backtop

Print 271 comment(s) - last by TheGreek.. on Jun 15 at 1:04 PM

Indian company Infosys was the largest recipient of H1-B visas last year with 4,908 (Source: Wikipedia)
Indian outsourcing firms, Microsoft, Google and others speak out on the restrictions on hiring foreign help

The pervasiveness of the Internet allows for a new definition of a “global market,” opening doors not only for businesses, but also labor forces. While a corporation may cater its products and services to a worldwide audience, it must adhere to strict rules with it comes to their human resources.

One such regulation by the U.S. government is the H1-B non-immigrant visa, which allows employers to seek temporary help (six years per visa) from skilled foreigners who have the equivalent U.S. Bachelor's Degree education. The most well known example of H1-B visa holders are workers from India providing IT duties to large Indian outsourcing firms and U.S. corporations. Out of the top 10 companies receiving workers thanks to H1-B visas, seven of them are Indian outsourcing firms, while the remaining three are Microsoft, IBM and Oracle.

In the early 1990s, the quota on the number of H1-B visas issued was rarely met, but in the last few years, all H1-Bs were snapped up in just a matter of months. Companies who are unable to acquire adequate number of visas will have to wait until the next fiscal year before refilling their applications. For the fiscal year 2008, the entire quota was exhausted before the end of the first day on which applications were accepted.

The U.S. government caps the number of H1-B visas at 65,000, with provisions for more workers with foreign graduate degrees and when the quotas are met. In May of this year, the Senate voted to increase H1-B visa fees from $1,500 to $5,000. Proceeds from the fees are used to fund U.S. educational programs.

Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), a strong supporter of the bill who originally sought for a greater fee increase to $8,500, explained his reasons for the increase to the Senate: "What many of us have come to understand is that these H-1B visas are not being used to supplement the American workforce where we have shortages but, rather, H1-B visas are being used to replace American workers with lower cost foreign workers."

The National Association of Software and Service Companies (NASSCOM), a group that represents a collection of Indian companies, was quick to refute the Senators’ claim, citing information that says there is no link between U.S. job losses. "These two do not seem to go hand in hand as exhibited through the 2006 survey by Money Magazine," NASSCOM said regarding Sander’s statement.

The group also pointed out that U.S. firms also benefit from its relationship with Indian companies. "India is a major buyer of a whole host of US goods and services, including aircraft, wheat, branded garments and accessories etc... An overwhelming majority of the computers and software used by India's IT industry as also other sectors of the economy are those produced by US companies like HP, Dell, Microsoft and Oracle," it said.

The Information Technology Association of America (ITAA) also opposes the recent changes in the H1-B bill because it "seems to give short shrift to innovation and the competitiveness of America’s high tech industries." The ITAA expressed its concerns (PDF) in a letter to Senate leaders (PDF) on both sides of the aisle as well as the negotiators of the compromise measure.

"America’s economy is strong and vibrant, but the country’s future competitiveness rests on the ability of firms to recruit globally. As you know, the H1-B cap for FY `08 was reached in April, shutting out US employers from recruiting highly skilled foreign nationals who are graduating from US institutions with degrees in computer science, engineering, mathematics and other scientific and technical fields. Vacancies go unfilled and highly valued workers are forced to leave the country," the letter read.

The letter later concludes, "There is no doubt that immigration reform is needed that is tough and protects our border. But we have the opportunity to pass a law that is fair, practical and strengthens our economy. Most importantly, we need to have workplace enforcement that is effective, and uses the best available technology."

Regardless of job loss statistics, Sanders believes that large corporations like Microsoft should divert some of its off-shore spending back home. "To win favor in China, Microsoft has pledged to spend more than $750 million on cooperative research, technology for schools and other investments," Sanders believed. "If Microsoft and other corporations have billions of dollars to invest in technology…in China, these same companies should have enough money to provide scholarships for middle-class kids in the United States of America."

This shortage of visas is an issue that many tech firms have been wrestling with for a number of years. Bill Gates said in his congressional testimony in 2005, "You can't imagine how tough it is to plan as a company where we say, 'let's have this engineering group and staff it' ... we'll have Canadians waiting at the border until some bureaucratic thing happens where a few more [visa spots] get opened up. That's just wounding us in this global competition." Gates was hoping to convince politicians to remove the caps on H1-B visas.

Although it is not in the top 10 companies receiving H1-B visas, Google strongly urged the U.S. government to raise the quota on H1-B visas. Google Vice-President of People Operations, Laszlo Bock, pointed out in his congressional testimony that the Internet giant was built on the foundation of foreigners, citing Google co-founder Sergey Brin’s Soviet Union family origins.

"We opened our doors to Sergey's parents – a mathematician and an economist," said Bock. "Our educational system served Sergey well – he attended the University of Maryland and Stanford University. Our free market economy supported Sergey and Larry's entrepreneurship and rewarded it when they proved that they could turn their idea into a successful business."

Bock also said that Google’s principal scientist and one of the chief creators of Google News, Krishna Bharat, was born in India and is a direct addition to the company through the H1-B visa. About eight percent of Google’s U.S. workforce is on a six-year H1-B visa.

Bock wasn’t campaigning only for his company’s interests, but rather of the entire IT industry. "In fact, Google is just the most recent story for immigrants in Silicon Valley. Intel, eBay, Yahoo, Sun Microsystems, and many other companies were all founded by immigrants who were welcomed by America," he said. "We are not the only ones recruiting talented engineers, scientists and mathematicians. We are in a fierce worldwide competition for top talent unlike ever before. As companies in India, China and other countries step up efforts to attract highly skilled employees, the U.S. must continue to focus on attracting and retaining these great minds."

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
No great minds in the US?
By zombiexl on 6/8/2007 8:47:04 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
As companies in India, China and other countries step up efforts to attract highly skilled employees, the U.S. must continue to focus on attracting and retaining these great minds


Basically google's entire plea for more visa's is nothing more than a cheap shot at people born in the US.
Am I the only one reading it this way?




RE: No great minds in the US?
By Chadder007 on 6/8/2007 8:52:48 AM , Rating: 1
Thats how I see it too. Billion dollar companies wining about having to pay programmers here in the U.S.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By BMFPitt on 6/8/2007 10:20:19 AM , Rating: 1
The way I see it is they are trying to get programmers here to pay them. Maybe we wouldn't have as much programming work done in India if we could bring the skilled Indians here where they'll pay taxes?


RE: No great minds in the US?
By tuteja1986 on 6/8/2007 10:35:04 AM , Rating: 2
Tech support is what i want them to restrict as for Programming and engineering i don't think government should have any restriction.

TECH SUPPORT : VOTE : )
Programmers , engineers :! Don't restrict..


RE: No great minds in the US?
By stromgald on 6/8/2007 12:13:55 PM , Rating: 2
I think this is silly and self-centered, even if you weren't comopletely serious.

Tech support is a menial task that only invovles leading people through a series of trouble-shooting steps. Sure, it pisses people off when they have to call tech support, but engineers and programmers are where the knowledge lies. This is absolutely critical in keeping our technological advantage over other countries.

Also think about it this way, would you like your engineering and programming work done by the kind of people that do your tech support? I would certainly hope not. Out-sourcing presents a huge risk to quality because the people doing the work aren't where the product is being used.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By Targon on 6/9/2007 1:09:57 PM , Rating: 3
You are probably the sort who complains about how tech support never has the right answers when YOU call them, but then try to make it out that tech support jobs require no training or even a clue about computers. What tech support is currently is not how tech support SHOULD be.

Back in the mid 1990s and before, tech support was considered a skilled job, where the tech support reps needed to know the product(s) they supported, as well as needing to be able to apply their own knowledge so a tech support rep could help the customer do things outside the standard minimums of using the product. Many consider this to be level 2 or 3 tech support, but in those days, the feeling was that phone tech support should be able to handle most of the calls themselves without escalating the problem to a higher level.

This changed in the late 1990s as tech support was seen by the MBA(Masters in Business Administration) crowd to be an extension of customer service(which doesn't require the technical knowledge of tech support). This was further encouraged by the shortage of junior level technical people who were using tech support as a stepping stone into companies. As a result of this, scripted support started to become more popular because too many tech support people were just seen as bodies to answer the phones, and outsourced tech support also became more popular.

If level 1 tech support were treated as a skilled job by companies, where the reps were expected to really know the products they are supposed to support, then we would see a change. There ARE a few companies out there where the tech support people really know what they are doing and can help without needing to read a script, but they are few and far between.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By Spineless on 6/12/2007 1:46:31 PM , Rating: 3
haha... You think that if we bring the Indian workers to the US they will pay taxes? I guess you are not familiar with the way in which H1-B Visas work. With H1-B visas, if you are initially contracted with a company that is outside of the US, you will not have to pay any US taxes. This is often the preferred method of H1-B visa applicants. They are contracted from a company in India to a US company that will "hold" their H1-B visa while they are working in the US. From there they can go to work either for that company, or contracted out to another company, or wherever the visa holder will allow them to work. During none of this, are these H1-B workers subject to US federal taxes, but they are usually given a nice per diem since they are working "away from home".

This is totally gaming the system for the benefit of the contractors and the contracting companies.

I have done a significant amount of research into the H1-B visa process and I have come to the conclusion that it creates an unfair environment when US workers are competing with H1-B workers for the same job. The H1-B worker can afford to get paid less because they aren't paying any taxes. Additionally, it is an unfair system for the H1-B visa worker, as they are required to work in a potentially unfair employment situation where they aren't in a position to have a fair voice in their employment status out of fear for their H1-B visa status (i.e. they can't rock the boat). This further leads to wage pressures and fewer benefits.

In the end, the only ones who benefit from H1-B visas are the companies that either provide the workers or the companies hire the workers. They are able to extract fees from the workers, and pay them less.

The ones whom are hurt the most by H1-B visas are US workers. US workers are forced to compete for the same jobs with H1-B workers whom can afford or are "forced" to accept a lower wage for the same job.

I have seen this first hand in interviews at Micro$oft where I have been turned down for a job after going through the extensive interview process only because I asked for the going rate for a US worker. Had I been an H1-B worker, I could have asked for at least 10k less per year, and I probably would have ended up with either of the jobs.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By TheGreek on 6/12/2007 2:00:52 PM , Rating: 1
So you're investigations reveal that despite all the righteous economic propaganda found on this thread it all simply boils down to plain old greed.

"With H1-B visas, if you are initially contracted with a company that is outside of the US, you will not have to pay any US taxes."

But they enjoy the benefits of living in the US, how fair is that?

"I have come to the conclusion that it creates an unfair environment when US workers are competing with H1-B workers for the same job. The H1-B worker can afford to get paid less because they aren't paying any taxes."

If you were a viable presidential candidate and maintained that viewpoint you'd end up like JFK.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By arazok on 6/8/2007 12:35:08 PM , Rating: 4
Last I read, there is a 2% unemployment rate in the IT sector (with some regional differences), which is full employment.

My company is looking for 8+ qualified programmers at the moment. Has been for about 6-8 months. Pay in in the range of $45-60K to start, depending on the exact position. Most of the people coming in are exceptionally unqualified... morons looking for big bucks really. We find about 1 in 25 people who come in are actually qualified for the positions. Of those, about half accept an offer, with the other half taking competing offers.

I personally went shopping for more money just last month. I had 3 interviews within 3 days of posting my resume, and offers within 24hours of each interview. It was pathetically easy to land these. My existing employer countered just as fast to retain me.

This isn't about trying to save a buck. It's about filling jobs that can't be filled within the domestic market. An employment free-trade pact would be a boon to the American economy. I'm a Canadian, and I'd consider a move to the US in heartbeat it it wasn't such a pain in the ass to get a visa and keep it current.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By hubajube on 6/8/2007 1:19:30 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
This isn't about trying to save a buck. It's about filling jobs that can't be filled within the domestic market.
Yep. I read about this quite a bit not to mention have seen this happen a couple of years ago. I was pretty much a shoe in for this position because there was only one other qualified person and he didn't accept because it was a pay cut for him.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By aos007 on 6/8/2007 1:30:03 PM , Rating: 5
You're saying that most people coming in are "unqualified". What do you mean? The person does not have 2+ year of hands-on, current experience on every one out of 20 skills you want? Or they are unable to answer most of a highly specific set of questions your interviewer came up with (say they "only" know UML 1.4 and you want 2.1)? Or they "don't participate in open source projects in their free time and read 5+ books a year"? Or the company they worked previously for wasn't in the same line of business (God knows why a programmer from a telecom company is not good for a financial service or vice versa)? All this for a boring, repetitive job (that most CS jobs are, let's face it - a bit of SQL, a bit of business logic, some GUI and a lot of google and search/replace) that pays the same as it did 10 years ago? Perhaps your company's definition of "qualified" is way too stiff? If you say that 1 in 25 are "not qualified", that may be the case.

quote:
I personally went shopping for more money just last month. I had 3 interviews within 3 days of posting my resume, and offers within 24hours of each interview. It was pathetically easy to land these. My existing employer countered just as fast to retain me.


This is extremely rare in Canada. In 10 years of living here I heard only on one person that had an offer countered by current employer (the whole thing sounds like an urban myth). And this person has uncanny social skills. Nor have I heard offers being extended after 24 hours of the FIRST interview - there is usually 2, sometimes 3. On occasion, a written test will be required or even a lengthy homework project to presented simultaneously with one or more competing candidates.

The CS companies are still EXTREMELY careful when hiring. But outside of CS, "now hiring" signs are everywhere and unemployment is at historic lows. I really wonder if there's no good people to hire in CS or is it still the mindset of a few years ago when you could easily have your pick of dozens if not hundreds of overqualified candidates willing to work for relatively little money. If they didn't fit exactly what you wanted (or thought you wanted), you could simply scroll down the resume list until you found it.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By Ringold on 6/9/2007 9:30:19 PM , Rating: 1
You start to make a point but ultimately made none. You whined about what may be considered qualified or not, made an entirely useless comparison to Canada (here in Florida many graduates, not just CS ones, are picking up multiple offers and counter-offers, and some I know have shared an observation I've had -- that recruiters are trying to convince us to work for them rather then the applicant trying to convince the employer to take them!), and then go on to ultimately agree that unemployment is very, very low.

The OP was wrong on one thing; 2% isn't full employment. Many economists would call 4.5 - 5% full employment, 2% employment is actually fairly dangerously low! That's begging for heavy inflationary wage pressures. It's a fairly safe assumption that those 2% are truly just not qualified or not looking for a job despite whining about looking for a job when polled over the phone. Healthy structural unemployment should be higher then that. The fact that the labor market truly is that tight is an indicator that, as the corporations are saying, they simply can't fill open positions.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By masher2 (blog) on 6/9/2007 10:15:33 PM , Rating: 3
> "2% isn't full employment. Many economists would call 4.5 - 5% full employment, 2% employment is actually fairly dangerously low! "

Exactly so. It proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that there are more jobs than employees in the IT sector. You can't hire someone without taking them away from an existing job. If these companies can't hire the help they need, they'll either move overseas entirely, or fail to compete and go out of business.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By bmheiar on 6/8/2007 2:23:02 PM , Rating: 2
"Most of the people coming in are exceptionally unqualified... morons looking for big bucks really. We find about 1 in 25 people who come in are actually qualified for the positions."

My comment is on this. How does one who is "unqualified" for a position, but has a degree that relates & is willing to learn more to become "qualified" with hands on real world work experience? But the problem is no one is willing to hire that person because of being "unqualified", since they have no real world work experience applying degree and/or related knowledge gained from going to college. Someone can only become "qualified" when another person actually hires them and is willing to teach & train them to give them that real world work experience to become "qualified". That is what I am running into. I have a B.S.E.E. degree, but have no real world work experience applying it, so no one is willing to hire me into an entry-level position that relates to my degree because they are always wanting someone who has already acquired 2+ years or more of previous experience applying that degree and/or related knowledge.

Those "unqualified" people are not "morons looking for big bucks", they are looking for a start to get their foot in the door, to be able to show and prove what they know and can do. So where they do not have to work retail and/or fast food places for the rest of their life, when they have a degree to do something better. To have a better life for themselves instead of working for minimum wage so having to live from paycheck to paycheck to paycheck. But maybe that is just me. Since I am in that Catch-22, of having to have previous experience with my degree to get a job, but need a job that relates to my degree to get that experience.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By arazok on 6/8/2007 3:03:46 PM , Rating: 4
A little clarification... At 45-60k to start, these are not junior positions. They are intermediate to senior positions where you need 2-3+ years of experience. We do hire juniors, just not at the moment.

We have one screening test we give to ALL job candidates (I've posed this here before, so sorry for the repeat quiz):

Write the code to take the string "The Fox Ran Down the Hill" and output in reverse order (Desired Output "Hill the Down Ran Fox The"). You may use any language you like.

1 in 10 passes this test (which still doesn't mean they are any good). 9 in 10 are morons looking for big bucks. I had a guy come in a limo. Told me he was an application architect. I found it highly unlikely as he seemed baffled when I asked him for technical details about his projects, and he was driving the limo.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By jdbost on 6/8/2007 4:25:52 PM , Rating: 2
$string = "The Fox Ran Down the Hill";

@array = split(/ /, $string);

for($i=@array-1;$i!=-1;$i--)
{
print "$i: $array[$i]\n";
}


RE: No great minds in the US?
By gatoatigrado on 6/9/2007 10:37:36 PM , Rating: 2
lambda x: " ".join(x.split()[::-1])

pwned. lol, just kidding. learn python :)


RE: No great minds in the US?
By jdbost on 6/10/2007 7:38:31 PM , Rating: 2
$string = "The Fox Ran Down the Hill";
print "".join(/""/,reverse(split(/ /, $string)));

- More than one way to skin a cat
- Tomato, "Toe" mato

Looks like a case of Premature pwnage declaration...;)

I know python, learn the definition of Divergent production


RE: No great minds in the US?
By fic2 on 6/11/2007 12:07:54 PM , Rating: 2
newS = reverse("The Fox Ran Down the Hill", " ");

in a language I just made up.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By CCRATA on 6/8/2007 5:12:25 PM , Rating: 2
45-60K start is crap. Fresh out of college most of my offers were 60k+ with some over 70K. And you wonder why you guys get crap turnouts.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By GoatMonkey on 6/8/2007 9:37:53 PM , Rating: 2
Depends on the location. But, yeah 45k is newbie level now in most places.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By P4blo on 6/11/2007 7:59:30 AM , Rating: 3
Amusing story but your company is creating its own problems. You want fully qualified and experienced programmers on those pickings? I'm in the UK and I have a few programmer friends that started on around £30k straight out of Uni the demand is so high. On current exchange rates that's the top end of your bracket and the cost of living V's salary comparison in the US is typically much better than here. Start offering a decent wage and you might get less noobs and limo drivers.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By stromgald on 6/8/2007 4:09:38 PM , Rating: 2
That's why you go looking for intenships and co-ops. They pay you less and you get related experience. While it's true some of thoes jobs involve just being a glorified copy boy and you don't learn anything, you still get job 'experience'.

There are literally tons of engineering jobs in the US paying 45-60k depending on location and industry. Where I work, they are desparate to get new graduates because alot of the current engineers are starting to retire.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By bmheiar on 6/8/2007 5:13:13 PM , Rating: 2
But internships & co-ops mostly apply to those who are still in college working towards their degree. I do apply to those when they come open (very few & far between, IMO.. I have only seen a couple or so posted every six months to a year), but get a rejection email saying that I do not qualify since I have already graduated.

I know I will get paid less, money is not an issue for me. I just need enough to live off of, that is more than if I stayed working in retail. I have even put on applications that my min is $10-15 an hour. I have even offered to volunteer just to get the experience, but get told no. I just want the experience of using & applying my degree. Otherwise going to college was a complete waste of time, money, and effort. Since I worked full-time in retail to pay my way thru college. I had no help from anyone, not my parents, not the school, nor the government. It was all me, myself & I. It took me longer to graduate but I graduated debt free, since I used no loans or anything.

I even moved after I graduated, I moved just outside of Austin, Tx. Since Austin and the surrounding area is know as the 2nd Silicon Valley. Plus most of my family lives here in Austin and other cities in Tx, and some of them work in the tech industry with Dell, Samsung, and etc. But that still has not helped me. Though I have gotten more interviews since moving down here, than I did when I was living further up north in Ks. But in all of those interviews I get told that I do not have the experience they are looking for. That they are not willing to hire me then train me in a real world work environment because they are afraid that once I get that real world work experience I will jump ship and get a better paying job somewhere else. I do understand their point of view, but it seems no one sees my point of that I have to have a job to get that experience they are looking for. So a Catch-22. The proverbial chicken & the egg, which came first. That I have to have real world work experience with my degree to get a job that relates to my degree, but I need a job that relates to my degree so where I can get that real world work experience applying my degree at a job. But maybe I am seeing it the wrong way.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By stromgald on 6/9/2007 4:25:00 AM , Rating: 3
I do see the catch-22 you're talking about, but the only way to break the cycle is for you to do so. Get work experience however you can and learn how to sell yourself. I saw the same catch-22 before I got my internship. They always ask for something you don't have (i.e. experience in X software or doing Y task). You just have to learn to not focus on those things and tell them what you have done.

My brother faced the same problems you mention since he never got an internship before graduating and spent 6 months looking for a job before he landed one. But he eventually did because after several interviews, he caught on what he needed to say to get hired without any out of school experience.

Learn to sell yourself. Don't mention how low you're willing to go. Nobody's going to hire someone who doesn't think much of themselves. You have to believe that you'll be an asset for whoever hires you before you can convince the recruiter of that. Beggars never win.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By stevenplatt on 6/9/2007 11:22:32 AM , Rating: 2
I agree. You have to create opportunity. As a student, i would see the listings on Dice.com that required lots of experience. My degree required an internship, I interned at a lowly library, but was given the title "Network Administrator". I later started my own business; Platt Technologies. I would never compete with Best Buy, quite the contrary. It was an eBay business. I was however registered with my county clerk and was authorized to open accounts in my business name which gave credibility. I now work for a fortune 500 whom is not in the tech market, but pays me almost 60k to be an IT analyst. You must be aware of opportunity and don't think for a minute that Microsoft, Cisco, and Dell are the only companies looking for your talent. My sister just finished her master degree and cannot find a job. She attended the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Her degree is much more prestigious than mine, and so is her school. But she is being offered salaries below what i make with a bachelors. The job market is stiff, so your education will never be all that gets you your dream job.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By Ludwick8 on 6/8/2007 3:01:27 PM , Rating: 3
So you say $45 - $60 K a year? I'm not familiar with pay in Canada but in the US for a developer that is entry level pay. I haven't been paid so little in over a decade.

Essentially what you are looking for is CHEAP labor, not necessarily skilled labor.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By TomZ on 6/8/2007 3:20:07 PM , Rating: 3
I agree, and so it is also no surprise that they are having such trouble filling the positions, especially if the desired salary range is part of the job posting. For software engineers with some experience, something more in the $50-75K range would probably create some more interest.

And you see, this is exactly what I'm talking about... Employers wanting to pay entry-level wages for experienced engineers. The quickest solution for them is H1B visas.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By TheGreek on 6/8/07, Rating: -1
RE: No great minds in the US?
By masher2 (blog) on 6/8/2007 3:52:53 PM , Rating: 3
> "So you say $45 - $60 K a year? ...in the US for a developer that is entry level pay"

That's just the point. $60K is entry level pay to you for a CS graduate. That's nearly double entry-level pay for many other positions with a bachelors degree. In education, for instance, its what someone with a Ph.D. and ten years experience makes in most states.

Now I'm sure all you in the CS field are happy with a job shortage that prices fresh graduates so far above any other field on the planet...but is that really a fair, balanced perspective?


RE: No great minds in the US?
By vanka on 6/8/2007 4:03:13 PM , Rating: 2
Job shortage is only part of the equation. If two guys started work right after graduating from the same high school; one at a fast food place the other for a construction company as a laborer; would anyone be surprised that one will be making more than the other? That's with them both having nearily identical educations. A CS BS degree is a lot more technical (requiring Calc, physics, engineering classes) than an education degree. Seems like you're advocating equal results without equal effort or skill.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By barclay on 6/8/2007 4:10:26 PM , Rating: 2
> "Seems like you're advocating equal results without equal effort or skill."

Actually, I think he might be advocating letting the market determine the salary, free of protectionist policies.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By BladeVenom on 6/9/2007 5:59:08 AM , Rating: 1
I agree, anything is harder than an education degree. Half the women getting an eduction degree are there just to meet a husband and an eduction degree is the easiest thing to get.

The Education department is the intellectual slum of a University.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By Ringold on 6/9/2007 9:45:28 PM , Rating: 1
Great place to get a date, though.

Which is precisely why I parked next to it, walked through it and ate lunch in it every year. :D

But seriously though, no PhD is an easy thing to get. Education may be easy, but I can look at my own degree (Economics) and compare it to CS. It's "easier" in that it has less mathematics, but unless someone has an acquired taste for it I'd wager it's every bit as difficult in different ways. It simply requires a different type of mind. Thanks merely to the fact that CS grads face a labor market in severe shortage with inflationary wage growth and government policies that limit competition and reinforce that inflation I'll have to work for a decade or more before I have a shot at having the same earning-power as a CS grad who apparently, according to you CS guys, do repetitive crap for a living while I regularly rack my brain. That doesn't seem to me like the labor markets working too well to me, and all I hear is bitching that if H1-B visa caps were lifted that, my god, some CS majors might actually have to work for middle-class wages. The horrors!


RE: No great minds in the US?
By fic2 on 6/11/2007 12:19:46 PM , Rating: 2
H1-B visas aren't just for tech workers. The article did say the foreign equivalent of a B.S.

Difference between a C.S. and an Economics is that the C.S. person is expected to be right most of the time.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By barclay on 6/8/2007 4:06:28 PM , Rating: 1
> "Now I'm sure all you in the CS field are happy with a job shortage that prices fresh graduates so far above any other field on the planet...but is that really a fair, balanced perspective? "

Exactly. As a consumer, I am thrilled if companies can hire someone of equal skills for cheaper. A portion of that savings will eventually be passed to me.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By TheGreek on 6/8/07, Rating: -1
RE: No great minds in the US?
By Ringold on 6/9/2007 9:49:52 PM , Rating: 2
It might be difficult, and cause some synapses to explode in your brain, but open a principles level textbook and find "Gains from trade" in the index and flip to the indicated page. Once that's done, "structural unemployment" would be a good one to look up, and a little research on Google about how it can be effectively dealt with by the government help retask labor in to higher productivity jobs would also be useful. Structural unemployment is a good thing, and a part of the reason why 5% unemployment is considered great.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By TheGreek on 6/12/2007 11:25:58 AM , Rating: 1
Let us know when you can answer my question. Yes, it's easy to say what's right for others when it's not applied to yourself.

As for learning new skills, companies weren't interested, only in lowering salary.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By arazok on 6/8/2007 4:42:55 PM , Rating: 2
Depends where you live. Bigger cities tend to draw bigger pay - especially in the US. I'm in Toronto. We have guys at my company making over $100k, but a typical senior is in the 70-85 range. We rarely hire at that rate, preferring to start them on probation of 55-65 with a raise after 3 months, and again at 1 year - which takes them to 70+. I would tend to agree that we are on the cheaper side of what bigger companies will pay, which will certainly contribute to our problems... but we aren't totally out of line with the industry in this area. We mostly need good senior programmers, not uber system architects.

When I wqas shoping, my offers came in at 65-70 to start. I have 8 years exp as a programmer.

I'd also mention that we have 5 weeks vacation (3 to start), flex hours, casual dress, and nobody ever really needs to work overtime. We're strict 8 hours 95% of the time. I'm not sure how many places offer an environment like that, which to some people is worth a lot.

BTW, Our juniors are 30-35 to start. Intermediate 40-50.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By aos007 on 6/8/2007 5:06:35 PM , Rating: 2
You do have a huge spread of salaries, which I find unusual. Your senior positions are reasonably paid (after probation) while entry/mid are underpaid compared to the average.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By hans007 on 6/9/2007 4:36:00 AM , Rating: 2
companies in california are already typically paying 60k or more for entry level out of college.

with 2-3 years experience it is possible to get 90 already. needless to say the higher wages being paid now should encourage people to major in engineering again.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By aos007 on 6/8/2007 4:47:42 PM , Rating: 2
$45k is a bit low for intermediate position in Canada. With 2-3 years of experience you should be looking to pay $50k+. However, it doesn't go much up after that - you can expect 60-70k for 10 years of experience.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By Tyhr on 6/11/2007 11:05:56 AM , Rating: 2
> $45k is a bit low for intermediate position in Canada. With 2-3 years of experience you should be looking to pay $50k+. However, it doesn't go much up after that - you can expect 60-70k for 10 years of experience.

I live in Wpg, B.Cs.degree with 10 years programming experience. I get about $45/year right now. Had a job offer in Seattle a few years ago, but the gf wouldn't move. Course, the gf and I broke up last month...bye bye. :)

I do find it ironic when Americans complain and jobs and wages. Their crappile is Canada's goldmine.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By vanka on 6/8/2007 3:53:43 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I'm a Canadian, and I'd consider a move to the US in heartbeat it it wasn't such a pain in the ass to get a visa and keep it current.

Let's see . . . you're in Canada . . . yet you are talking about the job market in the US. Does that strike you as odd? Your job hunting experiance in Canada (which is anecdotal anyway) does not necessarily reflect the situation in the US. From your post I can draw the conclusion that a skilled-guest-worker program (especially for the tech industry) makes excellent sense - in Canada; while no recommedations for the comparible US program can had. It would be interesting to hear from US skilled workers on their job hunting experiance in the tech industry.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By arazok on 6/8/2007 4:59:38 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, I'm a Canadian IT worker which means that I am completely ignorant of the job situation in the US, and I'm talking straight out of my ass.

Or perhaps I just happen to live in Canada, and I am well read on my industry, and know that this is typical throughout N. America. Let me know if I'm wrong and there is an army of unemployed IT workers on social assistance somewhere in the US.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By Frallan on 6/11/2007 5:41:50 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Let's see . . . you're in Canada . . . yet you are talking about the job market in the US. Does that strike you as odd?


Nope According to the theory of trade a BMW will cost the same or about the same wherever you buy it. Now A programmer or a CS graduate will cost the same sooner or later everywhere the question is just which companies and contries that will pay... As it seemes on this disscision I can tell you that it wont be in the U.S of A.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By vanka on 6/8/2007 3:53:46 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I'm a Canadian, and I'd consider a move to the US in heartbeat it it wasn't such a pain in the ass to get a visa and keep it current.

Let's see . . . you're in Canada . . . yet you are talking about the job market in the US. Does that strike you as odd? Your job hunting experiance in Canada (which is anecdotal anyway) does not necessarily reflect the situation in the US. From your post I can draw the conclusion that a skilled-guest-worker program (especially for the tech industry) makes excellent sense - in Canada; while no recommedations for the comparible US program can had. It would be interesting to hear from US skilled workers on their job hunting experiance in the tech industry.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By PWNettle on 6/8/2007 4:15:06 PM , Rating: 2
I got news for ya. Anybody you hire in that price range could be equally clueless. A fresh off the boat foreigner with zero experience and a "learn to code in 24 hours" education is just a useless as US poser who gets a job based on knowing a few key buzz words.

A lot of foreign wannabe coders are no different than US wannabe coders - they see that there's money to be made in coding, they go to school and learn ABOUT coding, but that doesn't necessarily make them good programmers.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By hans007 on 6/9/2007 4:32:42 AM , Rating: 2
i'm a software engineer.

when times were horrible 4-5 years back, they didnt throw all the h1-b people out of the country?

and the companies profited because i was workin ga horrible job swing shift?

and now they cant get people ? if you are an employer and need someone to work for you you'll just have to pay more to steal them from another company.

tough luck employers, its time for us to have some good times.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By arazok on 6/9/2007 8:14:15 AM , Rating: 2
Stealing an employee from one company to fill a roll in another still leaves you short one programmer. This is good for the programmer, as his wages will be inflated by the competition, but the shortage of people is bad for the economy as a whole.

CS tends to be an industry that facilitates science and productivity(efficiency) gains. A manpower shortage only means that projects are delayed or scuttled altogether - leading to companies that are less profitable and, more importantly, an economy that is less productive. Ultimately everyone loses.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By Fenixgoon on 6/8/2007 8:55:17 AM , Rating: 2
the fact still remains that foreign students complete technical majors (engineering, math, CS, etc.) at a far higher rate that americans do. the US seriously needs engineers, but the rate of "native" graduating engineers has been declining for some time, IIRC.

probably too many lazy kids turned off by REAL majors requiring "work" =P


RE: No great minds in the US?
By zombiexl on 6/8/2007 9:03:18 AM , Rating: 4
quote:
probably too many lazy kids turned off by REAL majors requiring "work" =P

I would tend to agree.

Although, I would guess a good number of kids these days are watching the tech industry shrink in the US and are choosing other career paths. No one wants to spend the money it costs to attend a good school to be outsourced before they even graduate.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By FITCamaro on 6/8/2007 9:06:31 AM , Rating: 3
Yes but theres still more than enough to meet their needs. The problem isn't that there isn't enough, its that we won't work for half of what the current engineers are being paid.

I graduated with a BS in Software Engineering with a 3.0. But it still wasn't a cake walk to find a job. Employers even for entry level jobs want 2 years of experience these days.

Yes fewer are going to college for real engineering disciplines these days. But the US isn't so strapped for engineers that we need to turn to the outside world and deprive yet more Americans of the jobs. What reason is there then to go get the engineering degree? The employers just want the cheapest guy they can find, not necessarily the most qualified.

I personally hope to god the government says no.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By edge929 on 6/8/2007 9:44:24 AM , Rating: 5
Having graduated in Computer Science and having a brother graduate in Electrical Engineering back in 2003 I can tell you first-hand that even here in the midwest it's hard to get the average salary in our fields because of immigrant workers. Roughly half of my company's 800 IT people are either Indian or Asian. One of them happens to be a good friend of mine for going on 6 years now. Went back home last year for his arranged marriage and is now working on his permanent citizenship here in the states. Knowing him before marriage, he lived with 3 roommates in a small 2 bedroom apartment. All they did was work their tech jobs and study. They now all have their MBAs and 2 are working on their Phd. He always made it sound like you were nothing in India unless you had at least an MBA.

Despite all of that, I'm against the bill strictly for the fact that if you want skilled workers from the US, working US jobs, then create the demand for it. Right now, as others have stated, new college students are seeing this out-sourcing trend and shying away from tech jobs. Who wants their job market to go down the drain when they just spent 4-5 years in college and are $30K in debt? If I had to do it again, Comp Science would not be my major. Love the field, just don't love the compensation.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By masher2 (blog) on 6/8/07, Rating: 0
RE: No great minds in the US?
By TheGreek on 6/12/2007 11:52:25 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
And unless the US can supply IT workers to those who need it, that trend will not only continue, but expand and possibly overwhelm the entire industry. Do you really want to see the Fortune 100 move their entire software development base overseas? See companies like Microsoft and IBM move their entire R&D divisions to India and China? Can you comprehend how devastating that would be to our economy?

What's a competitive salary for a programmer in India? Can you consider that a living wage here? Now repeat these questions for every occupation being outsourced. See a pattern?


RE: No great minds in the US?
By Murst on 6/8/2007 11:15:16 AM , Rating: 2
Hmm... I'm in the midwest. I graduated with a CS degree (engineering, not arts+sciences) almost 2 years ago to this day.

If you can't find decent compensation for what you do, I doubt you're even a decent programmer. I've seen people I work with who have very little skill grabbed by companies because there is such as shortage here.

I switched jobs about 5 months ago. On the day that I posted my resume on Monster and CareerBuilder, my voicemail was maxed out (had to turn phone off at work cause of so many calls), and I had a TON of email in my inbox about possible positions (80% were crap, but I did have an extremely nice choice of where I wanted to interview and work).

I actually doubt there's many BETTER fields to graduate from right now other than CS (perhaps Mech. E. and Medicine are better).

BTW, compensation for CS is very good...


RE: No great minds in the US?
By stromgald on 6/8/2007 12:33:01 PM , Rating: 2
The main reason CS doesn't get compensated well by some companies is because there was a flood of CS and EE graduates back in the late 90s. Some companies are still paying like there are a plethora of CS people to pick and choose from.

But now that they realize they can't continue their practices due to simple supply and demand, they want to go overseas to expand their recruiting base. Compensation depends alot on the company and the industry, but for the most part CS isn't doing all that bad. If someone can't get hired, there's probably some reason other than the fact that he or she is a CS major.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By cocoviper on 6/8/2007 1:10:10 PM , Rating: 5
Being an Electrical Engineering student myself who is currently at a very well paid internship, and knowing a ton of friends at school who are all getting at least average (56K is average starting EE salary) or higher I can say you're wrong. It depends less on foreign workers and more on the school you choose, the grades you put up, and the courses you take. That's the difference. All the guys I know that come from my school (University of Missouri-Rolla aka Missouri S&T) work HARD to get out 3.5+ GPAs. But the Indian guys work rediculously hard...I think they hide in the building when it closes at 2am and sleep...because their cars are there at 2am...and the same cars have not moved when I come back 4-5 hours later at 6-7am.

The problem is there are also a lot of people (in the US in general, and at my school) that expect to get an easy ride. They aren't there to become great engineers and push themselves...they are there to get their diploma and make some bank. That all it is to them. I've been in study sessions with several guys who were saying "well, theres only 2 classes I have to worry about passing...the others I've for sure got a C." It's like come on guys! A freaking C? It's unacceptable to be an engineer and perform at the level these companies need and get anything less than nearly all As. You have got to have more As than Bs, and you HAVE to come from a challenging school with a good rep and have taken challenging courses, not all the easy electives.

As a US born engineering student who made his way entirely on student loans I say we need A TON more skilled visas. Its the unskilled workers we need less of. I mean its this same setup that led to a cementing of US dominance in the 20th century. World War II led the greatest engineers and scientists in the world to flee to America on mass. Why do you think we were the only ones able to pull off Nuclear Weapons, Atomic Power, Putting a man on the moon, etc ? And all of this enormous economic and intelectual boom happened in the span of about 15 years! Its NOT a coincidence. Bring on the skilled workers...maybe it will convince some of the lazy guys at my school to work harder. If they aren't willing, than someone will...that or our businesses and our economy will tank.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By cocoviper on 6/8/2007 1:13:32 PM , Rating: 2
Being an Electrical Engineering student myself who is currently at a very well paid internship, and knowing a ton of friends at school who are all getting at least average (56K is average starting EE salary) or higher I can say you're wrong. It depends less on foreign workers and more on the school you choose, the grades you put up, and the courses you take. That's the difference. All the guys I know that come from my school (University of Missouri-Rolla aka Missouri S&T) work HARD to get out 3.5+ GPAs. But the Indian guys work ridiculously hard...I think they hide in the building when it closes at 2am and sleep...because their cars are there at 2am...and the same cars have not moved when I come back 4-5 hours later at 6-7am.

The problem is there are also a lot of people (in the US in general, and at my school) that expect to get an easy ride. They aren't there to become great engineers and push themselves...they are there to get their diploma and make some bank. That all it is to them. I've been in study sessions with several guys who were saying "well, there are only 2 classes I have to worry about passing...the others I've for sure got a C." It's like come on guys! A freaking C? It's unacceptable to be an engineer and perform at the level these companies need and get anything less than nearly all As. You have got to have more As than Bs, and you HAVE to come from a challenging school with a good rep and have taken challenging courses, not all the easy electives.

As a US born engineering student who made his way entirely on student loans I say we need A TON more skilled visas. It’s the unskilled workers we need less of. I mean it’s this same setup that led to a cementing of US dominance in the 20th century. World War II led the greatest engineers and scientists in the world to flee to America on mass. Why do you think we were the only ones able to pull off Nuclear Weapons, Atomic Power, Putting a man on the moon, etc? And all of this enormous economic and intellectual boom happened in the span of about 15 years! It’s NOT a coincidence. Bring on the skilled workers...maybe it will convince some of the lazy guys at my school to work harder. If they aren't willing, than someone will...that or our businesses and our economy will tank.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By cocoviper on 6/8/2007 1:17:47 PM , Rating: 2
(sorry for the double post)


RE: No great minds in the US?
By stromgald on 6/8/2007 4:17:43 PM , Rating: 2
I have to agree. I saw lots of people just hoping to squeak by. What's really disturbing is the fact that some of them got jobs and will be building bridges and airplanes for us over the next 30 years.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By blaster5k on 6/8/2007 9:22:42 AM , Rating: 2
From what I've read, there are also a greater proportion of graduating engineers overseas who are not really ready to enter the industry.

What's kind of sad is that other majors that require less work provide a faster path to getting more money (like business management). And those jobs don't seem to get outsourced to keep wages in check like they do in technical fields.

It's tough to sell people on technical fields here when we keep hearing about outsourcing and getting more people in here with H1-Bs. I ended up majoring in engineering instead of computer science -- even though I'm better at software development, since it seemed safer at the time. Other people abandoned technical majors completely I'm sure.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By encryptkeeper on 6/8/2007 11:46:54 AM , Rating: 2
You have a good point, but have we allowed companies to bring in foreign workers and outsource to the point to where we're in a vicious circle of not producing these great minds? This is also probably true...
Senator Bernie Sanders explained his reasons for the increase to the Senate: "What many of us have come to understand is that these H-1B visas are not being used to supplement the American workforce where we have shortages but, rather, H1-B visas are being used to replace American workers with lower cost foreign workers."

Companies are SUPPOSED to reinvest profit into the company and community. But they don't.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By masher2 (blog) on 6/8/07, Rating: 0
RE: No great minds in the US?
By Clienthes on 6/8/2007 1:07:30 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Since when? I don't see that in the Constitution. I do, however, see the word "freedom" instead.


Its just one of those "best practices" things. Of course they don't have to, but most do.

quote:
So you're saying our high school students are spending all their time listening to hip hop music and refusing to learn math and science, because of a deep-rooted fear of being supplanted by an H1-B worker later in life?


There's our Masher2...you're having an off day today, but I enjoyed that one.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By masher2 (blog) on 6/8/07, Rating: 0
RE: No great minds in the US?
By Clienthes on 6/8/2007 1:30:35 PM , Rating: 2
I addressed that one personally because I agreed with you. I normally do, on most topics.

quote:
"Best Practice" for a corporation is to pass on its profits to its shareholders. Those private citizens can do whatever they wish with them, charitable or otherwise.


Right, and in order for a company to be able to pass on those profits, they have to first make a profit. That generally means reinvestment at some point, either directly into the company, or back into the community that supplies/supports the company. I'm not saying the original poster was right, as he was implying something a little more charitable than what I'm getting at, but companies to invest in themselves and the community, and it isn't for humanitarian reasons, which is totally acceptable.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By masher2 (blog) on 6/8/07, Rating: 0
RE: No great minds in the US?
By TheGreek on 6/8/2007 1:43:24 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
> "Companies are SUPPOSED to reinvest profit into the company and community. But they don't."

Since when? I don't see that in the Constitution. I do, however, see the word "freedom" instead.


Well using your logic, Ken Lay didn't "see" what was wrong with what he was doing either. Like you, your kind only sees what they want to see, interprets words only for their own personal gain.

Did you also reinterpret "freedom" to mean freedom from any responsibility?

You haven't taken a professional ethics course have you? Or did you just decided do deflect everything that was taught in one?

There's a nice group of people in the U.S. with lots of freedom in this country and lots of money; successful criminals. Striving for that kind of freedom are we?

When exactly does education remove your conscience? If there's ever been a question you can answer it would this one.

Excuse me, once again you have caused to feel the need to shower.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By masher2 (blog) on 6/8/2007 1:53:32 PM , Rating: 1
> "Well using your logic, Ken Lay didn't "see" what was wrong with what he was doing either"

Oops. You've missed the point utterly here. Accounting fraud is not a sound business practice, nor one designed to enrich your shareholders. Try again.

> "Did you also reinterpret "freedom" to mean freedom from any responsibility?"

No, and I'm not sure why you believe I did. In this particular instance, I interpreted freedom as the ability to spend ones profits as one wishes, rather than being forced to donate them in bulk back to some "community" goal. Do you disagre with this?


RE: No great minds in the US?
By TheGreek on 6/8/07, Rating: -1
RE: No great minds in the US?
By dever on 6/8/2007 4:50:26 PM , Rating: 2
By trying to interpret the motives of a corporation as "good" or "bad" in your eyes, apart from the market determination through profits, does suggest you propose "forcing" these companies to "do something for the community" apart from running a successful business.

The best thing any company can do for the community is be successful as a business. Being successful as a business means you are producing a product or service that is valuable to consumers.

Before trashing someone for not taking ethics from a professor who is working off the public dole, try taking economics 101.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By TheGreek on 6/8/07, Rating: 0
RE: No great minds in the US?
By encryptkeeper on 6/11/2007 12:44:22 PM , Rating: 2
So you're saying our high school students are spending all their time listening to hip hop music and refusing to learn math and science, because of a deep-rooted fear of being supplanted by an H1-B worker later in life?

Good God man, talk about blowing things out of proportion. My point is lower wage workers pay lower taxes and invest less in the community (that's if the workers are in the US at all). If there were MORE higher paid jobs going to US citizens then more money would be reinvested in the community and therefore more would be available for the educational system (all systems really). See what I'm saying? I'm not here saying MTV is killing the youth of America.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By TheGreek on 6/12/2007 2:45:23 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Good God man, talk about blowing things out of proportion.

What did you expect? Some sense of normalcy?


RE: No great minds in the US?
By Turgon77 on 6/10/2007 10:24:42 AM , Rating: 1
THe health care industry is stealing sharp minds from engineering and such. There's easy money to be made and it doesn't require too much education - nursing, pharmacy, physicians assistants, etc. These people all make big money right out of school and there's no irrational fear of "outsourcing."


RE: No great minds in the US?
By TheGreek on 6/12/2007 12:05:16 PM , Rating: 2
Job security does count for something. Nobody wants to work with the grim reaper standing behind them 24/7.

"...and there's no irrational fear of "outsourcing."

Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they are not after you.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By TomZ on 6/8/2007 9:22:50 AM , Rating: 3
You're exactly right - many US companies know they can pay these people less compared native US citizens because people working on visa will have lower pay expectations. Shame on the industry for making this a "we can't find good talent" problem, when the real issue is that "we don't want to pay for good talent."

I would say that if these companies want to hire overseas workers, then they should employ them in their country of origin. That means setting up shop there. If they want to have workers here in the US, then they have to pay normal US scale wages, period. Creating demand for folks to work here on visas exposes them to the US cost of living while paying them substandard wages in many cases. That is unacceptable.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By masher2 (blog) on 6/8/07, Rating: 0
RE: No great minds in the US?
By BMFPitt on 6/8/2007 12:00:15 PM , Rating: 2
I graduated with a CS degree in 2003, had a job when I graduated (though I knew quite a few who didn't) and was making good money which has increased nearly 30% since. This is all on government contact work (both civilian and defense) so I can't speak for the commercial world, but I'm doing fine.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By TomZ on 6/8/2007 1:12:09 PM , Rating: 3
Starting pay is not the problem - the problem is that a lot of these companies want to hire much more experienced engineers at a similar pay rate. And the way I see a lot of companies doing that is by hiring people with work visas. That way they can hire a junior engineer for $30-40K or a senior engineer for $50-60K. I see it all the time, and I think it is just wrong.

The statistic that I would like to see is the "average pay for US citizen" compared to "average pay for H1B visa" worker for a particular skill level - ideally they would be about the same, since they are in the same market and also facing the same costs of living. But in practice, there is a large delta.

The supposed "shortage" of tech workers in the US is complete BS.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By masher2 (blog) on 6/8/2007 1:23:03 PM , Rating: 2
> "The supposed "shortage" of tech workers in the US is complete BS"

How do you explain the nearly zero unemployment rate then? And the tens of thousands of currently unfilled jobs? Without at least a small pool of unemployed workers, every job filled must be filled from another job.

> " a lot of companies doing that is by hiring people with work visas. That way they can hire a junior engineer for $30-40K "

You don't hire any engineer for $30-40K these days. Going through the H1-B program is pretty expensive for most companies. Most of them generally work through a consulting firm which charges them anywhere from $75 to $160 per hour for every worker.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By TheGreek on 6/8/07, Rating: -1
RE: No great minds in the US?
By masher2 (blog) on 6/8/2007 3:36:07 PM , Rating: 1
> "I buy the government stats about inflation too. "

So you're claiming the government is fabricating unemployment and inflation statistics? That's its all a big conspiracy?

> "If I use government stats that are not in favor here I am a fool."

I don't recall calling you a fool for using valid government statistics. Sounds like you're trying to throw out a red herring here.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By TheGreek on 6/8/07, Rating: -1
RE: No great minds in the US?
By TomZ on 6/8/2007 3:43:54 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
How do you explain the nearly zero unemployment rate then?

How do you figure there is zero unemployment in engineering? Here is one of a large number of articles discussing employment rates in the engineering industry, which states that unemployment in engineering is pretty much the same as the rest of the economy, e.g., 2-4%, more or less in some regions:

http://www.viewfromsiliconvalley.com/id197.html

quote:
You don't hire any engineer for $30-40K these days. Going through the H1-B program is pretty expensive for most companies.

This is not my experience in the automotive industry. I know of a number of mostly smaller companies that hire a lot of H1B visa holders and pay them in that salary range. Typically these folks are happy to have a job at any pay leve, and so they don't complain too much. But they also don't stay around for more than a couple of years either.

Sponsorship of an H1B visa by an employer is not a big deal, nor is it costly. I managed an engineering group at a previous employer, and at the company we sponsored one guy. He was pretty sharp and a good worker, and so we were more than willing to help him out in that way.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By TheGreek on 6/8/07, Rating: -1
RE: No great minds in the US?
By Ringold on 6/9/2007 10:09:17 PM , Rating: 2
It is technically incorrect to have said there is zero unemployment, but if the number bounced around of 2% I've seen in comments is correct, it would be correct to say there is "full employment". In fact, full employment is more around 5% by many economists opinion, making 2% unemployment not just full but inflationary, possibly dangerously so.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By masher2 (blog) on 6/9/2007 10:19:43 PM , Rating: 2
> "This is not my experience in the automotive industry"

I don't know about the automotive market, but the IT salary figures I quoted are straight from the Department of Labor, with supporting figures from the Infoweek Salary Survey.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By encryptkeeper on 6/11/2007 12:50:08 PM , Rating: 2
How do you explain the nearly zero unemployment rate then?

Dig a little deeper. States don't like to admit it, but some have come forward and revealed that their "new job growth" mainly consisted of low paying jobs with little or no benefits at places like Wal-Mart. Nearly zero unemployment? While anything is better than no job, it's not something to jump up and down like an idiot over.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By TheGreek on 6/12/2007 11:39:55 AM , Rating: 2
Wal-Mart is the DOL's best friend from a statistical point of view. What more could they care about anyway?

Question - You're out of work and you've looked so long that you have given up. Are you counted as unemployed or are you like gasoline prices and their effect on inflation statistics?


RE: No great minds in the US?
By gus6464 on 6/9/2007 1:31:07 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
US companies are paying quite well for CS talent these days. Starting salaries are in the $51K a year range. Compare that to the starting salary of someone with a liberal arts degree ($31k), Marketing ($37K), Economics ($42K), or Accounting ($43K), that seems more than sufficient. Of all possible careers, only Chem E's and EE's have a higher starting salary...and that only by a tiny margin ($52K and $54K).


What masher said makes sense. I graduated last year with a degree in accounting. I went for the 5 year program in my school because I wanted to be a CPA so the standard 120 credits that the bachelor's degree gives you is not enough to qualify to take the CPA exam (need 150 credits), so I went for combined degree with a BBS in Accounting and MS in accounting. Had to take the GMAT in my junior year of college and maintain a 3.0 GPA or else I wouldn't be qualified for the program. After graduation I landed a job making $55k starting but I also had some prior work experience as I worked full-time during the summers and part-time during the spring and fall in a bank as a teller.

So honestly $51k average starting salary fresh out of college is very good compared what other majors get. Now before you go and bash my major saying its probably easier than engineering or cs take into consideration that I had to take graduate level courses in conjunction with my upper division undergraduate courses while maintaining a certain GPA or I would get kicked out of the program. How many CS graduates have to go through that to make what I made starting out?


RE: No great minds in the US?
By psypher on 6/8/2007 9:24:48 AM , Rating: 5
I think what he is saying is that for US businesses to continue to be on top, we need the top minds... not just the top american minds. Beyond the examples he cited, remember that this is a country build on immigration. Many of our top thinkers over the course of our country have been immigrants. Think Einstein for christ's sake... I personally am a third generation american. How many generations back can you trace your heritage before your family looks less and less american?

and as far as the cap on H1-B visas goes, i think it is terribly low. For example, my coworker that sits at the desk next to me tried to apply for one. but because of the high volume of applications, they have some sort of lottery system in place and she did not get a visa. so now she is working for FREE. She is doing this knowing that when/if she does in fact get a visa, it is illegal to compensate her for the time she has prior to recieving it. Could an American worker do her job? maybe... but she does her job very well and plans to live in America permanently if possible. If you ask me, that would make her American at that point, wouldn't it? The difference between American and not American for a lot of these people is just a piece of paper...

sometimes i think that people need to take a look back at what makes this country great... Take a look back at what we are made from and look at our diverse heritages...


RE: No great minds in the US?
By VMCHP158 on 6/8/2007 10:09:23 AM , Rating: 5
I completly agree with psypher. As many other people have said that its all about the dollars I do not completely agree with that. Even though US companies do save a lot by hiring people overseas in the end its all about diversity and a level of achievement that is attained because of this diversity. If the final objective is to keep all the money in the US than hiring all American workers would seem to be the best option but leaving out people from different backgrounds and cultures only limits innovation and hence US loses a lot more than it saves by keeping money in the US. I graduated from Purdue with a 3.6GPA but I dont have a job because im not a US citizen. My friends who are US citizens who dont even have a 3.0 GPA have well paid jobs. Every person(US citizen or not) should be rewarded purely on merit. Let us remember that this is America and it is founded on equality(not just for Americans). It is naive to treat(and maybe call) non-Us citizens as "Aliens". With globalization a certain trade-off must be reached between hiring US and non-US citizens to balance both innovation and protecting US borders. Did you know that hotmail was created by an Indian who later sold it to Microsoft. Before replying to this think of the greater good of humanity and not just Americans.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By bldckstark on 6/8/2007 12:32:42 PM , Rating: 2
Hiring H1B's in order to pay less for work done on American soil is immoral.
If someone is a "great mind" then pay them like one. Don't use them as slave labor.
Why do H1B's get paid less? That is the question that should be asked. Not how many there should be, or what section should be regulatd. Why do they get paid less? If we required all H1B visa holders to be paid the average salary of a person holding the same postion in a company, the H1B problem would probably disappear.

With the advent of the internet, it is not necessary for someone to be in America to do CS work.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By masher2 (blog) on 6/8/2007 12:44:08 PM , Rating: 1
Paying someone $51K/year fresh out of college is "slave labor"? You forget these H1-B recipients are getting close to double what a US-born graduate in liberal arts gets.

Seriously, the emotional histrionics in this thread are making me laugh.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By Clienthes on 6/8/2007 1:02:36 PM , Rating: 3
Masher, you keep quoting average starting salaries. It isn't really relevant, for a couple reasons:

A. Its an average. It varies by individual, by region, by degree, by ...yada yada you get the point. One of the many things it varies by is national origin.

B. A lot of these foreign workers are not going to be accounted for, because not all of them graduated from US universities, some of them had experience in the field prior to coming to the US, etc. Depending on the methodology used to calculate that figure, these folks might not be represented at all.

Anyway, aside from criticizing everyone complaining about outsourcing and immigrants, what do you actually think of the issue?

I personally think that people in the US demand far higher salaries than are warranted, and that people here are on average not as motivated to work hard as the average immigrant. However, instead of lifting caps on visas, the gov't has a responsibility to US citizens first, and it probably isn't in our best interests to lift the caps. Hopefully Americans will see what causes companies to look outside the borders for help and decide to make some changes. Or maybe they'll just keep whining, and watch whole companies ship out.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By masher2 (blog) on 6/8/2007 1:13:50 PM , Rating: 2
> "It isn't really relevant [because] A. Its an average..."

On the contrary, its relevant because its an average. For every salary $10K below the average, there's one $10K above it also. The average worker earns the average salary...that's inherent in the definition.

> " A lot of these foreign workers are not going to be accounted for..."

They're not accounted for in US College Grad starting salaries. So? That means the average non-immigrant in the CS field earns $51K straight out of college...more than nearly any other field under the sun, and almost double what some college graduates in other fields make. That's not enough?

Furthermore, immigrants ARE included in the salary surveys for existing workers. That rate now stands at $75K/year. Considering a third of those employees have less than a four-year degree, that figure seems more than high enough to me compared to other fields. Take out the supposedly lower salaries paid to foreign workers, and the average would be higher still.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By Clienthes on 6/8/2007 1:43:03 PM , Rating: 2
So if the argument is that foreign workers are being recruited because they'll work for less, but aren't included in the average salary figures (thus bring down the average), then that means that the average American grade makes the average salary, right? The average salary is high, so there must be a shortage of qualified US applicant, thus encouraging recruiting foreign workers. But that doesn't speak to the wages paid to the foreign workers, which is what the comment I replied to was referring to.

And again, depending on the methodology, they may or may not be included in the existing worker studies, I'm not familiar with the survey's methodology. Assuming that they are accounted for, it still doesn't make any meaningful comparison between the wages of immigrant workers and domestic workers. I don't want to hit the back button to verify, but I believe your comment was that 51k a year is hardly slave labor in response to a comment that inviting people over here to overwork and underpay them was not a good thing.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By masher2 (blog) on 6/8/2007 1:48:50 PM , Rating: 1
> "Assuming that they are accounted for, it still doesn't make any meaningful comparison between the wages of immigrant workers and domestic workers"

True. But my point was that, since US (non-immigrant) CS workers are still some of the highest paid people in the nation-- when compared to those of equivalent education levels in other fields-- they certainly don't seem to be being hurt by the H1-B program. And given the incredibly low level of unemployment in the field, they don't seem to be losing jobs to them either.

If your argument is that the US government should be concerned about US workers, then you don't CARE how much those immigrants are paid. You only want to ensure your citizens are paid well...and that they are. In spades.

> "I believe your comment was that 51k a year is hardly slave labor ..."

You're right, I should not have used a US college grad starting salary to support that particular point, as immigrants are not included in that figure. However, the figure they ARE included in is even higher, so I think the point remains sound.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By Clienthes on 6/8/2007 1:59:33 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
If your argument is that the US government should be concerned about US workers, then you don't CARE how much those immigrants are paid. You only want to ensure your citizens are paid well...and that they are. In spades.


Well sure, but that doesn't mean I don't feel for their plight :P

It goes more to the point that the system is being used and abused for a purpose that it was not designed for. We aren't recruiting the best, we're giving visas to warm bodies. Sort of a point against the whole idea of lifting the quotas.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By masher2 (blog) on 6/8/2007 2:09:51 PM , Rating: 2
> "We aren't recruiting the best, we're giving visas to warm bodies"

The H1-B program wasn't designed to recruit Albert Einsteins, but highly skilled technical workers, for positions that cannot be filled by US workers. Given the essentially zero unemployment in the field, that criteria is being satisfied. When unemployment is zero, you cannot hire a person for a position, without hiring them away for another.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By Clienthes on 6/8/2007 2:17:34 PM , Rating: 2
Good point. I guess I always thought the spirit of the law wasn't so much gap-filling within an industry as recruitment of extraordinary (or at least above average :) talent, maybe because of the relatively low number of visas available. Anyway, I stand corrected.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By TheGreek on 6/8/07, Rating: -1
RE: No great minds in the US?
By TheGreek on 6/15/07, Rating: 0
RE: No great minds in the US?
By fic2 on 6/11/2007 1:20:39 PM , Rating: 2
Considering that the same companies were whining the same song after the dot com bust and technical unemployment was 10-20% I don't really tend to believe them. Did the H1-B visas get shut off during this time? No. Did the cap go down immediately? No.

Before the dot com bust I was working for one of the largest tech employers in the country. One of the guys I worked with was an FPGA engineer. Probably one of the best. He was from France here on an H1-B visa. His salary was around $45k. When I found that out I told him he should be making at least $90k and probably closer to $120k and he should look around. He did and moved to a company that would actually pay him closer to the going rate.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By BMFPitt on 6/8/2007 1:46:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
On the contrary, its relevant because its an average. For every salary $10K below the average, there's one $10K above it also. The average worker earns the average salary...that's inherent in the definition.
Not really. Median salary would be far more relevant to the discussion, as a few very large ones will skew an average.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By masher2 (blog) on 6/8/2007 1:57:02 PM , Rating: 1
> "Median salary would be far more relevant to the discussion..."

That point is debatable, but in this particular case, the median doesn't differ substantially from the mean. For instance, using my figures for Application Developers in Austin TX, the low compensation was $72K/year, and the high was $100K/year. With a mean of $84K/year, that range pretty much ensures the median is within $5-6K of that.


By Master Kenobi (blog) on 6/8/2007 1:19:51 PM , Rating: 2
I will add in that without anything more than a G.E.D. When I got into the IT Field, I landed a job making 50k/yr right off the bat just based on some Certifications and being able to demonstrate years of mastry in the Troubleshooting and Infrastructure Engineering fields.

So, :)


RE: No great minds in the US?
By Obadiah on 6/11/2007 7:40:50 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Paying someone $51K/year fresh out of college is "slave labor"? You forget these H1-B recipients are getting close to double what a US-born graduate in liberal arts gets.


Masher2, are you some sort of commie? The fact that a liberal arts major makes less has no bearing at all on the issue. People should be paid what they are worth - what the market determines their value to be.

If there were a significant shortage of employee candidates in the domestic market, the average salary would trend up over time. Basic supply and demand at work.

However, over the past two or so decades there has been very little upward movement in average salaries in the field, barely keeping up with inflation.

Thus it seems quite clear that, despite numerous but ultimately meaningless anecdotes, there is no shortage of skilled people in the US already. When salaries start to climb at an excessive rate, then we will know that supply really is contstrained.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By BMFPitt on 6/8/2007 1:16:43 PM , Rating: 2
People get paid what they negotiate. There are people who do about the same job as me for less money, and there are people who do it for more. The constant here is we all agreed to be paid $X amount for our work.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By Clienthes on 6/8/2007 1:16:10 PM , Rating: 2
I can't believe someone modded that drivel up.

quote:
With globalization a certain trade-off must be reached between hiring US and non-US citizens to balance both innovation and protecting US borders...Before replying to this think of the greater good of humanity and not just Americans.


No trade-off necessary to balance those two items, because they aren't even the issue. Its about money and productivity. And the US government is supposed to take care of US citizens. Humanity, outside these borders, is a secondary concern (until all humans vote and pay taxes in the US).


RE: No great minds in the US?
By masher2 (blog) on 6/8/2007 1:29:20 PM , Rating: 1
> "the US government is supposed to take care of US citizens."

Exactly. And forcing US companies (owned primarily by US citzens) to offshore labor-- or worse, forcing them out of business by preventing them from competing with international firms-- is bad for US citizens.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By Clienthes on 6/8/2007 2:11:00 PM , Rating: 2
Yup. I companies really are doing all of this off-shore recruiting because there is a shortage of qualified people in the US, then the answer is simple. Hand little Johnny a slide-rule, and no supper until he finishes his homework. But I think that's considered borderline abusive these days.
Anyway, it isn't the gov't that will solve the problem, but they need to encourage corps not let it get worse.

On a brighter note for all the IT people, doesn't it keep IT salaries at an artificially high level? If there were enough people here to fill all the positions, there would be no need to go through the expensive and time consuming overseas recruiting process. So if you work in IT, you might want to take away Johnny's slide rule now.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By Frallan on 6/11/2007 6:11:58 AM , Rating: 2
In among loads of protectionistic crap I find the nuggets...

quote:
Hand little Johnny a slide-rule, and no supper until he finishes his homework. But I think that's considered borderline abusive these days.


That is just the medicine the doctor ordered... Now if this could be coupled to the freedom of mind and speach that the constitutional fathers envisioned the U.S of A could once again become a great country.

Masher and Cliientheses for Presidents...


RE: No great minds in the US?
By daniyarm on 6/8/2007 2:41:04 PM , Rating: 2
GPA doesn't mean SH*T and everybody knows it!!! I had a 2.7 GPA in Comp Eng because didn't bother with lame classes and worked 30 hrs/wk. I knew plenty of international students with 3.5+ GPA that didn't have to work and memorized everything in the book just to forget it after the final.

American companies need to protect its technological secrets and its business. Hiring a citizen pretty much ensures that you will not leave the company and country one day and sell company secrets.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By Clienthes on 6/8/2007 1:22:32 PM , Rating: 2
The world is a lot different now than it was before. Opening up our borders isn't going to take us back, its just going to play games with our economy. The issue is far more complex than "immigration and diversity are good." I think we all agree that carefully selecting 65,000 of the best minds from outside our borders is a good thing. Throwing the doors opening and saying "If you can write a shell script, come on down!" is quite another.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By TheGreek on 6/12/2007 2:49:37 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
I think we all agree that carefully selecting 65,000 of the best minds from outside our borders is a good thing.

And this would done by whom? The same management that selected all the stupid lazy Americans?

Yes the "carefully selected 65,000" will obviously be working for the lowest bidder. The economy is saved!


RE: No great minds in the US?
By add on 6/8/07, Rating: 0
RE: No great minds in the US?
By FITCamaro on 6/8/2007 10:07:16 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
America is out of qualified workers. As you know, America has a modest IQ average, so that means there aren't enough smart people.


There's a few million Americans doing their jobs just fine that disagree with you.

You're obviously not from the US and have a low opinion of our country. If you are from the US, leave. We don't want you here.

IQ is only potential. There are plenty of people worldwide with very high IQs that work shit jobs because they're too lazy to actually do anything. I personally have never gotten an IQ test because it means nothing. But I still went to college, got a good job, and make twice the average income here in the US at only the age of 24. So I'd say I'm doing pretty well regardless of whatever IQ score I might get.

And you don't speak volumes about your own IQ when you use a statement like "much more cheaper" and forget words like "the".


RE: No great minds in the US?
By Schadenfroh on 6/8/2007 10:59:46 AM , Rating: 2
I agree, people put too much focus on IQ, ACT and SAT scores (I am not saying this because mine are low, for they are quite respectable). They should also look at attendance (yes, it is important that they put forth the effort to show up everyday on time), grades (in relation to the difficulty of the subjects they are taking, one cannot go only on test day and get a good grade in Organic Chemistry 351, I studied my ass off and never missed a day for a B) and the ability to get the job done on time.

America has a large amount of people capable of being engineers and computer scientists, they either just do not have the ambition, have obligations to their family (such as supporting a wife / kids before having a college degree) or simply believe that they would be happier doing something else.

By the way, the person with the highest IQ that I have ever known (personally) is now dead from a drug overdose. ;)


RE: No great minds in the US?
By JoeBanana on 6/8/2007 10:32:18 AM , Rating: 2
I think the problem is at colleges and the media influence on kids. The programs at colleges have gotten easier especially private, big money ones. Of course you can study more than college dictates but then comes the media. Showing college parties and defining geeks and stuff... I just think that students should obtain more knowledge from colleges. I know there are some individuals..., but I think that in past students really studied harder...
I am not from US, but I have a friend who couldn't get past few exams here, but then he went to US on some big money school and finished it without any problem and he just said to me, exams are just easier there. But I don't think it's just US.
A lot of developed country's have the same problem.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By Behlal on 6/8/2007 1:48:10 PM , Rating: 2
I think you are reading from a pretty strange point of view then. The requirements on a H-1B visa is that the job can't be fulfilled by someone already in the US. The vast majority of H-1Bs are to fill shortages due to the lack of engineers in the US (yes, there are many US engineers, but many more jobs). The other purpose of H-1B visas is to bring over specialists, people with PhDs. By definition, a PhD requires invention (i.e. you have to have novelty to obtain a PhD), so that means specialists skills that virtually no one else has. If a company needs that specific skill, then they will obtain it from anywhere.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By TheGreek on 6/8/2007 3:22:08 PM , Rating: 1
There was also a wonderful theory by the politicians that created the 401K about what the program would accomplish. What it actually created was something else and unforseen.

You have a wonderful theory too.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By BMFPitt on 6/9/2007 12:09:42 AM , Rating: 2
It created an excellent vehicle for retirement savings by individuals for the most part would not have otherwise done so - or done so later in life. It amplifies savings over what would be accomplished with other means, and makes it easier to manage.

I've contributed about 7% of every dollar I've made over the last 4 years to mine, and with matching and growth my account value stands at about 350% of my contributions. Of that, less than 15% of it is in company stock (total of the 2 companies I've worked for) and selected voluntarily.

For anyone with even minimal investing knowledge, it is an excellent program. Fro anyone who isn't stupid, it is at least a good program.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By TheGreek on 6/12/2007 1:03:34 PM , Rating: 2
It was supposed to augment pensions, not replace them, that was the intent.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By BMFPitt on 6/13/2007 12:19:09 AM , Rating: 2
So you think pensions would have survived if not for the 401k? I had a choice between pension and 401k at my current job and I didn't have to think twice. I want to control my money, and not have to count on my company to:
1) exist in 50 years.
2) be chained to me for however long it takes to be vested.
3) care what happens to me in 50 years.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By TheGreek on 6/13/2007 9:25:33 AM , Rating: 1
My point was corporations have used 401Ks as an excuse to eliminate pensions. Did you not see that or was that something you chose to blow off?

I had a choice as well at my last job, take a lump sum or take the pension. The lump sum was so small I would have had to double the long term average return of stocks for 20+ years in order to come up with what they would pay me when I turned 65. It was a joke, so I let them keep the liability. It was different for you, that's great, I never addressed that, but you assumed I did. Would I prefer to control my money? Of course.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By BMFPitt on 6/13/2007 1:36:10 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
My point was corporations have used 401Ks as an excuse to eliminate pensions. Did you not see that or was that something you chose to blow off?
I didn't blow I off, I addressed it. As you said, companies used it as an excuse. What makes you think they would have otherwise kept them?
quote:
I had a choice as well at my last job, take a lump sum or take the pension. The lump sum was so small I would have had to double the long term average return of stocks for 20+ years in order to come up with what they would pay me when I turned 65.
And hopefully for you they'll still be around by then.
quote:
Would I prefer to control my money? Of course.
But in a 401k you DO control your money. If your company goes bankrupt 6 months from now, you won't take a hit beyond whatever company stock you own. If you leave your company before 10-20 years in most cases, you get nothing.

Pensions were built for a system that no longer exists, where you work 40 years for one company, then die by 70. Look at the auto industry and wonder how secure you'll feel if your company looks like that when you turn 65.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By TheGreek on 6/14/2007 4:36:56 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
I had a choice as well at my last job, take a lump sum or take the pension. The lump sum was so small I would have had to double the long term average return of stocks for 20+ years in order to come up with what they would pay me when I turned 65.

And hopefully for you they'll still be around by then.

If I die I wouldn't get to use the money no matter where it was. For my case I could not grow their puny lump fast enough, obviously if you have more years in you'd end up with a larger lump sum. At some point it's worthwhile and I too would take it. If I had major concerns about money left after I am dead I would own life insurance.

quote:
If your company goes bankrupt 6 months from now,

I would have been long gone, there are usually signs.

quote:
you won't take a hit beyond whatever company stock you own. If you leave your company before 10-20 years in most cases, you get nothing.

I left after 16 years, I will get a pension. I did lose the health benefits, but they have been widdled down to nothing anyways.

If you're controlling your own assets you need to be able to read the writing on the wall. Even then, with 401Ks many employees at Enron were locked into failing company stock anyway. Several places match 401K funds, but they hold them until you're vested. One place I worked at paid all matching funds in company stock that could not be sold until you either quit or turned 60.

quote:
Look at the auto industry and wonder how secure you'll feel if your company looks like that when you turn 65.

Far less likely for the companies I've worked for because they have followed the general trend of reducing costs. You do have a good point but they had a union, and they got the wage increases and benefits they wanted. Car makers responded when all raised their prices. With outside competition they can't just raise prices whenever they feel like it. So when they had it good they should have socked it away. They still don't contribute anything towards health benefits, I don't see how that can be maintained. It was unreasonable from day 1. For local civil service workers those guys are tiered, newer employees get fewer and fewer benefits.

And wait until the Chinese start importing cars, every current auto maker is going to cringe.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By masher2 (blog) on 6/13/2007 1:37:46 PM , Rating: 2
> "corporations have used 401Ks as an excuse to eliminate pensions."

Corporations do not need an 'excuse' to eliminate pensions. They are under no moral or legal obligation to provide for retirement. It's your own responsibility, not your employers.

Pensions became a common perk only because of government meddling in wage limits. Immediately after WW2, when inflation-combatting price controls forbid raising wages, employers had to look to other means of attracting quality employees. Many of them chose to offer pension plans...and others followed suit.

Today, some people have taken this temporary twist of history and interpreted it as a god-given right to a pension. Ludicrous really...but such is human nature.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By rnnh on 6/8/2007 7:15:03 PM , Rating: 2
Are liberal arts subjects actually easier, or just an easier choice to obtain a degree?

It's not necessarily the same thing.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By Reynod on 6/9/2007 10:31:28 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah it is well known that US trained graduates are well below par when compared to the standard of education and training in some other parts of the world.

Many consider US graduates comparable to those trained at approximately a year below.

So a BEng (4 year engineer)graduate from the US is roughly the same as a BTech (3 yr trained)graduate elsewhere.

Essentially the public high school system in the US is poor ... so the general University levels are much lower (to compensate).

These Visas are an attempt to bring in superior standard graduates to bolster what is essientially a rather mediocre graduate system.

The US doesn't invest enough in decent education (other than the rich) and is paying the price.

It is also arguable that those trained overseas probably have a stronger work ethic.

I love America though ... the land of the free ... providing you own everything.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By Frallan on 6/11/2007 5:27:16 AM , Rating: 2
Ahh B$ M8!!!

Im sorry to say that the American workforce is generally a overpaid, underqualified and lazy bunch. Acctually most westerners are to a smaller or greater degree. But closing the border to ppl just doesnt help - it is called protectionism and there are on shortterm benefits ti that policy and its paid with longterm degradation in national competivness. Now I happen tio be a Swede who has lived in the US and in Germany so there is no Westerner bashing here that doesn't include myself.

What is needed is a new freedom of goods, money and workforce where things are produced where most benmeficial and where ppl are allowed to work where they want. That is the only way we can even start to protect our way of living.


By Master Kenobi (blog) on 6/11/2007 8:50:40 AM , Rating: 2
Liberal mindset mate. Europe is on a downward trend thanks to this level of thinking. Remember, not everyone gets to be an astronaut when they grow up, some have to flip my burgers at McDonalds.

Regardless, people can only do what they want, if they work towards that goal and put forth a lot of effort to get there. Otherwise too bad.


RE: No great minds in the US?
By TheGreek on 6/12/2007 2:27:46 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
it is called protectionism

The US was the path to a better future for foreigners because it treated everyone fairly. Nobody asked for or got special treatment. H1B's don't do that, there's no fair play.

Sorry if ethics are interfering with the alledged economic freedom again.

What would happen if corporations were required by law to pay H1Bs at least the going rate in their area?


RE: No great minds in the US?
By sxr7171 on 6/11/2007 11:14:38 PM , Rating: 2
No it just means that they'd rather pull the brightest out of potentially 6 billion people as opposed to limiting themselves to a set of 280 million people.


Real Word...
By knipfty on 6/8/2007 10:04:49 AM , Rating: 3
Most of you complain about companies trying to save money on labor. (often their largest expense) If they can hire someone to do it for less, a company will do it almost every time. Nothing evil, just plain economics.

The visa cap is a bad idea. If the large corporations in the article cannot hire the talent they want at a price they want in the U.S., they will set up shop elsewhere in the world to get that talent. Plain and simple.

Capital (money) will flow to where it will be treated best. Put up more rules and regulations, and it will go elsewhere.

I for one would rather have these companies bring that talent here to the U.S. to live, work, and spend, rather then send it oversees.




RE: Real Word...
By frobizzle on 6/8/2007 11:22:20 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I for one would rather have these companies bring that talent here to the U.S. to live, work, and spend, rather then send it oversees.

Your rationale here is flawed.
In general, they spend very little here, enough to cover living expenses. The rest gets sent back to their homeland.


RE: Real Word...
By knipfty on 6/8/2007 11:26:45 AM , Rating: 2
That's better than not spending anything here at all. I believe you also underestimate how many apply for green cards and citizenship. They buy houses and cars, and TV's, etc. They also pay taxes and tend to be paid of the national average.

No doubt some of $ is sent back home. I just don't believe it to be a large amount. It tends to be a bigger issue with illegal aliens who pay no taxes and are here to send money home only.


RE: Real Word...
By masher2 (blog) on 6/8/2007 11:28:48 AM , Rating: 3
This is a stereotypically racist picture. Some IT immigrants send money overseas and eventually plan to return, but the majority of them desperately are trying to gain permanent residency status. The IT department that supports my lab alone employs a couple dozen such immigrants. I don't know of any that send the bulk of their salary home.

Most of them do what few Americans are wise enough to do...they save a huge percentage of their salary. Something that is incredibly beneficial to our economy. In fact, one of them just bought a house here. With cash. How many native-born Americans manage that trick?


RE: Real Word...
By Funksultan on 6/8/2007 12:16:44 PM , Rating: 1
I wouldn't go as far as to call it "stereotypically racist". It's indicitive of a culture, and one that many Americans couldn't begin to grasp.

As far as your other statement..

quote:
...they save a huge percentage of their salary. Something that is incredibly beneficial to our economy.


I can only guess you mistakenly forgot a "n't" next to the word "is". *grin* Saving money (or sending it elsewhere) is poison to an economy. A healthy country prays that every dollar earned, is spent, and spent domestically. Dollars siphoned from a foriegn GNP is bonus.

In my years of consulting, I've seen lots of outsourced IT people move to the states, but that's a LONG process. Normally, before that happens, the lion's share of the income is sent home (happens with mexican laborers in Cali/Texas to a HUGE extent as well).

It's a very wide picture. If situations were reversed... and you were paid $500k to work in a foriegn country, and your family were back home, how easy would it be to spend $300 on an average meal? Not easy. You'd constantly be thinking about how much you (or family) could do with that money back home.


RE: Real Word...
By masher2 (blog) on 6/8/2007 12:24:21 PM , Rating: 1
> "Saving money (or sending it elsewhere) is poison to an economy..."

On the contrary, a low personal savings rate is anathema to the economy, and a large amount of economic research is expended to find ways to increase personal savings. Savings are capital, and without capital, capitalism cannot function.

The US personal savings rate has been declining for years...so much in fact that recently its become negative. In other words, the average american now spends more than they make.

Here's a link to a speech made by the Vice Chairman of the Federal Reserve on why personal savings are critical economically. His remarks made a few years ago when the rate was higher than it now stands, are even more relevant today.

http://www.federalreserve.gov/BoardDocs/speeches/2...


RE: Real Word...
By knipfty on 6/8/2007 12:53:10 PM , Rating: 2
The savings rate unfortunately is outdated. What really counts is wealth. And on that score people in this country are doing quite well.

Not included in the "Savings Rate":
- Stocks and Bonds
- Mutual Funds
- Home Ownership
- 401k's and IRA's (unless you have the money in a savings account or CD)

It's even worse. Let's say you own a stock that pays a good dividend. The dividend is not counted as income, but the tax you pay on it goes into your expenses.

The savings rate looks at your income, subtracts expenses (including taxes), and what is left is the savings rate. The money going into your pre-tax 401k doesn't show up as income!

The savings rate was created at a time before all these different types of savings were created. People are spending more because they feel the wealth effect (stock market rising at t healthy clip since 2003, home prices soring, and a low unemployment rate). These are all good things. Don't confuse net worth with the savings rate.


RE: Real Word...
By masher2 (blog) on 6/8/2007 1:05:22 PM , Rating: 2
> "The savings rate was created at a time before all these different types of savings were created."

The PSR was created as a US DOC statistic in 1959. Do you really think we didn't have stocks, bonds, or home ownership then?

And while you are correct that its an imperfect metric (as are all economic metrics), the fact remains that personal savings are a good thing economically, not a bad thing. When you put money in the bank or invest it in some other way, you help the economy. A certain level of personal savings is essential to economic health.


RE: Real Word...
By BMFPitt on 6/8/2007 1:12:08 PM , Rating: 2
Money changing hands as much as possible is good for the economy. Savings is good for the people saving. Do any jobs get created by you putting $10k under your mattress?


RE: Real Word...
By masher2 (blog) on 6/8/2007 1:27:17 PM , Rating: 2
> "Do any jobs get created by you putting $10k under your mattress? "

You don't save money these days by putting it under a mattress. You put in the bank instead, where the bank then loans it to someone else, to finance new businesses, or the purchase of new homes or other capital expenditures.

You do understand, don't you, that banks are for-profit entities? They don't make their money off all their free checking accounts. They make it by lending out the funds deposited with them.


RE: Real Word...
By Clienthes on 6/8/2007 1:53:21 PM , Rating: 2
I think the point he that last poster was not so eloquently trying to make is that saving != investing.

Putting money into an interest bearing account is investing, not just saving.

Saving only would be like putting money in a mattress. No good to anyone. Of course, non-interest bearing accounts help banks too, as you mention, but are really just plain silly, given alternatives.

Define your terms, boys, and we won't have these issues :P


RE: Real Word...
By masher2 (blog) on 6/8/2007 2:06:06 PM , Rating: 2
> "I think the point he that last poster was not so eloquently trying to make is that saving != investing."

A point on which I agreed...but he was using it to support the falsehold that personal savings were somehow bad for the economy.

> "Putting money into an interest bearing account is investing, not just saving"

The personal savings rate is calculated by subtracting personal consumption expenditures from personal income. Whatever left over is "savings", and includes anything put in a bank, or invested in other means. Technically it would include money "stuck in a mattress" as well...but thats not exactly a common practice in the US. 99.99% of all personal savings are immediately useable for capital investment, even if by no more than being placed in a non-interest bearing checking account.

The terms are well defined...even if some people in the thread may not know the definitions. :p


RE: Real Word...
By BMFPitt on 6/8/2007 1:54:28 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You don't save money these days by putting it under a mattress. You put in the bank instead, where the bank then loans it to someone else, to finance new businesses, or the purchase of new homes or other capital expenditures.
Personal saving doesn't accomplish this, spending does. Banks don't loan out 100% of their assets, so this indirect method means less money circulating. More people putting money into the bank means less spending by businesses.


RE: Real Word...
By masher2 (blog) on 6/8/2007 2:15:23 PM , Rating: 3
> "Personal saving doesn't accomplish this"

I don't know how I can explain this any clearer. The personal savings rate is a well-defined metric, and one the US government (and pretty much every economist in the world) considers a highly valuable one.

Saving money doesn't hurt the economy. It helps it. A populace of people who instantly dumps every penny on consumer goods is only beneficial in the short term. Long-term, capital is required for major investments, financing new businesses and infrastructure. That only happens when there is money to lend.


RE: Real Word...
By BMFPitt on 6/9/2007 12:36:02 AM , Rating: 2
And I have consistently used "saving" to describe any behavior that takes money out of circulation - using the most extreme example. You have tried to apply a definition that I don't agree with to my argument, knowing that it isn't what I was talking about.


RE: Real Word...
By barclay on 6/8/2007 2:17:10 PM , Rating: 2
Your argument stems from a misunderstanding of Keynesian economics (which sadly so many people share). Wealth is not created by greater consumption. Investment creates wealth. Higher consumption is typically only an indication of greater wealth.

To see this idea more clearly, go back to the simpliest of economic models -- "Robinson Crusoe" one man on an island. He does not become more wealthy simply by eating more bananas and burning more trees as firewood. He becomes more wealthy by building a house, making a fishing net, stock piling wood, etc. This is investment because instead of consuming all his current labor, he is actually investing it to make his life better in the long term. If you start adding more people into the system, you will see that the fundamental principle does not change.


RE: Real Word...
By aos007 on 6/8/2007 1:59:52 PM , Rating: 2
If you come from a 3rd world country, it is quite possible that you WILL save it by putting it under the mattress. Because many of those people would have no confidence in the banking system (having been burned by it before). I am talking from experience. And a money saved under the mattress does NOT help economy in any way, I imagine.

Of course, after spending some time in the West they will probably start leaving it in the bank eventually so this isn't a big deal. But the original poster is correct.

Of course, these days leaving the money in the bank "for saving" without at least investing it in government bonds is not a good use of the money (from the point of its owner). A lot of people - not just immigrants - have a mental block over not having their savings "in cash".


RE: Real Word...
By masher2 (blog) on 6/8/2007 2:18:46 PM , Rating: 2
> "If you come from a 3rd world country, it is quite possible that you WILL save it by putting it under the mattress..."

Are you seriously suggesting we have hundreds of thousands of skilled IT workers here in the US, making an average of $75K a year, who cash their checks every month and then put that money under their mattresses?

Ooooo-kay. Let's move on.


RE: Real Word...
By aos007 on 6/8/2007 2:33:37 PM , Rating: 2
You obviously haven't spent as much time abroad as you claim, if you believe that "skilled worker" always rises above the culture that bred him. And neither have you read my post. I am only saying that there well may be SOME people that do that.


RE: Real Word...
By masher2 (blog) on 6/8/2007 2:52:35 PM , Rating: 3
> "You obviously haven't spent as much time abroad as you claim, if you believe that "skilled worker" always rises above the culture that bred him."

If you seriously believe the "culture" of a high-caste, well-educated citizen of India-- whether they're here in the US or still in their native country-- is to shove all their earning under the mattress, then you're living a stereotype. There are thousands of banks of India, serving hundreds of millions of customers.

> "I am only saying that there well may be SOME people that do that. "

There may be. There may be some Americans who do it also. What's your point? In either case, the numbers aren't enough to seriously affect the results.


RE: Real Word...
By aos007 on 6/8/2007 4:59:26 PM , Rating: 2
I am talking about East European countries that went through hyperinflation 10 years ago. I just came back from vacation back home a few days ago and I can tell you from talking with people and reading papers that a lot of people are still very distrustful of banks. They do not want to take loans and - yes - some even won't put or keep ANY money in a bank; they will withdraw their entire salary immediately after payday and keep it "safe" themselves.

Sure, it's changing but there are still people that do that. And many people doing this are not just uneducated masses, but people with degrees as well. My point is that they do exist. It may not affect your statistics and averages, but it doesn't make it any less real.


RE: Real Word...
By subhajit on 6/8/2007 3:19:02 PM , Rating: 2
I am from one of those "3rd world countries" (India) and I can tell you that the banking system here is as robust and safe as anywhere in the world. I think the problem with you snob westerners is that you tend to put every country outside your known territory (Europe and US) in the same category. You tend to forget that a country like India has a strong constitution and democratic system. Also, we are trying to pull ourselves together as a nation after being under different foreign regimes for thousands of years. Just think about US after its independence.


RE: Real Word...
By knipfty on 6/8/2007 2:01:19 PM , Rating: 2


I'm not saying that savings is bad. I save lots of money. I am saving cash to buy a two cars in a few years. I have an emergency fund that has 6 months of expenses. So I like savings. I just don't think that the savings rate is indicative of success. It's wealth that matters.

quote:
The PSR was created as a US DOC statistic in 1959. Do you really think we didn't have stocks, bonds, or home ownership then?


Yes. There were stocks and bonds (and a handful of mutual funds) in 1959. A very small segment of the US population invested in those instruments back then. Even home ownership was a much lower level then.

I have maybe 10% of my assets in a bank. The rest is either in my house or invested. The savings rate does not reflect it.


RE: Real Word...
By stromgald on 6/8/2007 12:27:01 PM , Rating: 2
I agree with Masher. While there are many that send some money back home to the country they came from, the majority of them are also frantically working at getting their families over here. Nobody likes to be away from family, especially if they're from cultures where family is much more valued that it is in this country.

Generally, the people I know who have immigrated are doing quite well, saving up for homes, cars, or to bring their parents or equally skilled brother/sister over to the US.


Once again the US is going to be weakened
By PAPutzback on 6/8/2007 10:06:59 AM , Rating: 2
Just like we have to lessen our dependence on foreign oil we need to do the same with our labor force. Some people say ther eason for companies to go overseas is for cheaper labor. Yet their CFO's are making a much larger margin than the contractors and then the product is priced to cover all of these over paid people. Then the products hit the market and people need to ask for more money to afford the overpriced stuff. Inflation sucks but without salary and profit caps America is going to screw itself. The rich will get richer off of the cheap labor and products from other countries while we outsource the middle class then democracy will rear its ugly head and fail.




RE: Once again the US is going to be weakened
By FITCamaro on 6/8/2007 10:19:56 AM , Rating: 3
Well said.

But the problem is that salary caps and profit caps go against the idea of democracy. I do think we need to tax companies who try to outsource labor though. And when they want to bring them in from overseas, they will have to end up paying more for that employee instead of less. That way for the truly brilliant minds, companies can get them but will pay for it. But for the regular engineer that they want to bring in, they're better off hiring an American.

I worked with people too who were from overseas. They were brilliant and great to work with. But I don't want to be working at Best Buy in 30 years because companies have begged and pleaded every job but the defense industry out of American workers so they can save a million bucks a year while their CEO makes $20 million a year. We should have other options. Otherwise the only way we're going to keep American engineers employed is to stay at war with somebody.

Companies need to start trimming the fat where its due. Cut it from your employees who already have $100 million in the bank from years of being overpaid. Stop giving the high ups multi-million dollar bonuses after they slash hundreds or thousands of jobs to "restructure your business model in order to provide better customer service".


By masher2 (blog) on 6/8/2007 11:21:35 AM , Rating: 3
> "I do think we need to tax companies who try to outsource labor though"

You're not seeing the big picture. If you make labor expensive, a company will try to buy it elsewhere. If you tax companies who do that, they'll either move overseas themselves, or they're fail to compete with other companies already overseas, and go out of business. So now you not only have the workers overseas, but the corporations themselves...paying taxes to some other nation.

Protectionism never works in the long run. Its popular politically, but economic suicide.


RE: Once again the US is going to be weakened
By knipfty on 6/8/2007 11:14:08 AM , Rating: 2
Where to begin...

Why do you care what A CEO or anyone else gets paid for the work they do? Do you own stock in their companies? Only the shareholders should care since it affects their profits (they are the owners). Who decides what the cap should be?

Profit caps? There are no limits on what can be charged for a product. If you don't like the price, go elsewhere. Simple. Besides, who gets to decide the profit you or anyone else gets to make?

Inflation? What inflation? In the past year May's inflation rate was up < 2%.

Here is a prescription for making the job market and your pocket book better:
- Privatize social insecurity. Allowing you to manage your investments is the best way to insure your prosperity. Everyone in the U.S.A would retire millionaires. That money could be passed on to their children and grandchildren!
- Eliminate all corporate income taxes. The government is just taxing you the consumer indirectly. Since that has to be figured into the cost of the products and services a corporation provides.
- Institute a flat tax. Nothing would give people more incentive to work and produce than knowing that their money would not be grossly over taxed by a government run by incompetent politicians.


RE: Once again the US is going to be weakened
By BMFPitt on 6/8/2007 12:23:21 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Privatize social insecurity. Allowing you to manage your investments is the best way to insure your prosperity. Everyone in the U.S.A would retire millionaires. That money could be passed on to their children and grandchildren!
This is an incredibly stupid idea, and most people understand that. Privatizing social security removes its entire purpose - that is is guaranteed. Anyone who has the sense to properly manage their own investments already does so in their 401ks and IRAs. The rest pay 20% interest on their maxed out credit cards and go grocery shopping at 7-11.

quote:
Eliminate all corporate income taxes. The government is just taxing you the consumer indirectly. Since that has to be figured into the cost of the products and services a corporation provides.
And the only way to make up for it is to tax the consumer directly. Of course that also eliminates many tax-related incentives for corporations to do things that benefit society.

quote:
Institute a flat tax. Nothing would give people more incentive to work and produce than knowing that their money would not be grossly over taxed by a government run by incompetent politicians.
Yeah, because we all know a ton of people who decide not to make a high salary because of progressive taxation.


RE: Once again the US is going to be weakened
By knipfty on 6/8/2007 12:39:57 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
This is an incredibly stupid idea, and most people understand that. Privatizing social security removes its entire purpose - that is is guaranteed.


What guarantee? To be taxed without end? To accept below poverty monthly payments when you could live better in retirement? To not create wealth? Yeah I like it that we are all in it together, but poor because of it. It just keeps the poor poor. As you said those who can afford to save additionally in 401k and IRA's.

quote:
And the only way to make up for it is to tax the consumer directly. Of course that also eliminates many tax-related incentives for corporations to do things that benefit society.


People and corporations would continue to do things that benefit society regardless of the tax code. What a dim view of our society you have. "Unless you hold a gun to their heads in the form of a punishing tax code, they won't do anything that is helpful". You are being taxed, you just prefer not to see it. I would like to see it.

quote:
Yeah, because we all know a ton of people who decide not to make a high salary because of progressive taxation.


It's not progressive, but punitive. You are taxing people because they are successful. The more successful, the more it's punitive.


RE: Once again the US is going to be weakened
By BMFPitt on 6/8/2007 1:41:55 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
What guarantee? To be taxed without end? To accept below poverty monthly payments when you could live better in retirement? To not create wealth? Yeah I like it that we are all in it together, but poor because of it. It just keeps the poor poor. As you said those who can afford to save additionally in 401k and IRA's.
Privitization is equivalent to abolishment for all practical purposes. If you are going to abolish it, you must either screw over those who have paid into it their whole lives, or those who must pay for the previous generation and get no benefit (which I am fully confident will happen before I ever see a cent.)

I'd rather live in a society where people at least get that below-poverty payment and stay off the streets, not begging for change on my commute to work. If I wanted to live in such a place, there are plenty of third world countries I could move to with far fewer taxes.

quote:
People and corporations would continue to do things that benefit society regardless of the tax code. What a dim view of our society you have. "Unless you hold a gun to their heads in the form of a punishing tax code, they won't do anything that is helpful". You are being taxed, you just prefer not to see it. I would like to see it.
I don't think you actually believe that personal - or especially corporate - philanthropy wouldn't have a sharp decline if not for the tax benefits, so I won't even address that. Let's even pretend that such a system wouldn't be exploited even more than it is now with "self-employed" people making absurd write-offs. Passive taxation we don't see has always proven more effective. Would the government be able to function if people had to cut a check every April 15 rather than having the money taken out directly?

quote:
It's not progressive, but punitive. You are taxing people because they are successful. The more successful, the more it's punitive.
I'll ignore your (real or not) non-understanding of the terminology. I am near hitting the next tax bracket. It does not strike fear into my heart that I will be "punished" by paying an extra 2% on a tiny fraction of my income.


RE: Once again the US is going to be weakened
By knipfty on 6/8/2007 2:26:34 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Privitization is equivalent to abolishment for all practical purposes. If you are going to abolish it, you must either screw over those who have paid into it their whole lives, or those who must pay for the previous generation and get no benefit (which I am fully confident will happen before I ever see a cent.)


There needs to be a transitional plan put in place. You cannot just turn it over. There is a social contract involved. Besides there is something like one to two trillion in the social security trust fund at this point. That money could be used to cover the transition costs.

quote:
I'd rather live in a society where people at least get that below-poverty payment and stay off the streets, not begging for change on my commute to work. If I wanted to live in such a place, there are plenty of third world countries I could move to with far fewer taxes.


I am not saying don't save for retirement. Requiring workers to save in a Roth IRA type account and putting 15% their earnings into the account (1/2 from employee and 1/2 from employer) would keep everyone off the streets in retirement. A person making 5.50 an hour and working 40 hours a week for 50 years would retire a millionaire. Note that this person never got a raise! And this person never worked over time! I know of no one who could work 50 years and not get a raise. I know of no one making minimum wage and only working 40 hours. The point is we all could do so much better.

quote:
don't think you actually believe that personal - or especially corporate - philanthropy wouldn't have a sharp decline if not for the tax benefits, so I won't even address that.


You should address it. You think that people only give to get a tax break! Let's see I'll donate $10,000 only because the federal government will give me back $2,000. That's laughable. People and corporations will continue to give (albeit for different reasons).

quote:
Let's even pretend that such a system wouldn't be exploited even more than it is now with "self-employed" people making absurd write-offs. Passive taxation we don't see has always proven more effective. Would the government be able to function if people had to cut a check every April 15 rather than having the money taken out directly?


The people you describe above are the only people who really understand how much in taxes they pay. The rest of the public don't look at their tax bill. They look only how much they owe or get back by April 15th. They have no clue, because they have been conditioned by the IRS for decades. The self-employed and small business owners are the ones who budget for this and pay quarterly and fully understand the amount of taxes they are paying.


RE: Once again the US is going to be weakened
By BMFPitt on 6/9/2007 12:59:26 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
There needs to be a transitional plan put in place. You cannot just turn it over. There is a social contract involved. Besides there is something like one to two trillion in the social security trust fund at this point. That money could be used to cover the transition costs.
$2 trillion in IOUs. Future taxes will be paying for it one way or another.

quote:
I am not saying don't save for retirement. Requiring workers to save in a Roth IRA type account and putting 15% their earnings into the account (1/2 from employee and 1/2 from employer) would keep everyone off the streets in retirement ... The point is we all could do so much better.
My point is that those of us who can do better will anyway. I don't trust the majority of Americans to take even the simples system that involves choices and not make the wrong ones.

quote:
You should address it. You think that people only give to get a tax break! Let's see I'll donate $10,000 only because the federal government will give me back $2,000. That's laughable. People and corporations will continue to give (albeit for different reasons).
Since we're talking about businesses, it's more like "I'll spend $10k to install some safety device at my factory, and I'll get $5k back on my taxes." Personally it is easier to give up $80 to know that $100 is going to some charitable fund.

quote:
The people you describe above are the only people who really understand how much in taxes they pay. The rest of the public don't look at their tax bill. They look only how much they owe or get back by April 15th. They have no clue, because they have been conditioned by the IRS for decades. The self-employed and small business owners are the ones who budget for this and pay quarterly and fully understand the amount of taxes they are paying.
And my point is that it's better that way.


RE: Once again the US is going to be weakened
By Ringold on 6/10/2007 12:35:31 AM , Rating: 2
I'm sorry BMFPitt but you're just not up on your information.

Fact: Every tax cut (at least that I'm aware of over the past century) has seen a corresponding significant increase in charitable donations. Every tax increase has the opposite affect. Countries with lower marginal tax rates almost always have higher levels of charitable contributions than those with high marginal tax rates. If increasing philanthropy is your goal then the fastest proven way is a tax reduction.

Fact: A privatized social security system would only have people hang on to their money versus allowing the government to hold on to it and later return the money with vastly below-market rates of return. For the ignorant masses a default program could exist such that all required contributions automatically are placed in a US Government bond fund, which would provide a higher rate of return than social security does over a workers lifetime, and be backed by the full faith of the government (The US government has never defaulted on a bond). Those 20%, as you say, who are willing and able to take active management would be able to do so and could reap better returns. There are many financial calculators around the web that well tell you precisely this.


By BMFPitt on 6/10/2007 10:50:29 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
If increasing philanthropy is your goal then the fastest proven way is a tax reduction...
It's not. It was once sentence at the end of a comment and that was directed at businesses. Why are you so obsessed with this?

quote:
For the ignorant masses a default program could exist such that all required contributions automatically are placed in a US Government bond fund, which would provide a higher rate of return than social security does over a workers lifetime
Either way taxes are still paying for the interest. And I have no problem with the SSA being able to invest in any type of government security it wishes.

quote:
Those 20%, as you say, who are willing and able to take active management would be able to do so and could reap better returns.
I said 20% were competent to manage it themselves. I'm sure a much larger number would find a way to screw it up. And what happens when the money runs out? Social security payments never stop. If someone dies at 64.9, their money will pay someone living to 100, or someone who's disabled. How does a privatized system deal with such things, more taxes?


RE: Once again the US is going to be weakened
By knipfty on 6/11/2007 2:31:50 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
$2 trillion in IOUs. Future taxes will be paying for it one way or another.


And you continue to trust the US Government with your money? They continue to spend every dollar they take and then some. Even when Bill Clinton managed to show a surplus at the end of his second term, it was because of of surplus social security receipts. So as far as I am concerned that same government can cut other programs to find the money they rightly owe.

quote:
My point is that those of us who can do better will anyway. I don't trust the majority of Americans to take even the simples system that involves choices and not make the wrong ones.


You can create recommended models for individuals to follow. By default, they can invest in 100% US Treasury Notes and have a higher rate of return (double in fact) then the current system provides.

Other people can invest in stock mutual funds. In no way would I let the public invest in single stocks or commodities.

It looks like you expect the Government to take care of you. I will take of me and my family. Just leave me alone.


By TheGreek on 6/12/2007 3:14:54 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Just leave me alone.

Well the population here is like 300 million.

Perhaps you should be looking for an island?


RE: Once again the US is going to be weakened
By barclay on 6/8/2007 2:56:30 PM , Rating: 2
> "Anyone who has the sense to properly manage their own investments already does so in their 401ks and IRAs. The rest pay 20% interest on their maxed out credit cards and go grocery shopping at 7-11."

> "I'd rather live in a society where people at least get that below-poverty payment and stay off the streets, not begging for change on my commute to work."

So you want the rest of us responsible individuals to subsidize their poor spending habits?

> "Would the government be able to function if people had to cut a check every April 15 rather than having the money taken out directly?"

Where did he say anything about changing the actual collection method? His post was about how individuals and companies would continue to support community projects & charities in the absence of tax breaks. This is definitely true. Even if you rule out all altruistic motives (which is definitely a mistake), companies will still donate to charities for good PR and advertising.

Also, I would not be so quick to laud all the great things that tax incentives produce. More often than not, they produce an over investment in that particular area. A good example of this is employer provided healthcare. Due to the government's decision during WWII to not tax employer provided healthcare benefits (a tax break estimated to be about $100 billion annually), we now have an employment based system that not only reduces labor mobility but also tends to encourage overconsumption of healthcare goods.


By BMFPitt on 6/9/2007 1:10:35 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
So you want the rest of us responsible individuals to subsidize their poor spending habits?
No, I want to fore them to invest in super-safe government backed securities at the point of a gun so we don't have to pay for them later on.

quote:
Where did he say anything about changing the actual collection method?
He was arguing a direct tax was better than an indirect tax. I likened that to making people pay a bill, rather than having it deducted for them.

quote:
Also, I would not be so quick to laud all the great things that tax incentives produce. More often than not, they produce an over investment in that particular area. A good example of this is employer provided healthcare. Due to the government's decision during WWII to not tax employer provided healthcare benefits (a tax break estimated to be about $100 billion annually), we now have an employment based system that not only reduces labor mobility but also tends to encourage overconsumption of healthcare goods.
The problem isn't that there are tax breaks, the problem is that they only apply to companies. There was a plan floated a few months back to take this same tax break and transfer it from companies to individuals, which is where it always should have been. If you want to complain about tax breaks, target the billions wasted on pork for specific companies or industries that serve no public good. But I guess tax breaks are better than subsidies in a psychological sense.


RE: Once again the US is going to be weakened
By masher2 (blog) on 6/8/2007 12:52:54 PM , Rating: 1
> "Yeah, because we all know a ton of people who decide not to make a high salary because of progressive taxation"

Actually, I know several people who decline to do the extra work needed to raise their salary further, as the IRS's AMT bracket rakes them so severely, the little extra money just isn't worth it to them.


RE: Once again the US is going to be weakened
By BMFPitt on 6/8/2007 1:42:08 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Actually, I know several people who decline to do the extra work needed to raise their salary further, as the IRS's AMT bracket rakes them so severely, the little extra money just isn't worth it to them.
The AMT is a parallel tax system that everyone in the country agrees is broken. It really has no place is a comparison between flat and progressive tax.


RE: Once again the US is going to be weakened
By Ringold on 6/10/2007 12:41:41 AM , Rating: 3
It's related. I believe it was last year a study was attempted comparing the work/leisure incentives workers face under tax regimes. The flat tax icentive was extremely easy to calculate, and boils down to this: Work and grow.

The progressive tax system though? They used a super-computer (didn't say which, but it was one at a university) to try to model the incentives a workers faces under our tax code here and, in strange language for a staid economic publication, they were "Bizarre". In other words, a couple of the better educated PhD economists in the world, with the aid of a supercomputer, couldn't successfully model the icentives provided by our corrupted progressive tax structure, so it's pretty clear that the average joe is just winging it through his working career making money and not understanding all the decisions he faces.

Now, I'll admit that the best way to achieve a sort of social optimality is with a progressive tax system. The only problem is that it requires benevolent government which works in the best interests of the people. If you find a government like this, however, please let me know so I can move there.


RE: Once again the US is going to be weakened
By BMFPitt on 6/10/2007 11:00:42 AM , Rating: 2
Did you respond to the wrong branch of this thread? None of this post had anything to do with the AMT.

A supercomputer? I can do it with 10 cells in a spreadsheet. 25 if you want do see a bunch of extra information.

I'll do it here in text.

10% on the income between $0 and $7,825
15% on the income between $7,825 and $31,850
25% on the income between $31,850 and $64,250
28% on the income between $64,250 and $97,925
33% on the income between $97,925 and $174,850
35% on the income over $174,850

What is so complicated about it? Make more money, pay more taxes, have more take-home pay. Under no circumstance will anyone not benefit by making more money.

quote:
Now, I'll admit that the best way to achieve a sort of social optimality is with a progressive tax system. The only problem is that it requires benevolent government which works in the best interests of the people. If you find a government like this, however, please let me know so I can move there.
Wow, you really think the government will case to be corrupt with a flat tax? I guess you can say it will be more transparent that they are screwing us, but it's not like they even attempt to hide it these days.


RE: Once again the US is going to be weakened
By masher2 (blog) on 6/10/2007 11:48:06 AM , Rating: 2
> "What is so complicated about it?"

You're only listing federal taxes. Not state and local taxes, plus ones such as property taxes, sales taxes, excise taxes, etc.

At the higher income brackets, you're paying nearly 2/3 of your income in taxes in some areas. While you are correct in that it means you can still make a little extra money by raising your income...such a tax burden means its not worth it to many people.


By BMFPitt on 6/10/2007 12:20:39 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You're only listing federal taxes. Not state and local taxes, plus ones such as property taxes, sales taxes, excise taxes, etc.
So you're saying all of these go away under a flat tax system? I didn't know that sales tax changed based on your income, must be interesting to go to the store in the nonexistent state you live in.
quote:
At the higher income brackets, you're paying nearly 2/3 of your income in taxes in some areas. While you are correct in that it means you can still make a little extra money by raising your income...such a tax burden means its not worth it to many people.
So give me an example of this. I guarantee it begins with "So look how much property tax they have to pay on their $10 million house." When income is the only differentiating factor, the difference is minimal. And even so, I have never in my life met someone who decided against a higher income because of taxes, and I know a good number of people in that 33% bracket.


By TheGreek on 6/12/2007 11:30:02 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
At the higher income brackets, you're paying nearly 2/3 of your income in taxes in some areas. While you are correct in that it means you can still make a little extra money by raising your income...such a tax burden means its not worth it to many people.

Name a current movie star who has stated they are not making another movie because the taxes they pay are too high.

How far would I get making a statement without backing it up? Answer, not as far as MAsher.


All about the dollars...
By Funksultan on 6/8/2007 9:36:39 AM , Rating: 3
For the bulk of the IT contracting community, it's all about the dollars. The bottom line is, an American programming contractor does a job at say, $90/hour. Instead, a company can use one of the Indian contracting services, where the visas are bought in bulk, and supplied by the contracting company.

The American business can then pay $60 an hour for the same service (usually minus a couple minor language and/or cultural barriers) while the contracting company pays the actual employee $30/hour.

The american company saves $30/hour, the contracting company makes $30/hour, and the programmer here on visa is making well more than they could back home. Win, Win, Win, except for the problem stated in this article. All 3 of the parties involved are exploting a system that's in place for a different reason.

These visas are supposed to be available for us to acquire talents that aren't available domestically, NOT to save $60/hr over American labor.

Is the American contractor overpaid? Maybe.
Should the American company try to keep costs down? Obviously.
Is this method of doing so wrong? Of course it is. Once these companies are forced to be accountable for these visas, the free buffet will be over.

If we want the cheaper labor, that's fine too, but change the visa laws. We'll play any game they like, just make sure you tell us the rules up front.




RE: All about the dollars...
By zombiexl on 6/8/2007 10:17:43 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
For the bulk of the IT contracting community, it's all about the dollars. The bottom line is, an American programming contractor does a job at say, $90/hour.


The company i used to work for charged more that 2x that an hour.

I went out on my own after I decided that the ability to get a decent raise in salary for my extra efforts (60-70 hours a week) just wasnt there. I charge less than 1/3 of what the company i worked for charged for my time. Even when I bill my previous employer (they occasionally need my assistance) I bill at a lower rate than they are billing the end user.

All in all even after paying for my own benfits, self-employment tax, etc I still make out better than I did working for them and I set my own schedule (which is worth more than money when you have a family).

So what's my point? Quite simply I am trying to say that its the large companies that are making the prices high, not the workers.

Are some contractor's overpriced, you bet. Are they the main problem? I doubt it.


RE: All about the dollars...
By Funksultan on 6/8/2007 10:28:04 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
The company i used to work for charged more that 2x that an hour.... I went out on my own...


Dunno what you're trying to say here. I own a contracting company, and the bill rates listed here are just an example of where the "skim" comes from, and where it goes.

Your post was about your personal situation (good for you, independant contracting is great). I don't see at all how it correlates to large companies making prices high.

Are you trying to say contracting companies inflate prices? Sometimes they do, but that's neither here nor there. Let's stick to the topic, lest we start to complain about the MANY professions that overcharge us (plumbers, mechanics, electricians, interior designers, musicians, etc, etc).


RE: All about the dollars...
By TheDoc9 on 6/8/2007 10:47:43 AM , Rating: 2
I work in a building of 700+ and 90% are Indian. You hit it exactly right. It's so bad in fact that from my experience subcontractors will pay immigrants a set salary per year, while they are expected to work as much as double overtime. Of course the subcontracting company continues to be paid 60 - 90 per hour, only now it's straight profit for them because the worker is on a set yearly wage which was 25-35 for the first eight hours every day.

One of my Indian friends tells me that their country is so poor that of course they're willing to work for next to nothing or even free for awhile as mentioned earlier by a previous poster. With every 1 dollar made here it's worth almost literally 40 dollars in India. He tells me that sending back a few thousand U.S. dollars a year will get you chauffered cars and a mansion in India.

To those companies I say this: 65,000 should be more than enough of the best minds if you have to pick and choose carefully. It's sad that having a CS degree anymore is almost no better than having a liberal arts degree. It's so bad here in TX, that many starting jobs pay about as much as a janitor.


RE: All about the dollars...
By masher2 (blog) on 6/8/2007 12:04:39 PM , Rating: 2
> "It's so bad in fact that from my experience subcontractors will pay immigrants a set salary per year, while they are expected to work as much as double overtime"

I know dozens of non-immigrants who work more than "double overtime", all for a set salary. I know a couple CEOs, in fact, who work triple-time...regularly averaging 120 hours/week.

> "It's so bad here in TX, that many starting jobs pay about as much as a janitor. "

I call BS on this. Starting salaries in the CS field are $51K a year...average salaries for workers with experience are $75K. How many janitors make that?

> "He tells me that sending back a few thousand U.S. dollars a year will get you chauffered cars and a mansion in India"

According to the Worldwide Cost of Living Index, Mumbai is 68th. Costwise, that puts it as more expensive than Detroit, Houston, or Atlanta.

I've lived a large amount of time abroad and in most third-world countries, costs for things like food and domestic service are indeed dirt cheap. However, the cost of imported goods (such as books, cars, electronics, etc) are usually considerably higher than they are here in the US. You're not going to get a mansion and a nice new car, chauffered or not, for a few thousand a year anywhere.


RE: All about the dollars...
By Clienthes on 6/8/2007 12:50:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
in TX


Just thought I'd point out the part you missed. Everything is bigger in TX, except the salaries and the cost of living.

Those starting salaries you keep quoting are averages. Some make more, some make less. My brother got a job for 70k at graduation with Raytheon. For every 70k, there's a 30k...

And of course it varies by region as well. TX sucks.


RE: All about the dollars...
By masher2 (blog) on 6/8/2007 12:59:53 PM , Rating: 2
> "Just thought I'd point out the part you missed. Everything is bigger in TX, except the salaries..."

According to Information Week's salary survey, the average salary for an application developer in Austin TX is $83K per year . Thats well above the national average.

I don't know about the rest of TX, but I doubt its the slave labor situation you describe. Even if it is, there's no law preventing you from moving. If its really that bad, why not emigrate to Oklahoma or even Kansas?

> "...and the cost of living."

If the cost of living is lower, then a lower salary would be equivalent to a higher one elsewhere. If you get paid 20% less, but all your bills are 20% lower, you still break even.


RE: All about the dollars...
By Clienthes on 6/8/2007 2:30:43 PM , Rating: 2
True on both accounts. It's cheap to live, so its not so bad that the salaries are lower. I'd like to note that I have no experience with IT salaries specifically in TX, only more general experience with wages/COL.

And I just needed an excuse to say TX sucks.


RE: All about the dollars...
By TheGreek on 6/8/2007 3:28:16 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
If the cost of living is lower, then a lower salary would be equivalent to a higher one elsewhere. If you get paid 20% less, but all your bills are 20% lower , you still break even.


Right, those regions have 20% cheaper gas prices too.

Can you send me a map to your vacuum world?


RE: All about the dollars...
By barclay on 6/8/2007 3:41:18 PM , Rating: 2
> "Right, those regions have 20% cheaper gas prices too.

Can you send me a map to your vacuum world?"

Here you go

http://www.gasbuddy.com/gb_gastemperaturemap.aspx


RE: All about the dollars...
By grenableu on 6/8/2007 3:49:15 PM , Rating: 2
> "Here you go"

ROFL. But you have to understand that "TheGreek" is like a virus. Once he infects a thread with his personal attacks, misconceptions, false information, and downright silliness, he won't stop, no matter how many times you prove him wrong.


RE: All about the dollars...
By TheGreek on 6/8/2007 3:58:45 PM , Rating: 1
The light of truth has spoken.

While you're at it you can find the gas prices in the link that are 20% for us, can't you?

Feel free to prove me wrong again.


RE: All about the dollars...
By masher2 (blog) on 6/8/2007 3:43:05 PM , Rating: 1
> "Right, those regions have 20% cheaper gas prices too."

Erm, gas prices in Texas ARE 20% cheaper than in a state like California or Hawaii. In any case, you are, as usual, sadly off target. My point was that a lower salary if coupled with a corresponding lower cost of living is not neccesarily a bad thing for the people living there. A point the original poster (and everyone else on the thread but you) seems to understand quite well.

In some areas, gas might not be 20% less...but the cost of buying a home could be half the national. Its not the individual items, its the average cost of living that matters.


RE: All about the dollars...
By TheGreek on 6/8/2007 5:26:29 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
http://www.gasbuddy.com/gb_gastemperaturemap.aspx


While this map does show a variety of gas prices, there's no mention of issues, like the average number of miles people need to drive in Montana versus Delaware. Why don't you tell us the total significance of this map? You can keep your buddies laughing, the honorable goal that is.

And of course, of all the points I attempted to make, you chose to address the most important ones, not the ones most easy to poke a hole in. That's why you've made so many numerous comments about how the H1B process doesn't work.

So gas prices do fluctuate more than 20%, perhaps H1Bs can bring some gas in with them, since they come from areas of lower costs of living?


RE: All about the dollars...
By jtesoro on 6/10/2007 8:29:22 AM , Rating: 2
Going back to the cost of living argument, you do agree that if people paid 20% less and have bills (overall) 20% lower, then it breaks even, right?

I don't think focusing on gas prices is the right way to look at it.


RE: All about the dollars...
By TheGreek on 6/12/2007 3:11:33 PM , Rating: 1
When working in NYC I made more, spent more, and saved more. So then I get more options on where to live in retirement.

So the answer is "No it hasn't been for me."


RE: All about the dollars...
By TheDoc9 on 6/9/2007 3:06:32 PM , Rating: 2
Well since I live here I know. Those insane numbers you quoted as salaries are a joke masher2. Most starting salaries here for IT are in the 25 - 50k a year range. You can work at dell and they did pay 55 - 60k starting, of course with the recent layoffs they simply aren't highering IT people - there website went from over 300 IT positions available to just 8 recently.

You can also do subcontract work for set pay and stupid hours like I suggested in my original post. And if you're willing to give up 80 + hours a week and die young of stress, high blood pressure and heart attack, then 60 - 80k is certainly there. Of course you can't do this starting out of college typically.

By the way, I get my numbers from my native Indian friend who lived in India all his life until just recently.


RE: All about the dollars...
By masher2 (blog) on 6/9/2007 10:11:47 PM , Rating: 2
> "Those insane numbers you quoted as salaries are a joke masher2...I get my numbers from my native Indian friend"

My figures come straight from the spring salary survey from the National Association of Colleges and Employers:

http://money.cnn.com/2005/04/15/pf/college/startin...

I think that trumps your "native Indian friend".


RE: All about the dollars...
By TheGreek on 6/12/2007 11:58:21 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I think that trumps your "native Indian friend".

All you've ever been interested in is one-upmanship. Does that mean the other guy is not dealing with reality or negate his commentary?


RE: All about the dollars...
By TheGreek on 6/8/2007 3:39:18 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
.... TX sucks.

Don't sugarcoat stuff, tell us what you really mean.


Are the best minds only in cheap labor countries?
By jskirwin on 6/8/2007 9:04:19 AM , Rating: 4
Notice how the pleas for workers always involve competing wiht cheap labor countries? No one mentions attracting the best minds from the UK, France and Germany - nations that offer better benefits (e.g. universal health care) and salaries than the US?

If it's only about the best and brightest, why are most H-1bs from low wage countries? Is Europe full of the dull and addle brained?

That's because the "best minds" argument is a red herring. Instead it's about cheap labor. Flood the labor market and the cost of labor in that market declines. It's supply and demand; increase the supply with a given demand and you'll have lower prices - or wages in this case.




By psypher on 6/8/2007 9:32:12 AM , Rating: 3
These hires are coming from cheap labor countries and not europe because a person from england or france will have less of a reason to leave. The benefit of uprooting and switching countries is not as great as the costs in a lot of cases. Their overall lifestyle is not going to improve as much as someone from say India.


By BMFPitt on 6/8/2007 10:17:38 AM , Rating: 2
Doesn't seem like they're talking about getting cheap labor, as it's much much cheaper to outsource it to the courties where that cheap labor is. It seems like most of these visa are going to people from Asian countries where they actually value education.

I work with a lot of foreign-born US citizens in my job, and they are all smart people who love America and don't work for peanuts. I want to make sure that for the next few generations our kids don't grow up dreaming of going to China for a good job. If our educational system continues on its current trend, that's what is going to happen.


By jskirwin on 6/8/2007 10:35:18 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
If our educational system continues on its current trend, that's what is going to happen.


If our education system is so bad, why are so many foreign students clamoring to come here?

The criticism of our educational system is another red herring used by firms to justify importing cheap labor. American students are avoiding tech and science because they don't pay as well as other fields.

Students are rational actors - for the most part or at least after they start paying back their student loans. They have to choose fields that justify their investment. IT, engineering and sciences are no where near as lucrative as law, medicine, or business.


By Fenixgoon on 6/8/2007 10:57:40 AM , Rating: 2
the US higher education (colleges) are top notch - it's middle and high schools that are REALLY suffering. kids these days seem so apathetic towards their education.


By JoeBanana on 6/8/2007 11:02:24 AM , Rating: 2
Few reasons:
First one: Colleges are easier to pass. I have one m8 that who had a lot of trouble with few exams and scraped some money and went to US. He made it on the first run. When I asked him he said that it was just easier.
Second: If you graduate from some big money US school you will your diploma will be valid in US and also in other country.
Third: Those who are talented and educate in US have a lot of opportunity to work in good quality labs with the best people


By BMFPitt on 6/8/2007 12:09:38 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
If our education system is so bad, why are so many foreign students clamoring to come here?
Because our higher education systems is very good. And since so many Americans are so poorly prepared to enter into the technical majors there, the foreign students do quite well in comparison.

quote:
Students are rational actors - for the most part or at least after they start paying back their student loans. They have to choose fields that justify their investment. IT, engineering and sciences are no where near as lucrative as law, medicine, or business.
Yes, our school systems are just overflowing with kids who decide to skip out on being ChemEs to become lawyers.

By the way, have you been to a hospital lately? Medicine is at least close to engineering in terms percentage of foreign workers.


By masher2 (blog) on 6/8/2007 11:16:00 AM , Rating: 3
> "No one mentions attracting the best minds from the UK, France and Germany"

We already did that in years past. There's none left!

Seriously, your argument is itself a bit of a red herring. How does one "attract" a worker? By offering money and/or better working conditions. That's easy to do for a worker fom India...much harder for a worker from Great Britain.

The average US salary now for CS is $79K/year...with a full 10% of all workers earning more than $118K. Assuming our "better mind" in Britain has equal compensation, you'd have to offer them more than that to get them to drop everything and emigrate to a different country. MUCH more. Most people wouldn't do it for less than double the salary....some won't do it at any price whatsoever.

Since we're talking about the best minds here (a person probably already making on the high side of the salary range), to attract such a person from Britain or France would mean annual salaries in the $200-240K range. Do you really think the CS industry can afford to pay programmers that much and still survive? If so I suggest you start such a company, because if you can pull that trick off, you know more than the rest of the industry hands down.


By IGoodwin on 6/8/2007 12:23:29 PM , Rating: 3
Well, I'm from the UK and I came to America on a H1-B visa and I am, now, a permanent resident.

In order to get my visa, I had to be sponsed by an American company, and that company had to prove that they could not attract an American resident as a worker. Therefore, I am quite confident that my coming here did not deprive an American of a job. I pay taxes here and my earnings are spent here, meaning that my earnings go to supporting the economy where I live.

I am not for removing the caps on H1-B visas; however, if a person has received an education in the US, then they should be provided a means of remaining here for work, by transitioning the student visa into a work visa.

My bigest concern is money going out of the economy and into another one. Money going out of an economy is always a bad move and can only cause a downward spiral. A good coming into America can, at least, be taxed.


By masher2 (blog) on 6/8/2007 2:22:20 PM , Rating: 3
I think you're an example of the exception that proves the rule. I'd hazard a guess that either you were offered a pay rate substantially above what you could receive in Britain, or you already had a desire to travel outside your country anyway. Or both.


By kilkennycat on 6/8/2007 11:32:52 AM , Rating: 2
... compared to both Europe and the Far East. You want excellently-trained software engineering graduates... look to India and Europe. Apart from a handful of top technical colleges ( Stanford, MIT, Caltech, etc ), academic standards in the US have been falling for the past 20 years. If the money being squandered on college sports in the US at an exponentially-increasing rate was ploughed into college academics, rewarding professors and faculties for true academic excellent and relieving more students of their sometimes-horrid tuition-costs in the disciplines required by the high-tech industries, the number of competent graduates would be a lot higher and the demand for foreign-born technologists would be a lot lower. All other countries in the world view their universities as academic centers, not cushy lodgings for sports-jocks hoping to make the big-time. Also many other counties pump vast amounts of their tax-dollars into higher-education through both research grants and fully-subsidized tuition for those citizens that make it through the college entry-requirements. And the college-entry standards are generally much higher than they are in the US. There is no expectation in other counties that everybody has the "right" to a college-education... it is normally a privilege earned by academic-excellence (not rich parents' money). Many so-called colleges in the US are really only "colleges" in name, with unchallenging academic standards, such that the graduating student can claim to have a degree. In other countries, those who are not academically gifted have the alternate path to employment by attending excellent "trade" schools, like many of the community colleges in the US. Only in the US does the lack of a degree now carry any real social stigma.

Colleges in European countries base their entry requirements on achieving certain standards at in-depth national exams in multiple subjects .. none of this multiple-choice SAT and ACT nonsense... for example, the average standard for entry to university in Europe is generally equivalent to having completed the first-year of college in the US.




By knipfty on 6/8/2007 11:51:08 AM , Rating: 2
Socialism at work...

If you told me that anyone in Europe could go to a fully paid for college education. I would that is very cool. But all the European governments are doing is substituting price for a queue. They are rationing college to those that meet some standard.

In that world, my friend who was a C student in HS could have have become a cardiologist when he finally decided to grow up.

I say no thanks. If you want a college education, go for it. If mom and dad pay for it, all the better.


By Vinnybcfc on 6/8/2007 12:19:28 PM , Rating: 2
Right so keep the rich in education and sod the poor thats fair.

Whats wrong with entry based on skill? It means you have the best students for the degrees that are available.


By BMFPitt on 6/8/2007 12:29:01 PM , Rating: 2
As much as I tend to disregard any post that begins with the word "socialism," he's right on education. For the most part Europeans come to the US and pay to go to college, Americans don't go there to get it for free. That says something about the quality of the education.


By jtesoro on 6/10/2007 8:51:57 AM , Rating: 2
It was explained to me that the reason for the sports programs for schools is for it to get proper funding for the academic system. Great athletes leads to better performing sports teams. This in turn leads to more advertising / sponsorship / donation money which gets used to attract better teachers and fund the academic side of things.

Is this more theory that it is fact?


By jtesoro on 6/10/2007 8:53:45 AM , Rating: 2
Sorry, is this more theory than it is fact?


By BMFPitt on 6/10/2007 11:06:58 AM , Rating: 2
Depends what program you're talking about. A top tier football program will make tens of millions in profit without even factoring in the other stuff. Outside of the biggest football and basketball programs, athletics is mostly just there to entertain the students and, yes, motivate some alumni to donate.


By rippleyaliens on 6/8/2007 11:58:21 AM , Rating: 1
Actually the US still leads in overall education system. Problem is that Corporate GREED, and Peoples GREED has taken its toll.
An example is University of Michigan Ann Arbor campus.
the cost ranges from freshman=$10,000 a year
Sr= $15,000 a YEAR, for tuition.
In Ann Arbor, GOOD luck finding a decent apartment for under $700-800 a month. (1 BR)..
What all this means, is that The cost of going to School in America is Just INSANE... It is hard for a student to justify spending almost $40,000 on a degree without the fear of the job being outsourced..

NOW with that, we have to introduce the COST OF LIVING in America.. Which is INSANE, and growing rapidly. I have worked with many Visa- personal, and i tell you.. the gentlemen i know, work for MUCH less than i do. Are forced to be roomates, and generally are surviving.. Cant drive.(no license), Can hardly afford to go out to eat.. And skill set wise.. WELL i say 1 thing, for his resume it looked impressive.. MCSE, MCDBA, Cisco CCNP=etc... BUT he really didnt know the product. And it showed.. not downplaying his abilities.. But after talking to him.. the thing is, tahat overseas, MUCH emphasis is placed on education. (NOT HERE)
EDUCATION overseas is Free, or very close to being FREE, (Definetly not here)..
And the cost of living is %10 in India, china, russia, than it is here.. So offshoring, those guys/gals, GET PAID good money, but would be nothing here, but a fortune there..

My thing is with all this talk of not enough tallent here, going overseas..
The Auto Industry is experiencing this problem, as will the big Tech industries.. If you cut cost to the point, of (cutting employess, wether sending plant overseas, or offshoring IT work), you create a even bigger problem domestically. IT local workers cannot even afford to buy american products.

With the IT visa situation, it is close... US companies dont like to pay good IT tallent, the 100k that a good IT person RATES.. SO in their wisdom, they figure that they can hire 3x the personal, to cover the 1 guy.. BUT the problem comes, and it is there, for a few $$ in savings, we are discouraging their own country's internal assets (the people), from even trying to get to there..

Now if we were doing the visa's to every country on the planet, it would be different, but when a country like INDIA (which cannot even afford to provide clean water to its citizens) the opportunity to flurish, from these Loose immagration rules. IT hurts the US badly, and is not doing any of these 3rd world countries any benefit.

How on earth, can INDIA, and CHINA be IT world leaders, yet the people in the countries, are trying to get out of there, to come here...
So it is much more than dollars and cents.. and the US, will pay for it, 1 way or anoter.


By masher2 (blog) on 6/8/2007 12:14:18 PM , Rating: 2
> "GOOD luck finding a decent apartment for under $700-800 a month. (1 BR).."

As a student, why do you need your own private bedroom, bathroom, and kitchen? There are people who live their entire lives without that luxury. Surely you can do without it for a few years?


By TheGreek on 6/15/2007 1:04:27 PM , Rating: 1
Another downrating.

I guess MAsher did an excellent job of addressing all the important points after all.

Gag, cough, spit.


Updates
By crystal clear on 6/9/2007 6:44:56 AM , Rating: 3
US companies that lay off large numbers of workers shouldn't be allowed to hire workers with H1B visas if they're planning a large layoff that will reduce their total number of US workers, according to two senators.

Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Chuck Grassley (R-IA) have introduced an amendment to the Senate's immigration reform bill that would not only restrict H-1B hires from companies that have had "mass layoffs" within the last year but would also require companies that are planning to announce mass layoffs to cut their foreign workers as well. If the company has already received approval to hire new H-1B workers but plans to make layoffs soon, it must inform the foreign workers that their visas will expire within 60 days.
The purpose of the bill is to ensure that US companies are not exploiting the H-1B system by essentially replacing US workers with cheaper foreign talent. The amendment currently defines "mass layoffs" as a company with more than 100 employees letting go of 50 or more workers, but it offers an exemption for companies that provide written certification that the company's total number of employees in the US won't be reduced as a result of the layoff.

Under that definition of mass layoffs, a number of prominent US companies—ones that have applied for thousands of H-1B visas between them—could be under scrutiny. IBM, Motorola, and Dell are all companies that have either recently cut or plan to cut thousands of workers in the US.
"If there is truly a shortage of workers in the US why would some of the largest high-tech companies layoff thousands of American workers?" asked Sanders and Grassley in a statement seen by Computerworld

"According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, over the next decade, 2 million jobs will be created in mathematics, engineering, computer science, and physical science. That equates to about 200,000 jobs a year times 10 equals 2 million jobs," said Sanders on the Senate floor in May.

"Under this legislation, the number of H-1B visas would increase to as many as 180,000 a year. That means virtually every job, about 90 percent that will be created in the high-tech sector over the next 10 years, could conceivably be taken by a H-1B visa holder."
Those companies as well as others continue to push for more foreign workers, however. The H-1B cap for 2007—65,000 workers—was filled almost instantly before the fiscal year even started, and prominent companies like Microsoft and now Google claim that without the allowance of more foreign workers, they are left unable to fill gaps in talent. California Gov. Schwarzenegger also wrote a letter to the Senate majority and minority leaders voicing his support for the increase.

The amendment joins the crowd of 100-some others proposed for the immigration reform bill, so there will be some stiff competition for attention among the Senate. Both sides are lobbying hard for their position, and so the fate of Grassley's and Sanders' bill could go either way.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070607-sena...




RE: Updates
By BMFPitt on 6/9/2007 10:17:21 AM , Rating: 2
Based on that short overview it sounds like it's still perfectly legal to hire foreign contractors (as they're not employees.) Not to mention outsourcing it outright.

It's a good concept, just seems impossible to enforce without being overly restrictive.


RE: Updates
By SmokeRngs on 6/12/2007 9:11:39 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
It's a good concept, just seems impossible to enforce without being overly restrictive.


Actually, it's a terrible concept. Here's one glaring example of this. A business lays off 100 people performing a manual labor job because they are shutting down that part of the business for whatever reason. They expand the IT department for a new project there but have few qualified people around who can properly fill those positions. This amendment says the company cannot use H1B workers to fill the gap because they laid off 50 people that were in no way qualified to fill the new openings.

You could take that amendment and use it any number of ways in situations similar to what I have outlined. The so called intent of the amendment will be overlooked to be applied way too broadly. In this case, no one was being replaced but the amendment doesn't care about that.


RE: Updates
By BMFPitt on 6/13/2007 12:24:18 AM , Rating: 2
You said exactly what I said, but in a much less concise way.


RE: Updates
By TheGreek on 6/12/2007 2:06:23 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The purpose of the bill is to ensure that US companies are not exploiting the H-1B system by essentially replacing US workers with cheaper foreign talent. The amendment currently defines "mass layoffs" as a company with more than 100 employees letting go of 50 or more workers, but it offers an exemption for companies that provide written certification that the company's total number of employees in the US won't be reduced as a result of the layoff.

Such laws would not be required if companies had an ethical bone in their bodies.

Where's Ringold to comment on this legistlation?


By blckgrffn on 6/8/2007 9:21:10 AM , Rating: 3
than farm the talent out overseas. At least then more of the money stays in the U.S.

If you don't think companies are strapped for engineers (I am talking about mechanical engineers, which I have some experience with), then you haven't worked in that environment. And it's not like these big companies don't recruit.




By FITCamaro on 6/8/2007 10:10:55 AM , Rating: 2
I work for a primarily mechanical engineering company (although not one myself). They have been hiring like crazy. No problem finding engineers. And the majority of the jobs haven't been entry level. But those that were were filled without issue. I was even trying to get a guy I knew one of them. Unfortunately they needed someone to start immediately and he was a month away from graduating.


By masher2 (blog) on 6/8/2007 11:32:14 AM , Rating: 3
If the jobs aren't entry level, they're hiring someone away from another firm. Either that, or they're hiring an unemployed engineer with past experience.

The issue is, there is close to zero unemployment now in fields like EE, ChemE, and CS. So yes, if you offer a high enough salary, you can always get a worker. But you're just pulling that person away from some other job, which then needs to be filled itself.


By fic2 on 6/11/2007 2:25:15 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
If the jobs aren't entry level, they're hiring someone away from another firm. Either that, or they're hiring an unemployed engineer with past experience.


Isn't this just stating the obvious? Where else would they come from - thin air? Even if the person hired is from a different country he/she was either working for another company or unemployed.

quote:
The issue is, there is close to zero unemployment now in fields like EE, ChemE, and CS. So yes, if you offer a high enough salary, you can always get a worker. But you're just pulling that person away from some other job, which then needs to be filled itself.


If the project can't be staffed for X dollars then I would say that the project shouldn't be staffed. When a company looks at doing a project then a budget should be set and if the staffing can't be done in the budget framework then it probably shouldn't be done. Business darwinism.

Obviously, the previous poster's company values their projects more than the companies they are taking engineers from.

Also, some engineers leave because they found a more exciting project, more flexible hours, etc. Not just for more pay.


Enough foreigners already
By munky on 6/8/2007 6:28:03 PM , Rating: 2
I graduated college a few years ago with a BS in CS, and it's been tough finding jobs in my field. I've worked in insurance companies doing some light web development for which I am way overqualified, while the company has entire teams of Indian contract programmers doing the job that I should have been doing. In addition, a lot of the coding work was shipped overseas to India, all with the intent of getting it done cheaper. And then those Indians gain more experience and take up higher position jobs, while I have to continue working at a junior level. It's true that large companies are using foreign workers to replace US workers, whatever excuse they come up with is BS.




RE: Enough foreigners already
By nigel106 on 6/10/2007 12:17:18 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
It's true that large companies are using foreign workers to replace US workers, whatever excuse they come up with is BS.


In a global marketplace, companies will hire talent wherever they can get it for the lowest cost. So, if a US company hires foreign workers, who are you to say they shouldn't? Who's to say companies are to be forced to hire labor in whatever country they happen to be in, even when there exists cheaper alternatives? The US is a nation of capitalists, and if it is to survive in an a multi-polar world, then it has to learn (as other nations are also having to learn) to re-develop its core strengths to remain competitive. Competing globally is about finding the best people, wherever they may live, and getting them to work for your company. The notion that immigrants and others are "stealing" jobs by outsourcing from US workers is complete nonsense and has its roots in the win-lose war and sports analogies following America's emergence as the world's superpower. As India, China, and other developing nations equal, and eventually surpass America economically, America's relative position in the world will change, and so must its strategy to compete successfully. America cannot afford to be arrogant and simply say "American workers are the best workers" regardless of the merits workers elsewhere. Also, global wealth is not a zero-sum game: As India grows wealthier, the entire world (including the US) will benefit from its affluence.


RE: Enough foreigners already
By rnnh on 6/10/2007 11:23:46 AM , Rating: 2
The country which created that corporation in the first place?

The world isn't a market in which countries float alongside corporations.

Nations create the legal framework in which corporations can be created and the market within which they function. In the US case (being a democracy) this is mandated by the people ultimately.


RE: Enough foreigners already
By TheGreek on 6/12/2007 2:52:39 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Nations create the legal framework in which corporations can be created and the market within which they function. In the US case (being a democracy) this is mandated by the people ultimately.


Are you kidding? Try it's mandated by corporate lobbyists, their the ones running the show.


RE: Enough foreigners already
By TheGreek on 6/12/2007 11:46:32 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
In a global marketplace, companies will hire talent wherever they can get it for the lowest cost.

So Microsoft bugs occur because the stuff was written by the lowest bidder? Have you seen the quality of Chinese scooters entering the country? They would set new(low) standards for Wal-Mart.

I feel better already, I've gained so much.


Same old blog
By TheGreek on 6/8/07, Rating: 0
RE: Same old blog
By knipfty on 6/8/2007 3:24:53 PM , Rating: 2
I encourage college bound students to study comp sci. It's a great profession! I make a great living. The key to prospering in this economy is finding a way to add value to your job. Be an entrepreneur. Find ways of helping your employer make money. Don't worry about what others are making.

The opportunities for tech grads are awesome! Tech is only becoming more important every year not less.


RE: Same old blog
By TheGreek on 6/8/2007 3:36:48 PM , Rating: 2
I can't get out of IT fast enough, and I'm constantly working on it.


RE: Same old blog
By jtesoro on 6/10/2007 9:08:48 AM , Rating: 2
I understand your first paragraph, but I'm having a hard time with the second. Lots of sarcasm there but I can't see what's behind it. Care to restate?


RE: Same old blog
By TheGreek on 6/12/2007 11:21:09 AM , Rating: 2
Is the reason companies can't find workers that they don't exist or they don't pay enough to compete? If they want them on the cheap that's there problem, just saying there's a technical shortage somewhere is not a complete truth.


this is the problem
By casket on 6/10/2007 12:00:04 AM , Rating: 2
"qualified programmers... Pay in in the range of $45-60K to start"
-- I graduated 8 years ago. I made $40 grand with Zero experience straight out of college (Note: Chemical Engineers make more than programmers).

After inflation and cost of living changes... the salaries are lower than they used to be. Too many foreigners.

When I was considering graduate school... there is Zero Incentive to get an graduate degree in Computers. Zero increase in salary.

So I got an MBA and will leave the computer field.

Computer professionals used to be treated like managers... now they are treated like accountants.




RE: this is the problem
By masher2 (blog) on 6/10/2007 9:07:56 AM , Rating: 2
> "Note: Chemical Engineers make more than programmers"

Yes. And everyone else but Chem E's makes less than programmers. I'd say that's a pretty good argument in favor of adequate compensation for the computer industry. Graduates in the liberal arts make only a little more than half what a CS graduate does.

> "I graduated 8 years ago. I made $40 grand with Zero experience straight out of college...... the salaries are lower than they used to be"

According to the 2005 college graduate survey, starting salaries are now $51K. That's the average. Graduate with good grades from a top end school and you can easily make $60K fresh out of school.

> "There is Zero Incentive to get an graduate degree in Computers. Zero increase in salary"

Quite untrue. There's little incentive for a low-level programmer throwing together business apps to get a graduate degree. There's little need for that extra education in that particular job.

But if your position depends upon it, the extra education is quite valuable. A couple of my colleagues have Ph.D.s in CS, and both earn salaries close to $200K/year. Those are positions they wouldn't have received, of course, without the degree.


RE: this is the problem
By TheGreek on 6/12/2007 11:12:51 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
A couple of my colleagues have Ph.D.s in CS, and both earn salaries close to $200K/year.

How many positions?


RE: this is the problem
By BMFPitt on 6/10/2007 11:11:02 AM , Rating: 2
8 years ago was 1999. Yeah, we all wish we could have come out of college during the height of the bubble.
quote:
When I was considering graduate school... there is Zero Incentive to get an graduate degree in Computers. Zero increase in salary.
Not at anywhere I have worked. You get an automatic pay bump and easier time with promotions in both cases. Whether that is worth the effort is arguable.


Facing Reality.
By Mitch101 on 6/8/2007 2:03:50 PM , Rating: 4
You have to face reality that a programmer in India can be paid significantly less for the same quality work as some developers here. If your actually one of the highly skilled programmers then you have to look around at some of the lousy/lazy developers around you and certainly understand why they outsource a lot of it.

I dont like it but the IT industry in the USA is filled with morons who ran off to some school and in a few months wanted tons of money and didnt want to work for only because they heard you can make great money in computers. Most could care less. Since they are incompetent to begin with they only hire less competent people because they are afraid hiring someone with talent might point out they suck. In addition there are plenty of moron managers as well. I would say a good 30% of the IT workforce is useless and just makes more work for the more talented technicians. Those same 30% also dont ever learn from their mistakes they just rinse and repeat and what is worse is they have a very high perception of themselves. 30% is being generous I have been to places where a good 90% I wouldnt trust making toast but they are the ones who make all the decisions.

Now some companies are getting smart and moving the high cost tech/IT jobs to places like North Carolina, Georgia, and Tennesee. Its places like NY, NJ, CA, which programmers are refusing to work for anythng less than 90K a year. Because of that the jobs are moving elsewhere and this includes over sees.

IT in the USA is a dying industry because its filled with crud. The same goes for real estate agents and companies. See how much longer anyone is willing to give up more than 2% on thier home sales. We have a lot of 1.5%-2% real estate places going in around me and those homes are selling because they know 25K isnt going to someone who walked them through the house.

Overbilling. There is a lot of this going on. Pfizer's top people tend to do the work they should give to the guys getting paid half as much but its free money baby sitting things like mailbox moves.

I hate to say it but the glory days of crazy pay rates are nearly over. Here is my list of places that still pay good rates though.

Pfizer (Ask for $70+ an hour as a contractor) Dont let places like Tek-Systems tell you otherwise the bill rate is over $100 an hour.
Phillip Morris (Ask for $65+ an hour as a contractor)
Merill Lynch (Ask for $60+ an hour as a contractor)
Lucent (Ask for $55+ an hour as a contractor)
Merck (Reduced rates look for $45.00 an hour as contractor)

Of course this depends on state but I speak from experience.




RE: Facing Reality.
By vcespon on 6/11/2007 3:06:18 PM , Rating: 2
Let me explain the real game here. The only motivation of big companys right now is saving money and NOT hiring high-skilled workers. I work for a very big and well-known tech company, and in the last 5 years they have been firing most of the workers on USA and UK and hiring cheaper workers on other countries to do the SAME jobs.
Some time ago my group was in Dublin, you got a 6-month training period and 35K/year to start with. That was too expensive it seems, so they moved to Spain, where other people do the same job for 15K - 18K/ year.
That lasted 3 years. They have decided that even that was not cheap enough so they now move to Costa Rica, where they are hiring 3000+ people to replace a lot of current workers.
Don't talk me about skilled CS workers, 90% of the companies I have to talk to every day have their system administrators in Sloavaquia, Malasya or Bangalore, and they do not have the slighest idea about what systems they are supposed to be responsible of.
Customers are NOT going to get a better service (right now it's lame enough), this is not a move to hire better workers, it's only to spend as little as possible.


RE: Facing Reality.
By TheGreek on 6/12/2007 3:03:25 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Don't talk me about skilled CS workers, 90% of the companies I have to talk to every day have their system administrators in Sloavaquia, Malasya or Bangalore, and they do not have the slighest idea about what systems they are supposed to be responsible of .

It may take a while to find a reasonably good MAsherism to respond to this.


As soon as the CEOs from these companies...
By SiliconAddict on 6/8/2007 4:00:10 PM , Rating: 2
Step down and place an outsourced CEO in their position I'll be less critical of foreign workers. Until then. They can all go to hell.




RE: As soon as the CEOs from these companies...
By mmike87 on 6/12/2007 9:42:19 AM , Rating: 2
Bravo.

Anyone can be outsourced. Anyone who thinks they cannot be probably needs to be.


By TheGreek on 6/12/2007 1:13:57 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Anyone can be outsourced. Anyone who thinks they cannot be probably needs to be.

But the problem is when you believe that and decide the hell with education. And not everybody is cut out to be a manager or project leader, and for many that head to management well, being a manager at Best Buy is not what they had in mind.

This is all just economic warfare.


Why don't we outsource CEO's?
By casket on 6/10/2007 12:04:27 AM , Rating: 2
If a CEO can make $20 million/ year.... why don't we just hire 1000 indians at $20k per year... I'm sure the combined knowledge of 1000 people is more than Donald Trump...
Why don't we outsource all USA jobs and all become couch potatoes.
*******
H1B Visas are beyond destructive... they are wrecking our country.




RE: Why don't we outsource CEO's?
By Howard on 6/10/2007 5:56:59 PM , Rating: 2
Good thing you're not in charge of anything.


RE: Why don't we outsource CEO's?
By TheGreek on 6/12/2007 11:10:30 AM , Rating: 2
How about a more educated batch of 100 indians at $200k per year?


Thant Paris Hilton
By Shadowmaster625 on 6/11/2007 12:46:53 PM , Rating: 2
If there weren't so many idiots foaming at the mouth about Paris Hilton, maybe they'd get an education and we wouldn't have to import skilled workers? ...just a thought...




RE: Thant Paris Hilton
By Shadowmaster625 on 6/11/2007 1:26:44 PM , Rating: 2
see, I cant even spell "thank" when I think about that dummy :P


RE: Thant Paris Hilton
By TheGreek on 6/12/2007 1:18:19 PM , Rating: 1
I go to a coffee shop where a lot of young people hang out. It takes about 2 seconds to realize what they are communicating is they are going nowhere fast. There's no future.


By Dimasc on 6/10/2007 9:11:11 AM , Rating: 2
I'm Software Developer from israel and i get about 65k in a year(in Israel). Why are you always thinking about India and such places then you talking about Foreign workers??
I can do many things most of you just can't (i'm Symbian C++ developer.) Learning curve for a mobile s60 developer is 2-3 years , expirienced good C++ developer is another 3-4 years , industry is constantly changing .Working in a SW team whith 2-3 young developers i can teach them trick or two and prepare them for a real live -) Cheap Outsorcing is a crap . Just follow one simple rule- Make Companies to pay foreign employes the same money your domestic workers get and you'll be fine. And Yes CS graduate don't know nothing about SW development - GOOD LOGICAL THINKING IS A MUST!!!!




By TheGreek on 6/12/2007 1:15:44 PM , Rating: 2
American thinking is strictly short term profits, even at the expense of long term profits.


Achieving profit in an ethical manner.
By Emryse on 6/11/2007 1:42:34 PM , Rating: 2
I am an American and I am for capitalism. I am NOT for socialism. I am NOT for more government control. I AM for a global economy.

I state this, because there's a fine line and a bleeding edge that defines the difference between necessary political intervention and unconstitutional interference.

There is a timeless, proven principle that remains true: "Capitalism DOES NOT WORK without ethics!" Current situations with outsourcing portray a sad story that shows how imperative this principle is when applied to human resources.

It is NOT ETHICAL to lay off perfectly qualified and capable employees, simply to re-hire those same employees or other candidates who are willing to do the same job for less. It’s actual cost (which management gurus can’t seem to comprehend) for such unethical practices are not seen in black or red ink.

It’s seen in the lack of morale, the lack of employee ownership, the lack of quality. It’s seen in shifts of loyalty, and decrease in retaining senior employees with time served. In any organization these are supposed to be the people you want to keep in a company, and you look at ANY truly successful business – they understand this concept.

When I define a successful business – unfortunately for a lot of greed-driven executives out there my definition is not based on a bottom-line profit margin that funds their $10 M severance packages. Certainly, it is the entitlement of the ownership or directors of an organization to benefit and receive profits for both themselves and the shareholders; but NOT at the cost of ethical treatment for their employees.

Whatever happened to “better products”? Old-fashioned logic that dictated if you invested effort into creating the best product, you also would create the most purchased product; that’s been replaced by a mentality that we join forces with other “supposedly competitive” industry players to create mediocre products and fix prices (of course in a manner that won’t actually be construed as such or subject to legal ramifications), then we can laterally shift our human forces however we need to in achieving a lower cost and higher profit.

Anyone who says “there’s more to it” or “it’s complicated” or “you’re over-simplifying” – my response to you is: “you’re probably in on it, or wishing you were, or would if you were able to!”

We SHOULD punish companies that seek to increase profits by decreasing wages, for no other reason than to hire the same talent at a lower cost. However, to be fair – such a policy should only affect those companies whose executive management retains members receiving in excess of multiple $100k per year. Either that, or implement the same standard minimum wages applicable within the US to any company doing business within, from, or involving the US.

We have become an economy that invests the most money in image, marketing, and PR (which = BS wrapped in a fancy box with ribbon and bow) – no wonder the output is an equally unsatisfactory product.

My $.02 – for what it’s worth.




By TheGreek on 6/12/2007 11:07:33 AM , Rating: 2
Well said, but totally wasted, on this batch of readers, for they view ethics as limiting their freedom. That's all they choose to see. If you had posted earlier you may have even been flamed.


Employ more Aussies then...
By sqrt1 on 6/9/2007 12:29:26 AM , Rating: 2
Don't know if you guys are aware, but Australia has a special agreement where Australians can work in America using H1-B type visas. These are called E3 visas.

http://canberra.usembassy.gov/consular/visa-e3.htm...




RE: Employ more Aussies then...
By TheGreek on 6/12/2007 4:52:39 PM , Rating: 1
Perhaps I can go to Bangalore and open a 7-11?


HAHAHAHA
By Howard on 6/8/2007 1:02:48 PM , Rating: 2
That is an AWESOME picture of Samir.




By darkpaw on 6/8/2007 3:48:19 PM , Rating: 2
If it wasn't mainly about cheap labor, the companies using the visas wouldn't be so opposed to some of the proposed changes that have also been brought up. I would support raising the cap if restrictions like the ones suggested have been put into place.

While raising the caps so politicians have suggested:

Requiring the jobs to be posted on the Dept. of Labor website before getting a visa. If there are no Americans to fill these jobs, how does posting them hurt?

Not allowing companies laying people off to get visas. Why allow companies to can American workers to replace them with cheap imports? Sure companies need to be able to get rid of low performers, but if you're having massive lay-offs while bringing in new people from overseas its not because your old workers were all useless.

A set percentage of workers in the company being based in America. This is targeted at the Indian companies that use the visas soley to help outsource more US jobs to India. Why should we bring in foriegn workers to act as a bridge to workers in their home country for off-shored jobs?

The workers should also be able to port their visa easily to another company with an open visa position. The companies that heavily use the visa's can treat their employees like crap because they can always threaten to remove their sponsorship and have the employee deported. What employee is going to complain if they are under constant threat of deportation from their employer?




By pugster on 6/8/2007 4:26:34 PM , Rating: 2
I've been in IT for 10+ years and I am looking for a better job. Give me one before giving it to some lower paying foreigner.




By mmike87 on 6/12/2007 9:38:08 AM , Rating: 2
Many companies see foreign workers, depending on their type of visa, as essentially indentured servants. It's harder for a foreign worker to switch jobs, and with some visas very, very difficult. Companies will reuqire workers sign on for "n" number of years to repay the processing charges visa transfers and applications.

That said I am against more foreign workers. This country is being conquered from within. We've abandoned our entire manufacturing base, are outsourcing our technology base, and what we can't out source we fill with foreign workers. Anyone see a problem here? We're becoming a nation of "project managers" - the only thing we do is "manage" foreign workers domestically and abroad. What happens when the workers do not want to be managed anymore?

I personally am pretty pissed off that we cannot have Christmas, Easter, and Halloween celebrations at work anymore because of the risk of offending foreign workers.

These people ARE taking American jobs. Period. You are lying to yourself if you think otherwise. There is a demand right now ... the deman will, in time, create more American workers to fill the jobs. However, since these jobs are already filled by foreign workers - many of whom are from countries less than friendly to the US, by the way - there is no reason for any Americans to work towards filling these positions.

This is not in our national interest. We need, as ANY country needs, to have a core base of manufacturing, technology, and business that is based in the US and staffed by American workers. What happens if there is a serious dispute with India? China? What happens if these countries start to seriously leverage their hold on us through their workforces which staff and supply so many of our businesses and industries in this country?

The liberals will throw the "bigot" label at me and I do not care. It's not about anything but preserving this country and OUR way of life and OUR future. We have the right and the obligation to do this, yet we do not. We just keep pumping out business school grads like there is no tomorrow. Let the Indians, Chinese, etc. do all the math and science and we'll just "manage" them.

Yeah, right. Flame on.




"We’re Apple. We don’t wear suits. We don’t even own suits." -- Apple CEO Steve Jobs









botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki