[ale][OT] 08.20.04 on pbs... emphasis on it jobs going ===> u sa

[Bob Toxen]

On Fri, Aug 20, 2004 at 06:15:09PM -0400, Hogg, Russell E. wrote:
> This is always disheartening, especially the "Train Your Replacement" stuff.
> I've been laid off and had to move to Macon (yes, it's a backwater).
> Fortunately I wasn't a homeowner and didn't have any mouths to feed (aside
> from my own)

> FWIW, there are jobs coming into the US, (though not in the same numbers I'm
> sure) it's all relative, Labor costs here are far lower than they are in
> Germany for example because of the ridiculous labor law there.  Some 3rd of
> the population under 30 there is "unemployed" if memory serves.  Of course
> their government literally pays them so they aren't exactly starving.  
> (You can do this when foolish Americans pay for your defense - they spend
> less than 1% of the budget on their Military - Again going from memory)
> A guy I work with here has a buddy over there who hasn't worked since 1992.
The doller has lost 20% of its value as compared to most of the world's
currencies, particularly European currencies and even Canada.  This
certainly helps us.  So does many companies who outsourced discovering
that often it's not a good deal.  If you read all of the offshoring
advice, they emphasize choosing companies with highly trained programmers
and managers.  Duh.  If they did that here, they'd have good code for
a reasonable price.

The talk a few months ago by Kerry about offshoring being evil and other
publicity has, fortunately, scared some companies away, fearing adverse
reaction by customers.  (Before you go join his campaign, keep in mind
that in his decades as a U.S. Senator he has introduced NO legislation
benefitting IT professionals and has backed adverse legislation and
Clinton didn't do anything either.)

> I guess my question is what can be done about it?
> I personally think the Government telling me who I can, and can't do
> business with sounds nothing like freedom.
> Tariffs and the like have never had positive results as far as I know.
> (very little that the Fed mucks with does)
> All that Smoot-Hawley* stuff had a lot to do with starting the great
> depression.
That's very debatable.

Most of our "wonderful" trading partners have LOTS of tariffs, import
duties, etc. and it DOES greatly help a country's domestic workers
and businesses if done intelligently.

> This leaves me with one vote left.  My Pocket book.  I'm guessing there are
> web sites out there keeping tallies of who does the most off shoring.
> Maybe I'll write all those companies and explain that I don't appreciate it
> and that I'm taking my business elsewhere.  I think an organized effort by
> us will serve us far better than asking our government to put restrictions
> in place further eroding our freedoms 
> (One party eroding from the left and the other eroding from the right).
The three biggest IT offshoring of programmers are:

     Microsoft
     IBM
     Hewlett-Packard

All three are on my "don't give 'em business if there is any alternative"
list.  I'm also phasing out my Mindsproing/Earthsuck connections for the
same reason.

> I'll also point out that innovation means people losing their jobs.  People
> are the only costs of business.  
> When you figure out a way to make your product with less raw materials it
> damages the guy you bought the materials from (at least in the short term).
> When you figure out how to build the product in fewer steps the people
> building it pay the price.
> You save Money and sell more product at a lower cost.
> People in general benefit because more people can now afford your product.  
> Then maybe you buy just as much raw material as you did before but the
> system doesn't balance perfectly.
> Blacksmiths who specialized in shoeing horses probably never recovered from
> the advent of the car.

> GM pretty much destroyed Flint Michigan in the 80s but that cost cutting may
> have saved the company that employs however many thousands of auto workers
> today.
That's different. GM cars in the 1970's were junk that fell apart in 2 years
and the workers did't give a damn.

> One of the founding fathers actually described this, He described the
> welfare state as one where those who benefited from innovation could be
> taxed to support those who paid the price.  This bears some resemblance to
> the modern UNEMPLOYMENT program as opposed to WELFARE which got reformed
> during the Clinton years (Thanks Billy).  

> We've had some serious FLAME WARS over this stuff in the past, lets keep
> this one friendly, I think we all understand and feel the pain on this
> issue.  Maybe we can have a meaningful discussion about it.  
> Does Anyone know of such a web site?  
> Maybe someone disagrees with my outlook and can offer fact to repudiate it.


> ME ---> Digs flame retardant suit out of dresser drawer -  searches in vain
> for a helmet, ask Kramer if I can drink from the fire hose.


> (Ducking) -Russ
Flame thrower off.

Bob


> * - Protectionist U.S. trade legislation that raised tariff rates on most
> articles imported by the United States, triggering comparable tariff
> increases by U.S. trading partners. The Tariff Act of 1930 is also known as
> the Smoot-Hawley Tariff, after the two legislators who sponsored it, and
> sometimes as the Grundy Tariff, after Joseph Grundy, president of the
> Pennsylvania Manufacturers Association, who was the chief lobbyist for it. 
> See also: Beggar-Thy-Neighbor Policy, Column 2 Rates, Countervailing Duties,
> Imports, Protectionism, Reciprocity, Retaliation, Tariff, Trade Agreements
> Act of 1934, 
> http://www.asycuda.org/cuglossa.asp?term=Tariff%20Act%20of%201930

> -------------------------------
> --  Even though this E-Mail has been scanned and found clean of  
> --  known viruses, OPM can not guarantee this message is virus free.
> -------------------------------
> --  This message was automatically generated.
> -------------------------------oo