 'guild' is what you know in wow. it is not as such. there were guilds before wow, and there are functions that were present before teamspeak/ventrilo or raid duties or other shit wow brought to prominence.
ours is a democratic guild in which many properties of democratically run legal social groups exist. there are important functions to perform for running of it. guild is going on since 2003 summer in this fashion, and apparently is going to continue into the future.
sorry, but your understanding of gaming and gaming societies are as shallow as wow.
things get complicated much more if that guild you are member of is a long time guild which hops from game to game with the same people, ie the people you played the last 2-3 games with.
no you cant. if you are holding responsibilities in a long time guild, you need to ensure that your responsibility position will be fulfilled when you quit that game.
can you imagine that old coot as secretary of defense, hell, even president ?
How would that be worse than what we have now?
well, current one is an alcoholic. he at least has connection with reality, although it is blurred. an old coot would still be living back in 1930s, and would try to make the world like it was back then.
It doesn't matter. Going into or starting a business isn't never a safe thing to do. You have to be ready to change and you have to be willing to lose money. I'm not sure why you think that might be a bad thing or that anything is different. If you didn't have those risks, however large or small they were, you would be working from someone else who is taking those risks.
its not about 'risk' here. even going out in broad daylight carries the risk of getting struck by a fallen meteorite. its irrelevant.
the issue here is the predation of the small businesses by the big. and there doesnt exist any method to prevent it, outside of regulation, yet.
Well, no. Your wrong. You see, for the most part, in the US anyways, any restrictions cover everyone. Very few of them cover the markets specifically. This allows a good portion of "the people" to participate at will. Now, we have, because of people like you who have a severe misunderstanding of things, increased restrictions in the US which has lead to monopolies sprouting because of the higher bar for competition to join. This has resulted in problems that you complain about but your ignoring the cause in some ill formed attempt to fix things. It is almost as if you think the fix is to break it in some way.
does it ? what about intellectual property laws ? they cover anyone, but the biggest only benefit from it. the costs of litigation for small ip holders are way too high compared to any result they can get. and therefore big media is able to afford almost illegal practices like what they do with riaa.
you are missing that, in every country, each restriction covers everyone. but, the biggest players always find a way to be able to escape any requirements.
monopolies to not come to being out of restrictions. they come into being because of lack of regulation. as they grow, their power and any kind of effect on economy and society grow. and they are able to outdo smaller competitors more effficiently. 'high barrier to entry' can be only a localized, specific matter, and can be handled with regulations. the major problem to handle is how can you prevent predation by companies when they get too big. if i need to remind you, some corporations in california have gone far enough to try to implant their workers with rfid chips, citing 'security' excuses. they were only averted by the rule of the state senate. this is what happens when you let everyone be. biggest power always tries to have everyone do its bidding.
As apposed to tieing the legs of the best runners so you can place in the race? I mean what the hell are you attempting to get at here? If someone isn't easy for you, we should hold everyone else back?
your analogy does not hold correct. this is not a race. this is by definition, a battle. in a race you are not allowed to trip over your competitors, or push them out of the field. in business, you are. in an environment where you allow the stronger to subdue and outdo the weaker, you end up with a hierarchy of overlords and underdogs, it has never been different in any point in history.
It doesn't take a rocket scientists to see that it will only grow the same ill conceived resentment that you yourself have. Everything from sports to money has people better then others who will accell better then others. Some use advantages such as that provided by the economics of scale while others use their mind. Because you can't understand it, or you don't like it, or you have never been good at it, doesn't mean it is wrong.
well thats the brainwashing im talking about. you are so conditioned that you jump and alternate between concepts. you think that regulation to ensure noone stumps down any others and rules the scene is preventing the talented from going forward. it is not.
Everything from sports to money has people better then others who will accell better then others.
i didnt have much fun. it has a parabolic, speedily diminishing return arranged fun-time function. the worst part is, they reset you to zero with each expansion.
and you cant just quit online games like that. you generally have a group or a guild. they move into the game you are in, or you get to be a participant of a community. there are responsibilities and goodwill. but still, i quit.
no country lets other exploit him that freely. china is buying u.s. govt bonds and financing u.s. federal debt exclusively, in staggering amounts. therefore it is being let to act the way it does.
for other countries, china is letting them to its market, and they are buying its products.
trade means trade. in literal sense. you give and take. what you give and what you take may be different as in the example.
The wages of 1960s were at the level which finally allowed the "middle class" to form in America and for most people to be comfortably prosperous. What you are saying is that most Americans should expect to be dirt poor in this new "global economy", forever looking at their parents and grand-parents as those who were the final successful generation. Could you explain why is this supposed to be a benefit to the American populace? Why should not they demand that their government use all those stock piles of nuclear weapons to eradicate this new "global economy"? And this is not some theoretical musing here. All that xenophobia, lashing out abroad against any perceived foreign "enemy", increasingly viciously totalitarian political rhetoric and the like are fundamentally tied to this new, every day more depressing, "global reality". How is this a good thing for most people, again?
the wages in 1960s was the result of post ww2 situation. half of the world was destroyed. especially europe and japan. these were industrial nations that were the competition. iron curtain went up in eastern block, they totally got out of economic circulation. there was a huge need for every kind of produce. america was not destroyed. it produced, and there was the market, and it sold. result was an economic boom that resulted from extraordinary circumstances. it couldnt last however, and as other countries rebuilt their infrastructure, competition came back, both in production and consumption of raw materials. us was not the main buyer of resources anymore, prices also went up as a result.
Could you explain why is this supposed to be a benefit to the American populace? Why should not they demand that their government use all those stock piles of nuclear weapons to eradicate this new "global economy"?
first of all u.s. is not the only country that has nukes, and in the event of such an 'eradication' of that global economy us would also be destroyed. the illusion of 'missile shields' and whatnot are, illusions. even if 4 nukes land out of 200 launched against your country is still annihilation of half of your populace and huge cities turning inhabitable.
second, the 'global economy' is the reason we are able to get to a global production level to raise civilization to the point that we are able to talk with computers over distances of thousands of kilometers and send probes to the moon. growth and progress is only possible with participation. civilization went forward only in proportion to the extent of participants in its activities. the globalization is the product of last 50 years, and if you check those years out, you can see that the life standard of entire world rising exponentially compared to the thousands of years preceding, even though the distribution of that prosperity is not yet perfect.
third, it benefits american people because this situation IS real. post 60s boom was an extraordinary circumstance that will never happen. it was kinda a reward for america, in a manner of speaking, for the labor it undertook in the war against fascism. yet, the reward was a period, and it ran out. the advantage of current situation is that, because it is real, if you adapt to this new situation, you dont need to worry about the future anymore. because you will be surviving in a global, competitive world, and therefore there can be nothing to disturb the balance. yet, it will require working harder than 1960s, thats for granted.
10 years of advanced education does not exactly sound like "no effort" to me. I bet you did not try to obtain it, or else you would not be here ranting so. But then again your lack of ability to use the "shift" key should be a hint...
being educated doesnt mean a thing, if that education is able to produce valuable output. knowledge is just a stale, inert concept that is of no use, until it is applied in a needed area. if there arent any areas that are needing that knowledge and expertise, and the value becomes null until there occurs a need. with the approach you are suggesting, we should have to pay big bucks and find employment for a person who has studied in ancient sanskrit language for 12 years or more.
your last sentence in that block puts out our difference in our approach. i omit shift key, and use the energy and time i saved to impart with more words to describe ideas, therefore increasing the level of interaction between the person debating with me. whereas you are getting clung on the capitalization. as you are very well able to understand what i type, there is no problem. and it seems to be so up to this point too.
The answer of course is to institute some method of ensuring that the chosen fields of education are beneficial to both the society and the student. Education is an expensive, time consuming and laborious process, therefore the current crap-shoot method of selecting the fields of study (or perhaps the overall types of education) is at fault.
But you cannot blame the whole thing on parents and the students. They simply follow the signals being sent to them by the powers-that-be.
the answer is not educating people in fields that are not needed for the society. AND then implementing methods and providing opportunities for people to switch their profession (and reeducation, apparently) in case the field they have been trained in grows stale out of no demand. this is a necessity for anyone on the face of this world, yet, we as i.t. workers have a huge edge. our field is broad, demand is growing due to the digitization of our civilization, there are many other subfields in the sector, and we are very well able to learn new tricks and even work from home or from top of a mountain if need be. no other profession on this world enjoys such privileges. i see it as utter stupidity, people asking to be employed in conventional, ages old corporate positions, instead of enjoying the internet revolution. this level of freedom has never been experienced by anyone before.
then again from what i lived through while i was young, i dont think that the powers that be are the ones sending the signals. it was happening here as such : back in 1990s (early) there was a huge need for industrial engineers here. companies were not able to find industrial engineers, and they were signing contracts with students on their 3rd year in college (for top colleges of course). public eventually heard this, and all mothers and fathers herded their children to go for fields like that. what happened was, eventually the demand for those fields took a dive steadily in the next 5 years. and after 10 years, people are complaining their children get underpaid. well, its their own fault herding their kids to certain fields in hordes. then demand for other fields went high, and parents at that period herd their children into them, and the cycle continues.
you cant outsource jobs in a steel mill. you can only move the steel mill. thats not something new. corporations have been setting factories wherever labor or logistics are cheaper for a long time now. i dont think its relevant to outsourcing.
Huh? Outsourcing is only one type of corporate movement, specific to certain industries such as IT, telephone centers etc. In many other sectors companies outright moved their entire divisions, or even the company itself abroad.
well, if companies moved themselves abroad, why not people are setting up new corporations and filling the void in the country instead of making a stampede to force corporations to bring the factories back ? what happened to the entrepreneurship ?
This of course works also in the exact opposite direction: IT companies are some of the most easily destroyed of all companies out there as there are near to no barriers to entry for competitors. Most small scale IT companies do not live past 5 years. The bankruptcy rates are some of the highest amongst small IT companies. It is not a "career" to have with an expectation of long-term stability, which also reflects very negatively on any attempts at having a stable family life or raising children.
yes you can go bankrupt if you dont play your cards right. but then again this goes for any kind of business. if you try to make it big, you can also break it big.
reliability, good reputation is paramount for anything related to i.t.. have a good reputation, and youll get increasing business. if you try to grow fast at this stage, you totally mess it up. get reputation that is over a certain threshold, and you may see that clients wont quit nagging you to get their jobs done by you, even if your demands are high.
as for raising children, i see getting married and having children just a few years out of college as utter foolhardiness. i see it around quite often. without having decent savings or job security one should never have children.
i think you should be in digg, seeing that majority of your wow brethren occupy that internet space, and your strong argument is calling someone an idiot. but youll realize in time. but dont forget - time is the foremost think that money cant buy, and time passed away has no remedy.
i hate dog eat dog capitalism. its plain out brutal, and its totally detrimental to progress of mankind so far.
yet, i dont accept that it is dog eat dog capitalism to provide jobs to people without effort. its having detrimental effects on society.
its going to an extent of creating a new kind of aristocracy that takes its members through education. they go into college, they instantly start thinking that they are separate from the society, higher, and entitled to more rights and expect and demand them.
it shouldnt be as such. people should be valued over merits, it should be a meritocracy. without producing anything, noone should be entitled to anything just because they have endured the rigors of a scholastic textbook training and some experiments.
its like being the son of a baron, demanding stuff, yet, only getting to that position with education, not production of value and proving of merit.
there is a great imbalance in everything in usa though. you are sold your products are services from EXORBITANT prices. the cost of living is stupidly high due to the humongous profit margins that are charged by your corporations. this needs to be checked. despite anti trust laws, corporations are forming spontaneous cartels just by checking out competitors and therefore holding the prices at the level they desire. this in turn reflects on the competitiveness of us. employees that actually want to put real production in contrast to many of their easy life comrades. usa needs to realize that post ww2 boom is over, its a competitive global economy, and corporations shouldnt charge that high inside the country and employees shouldnt demand huge wages like back in 1960s.
Notice the utterly anti-competitive and dishonest nature of this scenario. Capital and corporations are free to move wherever... the workers are decidedly not.
on the contrary. telecommuting is exploding. even spanish government is sending government workers home in a pilot project.
labor that cannot commute is labor that cannot be outsourced. i dont see a problem in that side.
as for stuff that can be outsourced, i believe chances are high that it can be telecommuted too.
my opinion is that i.t. workers are the employees that experience the highest level of freedom in the world.
a heavy machine worker cant set up his own business. but an i.t. worker can easily set up his/her software production or i.t. counseling job with almost no investment. everything comes at a cost. we can set up a website and start running our own software house or it counseling in unbelievable ease from our home, but our jobs also can be outsourced easily. i say we are coming up profiting much more than we are losing. because setting up one's own business is dream of every employee after working 10 years.
there are many countries who provide far bigger incentives to corporations. if you create such an environment, your companies would speedily run away to other countries.
its your own fault. if you had balls, they would hurt instead of your brain. but since you prefer posting anonymous, its apparent that you do not have any balls, and hence the suffering of your brain.
he goes rather too extreme with the darwinist survivalism, but he has a point in that there is a great deal of people who just want to train themselves doing some stuff mediocre and get a high standard of living guaranteed just because of that.
its not just like that in the u.s. either. even in turkey that is as such. people go to colleges that are founded in the boom of 90s (hundreds of makeshift colleges and universities were founded in that decade) and expect to have a good life guaranteed just because they got a signed degree. and they make a fuss when they see that they dont get it. and yell around saying that college graduates are being left unemployed or underpaid.
the fact is quality university graduates are still getting high paying jobs without being even a month in the open. 4-6 top universities and colleges of the nation are still in very high demand. reason ? well, the degree actually holds a meaning.
i see that its the same in u.s.. someone gets a signed degree from someplace, and instantly think they are entitled to high life or guaranteed pay. well, it aint so. it aint so anywhere in the world in the times we are living in. you have to make yourself stand out of the crowd, if you want to be rewarded.
you are saying that you want to prevent importing of any goods. so all goods that are sold in your country are going to be produced by american companies.
where are you going to sell all your surplus to generate the wealth you need to maintain your life standard ?
arent you in the know that the major reason the world is at this point in civilization, sending probes to moon and talking to each other thousands of kilometers away with computers, because we have invented the concept of TRADE ?
do you think other countries will buy your goods like idiots, whilst you are barring them from selling their stuff and services in your country ?
are you a moron or have you taken no economics or history classes ?
where are you going to send all your exports with that protected economy of yours, when trade partners of u.s. also start to go protectionist ?
you are saying that you basically want your country to go cccp. do you think other countries are stupid enough to let you export to them in favorable terms, without you giving something back in return ?
Slashdot Mirror
didnt you hear anything called 'buyer beware' ?
if you let commercialization of education, after a point it goes haywire, trying to maximize profits at all costs.
they can sell you whatever they can, at whatever cost they can and do advertising and spread fud to that effect. all kinds of courses, programs, seminars and whatnot.
no sir. just putting 80 k into something does not entitle you to anything.
the act of learning is for being useful with the knowledge that you learn. if that knowledge is not needed, you cant come claim rights on grounds that you spent effort for it.
the education system is stupid. it teaches stale knowledge and loads up predefined programs to students instead of teaching them how to learn and think.
at our time and age, its better to ditch all conventional programs of 'professions' and 'degrees' and instead teach people how to learn fast and efficient, so they can actually learn whatever that is needed after they get out of school, and adapt to new times as times change and learn anew.
your world view is quite limited. you apparently think the concept 'guild' is what you know in wow. it is not as such. there were guilds before wow, and there are functions that were present before teamspeak/ventrilo or raid duties or other shit wow brought to prominence.
ours is a democratic guild in which many properties of democratically run legal social groups exist. there are important functions to perform for running of it. guild is going on since 2003 summer in this fashion, and apparently is going to continue into the future.
sorry, but your understanding of gaming and gaming societies are as shallow as wow.
things get complicated much more if that guild you are member of is a long time guild which hops from game to game with the same people, ie the people you played the last 2-3 games with.
i know the number of social services !! fookyuuuu
no you cant. if you are holding responsibilities in a long time guild, you need to ensure that your responsibility position will be fulfilled when you quit that game.
can you imagine that old coot as secretary of defense, hell, even president ? How would that be worse than what we have now?
well, current one is an alcoholic. he at least has connection with reality, although it is blurred. an old coot would still be living back in 1930s, and would try to make the world like it was back then.
It doesn't matter. Going into or starting a business isn't never a safe thing to do. You have to be ready to change and you have to be willing to lose money. I'm not sure why you think that might be a bad thing or that anything is different. If you didn't have those risks, however large or small they were, you would be working from someone else who is taking those risks.
its not about 'risk' here. even going out in broad daylight carries the risk of getting struck by a fallen meteorite. its irrelevant.
the issue here is the predation of the small businesses by the big. and there doesnt exist any method to prevent it, outside of regulation, yet.
Well, no. Your wrong. You see, for the most part, in the US anyways, any restrictions cover everyone. Very few of them cover the markets specifically. This allows a good portion of "the people" to participate at will. Now, we have, because of people like you who have a severe misunderstanding of things, increased restrictions in the US which has lead to monopolies sprouting because of the higher bar for competition to join. This has resulted in problems that you complain about but your ignoring the cause in some ill formed attempt to fix things. It is almost as if you think the fix is to break it in some way.
does it ? what about intellectual property laws ? they cover anyone, but the biggest only benefit from it. the costs of litigation for small ip holders are way too high compared to any result they can get. and therefore big media is able to afford almost illegal practices like what they do with riaa.
you are missing that, in every country, each restriction covers everyone. but, the biggest players always find a way to be able to escape any requirements.
monopolies to not come to being out of restrictions. they come into being because of lack of regulation. as they grow, their power and any kind of effect on economy and society grow. and they are able to outdo smaller competitors more effficiently. 'high barrier to entry' can be only a localized, specific matter, and can be handled with regulations. the major problem to handle is how can you prevent predation by companies when they get too big. if i need to remind you, some corporations in california have gone far enough to try to implant their workers with rfid chips, citing 'security' excuses. they were only averted by the rule of the state senate. this is what happens when you let everyone be. biggest power always tries to have everyone do its bidding.
As apposed to tieing the legs of the best runners so you can place in the race? I mean what the hell are you attempting to get at here? If someone isn't easy for you, we should hold everyone else back?
your analogy does not hold correct. this is not a race. this is by definition, a battle. in a race you are not allowed to trip over your competitors, or push them out of the field. in business, you are. in an environment where you allow the stronger to subdue and outdo the weaker, you end up with a hierarchy of overlords and underdogs, it has never been different in any point in history.
It doesn't take a rocket scientists to see that it will only grow the same ill conceived resentment that you yourself have. Everything from sports to money has people better then others who will accell better then others. Some use advantages such as that provided by the economics of scale while others use their mind. Because you can't understand it, or you don't like it, or you have never been good at it, doesn't mean it is wrong.
well thats the brainwashing im talking about. you are so conditioned that you jump and alternate between concepts. you think that regulation to ensure noone stumps down any others and rules the scene is preventing the talented from going forward. it is not.
Everything from sports to money has people better then others who will accell better then others.
not quite.
i didnt have much fun. it has a parabolic, speedily diminishing return arranged fun-time function. the worst part is, they reset you to zero with each expansion.
and you cant just quit online games like that. you generally have a group or a guild. they move into the game you are in, or you get to be a participant of a community. there are responsibilities and goodwill. but still, i quit.
no country lets other exploit him that freely. china is buying u.s. govt bonds and financing u.s. federal debt exclusively, in staggering amounts. therefore it is being let to act the way it does.
for other countries, china is letting them to its market, and they are buying its products.
trade means trade. in literal sense. you give and take. what you give and what you take may be different as in the example.
make me !
the board in yahoo has enough balls to suffice for entire i.t. sector. much bravado.
The wages of 1960s were at the level which finally allowed the "middle class" to form in America and for most people to be comfortably prosperous. What you are saying is that most Americans should expect to be dirt poor in this new "global economy", forever looking at their parents and grand-parents as those who were the final successful generation. Could you explain why is this supposed to be a benefit to the American populace? Why should not they demand that their government use all those stock piles of nuclear weapons to eradicate this new "global economy"? And this is not some theoretical musing here. All that xenophobia, lashing out abroad against any perceived foreign "enemy", increasingly viciously totalitarian political rhetoric and the like are fundamentally tied to this new, every day more depressing, "global reality". How is this a good thing for most people, again?
the wages in 1960s was the result of post ww2 situation. half of the world was destroyed. especially europe and japan. these were industrial nations that were the competition. iron curtain went up in eastern block, they totally got out of economic circulation. there was a huge need for every kind of produce. america was not destroyed. it produced, and there was the market, and it sold. result was an economic boom that resulted from extraordinary circumstances. it couldnt last however, and as other countries rebuilt their infrastructure, competition came back, both in production and consumption of raw materials. us was not the main buyer of resources anymore, prices also went up as a result.
Could you explain why is this supposed to be a benefit to the American populace? Why should not they demand that their government use all those stock piles of nuclear weapons to eradicate this new "global economy"?
first of all u.s. is not the only country that has nukes, and in the event of such an 'eradication' of that global economy us would also be destroyed. the illusion of 'missile shields' and whatnot are, illusions. even if 4 nukes land out of 200 launched against your country is still annihilation of half of your populace and huge cities turning inhabitable.
second, the 'global economy' is the reason we are able to get to a global production level to raise civilization to the point that we are able to talk with computers over distances of thousands of kilometers and send probes to the moon. growth and progress is only possible with participation. civilization went forward only in proportion to the extent of participants in its activities. the globalization is the product of last 50 years, and if you check those years out, you can see that the life standard of entire world rising exponentially compared to the thousands of years preceding, even though the distribution of that prosperity is not yet perfect.
third, it benefits american people because this situation IS real. post 60s boom was an extraordinary circumstance that will never happen. it was kinda a reward for america, in a manner of speaking, for the labor it undertook in the war against fascism. yet, the reward was a period, and it ran out. the advantage of current situation is that, because it is real, if you adapt to this new situation, you dont need to worry about the future anymore. because you will be surviving in a global, competitive world, and therefore there can be nothing to disturb the balance. yet, it will require working harder than 1960s, thats for granted.
10 years of advanced education does not exactly sound like "no effort" to me. I bet you did not try to obtain it, or else you would not be here ranting so. But then again your lack of ability to use the "shift" key should be a hint...
being educated doesnt mean a thing, if that education is able to produce valuable output. knowledge is just a stale, inert concept that is of no use, until it is applied in a needed area. if there arent any areas that are needing that knowledge and expertise, and the value becomes null until there occurs a need. with the approach you are suggesting, we should have to pay big bucks and find employment for a person who has studied in ancient sanskrit language for 12 years or more.
your last sentence in that block puts out our difference in our approach. i omit shift key, and use the energy and time i saved to impart with more words to describe ideas, therefore increasing the level of interaction between the person debating with me. whereas you are getting clung on the capitalization. as you are very well able to understand what i type, there is no problem. and it seems to be so up to this point too.
The answer of course is to institute some method of ensuring that the chosen fields of education are beneficial to both the society and the student. Education is an expensive, time consuming and laborious process, therefore the current crap-shoot method of selecting the fields of study (or perhaps the overall types of education) is at fault. But you cannot blame the whole thing on parents and the students. They simply follow the signals being sent to them by the powers-that-be.
the answer is not educating people in fields that are not needed for the society. AND then implementing methods and providing opportunities for people to switch their profession (and reeducation, apparently) in case the field they have been trained in grows stale out of no demand. this is a necessity for anyone on the face of this world, yet, we as i.t. workers have a huge edge. our field is broad, demand is growing due to the digitization of our civilization, there are many other subfields in the sector, and we are very well able to learn new tricks and even work from home or from top of a mountain if need be. no other profession on this world enjoys such privileges. i see it as utter stupidity, people asking to be employed in conventional, ages old corporate positions, instead of enjoying the internet revolution. this level of freedom has never been experienced by anyone before.
then again from what i lived through while i was young, i dont think that the powers that be are the ones sending the signals. it was happening here as such : back in 1990s (early) there was a huge need for industrial engineers here. companies were not able to find industrial engineers, and they were signing contracts with students on their 3rd year in college (for top colleges of course). public eventually heard this, and all mothers and fathers herded their children to go for fields like that. what happened was, eventually the demand for those fields took a dive steadily in the next 5 years. and after 10 years, people are complaining their children get underpaid. well, its their own fault herding their kids to certain fields in hordes. then demand for other fields went high, and parents at that period herd their children into them, and the cycle continues.
That is really going to work in a steel mill....
you cant outsource jobs in a steel mill. you can only move the steel mill. thats not something new. corporations have been setting factories wherever labor or logistics are cheaper for a long time now. i dont think its relevant to outsourcing.
Huh? Outsourcing is only one type of corporate movement, specific to certain industries such as IT, telephone centers etc. In many other sectors companies outright moved their entire divisions, or even the company itself abroad.
well, if companies moved themselves abroad, why not people are setting up new corporations and filling the void in the country instead of making a stampede to force corporations to bring the factories back ? what happened to the entrepreneurship ?
This of course works also in the exact opposite direction: IT companies are some of the most easily destroyed of all companies out there as there are near to no barriers to entry for competitors. Most small scale IT companies do not live past 5 years. The bankruptcy rates are some of the highest amongst small IT companies. It is not a "career" to have with an expectation of long-term stability, which also reflects very negatively on any attempts at having a stable family life or raising children.
yes you can go bankrupt if you dont play your cards right. but then again this goes for any kind of business. if you try to make it big, you can also break it big.
reliability, good reputation is paramount for anything related to i.t.. have a good reputation, and youll get increasing business. if you try to grow fast at this stage, you totally mess it up. get reputation that is over a certain threshold, and you may see that clients wont quit nagging you to get their jobs done by you, even if your demands are high.
as for raising children, i see getting married and having children just a few years out of college as utter foolhardiness. i see it around quite often. without having decent savings or job security one should never have children.
i think you should be in digg, seeing that majority of your wow brethren occupy that internet space, and your strong argument is calling someone an idiot. but youll realize in time. but dont forget - time is the foremost think that money cant buy, and time passed away has no remedy.
how is it troll to ask an unjustified invasion of a country, when someone brings it up as an excuse for something else.
post that again after you realize you wasted a few years of your life in a timesink.
i hate dog eat dog capitalism. its plain out brutal, and its totally detrimental to progress of mankind so far.
yet, i dont accept that it is dog eat dog capitalism to provide jobs to people without effort. its having detrimental effects on society.
its going to an extent of creating a new kind of aristocracy that takes its members through education. they go into college, they instantly start thinking that they are separate from the society, higher, and entitled to more rights and expect and demand them.
it shouldnt be as such. people should be valued over merits, it should be a meritocracy. without producing anything, noone should be entitled to anything just because they have endured the rigors of a scholastic textbook training and some experiments.
its like being the son of a baron, demanding stuff, yet, only getting to that position with education, not production of value and proving of merit.
there is a great imbalance in everything in usa though. you are sold your products are services from EXORBITANT prices. the cost of living is stupidly high due to the humongous profit margins that are charged by your corporations. this needs to be checked. despite anti trust laws, corporations are forming spontaneous cartels just by checking out competitors and therefore holding the prices at the level they desire. this in turn reflects on the competitiveness of us. employees that actually want to put real production in contrast to many of their easy life comrades. usa needs to realize that post ww2 boom is over, its a competitive global economy, and corporations shouldnt charge that high inside the country and employees shouldnt demand huge wages like back in 1960s.
Notice the utterly anti-competitive and dishonest nature of this scenario. Capital and corporations are free to move wherever ... the workers are decidedly not.
on the contrary. telecommuting is exploding. even spanish government is sending government workers home in a pilot project.
labor that cannot commute is labor that cannot be outsourced. i dont see a problem in that side.
as for stuff that can be outsourced, i believe chances are high that it can be telecommuted too.
my opinion is that i.t. workers are the employees that experience the highest level of freedom in the world.
a heavy machine worker cant set up his own business. but an i.t. worker can easily set up his/her software production or i.t. counseling job with almost no investment. everything comes at a cost. we can set up a website and start running our own software house or it counseling in unbelievable ease from our home, but our jobs also can be outsourced easily. i say we are coming up profiting much more than we are losing. because setting up one's own business is dream of every employee after working 10 years.
there are many countries who provide far bigger incentives to corporations. if you create such an environment, your companies would speedily run away to other countries.
i was sure that posting a piece of truth would hurt some eyes, but i didnt expect it to happen that fast.
its your own fault. if you had balls, they would hurt instead of your brain. but since you prefer posting anonymous, its apparent that you do not have any balls, and hence the suffering of your brain.
he goes rather too extreme with the darwinist survivalism, but he has a point in that there is a great deal of people who just want to train themselves doing some stuff mediocre and get a high standard of living guaranteed just because of that.
its not just like that in the u.s. either. even in turkey that is as such. people go to colleges that are founded in the boom of 90s (hundreds of makeshift colleges and universities were founded in that decade) and expect to have a good life guaranteed just because they got a signed degree. and they make a fuss when they see that they dont get it. and yell around saying that college graduates are being left unemployed or underpaid.
the fact is quality university graduates are still getting high paying jobs without being even a month in the open. 4-6 top universities and colleges of the nation are still in very high demand. reason ? well, the degree actually holds a meaning.
i see that its the same in u.s.. someone gets a signed degree from someplace, and instantly think they are entitled to high life or guaranteed pay. well, it aint so. it aint so anywhere in the world in the times we are living in. you have to make yourself stand out of the crowd, if you want to be rewarded.
or have ZERO understanding of economics.
you are saying that you want to prevent importing of any goods. so all goods that are sold in your country are going to be produced by american companies.
where are you going to sell all your surplus to generate the wealth you need to maintain your life standard ?
arent you in the know that the major reason the world is at this point in civilization, sending probes to moon and talking to each other thousands of kilometers away with computers, because we have invented the concept of TRADE ?
do you think other countries will buy your goods like idiots, whilst you are barring them from selling their stuff and services in your country ?
are you a moron or have you taken no economics or history classes ?
where are you going to send all your exports with that protected economy of yours, when trade partners of u.s. also start to go protectionist ?
you are saying that you basically want your country to go cccp. do you think other countries are stupid enough to let you export to them in favorable terms, without you giving something back in return ?