"'Too White' Berkeley Science Labs May Be Cut"
Mike
http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2010/01/too_white_berke.php
'Too White' Berkeley Science Labs May Be Cut
by Roger Hedgecock (more by this author)
Posted 01/29/2010 ET
The Berkeley (CA) Board of Education will consider, at its February 3
meeting, whether or not to cancel before and after school Science Labs
for Advanced Placement Science classes at Berkeley High School because
the classes are attended largely by white students. The proposal is
aimed at addressing "Berkeley's dismal racial achievement gap"
According to published reports, the proposal to cancel the science
labs and re-allocate the money for five teaching positions to an
unspecified program of "equity grants" to help struggling "minority"
students comes from Berkeley High School Principal Jim Slemp and the
school's Governance Council.
Berkeley Unified School District Superintendent William Huyett said
the unspecified new programs could include "a course on supporting
kids' scholarship -- note-taking skills, how to study -- and helps
them apply those things to the courses they are taking."
Huyett, a former AP Physics teacher himself, has been quoted as
believing that moving the lab classes from before and after school to
inside the school day would improve participation in the AP classes by
"minority" students. Huyett admits that limiting labs to the school
day would decrease the overall number of lab classes available to
students. The reason lab classes were scheduled before and after
school in the first place was the limited number of labs on campus.
Huyett, speaking for the Berkeley High School Governance Council, says
that "the six teachers (to be re-allocated from AP Lab
classes)...should help all students, not only those preparing for
college" and "should be used for other classes, not only science."
Berkeley's AP Science courses are an outstanding success. In a time
when we are constantly reminded of the need for American students to
get better at Physics, Biology, and Chemistry, 82% of Berkeley's AP
chemistry students passed the national exam. The national passing rate
is 55.2%.
Mardi Sicular-Mertens, a science teacher at Berkeley High School for
24 years, recently told the school board that her AP classes include
17.5% African-American and 13.9% Latino students. Apparently, that's
not enough. Chemistry teacher Aaron Glimme said that "there is a clear
difference by race as to who shows up to the lab classes."
In other words, the AP classes are open to all students, but because
"minority" students don't "show up" to these lab classes in the same
percentage as the percentage of "minority" students attending Berkeley
High overall, the classes must be cancelled to close the "dismal
racial achievement gap."
This being Berkeley, groups have organized on both sides of the issue.
The BHS Science teachers have sent a letter to Berkeley parents and
residents seeking support. An online petition to preserve the
successful Science Lab program has hundreds of signatures.
Proponents of the class cuts cite the need to address the "achievement
gap." According to the California Department of Education, while white
students at BHS are 90% proficient in English, only 30.8% of African-
American students are. While white students are 87.1% proficient in
Math, only 31.3% of African-American students are.
The Los Angeles Times points out that other largely "minority" schools
have much narrower "gaps" but cites no specific program differences
between the schools or reasons for the differences in statistics
between campuses.
Unsaid (and unsayable in politically correct speech) in this debate is
the obvious. If classes are open to all students, why should those
students who choose the harder classes be punished in the name of
those students who did not choose to work as hard ?
Berkeley High School has a first rate reputation for providing equal
opportunity to all students. Unequal outcomes in student achievement
are the result of the effort each student puts into taking advantage
of those opportunities. Narrowing the "achievement gap" by eliminating
the achievers doesn't help either the achievers or the rest of the
students.
Roger Hedgecock is a nationally-syndicated radio talk host. Visit
rogerhedgecock.com. The Roger Hedgecock Show is syndicated on the
Radio America network.
Me, ...again!
(see full quote of OP at end)
Whites, in California, are already a minority. You should easily find
statistics on this.
Talk to Indians on alt.computer.consultants (etc) and they are bragging
that the majority of students (eng. & sci) in the USA are Indian, and they
are getting most of the eng. & sci jobs, also bragging that they are making so
much more money than American whites (see the NG archives), and suggesting
and/or saying outright that "Americans are lazy/dumb/stupid" (check the
NG archives).
One Indian said that when he went with his kids to some science event
(somewhere on the east coast of the US) for the kids, the only other kids
he saw there were Indians or Asians. And, I know from personal contact
that the graduate students in sci/eng in US schools are heavily
Indian/Chinese/Asian, too, if not dominant in fraction of the whole
student population.
Old Pif
> (see full quote of OP at end)
>
> Whites, in California, are already a minority. You should easily find
> statistics on this.
>
> Talk to Indians on alt.computer.consultants (etc) and they are bragging
> that the majority of students (eng. & sci) in the USA are Indian, and they
> are getting most of the eng. & sci jobs, also bragging that they are making so
> much more money than American whites (see the NG archives), and suggesting
> and/or saying outright that "Americans are lazy/dumb/stupid" (check the
> NG archives).
>
> One Indian said that when he went with his kids to some science event
> (somewhere on the east coast of the US) for the kids, the only other kids
> he saw there were Indians or Asians. And, I know from personal contact
> that the graduate students in sci/eng in US schools are heavily
> Indian/Chinese/Asian, too, if not dominant in fraction of the whole
> student population.
>
Can Whites apply for affirmative action? I have heard that they tried
to abolish it but if it is still alive Whites can be protected.
Me, ...again!
Yeah, just google on "reverse discrimination" and get tons of hits.
kamal
> (see full quote of OP at end)
>
> Whites, in California, are already a minority. You should easily find
> statistics on this.
>
> Talk to Indians on alt.computer.consultants (etc) and they are bragging
> that the majority of students (eng. & sci) in the USA are Indian, and they
no -they are chinese. Indians are #2 in the no of foreign sci/eng
graduates in the US.
> are getting most of the eng. & sci jobs, also bragging that they are making so
> much more money than American whites (see the NG archives), and suggesting
> and/or saying outright that "Americans are lazy/dumb/stupid" (check the
> NG archives).
>
no -the no of americans enrolling into sci/eng is low because they
dn't find it financially viable to opt for sci/eng. Imagine how much
better life would be with a business/marketing/law degree?
> One Indian said that when he went with his kids to some science event
> (somewhere on the east coast of the US) for the kids, the only other kids
> he saw there were Indians or Asians. And, I know from personal contact
> that the graduate students in sci/eng in US schools are heavily
> Indian/Chinese/Asian, too, if not dominant in fraction of the whole
> student population.
>
yes -and if you have a problem with that, you should tell your govt
not to issue student visas to people piling on taxpayer funded
schools.
>
>
> On Sun, 31 Jan 2010, Mike wrote:
> >http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=35380
> >http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2010/01/too_white_berke.php
>
> > 'Too White' Berkeley Science Labs May Be Cut
> > by Roger Hedgecock (more by this author)
> > Posted 01/29/2010 ET
>
> > The Berkeley (CA) Board of Education will consider, at its February 3
> > meeting, whether or not to cancel before and after school Science Labs
> > for Advanced Placement Science classes at Berkeley High School because
> > the classes are attended largely by white students. The proposal is
> > aimed at addressing "Berkeley's dismal racial achievement gap"
>
surprising. They were at the forefront of fixing the racial gap. There
is also a little India in the vicinity of UC berkeley.
regards
-kamal
> > Radio America network.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
ind...@india.com
kamal says...
>no -they are chinese. Indians are #2 in the no of foreign sci/eng
>graduates in the US.
In 2007 they were the #1 with 31K doing grad or above. China was
#2 at 20K. But after that India lost that position as fewer students
came to US for further studies.
>yes -and if you have a problem with that, you should tell your govt
>not to issue student visas to people piling on taxpayer funded
>schools.
I doubt whether any univ would want that, given that more than
50% of Phd's awarded in USA are given to those who were not
born in USA.
kamal
> In article <975a1f70-f3f1-4195-85a7-6404b974b...@t34g2000prm.googlegroups.com>,
> kamal says...
>
> >no -they are chinese. Indians are #2 in the no of foreign sci/eng
> >graduates in the US.
>
> In 2007 they were the #1 with 31K doing grad or above. China was
> #2 at 20K. But after that India lost that position as fewer students
> came to US for further studies.
>
in did not want to be held captive by their employer or face race-
riots by unemployed americans.
> >yes -and if you have a problem with that, you should tell your govt
> >not to issue student visas to people piling on taxpayer funded
> >schools.
>
> I doubt whether any univ would want that, given that more than
> 50% of Phd's awarded in USA are given to those who were not
> born in USA.
the univ will not want it, but the funding to bring them on-board &
educate them comes from taxpeyer money. Since they are convinced that
people coming in amounts to India exporting its poverty and population
to the US -they might as well petition their lawmakers not to issue
visas to enable them rather than indulging in race riots or just
grumbling on usenet. US govt is not obliged to grant visas to anybody.
regards
-kamal
Old Pif
> On Feb 1, 4:23 pm, ind...@india.com wrote:> In article <975a1f70-f3f1-4195-85a7-6404b974b...@t34g2000prm.googlegroups.com>,
> > kamal says...
>
> > >no -they are chinese. Indians are #2 in the no of foreign sci/eng
> > >graduates in the US.
>
> > In 2007 they were the #1 with 31K doing grad or above. China was
> > #2 at 20K. But after that India lost that position as fewer students
> > came to US for further studies.
>
> maybe coz they did not have a clear path to permanent residency a-as
> in did not want to be held captive by their employer or face race-
> riots by unemployed americans.
>
Out of sheer curiosity, why they are interested in permanent residency
in the country staffed with racists, bigots and other unpleasant folk
that does not appreciate their intellectual supremacy?
Me, ...again!
On Sun, 31 Jan 2010, kamal wrote:
> On Feb 1, 12:41 am, "Me, ...again!" <arthu...@mv.com> wrote:
>> (see full quote of OP at end)
>>
>> Whites, in California, are already a minority. You should easily find
>> statistics on this.
>>
> yes -if you include illegals into the count.
No "if". Whites are not Asian or Hispanic.
>> Talk to Indians on alt.computer.consultants (etc) and they are bragging
>> that the majority of students (eng. & sci) in the USA are Indian, and they
>
> no
Yes according to several Indians.
-they are chinese. Indians are #2 in the no of foreign sci/eng
> graduates in the US.
>
>> are getting most of the eng. & sci jobs, also bragging that they are making so
>> much more money than American whites (see the NG archives), and suggesting
>> and/or saying outright that "Americans are lazy/dumb/stupid" (check the
>> NG archives).
>>
> no
See the archives and notice your Indian brethern making the comments.
-the no of americans enrolling into sci/eng is low because they
> dn't find it financially viable to opt for sci/eng.
That is _my_ answer, not yours.
Imagine how much
> better life would be with a business/marketing/law degree?
>
>> One Indian said that when he went with his kids to some science event
>> (somewhere on the east coast of the US) for the kids, the only other kids
>> he saw there were Indians or Asians. And, I know from personal contact
>> that the graduate students in sci/eng in US schools are heavily
>> Indian/Chinese/Asian, too, if not dominant in fraction of the whole
>> student population.
>>
> yes -and if you have a problem with that, you should tell your govt
> not to issue student visas to people piling on taxpayer funded
> schools.
All part of the free ride to Indians, on a silver platter.
>>
>>
>> On Sun, 31 Jan 2010, Mike wrote:
>>> http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=35380
>>> http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2010/01/too_white_berke.php
>>
>>> 'Too White' Berkeley Science Labs May Be Cut
>>> by Roger Hedgecock (more by this author)
>>> Posted 01/29/2010 ET
>>
>>> The Berkeley (CA) Board of Education will consider, at its February 3
>>> meeting, whether or not to cancel before and after school Science Labs
>>> for Advanced Placement Science classes at Berkeley High School because
>>> the classes are attended largely by white students. The proposal is
>>> aimed at addressing "Berkeley's dismal racial achievement gap"
>>
> surprising. They were at the forefront of fixing the racial gap. There
> is also a little India in the vicinity of UC berkeley.
There is a lot of "little everything" in California.
==================================
Me, ...again!
On Mon, 1 Feb 2010 ind...@india.com wrote:
> In article <975a1f70-f3f1-4195...@t34g2000prm.googlegroups.com>,
> kamal says...
>
>> no -they are chinese. Indians are #2 in the no of foreign sci/eng
>> graduates in the US.
>
> In 2007 they were the #1 with 31K doing grad or above. China was
> #2 at 20K. But after that India lost that position as fewer students
> came to US for further studies.
>
>> yes -and if you have a problem with that, you should tell your govt
>> not to issue student visas to people piling on taxpayer funded
>> schools.
>
> I doubt whether any univ would want that,
Because they like cheap labor, too.
given that more than
> 50% of Phd's awarded in USA are given to those who were not
> born in USA.
Because USA educational quality is still #1.
Me, ...again!
On Mon, 1 Feb 2010, kamal wrote:
> On Feb 1, 4:23 pm, ind...@india.com wrote:
>> In article <975a1f70-f3f1-4195-85a7-6404b974b...@t34g2000prm.googlegroups.com>,
>> kamal says...
>>
>>> no -they are chinese. Indians are #2 in the no of foreign sci/eng
>>> graduates in the US.
>>
>> In 2007 they were the #1 with 31K doing grad or above. China was
>> #2 at 20K. But after that India lost that position as fewer students
>> came to US for further studies.
>>
> maybe coz they did not have a clear path to permanent residency a-as
> in did not want to be held captive by their employer or face race-
> riots by unemployed americans.
Leave it to Kamal Prasad to always give a hint of anti-nonwhite racism
wherever he can.
>>> yes -and if you have a problem with that, you should tell your govt
>>> not to issue student visas to people piling on taxpayer funded
>>> schools.
>>
>> I doubt whether any univ would want that, given that more than
>> 50% of Phd's awarded in USA are given to those who were not
>> born in USA.
>
> the univ will not want it, but the funding to bring them on-board &
> educate them comes from taxpeyer money.
So, it is really the taxpayer that owns all those funded positions!!
All according to your "theory" that employers own jobs.
Since they are convinced that
> people coming in amounts to India exporting its poverty and population
> to the US
..and importing US wealth to India, and dumping its people in the USA
becasue India can't make enough jobs for its own people.
-they might as well petition their lawmakers not to issue
> visas to enable them rather than indulging in race riots or just
> grumbling on usenet.
With Kamal grumbling all the time with his anti-white crap.
> US govt is not obliged to grant visas to anybody.
Big corporratiions, of course, always say they can't find workers (at the
cheap price).
> regards
> -kamal
>
>
>
>
Mike
PHDs in physics and chemistry recipients go to foreigners. Now wonder
there are few Americans for the security clearance-required scientific
positions at the labs.
maybe we should try convincing the anti-science and anti-math folks at
NEA and ATF to emphasize more math and science in K-12...And the
military is now emphasizing this....
reverse discrimination? well see "why is the NFL 70 percent African-
American?" at http://www.jonentine.com/articles/dark_thoughts_recon.htm
mike
Me, ...again!
On Mon, 1 Feb 2010, Mike wrote:
> well, according to the NSF, GAO, CRS, DOD, something like 90% of all
> PHDs in physics and chemistry recipients go to foreigners. Now wonder
> there are few Americans for the security clearance-required scientific
> positions at the labs.
You get all those labs, agencies, offices to offer more jobs, pay
something more like real pay instead of postdoc pay, offer some job
security instead of year-to-year contracts, etc) and you'll get all the
Americans you need for S&E labor.
> maybe we should try convincing the anti-science and anti-math folks at
> NEA and ATF to emphasize more math and science in K-12...And the
> military is now emphasizing this....
See above.
> reverse discrimination? well see "why is the NFL 70 percent African-
> American?" at http://www.jonentine.com/articles/dark_thoughts_recon.htm
Ever think about when you go to a Chinese restaurant and see only Asian
faces (at least in 90-95% of those restaurants, at least 90-95% of the
time)? Most of them barely speak english. I wonder how they get away with
that, too.
And, in my neighborhood (35 mile radius) we get a lot of Russians, E.
Europeaners, etc., working in restaurants as waitstaff, grocery stores
as cashiers, etc., and they all speak excellent english. And, as I have
been asking them over the last ten years, at least half of them are also
going to school, enrolled as business majors, economics majors, even law
and accounting. Think that tells you something?
> mike
>
>
kamal
I answered your question (perhaps in part) before you could ask it.
> > in did not want to be held captive by their employer or face race-
> > riots by unemployed americans.
people who take the trouble to acquire education in another country do
so because they expect the degree obtained to land them a job in that
country. More often than not, the degree is tailored to the local
industry's requirement. Having decided that they want a job which will
pay back their expenses and student loans, they will not like the idea
of being held captive by their employer (as in threatened that visa
will be cancelled and they will be handed over to law-enforcement
authorities for violating visa) or face the brunt of race-riots.
> that does not appreciate their intellectual supremacy?
no -they don't consider themselves superior. Just that they are
willing to work harder for lesser money and lower career prospects
than the native born folks. The position for which they opt for -will
probably attract lesser competent native born workers (and you could
say that foreign born workers consider themselves superior to the
other native applicants for the same position).
regards
-kamal
Old Pif
> On Feb 1, 6:48 pm, Old Pif <old...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Feb 1, 8:02 am, kamal <kama...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 1, 4:23 pm, ind...@india.com wrote:> In article <975a1f70-f3f1-4195-85a7-6404b974b...@t34g2000prm.googlegroups.com>,
> > > > kamal says...
>
> > > > >no -they are chinese. Indians are #2 in the no of foreign sci/eng
> > > > >graduates in the US.
>
> > > > In 2007 they were the #1 with 31K doing grad or above. China was
> > > > #2 at 20K. But after that India lost that position as fewer students
> > > > came to US for further studies.
>
> > > maybe coz they did not have a clear path to permanent residency a-as
> > > in did not want to be held captive by their employer or face race-
> > > riots by unemployed americans.
>
> > Out of sheer curiosity, why they are interested in permanent residency
> > in the country staffed with racists, bigots and other unpleasant folk
>
> I answered your question (perhaps in part) before you could ask it.
>
Did you? I don't recall
>
> people who take the trouble to acquire education in another country do
> so because they expect the degree obtained to land them a job in that
> country.
>
Yup, that what I thought - the feeling of entitlement, but this is not
an answer why they are so eager to live in the country which as some
of them claim is the center point of all evil in this planet.
kamal
> On Feb 2, 12:38 am, kamal <kama...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 1, 6:48 pm, Old Pif <old...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 1, 8:02 am, kamal <kama...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Feb 1, 4:23 pm, ind...@india.com wrote:> In article <975a1f70-f3f1-4195-85a7-6404b974b...@t34g2000prm.googlegroups.com>,
> > > > > kamal says...
>
> > > > > >no -they are chinese. Indians are #2 in the no of foreign sci/eng
> > > > > >graduates in the US.
>
> > > > > In 2007 they were the #1 with 31K doing grad or above. China was
> > > > > #2 at 20K. But after that India lost that position as fewer students
> > > > > came to US for further studies.
>
> > > > maybe coz they did not have a clear path to permanent residency a-as
> > > > in did not want to be held captive by their employer or face race-
> > > > riots by unemployed americans.
>
> > > Out of sheer curiosity, why they are interested in permanent residency
> > > in the country staffed with racists, bigots and other unpleasant folk
>
> > I answered your question (perhaps in part) before you could ask it.
>
> Did you? I don't recall
>
posted this the 3rd time:-
> > > > in did not want to be held captive by their employer or face race-
> > > > riots by unemployed americans.
is it that you don't like the facts stated by me?
>
>
> > people who take the trouble to acquire education in another country do
> > so because they expect the degree obtained to land them a job in that
> > country.
>
> Yup, that what I thought - the feeling of entitlement, but this is not
the feeling that money invested in training for a profession should
not go in vain -which is different from being entitled to a job.
> an answer why they are so eager to live in the country which as some
> of them claim is the center point of all evil in this planet.- Hide quoted text -
>
lots of people need to put up with obnoxious people(not to mention
employers) just to make ends meet. The fact that someone is aspiring
for a better life and so moves to another country -only to be preyed
upon by politicians and middle-men in that country is not the
migrant's fault and it doesn't mean that the politician and his
henchmen are not to blame for preying on the migrant. All throughout I
have been hiring just 1 line from you and art -who is forcing you guys
to come here, or nobody is holding you captive and you can always go
back to where you came from. The missing sentence is that they come
just to improve their chances of survival and that the cost of
relocation makes them decide against leaving the US. It is easier to
stay out than to enter the US and quit at one's own expense.
If you are so sure that these people coming into your country are
exporting their over-population and poverty, why don't you get your
govt to stop issuing them visas? The answer -which you will not admit -
is that you want them to come but want your share of the loot from the
powers-that-be. That explains why you are debating on how/whether it
benefits you -coz it is all about "what's in it for me?".
regards
-kamal
Me, ...again!
For the last five or more years, you and your racist Indian friends have
been demonizing only white Americans and white Europeans who "killed all
the American Indians and stole their land" and "playing the race card"
yourself (anyone can find these statements in the NG archives), and the
_implication_ is that you and your Indian friends do this to show "whites"
as morally/ethically/criminally inferior to Indians (in addition to your
offer to work harder and cheaper (see below).
Just that they are
> willing to work harder for lesser money and lower career prospects
> than the native born folks.
And, the other sub-theme in your posts (as well as the posts by some of
your other Indian friends) is that Indians are "entitled" to say that
Americans are _not_ "entitled" to a standard of living commensurate with
the cost of that standard of living in America.
The position for which they opt for -will
> probably attract lesser competent native born workers (and you could
> say that foreign born workers consider themselves superior to the
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> other native applicants for the same position).
And, here is where you finish your story about the "superiority" of
"yourself".
Like I have said for the last many years, out of all the foreigners I've
ever met in my life, it is only Indians who have these views in addition
to making remarks such as "Americans are lazy and dumb" and stating that
they "enjoy sending Americans to the hot dog stand" (such comments are
also easily found in the NG archives, in addition to your own).
Then we have Tambi Dude with his own words (approximately): "I get
infinite pleasure out of screwing job candidates with impossible to answer
questions [in interviews with applicants]."
> regards
> -kamal
>
>
Me, ...again!
On Tue, 2 Feb 2010, kamal wrote:
> On Feb 2, 11:05 am, Old Pif <old...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Feb 2, 12:38 am, kamal <kama...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Feb 1, 6:48 pm, Old Pif <old...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> On Feb 1, 8:02 am, kamal <kama...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>> On Feb 1, 4:23 pm, ind...@india.com wrote:> In article <975a1f70-f3f1-4195-85a7-6404b974b...@t34g2000prm.googlegroups.com>,
>>>>>> kamal says...
>>
>>>>>>> no -they are chinese. Indians are #2 in the no of foreign sci/eng
>>>>>>> graduates in the US.
>>
>>>>>> In 2007 they were the #1 with 31K doing grad or above. China was
>>>>>> #2 at 20K. But after that India lost that position as fewer students
>>>>>> came to US for further studies.
>>
>>>>> maybe coz they did not have a clear path to permanent residency a-as
>>>>> in did not want to be held captive by their employer or face race-
>>>>> riots by unemployed americans.
>>
>>>> Out of sheer curiosity, why they are interested in permanent residency
>>>> in the country staffed with racists, bigots and other unpleasant folk
>>
>>> I answered your question (perhaps in part) before you could ask it.
>>
>> Did you? I don't recall
>>
> why do you have a problem reading this text below despite my having
> posted this the 3rd time:-
>
>>>>> in did not want to be held captive by their employer or face race-
>>>>> riots by unemployed americans.
>
> is it that you don't like the facts stated by me?
Your facts are only a piece of the whole story and you "cherry pick" from
all the facts only what you need to demonize the USA and Americans. It is
what you have done for at least five years and anyone who reads the NG
archives can find out what you have been saying all these years.
>>
>>
>>> people who take the trouble to acquire education in another country do
>>> so because they expect the degree obtained to land them a job in that
>>> country.
>>
>> Yup, that what I thought - the feeling of entitlement, but this is not
>
> the feeling that money invested in training for a profession should
> not go in vain -which is different from being entitled to a job.
You, yourself have even stated a few times that you feel _entitled_ to
move anywhere on the planet in defiance of any and all local immigration
laws and customs.
>> an answer why they are so eager to live in the country which as some
>> of them claim is the center point of all evil in this planet.- Hide quoted text -
>>
> lots of people need to put up with obnoxious people(not to mention
> employers) just to make ends meet. The fact that someone is aspiring
> for a better life and so moves to another country -only to be preyed
> upon by politicians and middle-men in that country is not the
> migrant's fault and it doesn't mean that the politician and his
> henchmen are not to blame for preying on the migrant. All throughout I
> have been hiring just 1 line from you and art -who is forcing you guys
> to come here, or nobody is holding you captive and you can always go
> back to where you came from. The missing sentence is that they come
> just to improve their chances of survival and that the cost of
> relocation makes them decide against leaving the US.
There are several missing sentences from YOU. Immigrants also depress
local wage scales, displace existing workers from their jobs, and bring
other problems such as a drain on local resources.
Another missing sentence from you are all the immigrants who go back
because they can't "make it" in the USA or life is better in some way back
home.
It is easier to
> stay out than to enter the US and quit at one's own expense.
>
> If you are so sure that these people coming into your country are
> exporting their over-population and poverty,
It has a formal name: labor dumping.
why don't you get your
> govt to stop issuing them visas?
There are grass roots organizations that are attempting to do this.
The answer -which you will not admit -
> is that you want them to come but want your share of the loot from the
> powers-that-be.
I will admit many people want cheap prices at Walmart, but Walmart also
decides what to put on its shelves. And, YOUR answer you will not admit is
not the whole story, either, since you can ask anyone who lost their job
to cheap labor is not happy, and the public opinion polls are going
against the story that globalization is good for America.
That explains why you are debating on how/whether it
> benefits you -coz it is all about "what's in it for me?".
What is in it for America is that US CEOs want the immigrants, and the
immigrants want to come, but you will not admit that it hurts the local
economy.
Old Pif
> > > people who take the trouble to acquire education in another country do
> > > so because they expect the degree obtained to land them a job in that
> > > country.
>
> > Yup, that what I thought - the feeling of entitlement, but this is not
>
> the feeling that money invested in training for a profession should
> not go in vain -which is different from being entitled to a job.
>
And how it is different from the feelings of an American who invested
the same money into his/her education and can't get a job in his own
country? Or invested his personal time AND money into his/her
professional development, accumulated years of experience and can't
get a job. Should we compile a dictionary to translate it into your
speak:
the feeling of an Indian when the money for education and professional
development have been wasted is called entitlement when experienced by
everybody else.
Next entry.
Old Pif
>
> > an answer why they are so eager to live in the country which as some
> > of them claim is the center point of all evil in this planet.
>
What is below is not a straight answer but I think we can find it
> ... someone is aspiring for a better life and so moves to another country ...
> ... they come just to improve their chances of survival ...
>
Good. That is not at all different from why millions have been coming
to America before you.
The only thing which is not clear why Americans are stupid and lazy?
Because they allowed you in?
Straypuppy
Old Pif says...
>And how it is different from the feelings of an American who invested
>the same money into his/her education and can't get a job in his own
>country? Or invested his personal time AND money into his/her
>professional development, accumulated years of experience and can't
>get a job. Should we compile a dictionary to translate it into your
>speak:
Can you prove that such people are good at what they do or
are plain mediocre.
Straypuppy
kamal says...
> If you are so sure that these people coming into your country are
>exporting their over-population and poverty, why don't you get your
>govt to stop issuing them visas? The answer -which you will not admit -
>is that you want them to come but want your share of the loot from the
>powers-that-be. That explains why you are debating on how/whether it
>benefits you -coz it is all about "what's in it for me?".
You ask this 100000 times and you will never get a response.
The truth is, Americans LOVE immigrants so that their god
given birth right to a superior standard of living is maintained.
Dinner for a family at a restaurant which costs $75 will cost
$150 if the restaurant does not employ illegal migrants. Their
beautiful house and community will stink worse than a slum in
Mumbai if the garbage cleaners are not illegal immigrants.
And if the city employs 'real' americans, then the property
tax would hit the roof.
They love buying cheap things at Bestbuy and Walmart as if
buying a 200$ netbook or laptop is their birth right.
HOWEVER THE MOMENT THESE BASTARDS FACE COMPETITION FROM
OUTSIDERS IN THEIR 100K JOB , THEY ALL START SHOUTING AT
THEIR LOUDEST.
Good that US companies are screwing them with H1B and outsourcing.
Me, ...again!
On Tue, 2 Feb 2010, Old Pif wrote:
> On Feb 2, 6:40 am, kamal <kama...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>> people who take the trouble to acquire education in another country do
>>>> so because they expect the degree obtained to land them a job in that
>>>> country.
>>
>>> Yup, that what I thought - the feeling of entitlement, but this is not
>>
>> the feeling that money invested in training for a profession should
>> not go in vain -which is different from being entitled to a job.
>>
>
> And how it is different from the feelings of an American who invested
> the same money into his/her education and can't get a job in his own
> country?
Kamal and his ilk would display the selfish-greedy behavior and vocalize
the message: "you have to compete" and "lower your standard of living"
which of course is translated into "I am entitled to tell you that you are
entitled to nothing."
Or invested his personal time AND money into his/her
> professional development, accumulated years of experience and can't
> get a job. Should we compile a dictionary to translate it into your
> speak:
>
> the feeling of an Indian when the money for education and professional
> development have been wasted is called entitlement when experienced by
> everybody else.
We have a lot of problems with hungry mice that would like to enter our
homes through cracks and holes and eat everything we have while we sleep.
> Next entry.
>
>
>
Me, ...again!
On Tue, 2 Feb 2010, Old Pif wrote:
It is the "cheap labor, cheap currency" based "new imperialism".
Me, ...again!
On Tue, 2 Feb 2010, Straypuppy wrote:
> In article <2b3bee6d-80bd-4a81...@u19g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,
> kamal says...
>
>> If you are so sure that these people coming into your country are
>> exporting their over-population and poverty, why don't you get your
>> govt to stop issuing them visas? The answer -which you will not admit -
>> is that you want them to come but want your share of the loot from the
>> powers-that-be. That explains why you are debating on how/whether it
>> benefits you -coz it is all about "what's in it for me?".
>
> You ask this 100000 times and you will never get a response.
I have answered every one of his little speeches on this.
> The truth is, Americans LOVE immigrants so that their god
> given birth right to a superior standard of living is maintained.
The truth is that immigrants are given, on a silver platter, a better deal
(even with low pay) than they can get by staying where they came from.
I have stated that 100,000 times in the last 5-7 years.
Another truth is that getting work experience on an immigrant's work
resume is a ticket to future job security because it is track record.
I have stated that 100,000 times in the last 5-7 years.
> Dinner for a family at a restaurant which costs $75 will cost
> $150 if the restaurant does not employ illegal migrants.
Most of the cost of a restaurant is in rent and overhead. Waitstaff make
90% of their income from only tips. Manager-owners take a big cut of gross
profits. I've been in a lot of restaurants in the last decade; yeah, there
will be maybe one Hispanic guy in the kitchen washing dishes.
Illegal migrants? You'll find a lot in the chicken processing plants
($8/hour).
Their
> beautiful house and community will stink worse than a slum in
> Mumbai if the garbage cleaners are not illegal immigrants.
There is a pretty big push to at least find the criminals in this
population and deport them.
> And if the city employs 'real' americans, then the property
> tax would hit the roof.
I think you have no idea about how much illegal immigrants suck resources
out of a community and do not give much back in return. The only
benefactors are wealthy residential developers who might even be paying
the illegals as little as $3.50 an hour (per a rumor I heard, but sounds
similar to other rumors).
> They love buying cheap things at Bestbuy and Walmart as if
> buying a 200$ netbook or laptop is their birth right.
You mean you can't buy a $200 netbook (made in China) in India?
> HOWEVER THE MOMENT THESE BASTARDS FACE COMPETITION FROM
> OUTSIDERS IN THEIR 100K JOB , THEY ALL START SHOUTING AT
> THEIR LOUDEST.
Whereas guys like you want to play hungry mouse and come into my house and
eat all my food while I sleep?
> Good that US companies are screwing them with H1B and outsourcing.
Nice how you reveal your natural hate and racism.
Me, ...again!
On Tue, 2 Feb 2010, Straypuppy wrote:
> In article <2b3bee6d-80bd-4a81...@u19g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,
> kamal says...
>
>> If you are so sure that these people coming into your country are
>> exporting their over-population and poverty, why don't you get your
>> govt to stop issuing them visas? The answer -which you will not admit -
>> is that you want them to come but want your share of the loot from the
>> powers-that-be. That explains why you are debating on how/whether it
>> benefits you -coz it is all about "what's in it for me?".
>
> You ask this 100000 times and you will never get a response.
Here, you need to read this, again (I gave it as response many times
in the last year)....
//////////////
Kamal Prasad has been preaching "economics 101" for many years now. It
also includes that:
1. The USA is all bad (he would never talk about any other country's
problems except the problems of the USA), and there is no good in the USA
(surely an unfair witch-hunt against the USA just as much of the world
calls the US the "Great Satan"). Kamal Prasad has, in some posts in 2009,
denied that he stated some of these earlier comments which can easily be
found in NG archives some few years earlier.
2. Americans never did anything but steal land from the American Indians,
and all of our "fountain of wealth" is due to inflated currency and our
standard of living is because we used slaves (this is all stated by him
many times despite the fact that all throughout history untill the 1800s,
slavery was common and wars were carried out to "acquire" land and
treasure also all throughout history, and by all great powers).
3. The curious idea that employees do not own their jobs.
This idea is mostly a derivation of life in the dark ages when kings and
emperors were as close to being gods and all other human beings were
considered as low-life worms, insects, or other sub-human lifeforms. It is
a mystery why Kamal Prasad really wants people to live under conditions
and rulers as if in times of 1,000 years ago, or so, under despotic
kings-emperors.
In the cave-man days, there were no jobs, no property, no money, no
corporations, no CEOs, no restrictions. If you wanted to eat, you just
went out and did "hunterer-gatherer-planter." Find your cave, or make a
tent out of animal skins. You could still have sex and kids. Life was,
however, at the mercy of floods, droughts, famine, disease, wars, and
superstition.
In the Inca Empire (1250-1500), there was no money, no property, no CEOs,
no employer (except the state) and no employees, etc., but the society was
well developed, civilized, had buildings and cities, was well fed, and had
a high culture.
In the days of Egyptian pyramids (> 4000 years ago), it is recorded in
narrative, that days came when food prices went up by inflation so that
pyramid builder wages were not enough. Did the Pharo own those jobs?
Irrelevant: the Pharo needed the workers, the workers needed wages to buy
food. When the deal went from good to bad, the workers went on strike.
Then, the Pharo did something to resolve the problem of the workers.
Seems to me like the workers had more power than Kamal Prasad would
say they have.
The history of human rights, the ethical question of whether slavery
should be legal (it became illegal in most countries during the 1800s),
and the democratization of politics (where statesmen have term limits and
are elected by popular vote) is an interesting story of how power, wealth,
and priviledges were taken away, at least to some degree, from the few
powerful/wealthy and given to the masses. From the Magna Carta (1215 AD)
until a vast number of laws came into existence in England/Europe to
curtail favored interests and priviledged people, including state granted
monopolies, mostly during the 1800s, is an evolution of the development
of fairness and power-sharing in society.
Union history is about empowering employees who are otherwise at a
negotiating disadvantage in the employer-employee relationship.
The expansion of trade between first world countries and 3rd world
countries has exploited the exchange rate advantage where 3rd world
countries started to offer, around 1970s, cheap currency which makes
business transactions take place based on guaranteed net profits to the
business and forget the employees in the first world. Unions have become
almost powerless against this new strategy, but countries like India would
never experience current high growht rates without the favor of US money,
US CEOs, and currency cheating by the Reserve Bank of India, which
includes that Indian markets are still not open to US, Indian tarrifs on
US exports are still high, and there is no free market in India (Us
companies have to partner with Indian companies) and yet India can set up
operations in the US, and get US-govt-taxpayer subsidies in the form of
H1b and L-1 visas for cheap Indian workers to come over and then underbid
the local Americans.
The USA cannot be a "cash-cow" for all of the 3rd world countries at the
expense of US citizens and for sustainable periods into the future.
4. Kamal Prasad's complaint about US "fountain of wealth" being all due to
the government "printing" money on demand is a flawed idea when compared
with: i) how fractional reserve banking _creates_ money when deposits are
loaned out (see any book on banking), ii) how corporations _print_ stock
shares and bonds which people readily buy, and iii) value keeps increasing
for antiques and rare art (Picasos, Rembrandts, etc.) to the point where such
art can be worth $10-100 million for one small art object. Is that
greenback really worthless? The vast majority of world's business transactions
are based on checks, electronic trades, contracts, stock shares, bank
statements, plastic, and paper money. I've been buying and selling things
(including cars and houses) with such "worthless" money all my life. At
least 99% of the world's business uses this "worthless" money, all the
time.
5. Kamal Prasad has this idea that there is a fixed, absolute, final
"economics". He does not understand that a lot of economics is more like a
religion. There have been at least a dozen "schools of economic thought"
in the last 200 years. There are also many economists who accept that
economics is an imperfect science and some don't even think economics is a
science. Steve Keen, who authored the book "Debunking Economics" is a
professor of economics who thinks economics has a long way to go before it
becomes a science. Kamal Prasad should also read "Bad Samaritans" by
Chang, all about the myth of free trade. It is interesting to learn from
history that some kings/emperors had (either themselves, or through their
advisors) a rudimentary idea of how to make their societies function
better by having money (coins/paper money existed in many places thousands
of years ago), before the words "economics/economists" came into
existence. Moneylending existed in ancient Babylon, 4,000 years ago.
6. Kamal Prasad, and some other Indians, seem to have this idea that
Americans should lower their standard of living in order to better compete
with cheap currency countries. What Indians _should_ do is thank the US
CEOs for taking jobs away from Americans and giving them to Indians, and
sharing that "fountain of wealth" with Indians who from 1950-2000 could
not lift themselves out of poverty without US help. What else India should
do is clean up its educational system, work to feed its own people,
generate its own jobs, establish better control in the
Naxalite/Maoist-controlled areas of the country, stop female infanticide
and child slave labor, and eradicate caste discrimination including
against Dalits (the "untouchables").
////////////////////////////
Old Pif
> In article <613ed74d-7a54-4757-9529-27f649a11...@r19g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
Sure. Take as an example multiple cases when Indians have been trained
by Americans which have been fired after the training is complete.
Me, ...again!
On Tue, 2 Feb 2010, Straypuppy wrote:
> In article <2b3bee6d-80bd-4a81...@u19g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,
> kamal says...
>
>> If you are so sure that these people coming into your country are
>> exporting their over-population and poverty, why don't you get your
>> govt to stop issuing them visas? The answer -which you will not admit -
>> is that you want them to come but want your share of the loot from the
>> powers-that-be. That explains why you are debating on how/whether it
>> benefits you -coz it is all about "what's in it for me?".
>
> You ask this 100000 times and you will never get a response.
> The truth is, Americans LOVE immigrants so that their god
> given birth right to a superior standard of living is maintained.
Of course it is also well known that high caste Hindus also expect, by
birtright, all priviledges guaranteed by 3,000 years of discrimination
involving birthright.
> Dinner for a family at a restaurant which costs $75 will cost
> $150 if the restaurant does not employ illegal migrants. Their
> beautiful house and community will stink worse than a slum in
> Mumbai if the garbage cleaners are not illegal immigrants.
> And if the city employs 'real' americans, then the property
> tax would hit the roof.
Isn't it nice that the Reserve Bank of India guarantees business flows
from US to India because of cheap Rupee? See the essay I wrote after doing
library research on Indian Rupee exchange rates....
-------------
The Indian Rupee: history of its exchange rate and that
of other currencies
-----------------------------------------------
In connection with a long series of exchanges between
Kamal Prasad and myself regarding some details of world
economics and trade, I have found in a book ("The World
Almanac and Book of Facts, 2002", page 221) in my
personal library a table of exchange rates for many
currencies going back to 1970.
I find it very very interesting that the value of the
Indian Rupee has gone down greatly since 1970. Here is
what the table shows (annual averages):
Year Value of one Rupee (units per US$),
1970 7.576 (or, one US$ buys 7.576 Rs)
1975 8.409
1980 7.887
1985 12.369
1990 17.504
1995 32.427
1996 35.433
1997 36.313
1998 41.259
1999 43.055
2000 45.000
In other words, one US$ can buy 45/7.5 = 6 times as
many Rupees in 2000 as in 1970, and almost double as
many in 1995 as in 1990. This is a remarkable and
continuous devaluation of the Rupee over three decades.
I do not believe this trend has happened by accident or
as a result of "development" in India due to Indian
"products" becoming more valuable. This year, the Rupee
is still bouncing around 44-45 per US$. The Rupee is
essentially really worthless.
Now, what other 23 currencies were in that table? Here
they are: Australian dollars, Austrian schillings,
Belgian francs, Canadian dollars, Danish krone, French
francs, German deutschmarks, Greek drachmas, Irish
pounds, Italian lira, Japanese yen, Malaysian ringgits,
Mexican pesos, Netherland guilders, Norweigian krone,
Portugese escudos, Singapore dollars, South Korean
wons, Spanish pesetas, Swedish krone, Swiss francs,
Thai bahts, and the UK pound. The vast majority of
these currencies moved up and down by small amounts.
The vast majority did not change by more than a factor
of two in three decades. The ones that changed by more
than a factor of two actually changed by a lot more
than a factor of two and were mostly poor, 3rd world,
or developing countries. Greek drachmas devalued by a
factor of ten, Italian lira devalued by a factor of
three, Portugese escudos devalued by about eight, and
South Korean won by a factor of about four. Many EU and
some other countries' currencies got stronger (Austrian
schilling, German mark, guilders, yen, Irish pound,
Singapore dollar, Swiss franc, and the UK pound). Of
course, the EU (not all of Europe) is on the Euro, now,
which is close to the US$ in value.
China is a separate entity (not in the table) but they
pegged their currency to the US$ and devalued it
greatly in the early 1990s and it is only a few
uneducated people who would not be able to understand
that this fact alone will draw vast amounts of business
to China. Any country that devalues its own currency,
however it may control this, will automatically cause
exports to become very cheap (thus stimulating exports)
and cause imports to become very expensive (thus
inhibiting imports). If a currency is floating, then if
the world considers that currency to be low in value
compared to others, then its value will go down
according to market supply/demand psychology. Anyone
can google on "Indian exchange rate targeting" and get
thousands of hits on refernce to this method of forcing
India's offerings to the world to become economically
desireable regardless of intrinsic value, quality, or
morals-ethics.
There is a vast amount of propaganda floating through
our media that the USA can't compete or our
productivity is too low (in spite of references I can
find to the contrary), because of a few sectors of our
economy being torn up by India and China, when, in
fact, much if not most of the problem is due to the
exchange rates and how they are manipulated. The vast
majority of the focus in the USA is on China's currency
and it is a fact that they pegged their currency. India
"targets" its exchange rate as per the results of any
google search, and thus causes business to come to it
and a few people in India know very well what they are
doing. People can complain about US monetary policy all
they want and that, too, is under the control of a few
powerful people and justified by whatever political
strategy they feel is best (however that may be
defined). But, in the end, plenty of blame is properly
placed on developing countries that have used an old
technique to stimulate exports. European trade history
going back several hundred years includes many examples
of economic conflicts caused by currency manipulation,
tariffs, duties, or other methods/laws meant to control
trade and benefit only the country initiating them and
at the expense of the countries that these controls
were aimed at. With currencies that are worthless, it
is no wonder that companies/governments will prefer to
invest their excess profits into strong and stable
currencies like the US$, Japanese yen, and the Euro.
===========================
kamal
> On Feb 2, 6:40 am, kamal <kama...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > people who take the trouble to acquire education in another country do
> > > > so because they expect the degree obtained to land them a job in that
> > > > country.
>
> > > Yup, that what I thought - the feeling of entitlement, but this is not
>
> > the feeling that money invested in training for a profession should
> > not go in vain -which is different from being entitled to a job.
>
> And how it is different from the feelings of an American who invested
> the same money into his/her education and can't get a job in his own
> country? Or invested his personal time AND money into his/her
> professional development, accumulated years of experience and can't
> get a job. Should we compile a dictionary to translate it into your
> speak:
>
the US to acquire education expects not a job -but permission to apply
for a job. The legal permission to seek employment is givwn by the
govt machinery -whereas the job that allows one to repau student loans
is given by the private sector (not funded by taxpayer money).
> the feeling of an Indian when the money for education and professional
> development have been wasted is called entitlement when experienced by
so you need to take it up with educational instittutions on why they
charged so mauch money and did not arrange for proper employment. The
issue with Indian students is that permission to take up employment on
the same rights as native brn workers is not given.
> everybody else.
>
I read that thanks to outsourcing, applicatons to CS& majors have
dropped in the US. So, you have lesser reasond to blame Indians for
causing the loss in future.
regards
-kamal
> Next entry.
kamal
> On Feb 2, 6:40 am, kamal <kama...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > > an answer why they are so eager to live in the country which as some
> > > of them claim is the center point of all evil in this planet.
>
> What is below is not a straight answer but I think we can find it
>
> > ... someone is aspiring for a better life and so moves to another country ...
> > ... they come just to improve their chances of survival ...
>
> Good. That is not at all different from why millions have been coming
> to America before you.
>
you seem to be under the impression that I am inside the US or plan to
be. FYI -I am very much in India with no intent to relocate outside
this country.
> The only thing which is not clear why Americans are stupid and lazy?
I wouldn't know if all 300 million are stupid. I can say for sure that
all 300 million do expect alot more than what their productivity
entitles them to.
> Because they allowed you in?
The way bodyshopping works -an Indian company receives a req from its
US/overseas offices and scouts for talent or trains some of it in-
house. The person being shipped to the US is not involved in any scams
that facilitate this i.e. bribing politicians and /or facilitating
visa issuance. For them, it is just employment at a different work
location arranged for by the employer. I was employed for more than a
year before my employer arranged for an h1b visa through their office
in santa clara. The US office in turn would only arrange for plane
tickets and hotel accomodation for 2 weeks on receiving a purchase
order from their US client. The american public did not allow me in,
nor did I want in. Just that the corporation wanted me in to reduce
expenses of hiring a white elephant.
regards
-kamal
Mike
China is Likely to Overtake the U.S. in Scientific Research
February 1, 2010Alex B. BerezowLeave a commentGo to comments
The writing is on the wall. China will overtake the U.S. in
scientific output in the near future. A couple reports make this
conclusion almost inevitable.
First, a recent post on the blog of the internationally renowned
journal Science indicates the rise of China in scientific
productivity. For instance, China ranks second only to the U.S. in
number of journal publications. Also, China is increasing its
investment in science education and research. Additionally, for many
scientific indicators, “the slope of the line is accelerating rather
than decelerating.”
Secondly, American education is mediocre at best. In a 2006 study of
several different countries and economic areas conducted by the
Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), U.S. students
consistently ranked “below average” for proficiency in math and
science. The U.S. ranked 18th in science and 24th in math out of 30
(OECD) countries. In math, the U.S. was not only outperformed by
Japan and Germany, but it was also (embarrassingly) outperformed by
former communist countries such as Hungary, Poland, and Czech
Republic. When economic areas (such as Taipei or Hong Kong) were
included, the U.S. fared even worse. (The 56-page executive summary
can be found here.)
Finally, it should be pointed out that countries that outperformed the
U.S. in education often spent less money on it. For instance, as a
percentage of GDP, the U.S. (5.7%) outspent Poland (5.6%), Hungary
(5.5%), Germany (4.6%), and Japan (3.6%).
What does it all mean? It’s pretty straightforward: With U.S.
students falling behind much of the westernized world in math and
science proficiency, it is only a matter of time before China will
overtake us as the global leader in science and technology. However,
this could probably be prevented if we fix our decidedly mediocre K-12
education system. Reforming the quality of our education is the key to
the solution. Throwing more money at the problem is certainly not.
See also this article: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/31/business/energy-environment/31renew.html
and this one:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20527426.900-get-ready-for-chinas-domination-of-science.html?full=true&print=true
Straypuppy
Old Pif says...
>
>On Feb 2, 9:06=A0am, Straypuppy <me_again@head_in_the_sand.com> wrote:
>> In article <613ed74d-7a54-4757-9529-27f649a11...@r19g2000yqb.googlegroups=
>.com>,
>> Old Pif says...
>>
>> >And how it is different from the feelings of an American who invested
>> >the same money into his/her education and can't get a job in his own
>> >country? Or invested his personal time AND money into his/her
>> >professional development, accumulated years of experience and can't
>> >get a job. Should we compile a dictionary to translate it into your
>> >speak:
>>
>> Can you prove that such people are good at what they do or
>> are plain mediocre.
>>
>
>Sure. Take as an example multiple cases when Indians have been trained
>by Americans which have been fired after the training is complete.
Only the mediocre ones. The good ones are absorbed in other depts
first.
Old Pif
>
> What does it all mean? It’s pretty straightforward: With U.S.
> students falling behind much of the westernized world in math and
> science proficiency, it is only a matter of time before China will
> overtake us as the global leader in science and technology. However,
> this could probably be prevented if we fix our decidedly mediocre K-12
> education system. Reforming the quality of our education is the key to
> the solution. Throwing more money at the problem is certainly not.
>
As much as I am favor of improvement of education, if hardly helps in
maintaining of leadership in science in the US. Which depends mostly
on the availability of funds for research and their proper allocation.
With the current budget deficit one can hardly expect any changes for
the better. And as far as allocation is concerned, those who actually
make science get very small portion of the funds. The lion share goes
to scientific bureaucracy which is why it is so expensive here.
So, where all those mathematical geniuses will go being produced in
the improved school system? To MBA programs most probably. There is
not enough jobs here even for existing mathematicians.
Old Pif
>
> Only the mediocre ones. The good ones are absorbed in other depts
> first.
>
You are supposed to reply with sarcasm. Where is it?
Me, ...again!
On Tue, 2 Feb 2010, kamal wrote:
> On Feb 2, 6:30 pm, Old Pif <old...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Feb 2, 6:40 am, kamal <kama...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>> people who take the trouble to acquire education in another country do
>>>>> so because they expect the degree obtained to land them a job in that
>>>>> country.
>>
>>>> Yup, that what I thought - the feeling of entitlement, but this is not
>>
>>> the feeling that money invested in training for a profession should
>>> not go in vain -which is different from being entitled to a job.
>>
>> And how it is different from the feelings of an American who invested
>> the same money into his/her education and can't get a job in his own
>> country? Or invested his personal time AND money into his/her
>> professional development, accumulated years of experience and can't
>> get a job. Should we compile a dictionary to translate it into your
>> speak:
>>
> it is different from that of an american because the guy coming into
> the US to acquire education expects not a job -but permission to apply
> for a job.
It is no different that an US guy except the US guy is already here.
The legal permission to seek employment is givwn by the
> govt machinery -whereas the job that allows one to repau student loans
> is given by the private sector (not funded by taxpayer money).
And, all you really want is for a job to be taken from a US guy and given
to you, and you expect the US guy to give you a hug and a kiss, too, for
this.
>> the feeling of an Indian when the money for education and professional
>> development have been wasted is called entitlement when experienced by
>
> so you need to take it up with educational instittutions on why they
> charged so mauch money
Oh? You expect the US schools to give you education for less cost than
charged to US guy?
Such feelings of "entitlement"!
> and did not arrange for proper employment.
And, in addition, you want a job handed to you on a silver platter?
Such feelings of "entitlement"!
The
> issue with Indian students is that permission to take up employment on
> the same rights as native brn workers is not given.
Yeah, you're "entitlement."
>> everybody else.
>>
> I read that thanks to outsourcing, applicatons to CS& majors have
> dropped in the US. So, you have lesser reasond to blame Indians for
> causing the loss in future.
Can't fight CEOs very easily.
> regards
> -kamal
>
>> Next entry.
>
>
Me, ...again!
On Tue, 2 Feb 2010, kamal wrote:
> On Feb 2, 6:42 pm, Old Pif <old...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Feb 2, 6:40 am, kamal <kama...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>> an answer why they are so eager to live in the country which as some
>>>> of them claim is the center point of all evil in this planet.
>>
>> What is below is not a straight answer but I think we can find it
>>
> good.
>
>>> ... someone is aspiring for a better life and so moves to another country ...
>>> ... they come just to improve their chances of survival ...
>>
>> Good. That is not at all different from why millions have been coming
>> to America before you.
>>
> you seem to be under the impression that I am inside the US or plan to
> be. FYI -I am very much in India with no intent to relocate outside
> this country.
But you continue to argue _against_ the USA on any and every topic.
>> The only thing which is not clear why Americans are stupid and lazy?
>
> I wouldn't know if all 300 million are stupid. I can say for sure that
> all 300 million do expect alot more than what their productivity
> entitles them to.
As I've said many times, the USA was doing fine in 1970s and before. US
productivity is still highest, or very high. What you refuse to admit is
the labor arbitrage caused both by strong dollar and weak Indian Rupee.
There is no other explanation. It is a cheap free ride for the CEOs of US
corporations, and a big gift to Indians to get a big boost from a job in
the USA or from a US corporation in India.
>> Because they allowed you in?
>
> The way bodyshopping works -an Indian company receives a req from its
> US/overseas offices and scouts for talent or trains some of it in-
> house. The person being shipped to the US is not involved in any scams
> that facilitate this i.e. bribing politicians and /or facilitating
> visa issuance.
No, it is all arranged by the Reserve Bank of India which has been
devaluing the Rupee for the last three decades.
For them, it is just employment at a different work
> location arranged for by the employer. I was employed for more than a
> year before my employer arranged for an h1b visa through their office
> in santa clara. The US office in turn would only arrange for plane
> tickets and hotel accomodation for 2 weeks on receiving a purchase
> order from their US client. The american public did not allow me in,
> nor did I want in. Just that the corporation wanted me in to reduce
> expenses of hiring a white elephant.
Another racist remark from you.
> regards
> -kamal
>
>
Me, ...again!
So...what are you doing to learn Chinese culture, language, and planning
to seek a place in China for the rest of your life?
I would alternatively suggest that you be learning Spanish and Spanis
culture as another strategy for supplementing your career longivity.
The only thing missing from your piece below is the lack of attentiion to
the devalued Chinese renminbi which is now negatively affecting most
regional economies in the world (including Europe and SE Asia).
Me, ...again!
More Indians are mediocre or less. Read this.....
Hey, you need to get the January 30th, 2010 issue of The Economist, and
look on page 76 for this article: "The Engineering Gap" about testing
India's engineering graduates. Two Indians, Himanshu and Varun Aggarwal
(who went to the best schools in Delhi and Massachusetts) did a study that
showed (I quote): "...only 4.2% of India's engineers are fit to work in a
software product firm, and just 17.8 % are employable by an IT services
company, even with up to six months' training."
Go read it yourself. So, looks like 95.8 % of Indians are already
mediocre.
Me, ...again!
On Wed, 3 Feb 2010, Old Pif wrote:
> On Feb 3, 1:34 am, Mike <yard22...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> What does it all mean? It’s pretty straightforward: With U.S.
>> students falling behind much of the westernized world in math and
>> science proficiency, it is only a matter of time before China will
>> overtake us as the global leader in science and technology. However,
>> this could probably be prevented if we fix our decidedly mediocre K-12
>> education system. Reforming the quality of our education is the key to
>> the solution. Throwing more money at the problem is certainly not.
>>
>
> As much as I am favor of improvement of education, if hardly helps in
> maintaining of leadership in science in the US. Which depends mostly
> on the availability of funds for research and their proper allocation.
Your point is well taken; the issue is the creation of jobs in the US that
will _use_ the educated graduates. I cannot recommend sci & eng study for
young people when the corporations are all shutting down R&D in the US and
moving it to India/China/SEAsia for the cheap labor, and of course they
are not going to hire US people to take those jobs at local lower wages.
They are going to hire the guys who got their degrees from US schools and
went back home.
> With the current budget deficit one can hardly expect any changes for
> the better. And as far as allocation is concerned, those who actually
> make science get very small portion of the funds. The lion share goes
> to scientific bureaucracy which is why it is so expensive here.
>
> So, where all those mathematical geniuses will go being produced in
> the improved school system? To MBA programs most probably. There is
> not enough jobs here even for existing mathematicians.
I recommend: learn Spanish or Chinese and pray.
Mike
THE U.S. SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY WORKFORCE . 2009. Order
www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL34539.pdf
SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, ENGINEERING, AND MATHEMATICS (STEM) EDUCATION:
BACKGROUND, FEDERAL POLICY, AND LEGISLATIVE ACTION . 2008.
www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL33434.pdf
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICYMAKING: A PRIMER . 2009 www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL34454.pdf
SCIENCE, ENGINEERING, AND MATHEMATICS EDUCATION: STATUS AND ISSUES .
2008. ww.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/98-871.pdf
Higher Education: Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics
Trends and the Role of Federal Programs GAO-06-702T, May 3, 2006
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06702t.pdf
Higher Education: Federal Science, Technology, Engineering, and
Mathematics Programs and Related Trends GAO-06-114, October 12, 2005
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06114.pdf
Plans of Foreign Ph.D. Candidates: Postgraduate Plans of U.S. Trained
Foreign Students in Science/Engineering
RCED-86-102FS February 19, 1986 http://archive.gao.gov/d12t3/129158.pdf
Gender Issues: Women's Participation in the Sciences Has Increased,
but Agencies Need to Do More to Ensure Compliance with Title IX
GAO-04-639, July 22, 2004 http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04639.pdf
Testimony on Diversity of Executive-Level Employees at the
Congressional Budget Office http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/87xx/doc8799/11-09-Hiring_Practices.pdf
Me, ...again!
Thank you for your contribution of the links (below).
Unfortunately you left out all of the problems associated with where the
jobs come from, when those jobs disappear, where they re-appear, who pays
for this, who benefits by this, and the fact that global finance now
includes the problem of exchange rate disparities which greatly favor all
cheap currency countries and damage all first world countries. Global
imballances are even being recognized by highly regarded economists
as well as the people who are being hurt by these trends.
morris croy
> I recommend: learn Spanish or Chinese and pray.
That's not good enough anymore either.
One also has to learn how to use an AK-47. ;)
Michael Coburn
> So...what are you doing to learn Chinese culture, language, and planning
> to seek a place in China for the rest of your life?
>
> I would alternatively suggest that you be learning Spanish and Spanis
> culture as another strategy for supplementing your career longivity.
>
> The only thing missing from your piece below is the lack of attentiion
> to the devalued Chinese renminbi which is now negatively affecting most
> regional economies in the world (including Europe and SE Asia).
And this is why the US is in a position to create and spend as much money
into its own economy as necessary to address its problems. But the
Chinese will not float their currency and will continue to run their
country from the top down selecting who gets an education and who does
not and using the Chinese people as a tool to ends conceived by the
leaders. We cannot save the Chinese people. Only the Chinese people can
stop their imprisonment by their government and they will not do so until
we repair the Chinese government's relationship with our own economy and
the rest of the world. As the Chinese simply lock their currency to the
dollar then monetary devaluation is ineffective. The most precise tool is
tariffs.
I see this parroted crap constantly concerning the K12 system. The
sentiment is that since the K12 system is rotten (rot caused by
conservatives and budget cutting and false science) then restoring a
decent budget won't help. While "throwing money at it" is not the
answer, continuing to shortchange it because of a hatred of teacher's
unions is not going to solve anything either. But any time you speak of
standardized scientifically derived scoring systems to ascertain the
educational level and performance of the kids, the rightrarded become
totally unglued and so too does the leftarded. Both are irrational. The
selection of what is to be taught and what is to be achieved in the K12
system is actually what is at issue. The extremes on either side of the
political divide insist that their "beliefs" should be exclusive and
dominant. And the most important subjects one should master in K12
education are not even being discussed. These are civics and economics.
Because VOTERS are constantly being mislead by politicians concerning
these realities. The majority of Americans do not attend a 4 year
university. Insisting on calculus as a prerequisite for economics is
self defeating and so too is trying to address the problems of political
economy in the universities. Leaving the interpretation of the
Constitution to people who have no understanding of the history and the
actual events and written intents surrounding the creation and
ratification of the document that defines the nation is not an acceptable
path path to proper governance. And this is what I mean by "civics".
What was missing in "civics" classes that no longer exist was a firm
understanding of what the people of the United States thought they were
doing when they ratified the replacement of the Articles of Confederation
with the Constitution. And even this does not suffice. Over 200 years
the people are suppose to become more enlightened as opposed to more
ignorant. Yet understanding the original meanings and the intents is
very helpful in understanding the current dis-functioning of government
so as to improve it.
>> See also this article:
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/31/business/energy-
environment/31renew.html
>> and this one:
>> http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20527426.900-get-ready-for-
chinas-domination-of-science.html?full=true&print=true
>>
--
"Senate rules don't trump the Constitution" -- http://GreaterVoice.org/60
Me, ...again!
Easy: aim and pull the trigger! :-|
Me, ...again!
On Wed, 3 Feb 2010, Michael Coburn wrote:
> On Wed, 03 Feb 2010 08:43:25 -0500, Me, ...again! wrote:
>
>> So...what are you doing to learn Chinese culture, language, and planning
>> to seek a place in China for the rest of your life?
>>
>> I would alternatively suggest that you be learning Spanish and Spanis
>> culture as another strategy for supplementing your career longivity.
>>
>> The only thing missing from your piece below is the lack of attentiion
>> to the devalued Chinese renminbi which is now negatively affecting most
>> regional economies in the world (including Europe and SE Asia).
>
> And this is why the US is in a position to create and spend as much money
> into its own economy as necessary to address its problems. But the
> Chinese will not float their currency and will continue to run their
> country from the top down selecting who gets an education and who does
> not and using the Chinese people as a tool to ends conceived by the
> leaders. We cannot save the Chinese people. Only the Chinese people can
> stop their imprisonment by their government and they will not do so until
> we repair the Chinese government's relationship with our own economy and
> the rest of the world. As the Chinese simply lock their currency to the
> dollar then monetary devaluation is ineffective. The most precise tool is
> tariffs.
I agree about the tariffs. For hundreds of years of European & British
history, tariffs were used as effective trade control mechanisms, but
according to globalization dogma and WTO mantras, tariffs are supposed to
go away in the long run. So, what to do with an intransigent govt like
China (and India), both of which do not have fully convertible currency?
Force foreign companies to partner with local companies? Otherwise break
WTO rules?
Its going to be difficult down the road to change anything because
whatever happens, prices will go up. The question is whether wages in the
US might also go back up, and whether jobs ever come back to the USA. If
the existing trends keep going the way they are, the USA is going to be in
deep shit and to a great extent already is.
======================
morris croy
> Its going to be difficult down the road to change anything because
> whatever happens, prices will go up. The question is whether wages in the
> US might also go back up, and whether jobs ever come back to the USA. If
> the existing trends keep going the way they are, the USA is going to be in
> deep shit and to a great extent already is.
With perpetual high unemployment, wages will not go back up at all.
LOUDSPEAKER
says...
>Its going to be difficult down the road to change anything because
>whatever happens, prices will go up. The question is whether wages in the
>US might also go back up, and whether jobs ever come back to the USA. If
>the existing trends keep going the way they are, the USA is going to be in
>deep shit and to a great extent already is.
MAKE UP YOUR MIND YOU SENILE OLD FART ART SOWERS. ON ONE HAND YOU SAY
OUTSOURCING IS OVER AND ON THE OTHER HAND YOU DOUBT WHETHER JOBS ARE
EVER GOING TO COME BACK TO USA. (actually the truth is latter)
kamal
> On Wed, 3 Feb 2010, Michael Coburn wrote:
> > On Wed, 03 Feb 2010 08:43:25 -0500, Me, ...again! wrote:
>
> >> So...what are you doing to learn Chinese culture, language, and planning
> >> to seek a place in China for the rest of your life?
>
> >> I would alternatively suggest that you be learning Spanish and Spanis
> >> culture as another strategy for supplementing your career longivity.
>
> >> The only thing missing from your piece below is the lack of attentiion
> >> to the devalued Chinese renminbi which is now negatively affecting most
> >> regional economies in the world (including Europe and SE Asia).
>
> > And this is why the US is in a position to create and spend as much money
> > into its own economy as necessary to address its problems. But the
> > Chinese will not float their currency and will continue to run their
> > country from the top down selecting who gets an education and who does
> > not and using the Chinese people as a tool to ends conceived by the
> > leaders. We cannot save the Chinese people. Only the Chinese people can
> > stop their imprisonment by their government and they will not do so until
> > we repair the Chinese government's relationship with our own economy and
> > the rest of the world. As the Chinese simply lock their currency to the
> > dollar then monetary devaluation is ineffective. The most precise tool is
> > tariffs.
>
> I agree about the tariffs. For hundreds of years of European & British
> history, tariffs were used as effective trade control mechanisms, but
a tariff is nothing but a trade-distorting subsidy. It is levied not
on the producer class but on the consumer class to narrow down the
choices one has.
> according to globalization dogma and WTO mantras, tariffs are supposed to
> go away in the long run. So, what to do with an intransigent govt like
FTAs are about doing away with tariffs and quid-pro-quo. Refusal to
abide by FTAs mean that tariffs attract retaliatory tariffs.
> China (and India), both of which do not have fully convertible currency?
India's currency is fully convertible on capital account -which means
companies can sell their stuff in India in rupe and convert that back
to USD or any other currency of their liking. I buy lots of stuff in
dollars on my credit card and the credit card co bills my card with
the current dollar buying rate. It is also possible for Indians to buy
about $50000 by exchanging their rupees and keep that in a foreign
currency account in India. In addition, they can legally buy about
$25000 for medical/education etc.. and upto $10000 for a business
trip.
> Force foreign companies to partner with local companies? Otherwise break
> WTO rules?
>
Many countries have restrictions on foreign ownership, but a lot of it
will be dismantled.
> Its going to be difficult down the road to change anything because
> whatever happens, prices will go up. The question is whether wages in the
> US might also go back up, and whether jobs ever come back to the USA. If
> the existing trends keep going the way they are, the USA is going to be in
> deep shit and to a great extent already is.
>
yep -that is one reason why i don't miss the US. Good luck with your
american dream.
regards
--kamal
> > "Senate rules don't trump the Constitution" --http://GreaterVoice.org/60- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Me, ...again!
On Wed, 3 Feb 2010 retro...@comcast.net wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Feb 2010 18:32:38 -0500, "Me, ...again!" <arth...@mv.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I agree about the tariffs. For hundreds of years of European & British
>> history, tariffs were used as effective trade control mechanisms, but
>> according to globalization dogma and WTO mantras, tariffs are supposed to
>> go away in the long run. So, what to do with an intransigent govt like
>> China (and India), both of which do not have fully convertible currency?
>
> Why follow the mantra? Were we better off when we had them?
> (Absolutely.)
>
>
>> Force foreign companies to partner with local companies? Otherwise break
>> WTO rules?
>
> Sink WTO. BTW NAFTA was never ratified by the Senate.
NAFTA never ratified? I didn't know that. I thought it was.
> We liked free trade when we had the clout of being the biggest
> manufacturing country in the world. But then we let the jobs get
> shipped out, and now we seem surprised that the free trade mantra has
> bitten us in the ass. We have the largest domestic consumer economy in
> the world (until CHina and India catch up). A bit of America first
> could get us back to full employment and rising wages again. but the
> corporations who control our policies have profited from shipping our
> manufacturing base and jobs off shore. And now we don't make enough to
> have enough jobs to support an economy with rising wages and full
> employment. Real wages have been declining since the 70s oil shocks
> and the introduction of Reaganomics.
I think all that is pretty much correct.
I like your comments on two books, below, but here is my two books:
From arth...@mv.com Mon Feb 1 12:53:50 2010
See below....
On Mon, 1 Feb 2010 retro...@comcast.net wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Feb 2010 06:59:41 -0800, TheKeral <KalluM...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> The Heritage Foundation is 'conservative' and not ultra-rightwing
>> (orders magnitude more 'conservative' IMO) as you claim. However,
>> like any 'think tank,' it too suffers from expediency. :-)
>
>
> It's a propaganda arm for the right, which came into existence because
> of the Powell memo.
>
> _________
>
> "Two novels can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord
> of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often
> engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading
> to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to
> deal with the real world. The other involves orcs."
>
"Two non-fiction books, complete with references and sources, that can
change anyone's understanding of reality: "The Creature from Jekyll
Island" (by Griffin) and "Democracy For The Few" (by Parenti). One will
explain, beautifully, how banks/Fed/money/plutocracy work but wrongly
advocates eliminating the Fed, and the other reveals how our democracy is
really a plutocracy wearing democracy clothing."
================================
> _________
>
> "Two novels can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord
> of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often
> engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading
> to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to
> deal with the real world. The other involves orcs."
>
Me, ...again!
CEOs, arbitrageurs, wheeler-dealers, successfull criminals, and maybe
doctors/dentists will all probably see higher compensation.
The rest of us will follow H1B to the 3rd world.
Me, ...again!
On Thu, 4 Feb 2010, LOUDSPEAKER wrote:
> In article <Pine.BSF.4.61.10...@osmium.mv.net>, Me, ...again!
> says...
>
>> Its going to be difficult down the road to change anything because
>> whatever happens, prices will go up. The question is whether wages in the
>> US might also go back up, and whether jobs ever come back to the USA. If
>> the existing trends keep going the way they are, the USA is going to be in
>> deep shit and to a great extent already is.
>
> MAKE UP YOUR MIND YOU SENILE OLD FART ART SOWERS. ON ONE HAND YOU SAY
> OUTSOURCING IS OVER
I said in my FAQ that India is no longer the only outsourceing destination
in the world and not everyone has been happy with all outsourcing to India
(you need to read it again, below),
AND ON THE OTHER HAND YOU DOUBT WHETHER JOBS ARE
> EVER GOING TO COME BACK TO USA. (actually the truth is latter)
Actually some jobs have come back, too, as you can read (if you are
capable of reading) below.....
===========================================
Reference List: India No Longer Offshore IT King
(34 references to recent articles)
Offshore outsourcing (including BPO to India) is
declining as a fraction of total world-wide IT service
to developed countries and has a high failure rate,
not necessarily high quality service, is leading to
a new phenomenon: backsourcing/backshoring.
Somethings called the "H-1B swindle" is discussed
below. And there are some reports that outsourcing
is declining or reversing.
----
34. WSJ, Oct 5, 2009, page B1:
title:"Indian Tech Outsourcers Aim to Widen Contracts"
contains the following sentences:
"But the days of 30% annual revenue growth from such work are over, a
casualty of the global economic downturn and increasing competition in the
services industry world-wide."
"Annual revenue growth in Indian technology services slowed to 16 % in
fiscal year ended in March. The industry's trade group, Nasscom, estimates
growth will be only 4% to 7% this fiscal year."
page B7 (continuation):
"Adding to the pressure on Indian firms is increased competition from
outsourcers based in the U.S. that have expanded their presences in
India, and the rise of competitors in even cheaper offshoring locales
such as the Philippines and Vietnam."
"But Indian companies are still having a hard time shaking their
reputation as the vendors of choice for low-cost, commodity services. And
on bigger, infrastructure heavy deals, they can no longer beat rivals on
price."
- - - - - - - - - - -
33. From Business Week, October 5, 2009, title "The Peril and Promise of
Investing in Russia," starting on page 49, about 1/3 way into article is
this paragraph on page 50:
"Consider IT giant Intel, which moved into Russia in 1999 and since then
has invested $800 million. It now employs more than 1,000 engineers at
four research centers, including its largest software [R&D] group outside
of the U.S. Because of Russia's top-notch math skills, Intel assigns local
engineers more complex work than it gives specialits in other outsourcing
venues such as India, says Dimitry Konash, the company's Moscow-based
regional director."
And the picture caption on page 52 says "Russian worker's math skills give
them an edge over Indian engineers, says Intel's Konash"
- - - - - - -
32. Business Week, May 4, 2009 issue, page 59: title: "The Sudden Chill
at an Indian Hot Spot." Picture caption says:"A commercial real estate
boom has turned into a glut, with vacancy rates of 28%" "In the second half
of 2008, as American and European clients hit the skids, India's outsourcing
industry saw contracts shrivel by 22%, its worst performance in a decade,
according to research firm Technology Partners International." "Nobody in
India collects layoff data, but every day papers carry dire news...." as
many named Indian companies announce layoffs.
Sidebar at the bottom of page 60:
"Outsourcing to India may soon be old news. KPMG has identified 31 new hot
spots, from Buenos Aires to Zagreb, and from Indianapolis [in the USA] to
Iloilo City (a Philippines town known for its animation services).
It gives the URL for that KPMG report as:
http://bx.businessweek.com/global-outsourcing/reference
- - - - - - -
31. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601110&sid=aB5yoCVxbXe4
Delta Air Returns Customer Call-Center Work to U.S. From India
April 18 (Bloomberg) -- Delta Air Lines Inc., the world~Rs largest
carrier, said it stopped routing customer service calls to India and
brought them back in house in the U.S. because customers were unhappy.
Delta started shifting the calls to employees in the U.S. over the
past year, and completely removed Indian contractors last quarter,
Chief Executive Officer Richard Anderson said in his weekly recorded
message to employees.
The move makes Delta the second big carrier to repatriate customer-
service work from India in 2009, after UAL Corp. United Airlines
did so in February. Companies including AT&T Inc. have taken similar
steps, said Karl Keirstead, an outsourcing analyst at Kaufman Bros.
LP in New York.
- - - - - -
30. Subject: More Jobs coming back to the USA from India
WSJ, April 7, 2009, Tuesday, page B5:
title: "Sallie Mae To Shift Jobs to the U.S."
Quote: "AP. New York--Sallie Mae gave some hope to the unemployed Monday,
announcing it will bring 2,000 jobs to the U.S. within the next 18 months as
it shifts call-center and other operations from overseas."
And, same story in Washington Post, April 7, 2009, page A18:
title: "SLM to Transfer Overseas Jobs to U.S."
subtitle: "Reston Student Lender to Move 2,000 Workers Out of Asia"
- - - - - -
29.(BusinessWeek/SmallBiz, Feb/Mar 2008) title:
"Outsourcing HEADING SOUTH" by Amy Barrett, "Jon
Morris...shifted his outsourced design and Web
development staff from India to Costa Rica in 2005"
and he made reference to not having to deal with
the time zone difference with India. "Forget
'Chindia,' A growing number of entrepreneurs are
finding Latin America a great place to sell,
source, and outsource.." Article says US companies
exported 30% more goods to Latin America, up 30%
from five years earlier. Direct investment to LA up
12% in 2006 over 2005. LA has less daunting
language and cultural problems. Countries featured:
Mexico, Brazil, Columbia, Chile, and
Argentina.(businessweek.com/smallbiz).
CFO magazine (www.cfo.com/backissues?), February,
2008, p. 24: "view from asia" in an interview with
Deepak Natraj, Infosys's head of strategic
initiatives: "Everyone assumes that we're going to
slash and burn and send two-thirds of the people
home," (and the bring over Indians on L visas) "But
when you send home the workforce, what are you
paying for?" Natraj "...prefers leaving the local
CEO--as well as the human-resources director --in
place."
- - - - - - -
28. Subject: "India's Competition in the Caribbean"
from Business Week,
Dec 24, 2007 issue, page 072, edited by Jena
McGregor:
"The region [the Carribean], along with Latin
America, is fast becoming a customer-service
hot spot. GE Money is...using call centers in Barbados
and Puerto Rico. Delta Air Lines is sending calls
to Jamaica." "...Philip Peters, CEO of Zagada Markets,
....[says]..the ranks of Caribbean call-center agents have
swelled from 11,000 in 2002 to 55,000 in 2007.
Hispanics are boosting demand for bilingual agents,
driving companies to Central and South America, too.
Dell and [HP]...have set up in countries
such as Panama and Argentina.'Latin America is the
fastest-growing region that we have,' says Mark
Notaraninni, HP's call-center director."
- - - - - -
27. Subject: Dell shuts down hardware R&D unit in
India and moves back to USA
"BENGALURU, India -- Dell Inc. is about to shut
down its hardware R&D unit based in this city, and
will move the work being done here to its centers in
Texas and Taiwan. Anywhere between two dozen to 170
staff will lose their jobs as a result; they have been given
45 days to find new employment."
"A Dell executive blamed rising costs in the city
for shifting the R&D unit out of the country, but
current and previous staffers have pointed
out that employing similar engineers in Austin,
Texas, or Taiwan would likely be more expensive,
not less."
"This is the second time the company has shifted
work out of India. Citing customer complaints about
quality about four years ago, Dell moved part of
its high-end technical support out of India."
http://www.eetimes.com/news/semi/showArticle.jhtm
l?articleID=204701812
(originally posted on a.c.c Dec 6, 2007)
- - - - - - - - -
26. From WSJ, Aug 21, 2007, page A6 (see title
above): Quote of first paragraph: "CAIRO, Egypt--
As rising wages and attrition rates in India
spur some international companies to seek new
locales for outsourcing operations, Southeast Asian,
Eastern Europe, and Latin America have all
been competing to become new offshoring hubs." The
article says Satyam CS hired 300 in Cairo; Wipro
set up in Saudi Arabia and plans to enter Egypt,
Tata says it will go into Morocco. Says in recent
years Egypt, Jordan and the UAE have all broken
into the top 20 for offshoring destinations.
Quotes A.T. Kerney as saying the Middle East is the
next big destination. Paris-based Teleperformance
hired 3,500 in Tunisia, and going into Cairo.
EDS is putting $100 million into Abu Dhabi (UAE
emirate), and already hired 450 in Egypt and planning
to hire more. The sidebar clearly implies that India is no
longer the offshore destination any more. On the list in
the sidebar for offshoring destinations are China,
Malaysia, Thailand, Brazil, Indonesia, Chile, Phillipines,
Bulgaria, Mexico, Singapore, Slovakia, Egypt, Jordan,
and Estonia.
--------
25, From Business Week, August 6, 2007, page 66m
("Rise of the Rupee") and The Economist, July 28, 2007,
pages 65-66 ("Outsourcing-External Affairs").
From BW: Quotes: '"We are losing our competitiveness to
China, Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore...and the Reserve
Bank [of India] is allowing the rupee to appreciate?" growls
New Delhi economist Surjit Bhalla." And, "Profitability across
the sector [Indian IT] fell by 8% in the most recent quarter."
And, "A further rise in the rupee, says Suresh Ramrakhiani,
economist at the Cotton Textile Export Promotion Council
in Mumbai, could lead to job losses for up to 200,000 people."
From The Economist: "...jobs no longer flow only from richer
countries to poorer ones." And, "The latest outsourcing from
TPI, a consultancy, was published earlier this month. It
showed that both the number and value of contracts awarded
during the first half of this year had declined in comparison with
the same period in 2006 [lowest since 2001]." Article also
says Wipro is going to set up its first software-development
center in America (either Atlanta, Austin, Raleigh, or
Richmond) and "Azim Premji, Wipro's chairman, says that the
proportion of local employees (as opposed to visiting Indians)
in the company's overseas locations will rise from
10% to one-third over the next three years." Jobs
coming back to the USA.
- - - -
24. title: "Infosys Shaves Forecast After Strong
Quarter" by Jackie Range (WSJ, July 12, 2007, page C8)
"...citing the stronger currency, Bangalore-based
Infosys cut its full-year, rupee-based earnings outlook..."
and "In the past three months, the rupee has appreciated
some 7% against the dollar. That has particularly hurt
companies like Infosys, which earn most of their revenue
in dollars." The graphic, made from data provided
by the company, shows projected 1Q, '08 net profits
as being below 4Q, '07 net profits by about 7 %. Looks
like India's "rising" and "shining" may be coming to an end as
more foreign companies don't consider India as an
outsourcing destination any more (see below).
------------
23. from: The Wall Street Journal, Tuesday, July 3,
2007, front page
title: "Some in Silicon Valley Begin to Sour on
India" subtitle: "A Few Bring Jobs Back As Pay of Top
Engineers In Bangalore Skyrockets" by Pui-Wing Tam
and Jackie Range
Interviews and research with quotes as follows:
Munjal Shah [with image of him, and born in India]
led a California start-up [Riya] opened an office in
Bangalore in 2005, hired about 20 skilled software
developers at 1/4 what they cost in Silcon Valley. Then
salaries soared. He said this year it cost 75% of
SV salaries, plus extra expenses of running an office
in India, and in April this year he closed the Bangalore
office.
"Across SV, some technology companies, particularly
start up and midsize ones, are beginning to turn away
from India for low-cost labor to do sophisitcated tech
work. Kana ... eliminated 100 software-developemnt jobs
in India in late 2005 and expanded its U.S. hiring
instead. Teneros, Inc., shut down a 30 member
India office and brought 12 of the people to its
headquarters in ...California."
The article mentioned that Apple cancelled plans to
open a facility in India.
"'The wage inflation rate for engineers in India is
four times what it is here' in America, says Intel's
chief executive, Paul Otellini."
Article says Indian wage inflation is 10-15% per
year, other sources say it is closer to 50%.
"India is no longer the premier outsourcing
destination."
Article says even the simple call-center work may
be done more cheaply in the Philippines and Vietnam,
and mentions that Indian companies are even
looking outside India to create jobs. TCS recently
opened a center in Mexico and is considering a move
to Morocco. Wipro has two centers in China and
planning one for the Philippines.
Pervasive Software (from Texas) opened a Bangalore
unit in 2004 with 45 people, but turnover reached more
than 25% per year. Last year it closed the
Bangalore office.
The article mentioned that it takes more supervisors to
manage Indians. So, they are asking why pay a junior
guy in India just a little less when they can get a senior
guy right in California.
---------------
22. Quotes from A Wall Street Journal article, Feb
26, 2007, page B3: title: "Behind Outsourcing: Promise
and Pitfalls" by Scott Thurm
"Companies such as Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.
and Dell Inc. reversed decisions to move customer call
centers to India after a customer rebellion." and "[Jagdish]
Dalal advised a big insurance company with
little outsourcing experience to locate a call
center in Canada, to minimize problems with non-North
American English accents." This article also gave many
other details on problems with outsourcing that had nothing
to do with India or offshoring.
----
21. I have seen many reports (sorry I have no
specifics) of Indian (and other foreign corporations) opening
up branches in the USA and establishing jobs within the
USA. An important caveat regarding this action is that while
these are new jobs in the USA, foreign companies are
allowed to transfer existing employees from their
home country into these jobs on L-1 visas and there is no
cap on the number. I hardly think that many of these jobs
will be offered to US guys (green card or citizens)
when home country guys can probably be transferred
at lower pay. Furthermore, the reports may be overly
glossy if a foreign company just buys an existing company
and then claims that it is "bringing" jobs to the
USA. When, however, a US MNC lays off 20,000 US
guys and moves those jobs to India, that MNC is going
to hire local Indians into those jobs and NOT
invite the US guys to "transfer" to India with
something like a 2/3 pay cut.
-------
20. Wall Street Journal, Feb 21, 2007, page B6:
Under "Plots and Ploys" section entitled "Call it
insourcing": Quotes: "One real-estate company has
decreased its outsourcing of some services to india
and turned to a North Carolina town that has lost jobs
to overseas competitors. Situs Cos., a Houston-based
company that provides services to the commercial-
mortgage industry, says it will send some work
to Robbins, N.C. the company previously had tried
to outsource certain services to india, but looked
elsewhere as well in part because of soaring
rents in India, says Situs Chief Executive Ralph
Howard. 'We think we are getting a better quality
for the same price, and at the same time, we're
creating U.S. jobs,' says Mr. Bean [who works for
Mr. Howard]."
---------
19. WSJ, front page, November 13, 2006. title
"Clothes Made Abroad Create Factory Jobs in
L.A. for Mr. Fix-It" subtitle: "Barry Foreman Left Rag
Trade, But is Back, Salvaging Flawed Chinese
Garments" by Stephanie Kang. This whole article
is about a fairly large fraction of imported clothing
that comes with a variety of defects and the
featured guy, Barry Forman, got back into business
to "correct" the defects in the imported lots so as to
make them saleable again. His business is booming,
expanding, and the article is worth reading for those
who want the details. Not all of that cheap labor is
worth what people pay for it. You get cheap quality,
too.
------------
18. Financial Times, Nov 2, page 18, 2006
title: "Volkswagen chooses to swim against the
current-The German carmaker is to shift some of
its production back home" by Richard Milne
"To move production away from lower-cost countries
to a high-cost nation may appear to be a peculiar
decision, but not at Volkswagen. The carmaker
intends to cut thousands of jobs at Spanish,
Portugese and Belgian factories and to shift some
of the models back to Germany..."In the course of this
change, workers in Germany will work longer hours
for the same pay (and keep their high-paying jobs
which will end up at about E40.65/hour [or around
US$50/hour]).
------------
17. From Financial Times, Oct 12, 2006, page 15,
entitled "Boom in outsourcing abates as groups seek
shorter deals" by Francesco Guerrera.
"The wave of outsourcing that has engulfed the
global economy over the past five years is showing
signs of abating as multinational companies opt for
shorter and smaller deals, according to a study to
be published today. The outsourcing industry has
just experienced its worst quarter in four years
and is unlikely to match the $81.9bn in contracts
won in 2005 by the end of
this year, data from the consulting firm Technology
Partners International shows. A slowdown in 2006
would mark the second consecutive year fall in the
volume of outsourcing contracts since their $84.7bn
peak reached in 2004. The results suggest that, following
the drive to curb costs and streamline operations by
contracting out non-core functions, multinationals
might be running out of major operations to outsource.
...The average contract is down to four years from
about 10 years in the recent past. 'In some sectors,
especially information technology, companies
perceive that there has been a commoditisation of
services, leading them to opt for shorter-term contracts
of lower overall value,' said Peter Allen, a partner at
TPI. 'We just don't see enough big deals in the pipeline
to cause us to believe the levels of last year will be
reached.' The trend is likely to raise concerns in
countries such as India and China and among groups
like IBM, Accenture and [EDS], which have been
among the biggest beneficiaries of the outsourcing
trend... According to TPI, which tracks worldwide
deals worth more than $50m, outsourcing contracts
signed between July and September totalled
$13.4bn, a fall of more than 20 per cent on both
the previous quarter and the same period last year.
The weakness of the past three months has left
the total for the year at $55.3 bn, more than #26
bn below the figure for the whole of 2005....
--------------------
16. From WSJ, Monday, July 3, 2006, page B1,
entitled "Siting a Call Center: Check Out the
Mall First" by John Lyons.
Quote(p B3): "After Lehman Brothers moved its
internal computer help desk to India in 2003, the
mismatch between the investment bank's hard-charging
employees and their new Indian phone-support agents
created problems, say industry insiders, and the help
desk returned in house."
It is also interesting that most of this article is
about an Indian, Mr. Shankardass, a US citizen
("born to Indian parents in Nairobi, Kenya") who
works for ClientLogic, that sets up call centers as
an outsourcing business
and most of the article is devoted to his work
finding call center sites in Mexico.
--------------------
15. From Business Week/Small Biz, Summer, 2006 (may
be on the website:www.businessweek.com/smallbiz)
entitled: "Here or There" subtitle: Six entrepreneurs
explain why they outsource or not. Here is a quote
from the first page of the article (page 67):
"Some 24% of small manufacturers said they had
purchased goods or services from vendors outside
the U.S. in the past three years, according to a 2004
study by the National Federation of Independent
Business. For the rest, the best place to manufacture
is right at home, at least for now. The easy
rapport with vendors, relatively short plane rides,
and the quality of American-made goods keep these
business owners and their customers perfectly
happy."
---------------------
14. Subject: More India BPO failure
(in Business Week, June 19, 2006 issue, page 48):
title: "India: Why Apple Walked Away"
subtitle: "Plans for an Indian tech support center
have been scrapped. A cautionary tale"
by Manjeet Kripalani and Peter Burrows.
Quotes:
"Just three months back, Apple ...[was talking
about] hiring 3,000 workers by 2007 [in Bangalore]...."
These plans are now cancelled and most of the 30
existing employees in Bangalore have been dismissed.
The factors mentioned as working against the
original plan include "Entry level pay at tech and
outsourcing companies climbed by as much as 13%
annually from 2000 to 2004, while salaries for
midlevel managers jumped 30% a year during the same
period...." Also cited as a problem was high turnover.
Thus the financial advantage of sending work
to India has just about vanished.
--------------
13. Quote from CFO magazine, June 2006, page 17
(may be on their website, cfo.com): "Passing on India?
Rising wages in India are eating into some of the cost
advantages of sending work to the popular
outsourcing destination. Wages have increased
roughly 11 percent in each of the last three years with
little sign of abating, says Michael Spellacy,
vice president at The Boston Consulting Group. In
major cities like Bombay and Bangalore, inflation
has climbed as high as 14 percent, with worker
attrition rates now averaging 25%. A full time
worker in outsourced financial services in India earns
between $22,000 and $27,000, Spellacy says."
Also, in The Economist, June 3rd, 2006ssue is a
special report on India "A Survey of Business in India"
with the title "Now for the hard part" and on
page 6 of the special report (center section of the
issue) is a large article ("If in doubt, farm it out") on the
difficulty India is having finding workers for this great
expansion in BPO service to the outside world.
---------------------
12. The article "The H-1B Swindle" by Ephraim
Schwartz, appearing in Infoworld, October 31, 2005,
page 12, has the subtitle "A new study suggests
that companies hire foreign workers for cheap
labor, not skill." The article goes on to say: "It
appears there is hard evidence to prove that employers
are using the H-1B visa program to hire cheap
labor; that is, to pay substantially lower wages than
the national average for programming jobs
(infoworld.com/3449)" The article goes into
additional detail and cites data sources such as BLS
(infoworld.com/3450) and DOL's H-1B website
(infoworld.com/3451). Across the board, foreigners
were being paid less. As a general fact, companies have
a financial incentive to preferentially recruit foreigners
because they know foreigners will accept a job offer at a
lower wage.
---------------------
11. A study show that outsourcing really does not
save as claimed.
http://www.boston.com/business/technology/article
s/2006/04/13/
outsourcing_saves_less_than_claimed/
(this reference was posted on a newsgroup in early
2006, and was not checked)
--------------
10. Three more recent articles. First: the article
"Don't Offload Big IT Problems On Outsourcers" by
Rob Preston (VP.Ed-in-cheif) as appeared in
Informationweek, April 10, 2006, page 88 (may be
online at informationweek.com). Second: the large article
"How Do You Spell Relief?
O-U-T-S-O-U-R-C-I-N-G" by Bruce Boardman, appearing
in Network Computing, April 1, 2006, pages 30-36, and
a third article in the same issue on pages 39-48.
So what do these three articles say? The first is
a one page qualitative review of several outsourcing failures
and cites "Outsourcing Backlash"
(presumably at informationweek.com/650/50iuout.htm
[I have not checked it]) and explained that any problems
people have at home become magnified when
they offshore/outsource (many references to India).
The second walks people through the "process" of
outsourcing/offshoring work, including a discussion of how
to do this, but also has a sidebar on page 36 which includes
a summary of a Deloitte Consulting survey of 25
organizations (worth $1 trillion in market cap, and
with 1 mil employees, and spent $50 bil on operations
outsourced) and the sidebar says things like: one in four
brought functions back in house after realizing they could
do the work better, cheaper themselves, 33% of
outsourcing relationships failed in one year while 50% didn't
last five years, and 57% paid extra for services they though
were included in the original contract.
The third article also helps the IT specialist by
evaluating four data center packages (from Savvis, EDS,
Globix, and Infosys). There were a number of tables with data.
Bottom line results: Infosys was the cheapest, EDS
about three times more expensive, others midway;
quality of results- Savvis and EDS got A-, Globix got B+,
and Infosys got a C. You get what you pay
for.
----------------
9. Courtesy of "indiabpoking" are the following
reported negatives, failures and shortcomings of BPO,
quoting his quote from the source given:
> From indiab...@yahoo.com Mon Apr 10 18:36:37
2006
Date: 10 Apr 2006 15:36:37 -0700
From: indiaBPOking <indiab...@yahoo.com>
Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants,
alt.politics.economics,
alt.politics.bush, sci.research.careers,
soc.culture.british
Subject: Outsourcing seen as source of innovation
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-6059512.html
"An IDC and Capgemini survey of almost 300
executives attending IDC's Outsourcing Forum East last
week found that top reasons for deciding to use Business
Process Outsourcing in a corporate strategy include
reducing costs, driving innovation, and the ability
to focus on core competencies."
[but see below]
"Additional [negatives, failures, drawbacks] survey
highlights include:"
"* More than one third (38.2 percent) of participants felt
the biggest downside to outsourcing is not getting the expected
results, followed by public/customer backlash (23.5 percent), and
anxiety over loosing control (20.6 percent)."
[note that 38.2 percent is much lower than other
figures cited from other sources farther down]
"* The three most important legal issues concerning
BPO today according to those surveyed were: governance
procedures (33.8%), business continuity (27.7 percent) and
intellectual property rights (26.2 percent)."
--------------------------------
8. More complaints about India:
from the article "View from Asia-India won't fully
benefit from the amazing productivity of its companies
unless it builds a better infrastructure for business" by
Tom Leander (Editor-in-Chief, CFO Asia). Appearing
in "CFO" magazine for April 2006, page 27 (may be at their
website: www.cfo.com/backissues).
Some quotes:
"... GE's CFO, Keith Sherin, told CFO Asia late
last year that he finds India frustrating. 'You get
excited and nothing happens,' he says. Three
years ago, GE did about the same volume of business
in both India and China. Today, China is a $3 billion
market for GE, triple that of India. So, it's no surprise
when Sherin sums up GE's Asian strategy by saying
that 'China is number one, two, and three for us'."
"His primary complaint is the lack of government
support for infrastructure improvements. Turn off any
highway in India and you'll know what Sherin is
talking about."
"It may be unseemly to criticise a government that
has to take care of so many poor citizens for not
building better roads to facilitate commerce, but
India's CFOs point out that infrastructure is a
social-welfare issue. Sumant Sinha, CFO of leading
conglomerate Aditya Birla Group, says that he spends
more on capital expenditure every year than peer
companies in other nations might. How many of them,
after all, must build their own power stations?"
"But its wishful thinking [despite all the positives of
India] to conclude that India's remarkable productivity
will translate into a thriving internal market any time
soon. In the eyes of most U.S. finance chiefs,
China remains number one, two, and three."
---------------------------------------
7. Backshoring...the new buzzword
Feb 13, 2006 issue of Infoworld, pages 8 (Efraim
Schwartz's column) and page 4, (editor's);
Developer poaching and rapidly rising prices are
causing US based companies to start pulling jobs back
to the USA. Read about it in the periodical.
------------------------------------------------
6. Subject: Deloitte Report: outsource failure
rates
From June, 2005, CFO magazine, page 19.
(it may be on their website, www.cfo.com/BackIssues)
Deloitte Consulting was said (by the CFO article)
to have said "'In the real world, outsourcing frequently
fails to deliver its promise.' wrote researchers who
surveyed 25 companies with average revenues of $50 billion.
The study reveals that 70 percent of its respondents have
had significantly negative experiences and are outsourcing
business processes and IT with increasing caution."
"...there is growning evidence that large comapnies
are rethinking massive outsourcing contracts. Big name
defectors that have unwound at least part of
their arrangements include Conseco, Dell, Capital
One, and Lehman Brothers."
"A sure sign that outsourcing isn't working is the
amount of renegotiation surrounding the vendor
agreements, says Deloitte senior strategy principal
Ken Landis. 'There wasn't a single participant in
the study where contract went to term,' he says.
'All of them had renegotiated prior to the contract
expiration date'"
"Companies are souring on outsourcing, the survey
asserts, for the same reason it has been criticised
for years: failure to live up to cost-reduction
promises, risks to intellectual property, and confidentiality,
and lack of transparency."
The article states that, so far, 25% of the companies
have brought services back (now called backsourcing).
-------------------------------------------------
-----
5. From Information Week, page 8, in the Nov 21,
2005 issue.
Sidebar: "48% of all companies will spend more
money on BPO this year than in 2004"
"55% of current BPO service delivery is conductend
inside the USA"
"41% of companies are satisfied with their BPO
services"
So, that sounds like 100 - 41= 59% are
dissatisified with their BPO services. And, there's
going to be more BPO?
Says the source is IW, Managing Offshore, and Equa
Terra study of 200 BPO customers.
-------------------------------------------------
4. "Offshoring isn't such a sure thing"
by Lora Kolodny, Inc. magazine, September, 2005,
pages 22-24
Quotes:
"Companies are finding that sending IT work
overseas can be more trouble than it's worth,
according to a new survey from DiamondCluster
International, a Chicago-based management
consultancy. The number of executives surveyed
who said they were pleased with their outsourced
IT vendors fell by 17 pecentage points versus the
previous year, marking the first decline since 2002.
Moreover, early termination of relationships
between buyers and offshore service providers
spiked to 51%, which is double the rate of 2004."
In other words, half of all relationships are
terminated before their first contract period is up.
In view of this, a spokesman for the consulting
firm says that "...tech buyers will think twice about
sending critical services abroad--at least
for now."
--------------------------------------------------
3. From "CFO" magazine, FALL 2005, special issue,
pages 40-44. (may be on www.cfo.com/Backissues)
article: "Customer Disservice: Critics say the
promised savings from offshoring come at too steep
a price, while companies say very little at
all"
by Norm Alster
This article starts by saying that on a recent talk
show where people could call in with comments and
questions, it was discovered that virtually everyone in
the USA does not like foreign call center representatives.
"But the practice of outsourcing customer service
to offshore call centers is beginning to look like a
classical idea carried too far. Critics of the
practice point to a growing body of evidence that
suggests faulty economics and customer dissatisfaction
are forcing a rethink of what once seemed a no-brainer."
"'The economic benefits of outsourcing customer
service are grossly overstated' according to Niels
Kjellerup, a senior partner with Australian
consulting firm Resource International and editor
of a Website devoted to call centers
(www.callcenters.com.au). Customer resistance, along
with data-security concerns and the unexpectedly high
costs of managing offshore call centers, offset and dilute their
promised economic benefits, says Kjellerup."
"There is already evidence that these factors have
combined to slow the offshore migration. Several large
firms, including Dell, credit-card giant
Capital One, and insurer Conseco, have shifted at
least some customer-support operations back to the
United States."
Gartner's analyst, Robert Brown, says that the initial
large growth in offshoring is expected to be, in the
future, much smaller.
"Companies with monopolistic or overwhelmingly
dominant market positions are more apt to risk customer
alienation where near-term savings can be realized."
"Alexa Bona, a Gartner analyst based in London,
predicts that during the next three years, up to 60 percent
of companies outsourcing customer-facing service will
encounter customer defections and hidden costs that will
either cancel or outweigh any perceived savings in such
arrangements."
"He [Chris Selland, at Covington Associates in
Boston]says executives at firms that have employed offshore
call centers keep telling him that 'it's harder, it takes more
management attention, and you have to be meticulous
about the way you structure the agreement.' As a
result of all this unexpected overhead, the projected savings
from offshoring can swiftly evaporate."
The article says there is huge turnover at Indian
call centers; it can be up to 70% per year. And, with the big
expansion, there have been recruiting wars in India and
escalating pay scales.
"Martha Rogers, a consultant and author of several
books on customer relationships, contends that the
metrics generally used to measure call-center performance
are flawed."
"Many companies that outsource customer service, in
fact, don't like talking about it, and more than a dozen
turned down requests for interviews. 'Companies are
looking to do everything they can to hide the
fact that they are using off shore call centers'
says Selland. 'From a political standpoint and a
customer-acceptance standpoint, it is something
they are trying to downplay.' At some Asian
centers, agents are actually trained to conceal their
real names and adopt phoney American monikers, a
practice that fools few and can further inflame an
already angry caller."
"One in three respondents in a British survey said
they would stop doing business with a bank that
relocates its call centers offshore. Another
study, conducted in 2004, reported that just 5
pecent of the British are satisfied with offshore
call centers. The Irish arm of Sweden's Tele2AG, a
telecommunications firm, recently switched its call
center operation out of India and back to Ireland,
citing consumer preference."
"In an unpublished data-theft case now under
investigation, a large U.S.-based technology
multinational contracted with a call center in India
without knowing that the company in turn subcontracted
a portion of the work to firms outside India, where
employees of the subcontractor apparently managed
to penetrate the American company's information
database."
"...growing outsourcing industries in Eastern
Europe and Latin America have been targeted by
criminals seeking access to customer data. "
"'For companies that regard customer service as a
key part of future revenue growth, bringing such operations
back to domestic shores is the way to go,' says Kjellerup."
---------------------------------------------------
2. From _Information Week_, page 60, Dec 19/26
issue, 2005
A short article by Paul McDougall reporting that:
"...companies operating in India, including local ones such as
Infosys Technologies, Tata Consultancy Services, and Wipro
Technologies, spend a lot of time and energy time stealing each
other's employees--and that's quickly driving up salaries" and
"'There's a lot of employee turnover [in India], and we weren't
interested in that,' says Martin Mellon, director of development at
applications vendor ASG Software Solutions. The company
chose Northern Ireland over India for its offshore development
work."
--------------------------------------------------
1. Subject: "Satisfaction Wanes for Offshoring"
On page 2 of the print issue of Processor.com for
June 17, 2005, volume 27, number 24:
"According to consulting firm DiamondCluster
International, the number of buyers satisfied with the
providers of their offshore outsourcing has fallen
from 79% to 62%. The firm's annual survey of IT
outsourcing also revealed that 51% of buyers are
terminating their outsourcing relationships earlier
than scheduled."
Me, ...again!
On Thu, 4 Feb 2010, kamal wrote:
> On Feb 4, 4:32 am, "Me, ...again!" <arthu...@mv.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 3 Feb 2010, Michael Coburn wrote:
>>> On Wed, 03 Feb 2010 08:43:25 -0500, Me, ...again! wrote:
>>
>>>> So...what are you doing to learn Chinese culture, language, and planning
>>>> to seek a place in China for the rest of your life?
>>
>>>> I would alternatively suggest that you be learning Spanish and Spanis
>>>> culture as another strategy for supplementing your career longivity.
>>
> funny -the US govt wants all hispanics to learn english.
funny-- I'm seeing signs in all the stores now carry both english and
spanish labels.
>>>> The only thing missing from your piece below is the lack of attentiion
>>>> to the devalued Chinese renminbi which is now negatively affecting most
>>>> regional economies in the world (including Europe and SE Asia).
>>
>>> And this is why the US is in a position to create and spend as much money
>>> into its own economy as necessary to address its problems. But the
>>> Chinese will not float their currency and will continue to run their
>>> country from the top down selecting who gets an education and who does
>>> not and using the Chinese people as a tool to ends conceived by the
>>> leaders. We cannot save the Chinese people. Only the Chinese people can
>>> stop their imprisonment by their government and they will not do so until
>>> we repair the Chinese government's relationship with our own economy and
>>> the rest of the world. As the Chinese simply lock their currency to the
>>> dollar then monetary devaluation is ineffective. The most precise tool is
>>> tariffs.
>>
>> I agree about the tariffs. For hundreds of years of European & British
>> history, tariffs were used as effective trade control mechanisms, but
>
> a tariff is nothing but a trade-distorting subsidy.
It is an excellent compensation for trade cheaters like India that has
devalued its currency, constantly, over the last many decades, and
devalued its currency to stimulate exports and inhibit imports.
It is levied not
> on the producer class but on the consumer class to narrow down the
> choices one has.
>
>> according to globalization dogma and WTO mantras, tariffs are supposed to
>> go away in the long run. So, what to do with an intransigent govt like
>
> FTAs are about doing away with tariffs and quid-pro-quo. Refusal to
> abide by FTAs mean that tariffs attract retaliatory tariffs.
Tariffs are going on Chinese exports, already.
>> China (and India), both of which do not have fully convertible currency?
>
> India's currency is fully convertible on capital account -which means
> companies can sell their stuff in India in rupe and convert that back
> to USD or any other currency of their liking.
But that leaves out all other transactions. You are not off the hook on
that. It is cheating for USD to be fully convertible and Rupees not.
I buy lots of stuff in
> dollars on my credit card and the credit card co bills my card with
> the current dollar buying rate. It is also possible for Indians to buy
> about $50000 by exchanging their rupees and keep that in a foreign
> currency account in India. In addition, they can legally buy about
> $25000 for medical/education etc.. and upto $10000 for a business
> trip.
And, what about non-Indians how much Rupees can they buy with USD?
Looks like what you are revealing is more benefit to Indians not to anyone
else.
>
>> Force foreign companies to partner with local companies? Otherwise break
>> WTO rules?
>>
> Many countries have restrictions on foreign ownership,
Including India and China. Not the USA, west.
but a lot of it
> will be dismantled.
Probably never.
>> Its going to be difficult down the road to change anything because
>> whatever happens, prices will go up. The question is whether wages in the
>> US might also go back up, and whether jobs ever come back to the USA. If
>> the existing trends keep going the way they are, the USA is going to be in
>> deep shit and to a great extent already is.
>>
> yep -that is one reason why i don't miss the US. Good luck with your
> american dream.
If you are so happy in India, why keep bashing the USA and Americans?
Michael Coburn
> a tariff is nothing but a trade-distorting subsidy. It is levied not on
> the producer class but on the consumer class to narrow down the choices
> one has.
Who suffers the burden of an import tariff is utterly dependent upon what
is done with the proceeds of the tax. If the tax proceeds are rebated to
the general public in the form of a "citizen's dividend" or in the form
of a "progressive" stimulus (the rich get nothing and the poor and the
middle get the refund) then the burden of the tax is placed on those who
produce in foreign sovereignties and those who purchase foreign goods.
Those who produce domestically and those who purchase domestic goods see
an improvement in financial power.
The same effect can be achieved by devoting the proceeds to tax cuts in
Medicare taxes or some other tax burden that weighs heavily on the middle
class and the poor. In that case we have a tax shift as opposed to a tax
increase.
People who criticize import tariffs are Republicans, morons, and
neoconomists. In the latter case "efficiency" is being weighted more
heavily than real results. The point of tariffs is that they are
controlled by the people's government within a sovereignty while exchange
rates (currency values) are controlled by neocon central bankers and
cheats in large multinational corporations.
"We the people" of America cannot control the value of the Yuan, the
Rupee, or the remenbi. All of those are controlled by the central banks
of the nations that use those currencies. The people of the USA are at
the mercy of these thieves but for tariffs. WE can use tariffs as WE
need to arrest the thieving of both the offsore and onshore bankers and
multinationals.
Me, ...again!
On Thu, 4 Feb 2010 retro...@comcast.net wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Feb 2010 08:08:00 -0500, "Me, ...again!" <arth...@mv.com>
> wrote:
>
>>> Sink WTO. BTW NAFTA was never ratified by the Senate.
>>
>> NAFTA never ratified? I didn't know that. I thought it was.
>
>
> Nope, not enough votes. They subscribe to the agreement as something
> called an executive agreement, rather than as a treaty. Hence any
> President is free to abandon compliance.
How interesting!!!! Thank you for the info.
P.S. I also read Atlas Shrugged and Lord of the Rings, and afterwards had
the feeling that Ann Rand belongs in Matthew Josephson's book "The Robber
Barrons" and I did not like Ann Rand, and I did like Tolkein's The Lord of
The Rings.
kamal
> On Thu, 04 Feb 2010 03:34:14 -0800, kamal wrote:
> > a tariff is nothing but a trade-distorting subsidy. It is levied not on
> > the producer class but on the consumer class to narrow down the choices
> > one has.
>
> Who suffers the burden of an import tariff is utterly dependent upon what
> is done with the proceeds of the tax. If the tax proceeds are rebated to
> the general public in the form of a "citizen's dividend" or in the form
> of a "progressive" stimulus (the rich get nothing and the poor and the
> middle get the refund) then the burden of the tax is placed on those who
> produce in foreign sovereignties and those who purchase foreign goods.
no -the burden is placed wholly and solely on those who purchase those
goods (regardless of whether they are rich or poor). To tax people
outside your country, you need to infringe on the soverighity of their
country (as in prey on the other country's populace).
> Those who produce domestically and those who purchase domestic goods see
> an improvement in financial power.
>
yes -at the expense of those who consume within the same country.
Producers in other countries are not liable to pay tax to US govt -but
tariffs will definately make their exports uncompetitive by a
fraction.
> The same effect can be achieved by devoting the proceeds to tax cuts in
> Medicare taxes or some other tax burden that weighs heavily on the middle
> class and the poor. In that case we have a tax shift as opposed to a tax
> increase.
>
> People who criticize import tariffs are Republicans, morons, and
> neoconomists. In the latter case "efficiency" is being weighted more
> heavily than real results. The point of tariffs is that they are
> controlled by the people's government within a sovereignty while exchange
> rates (currency values) are controlled by neocon central bankers and
> cheats in large multinational corporations.
>
currency exchange rates cannot be controlled by a central bank. It is
a market determined pricing -which central banks can *influence* but
not *control*. The chinese central bank does not have a dictate out to
the currency market that 1 USD should buy only so many rembimbi. They
just have a position that they will buy all rebimbi in the open market
for so many USD/rebimbi. That said -currency rates are almost
certainly determined/influenced by vested interests which have sway
over polticians. So, if you want the USD to depreciate vs the rupee,
you will need to talk to your own reps as in dis-engage goldman sachs
(and the strong dollar policy) from policy making.
> "We the people" of America cannot control the value of the Yuan, the
> Rupee, or the remenbi. All of those are controlled by the central banks
> of the nations that use those currencies. The people of the USA are at
> the mercy of these thieves but for tariffs. WE can use tariffs as WE
> need to arrest the thieving of both the offsore and onshore bankers and
> multinationals.
>
yes-you are at their mercy but the solution is to ensure that a
state's monetary policy is decided by public interest and not by
private interests. If you look at the last several treassury
secretaries -almost all of them have been from goldman sachs and
benefitted them greatly -just as dick cheney was from halliburton and
benefitted them greately after joining the govt. Tariffs just change
the distribution of wealth to a small extent (but no denying that it
will help the downtrodden in your country).
regards
-kamal
Michael Coburn
> On Feb 4, 11:24 pm, Michael Coburn <mik...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> On Thu, 04 Feb 2010 03:34:14 -0800, kamal wrote:
>> > a tariff is nothing but a trade-distorting subsidy. It is levied not
>> > on the producer class but on the consumer class to narrow down the
>> > choices one has.
>>
>> Who suffers the burden of an import tariff is utterly dependent upon
>> what is done with the proceeds of the tax. If the tax proceeds are
>> rebated to the general public in the form of a "citizen's dividend" or
>> in the form of a "progressive" stimulus (the rich get nothing and the
>> poor and the middle get the refund) then the burden of the tax is
>> placed on those who produce in foreign sovereignties and those who
>> purchase foreign goods.
>
> no -the burden is placed wholly and solely on those who purchase those
> goods (regardless of whether they are rich or poor).
That's what I said. Now let us imagine for just a fleeting moment that I
will get a refund for every penny of tax I pay on an imported hula hoop.
If that is the case I have lost nothing. The burden of the tax is on
nobody. It is just a waste of effort. But let us assume that I have
choices as to what I will buy. I can pay taxes on a hula hoop and
receive a refund or I can buy an untaxed domestically produced slinky at
a lower untaxed price and I still get the refund. Many people will buy
the untaxed slinky as opposed to the taxed hula hoop and spend the
difference on some domestically produced Cracker Jacks. And those people
who do this actually see an increase in utility. The folks that produce
Slinkys and Cracker Jacks also see a net gain and the amount I have to
pay in unemployment is reduced too.
SO yes. The people who insist on imported hula hoops pay the tax. The
rational people that shift their consumption to other choices will
increase their utility because government will be sending out the tax
proceeds to ALL persons and not just the persons that insist on buying
imported hula hoops. i.e. The number of taxpayers = 1000 and the number
of hula hoop consumers = 100. If the tax is $1 than all persons get a
dime. The 100 hula hoop buyers lose 90 cents as they buy a hula hoop. The
rest of the people buy something else of equal price and equal utility
that does not have the $1 tax on it. Everyone gets a dime in the mail.
900 people see a net utility is $1.10 while the net utility of the hula
hoopers is 90 cents. So what happens is that people stop buying imported
hula hoops and instead buy some alternative. In aggregate there is but a
very small loss in utility due to the inefficiency of collecting and
redistributing the tax proceeds.
> To tax people
> outside your country, you need to infringe on the soverighity of their
> country (as in prey on the other country's populace).
I have not suggested taxing people outside the USA DIRECTLY. I have
suggested taxing them through the imposition of an import tax. If the
price to the consumer of the externally produced item is increased by the
tax then the producers of the external country will sell a smaller amount
of goods and they will therefore suffer the burden of the tax along with
the American consumers of those goods. The rest of the American
consumers who choose alternative goods will see a boon. So too will the
domestic producers of the alternative goods.
>> Those who produce domestically and those who purchase domestic goods
>> see an improvement in financial power.
>>
> yes -at the expense of those who consume within the same country.
At the expense of those that continue to consume the taxed goods.
> Producers in other countries are not liable to pay tax to US govt -but
> tariffs will definately make their exports uncompetitive by a fraction.
Yes.....
>> The same effect can be achieved by devoting the proceeds to tax cuts in
>> Medicare taxes or some other tax burden that weighs heavily on the
>> middle class and the poor. In that case we have a tax shift as opposed
>> to a tax increase.
>>
>> People who criticize import tariffs are Republicans, morons, and
>> neoconomists. In the latter case "efficiency" is being weighted more
>> heavily than real results. The point of tariffs is that they are
>> controlled by the people's government within a sovereignty while
>> exchange rates (currency values) are controlled by neocon central
>> bankers and cheats in large multinational corporations.
>>
> currency exchange rates cannot be controlled by a central bank. It is a
> market determined pricing -which central banks can *influence* but not
> *control*. The chinese central bank does not have a dictate out to the
> currency market that 1 USD should buy only so many rembimbi. They just
> have a position that they will buy all rebimbi in the open market for so
> many USD/rebimbi. That said -currency rates are almost certainly
> determined/influenced by vested interests which have sway over
> polticians. So, if you want the USD to depreciate vs the rupee, you will
> need to talk to your own reps as in dis-engage goldman sachs (and the
> strong dollar policy) from policy making.
Tap, tap, tap, dance, dance, dance.
>> "We the people" of America cannot control the value of the Yuan, the
>> Rupee, or the remenbi. All of those are controlled by the central
>> banks of the nations that use those currencies. The people of the USA
>> are at the mercy of these thieves but for tariffs. WE can use tariffs
>> as WE need to arrest the thieving of both the offsore and onshore
>> bankers and multinationals.
>>
> yes-you are at their mercy but the solution is to ensure that a state's
> monetary policy is decided by public interest and not by private
> interests. If you look at the last several treassury secretaries
> -almost all of them have been from goldman sachs and benefitted them
> greatly -just as dick cheney was from halliburton and benefitted them
> greately after joining the govt. Tariffs just change the distribution of
> wealth to a small extent (but no denying that it will help the
> downtrodden in your country).
None of that is relevant. Import tariffs cut through every bit of that
crap. And so long as the proceeds of the tariffs are properly
distributed, the American producers-consumers (one must produce to be
able to consume) are better off.
kamal
that both the loser and gainer are within the same country. the gainer
is a person who finds employment to generate goods/services on account
of tariffs on imported stuff and the loser is the consumer who has to
shell out more for imported goods or make do with less desirable
homegrown stuff.
we have the exact same scenario described herein -in India, which has
very high tariffs. Unfortunately, tarifffs haven't gotten us anyware
close to utopia.
> SO yes. The people who insist on imported hula hoops pay the tax. The
> rational people that shift their consumption to other choices will
> increase their utility because government will be sending out the tax
> proceeds to ALL persons and not just the persons that insist on buying
> imported hula hoops. i.e. The number of taxpayers = 1000 and the number
> of hula hoop consumers = 100. If the tax is $1 than all persons get a
> dime. The 100 hula hoop buyers lose 90 cents as they buy a hula hoop. The
> rest of the people buy something else of equal price and equal utility
> that does not have the $1 tax on it. Everyone gets a dime in the mail.
> 900 people see a net utility is $1.10 while the net utility of the hula
> hoopers is 90 cents. So what happens is that people stop buying imported
> hula hoops and instead buy some alternative. In aggregate there is but a
> very small loss in utility due to the inefficiency of collecting and
> redistributing the tax proceeds.
>
maybe
> > To tax people
> > outside your country, you need to infringe on the soverighity of their
> > country (as in prey on the other country's populace).
>
> I have not suggested taxing people outside the USA DIRECTLY. I have
> suggested taxing them through the imposition of an import tax. If the
> price to the consumer of the externally produced item is increased by the
> tax then the producers of the external country will sell a smaller amount
> of goods and they will therefore suffer the burden of the tax along with
> the American consumers of those goods. The rest of the American
> consumers who choose alternative goods will see a boon. So too will the
> domestic producers of the alternative goods.
>
well -there has to be a reason why the american consumer will
vuoluntarily opt not to buy homegrown stuff but for a tariff. It is
probably because s/he can get a better deal for his/her money by
buying stuff made in 3rd world sweatshops.
> >> Those who produce domestically and those who purchase domestic goods
> >> see an improvement in financial power.
>
> > yes -at the expense of those who consume within the same country.
>
> At the expense of those that continue to consume the taxed goods.
>
yes
> > Producers in other countries are not liable to pay tax to US govt -but
> > tariffs will definately make their exports uncompetitive by a fraction.
>
> Yes.....
>
>
>
>
>
> >> The same effect can be achieved by devoting the proceeds to tax cuts in
> >> Medicare taxes or some other tax burden that weighs heavily on the
> >> middle class and the poor. In that case we have a tax shift as opposed
> >> to a tax increase.
>
> >> People who criticize import tariffs are Republicans, morons, and
> >> neoconomists. In the latter case "efficiency" is being weighted more
> >> heavily than real results. The point of tariffs is that they are
> >> controlled by the people's government within a sovereignty while
> >> exchange rates (currency values) are controlled by neocon central
> >> bankers and cheats in large multinational corporations.
>
> > currency exchange rates cannot be controlled by a central bank. It is a
> > market determined pricing -which central banks can *influence* but not
> > *control*. The chinese central bank does not have a dictate out to the
> > currency market that 1 USD should buy only so many rembimbi. They just
> > have a position that they will buy all rebimbi in the open market for so
> > many USD/rebimbi. That said -currency rates are almost certainly
> > determined/influenced by vested interests which have sway over
> > polticians. So, if you want the USD to depreciate vs the rupee, you will
> > need to talk to your own reps as in dis-engage goldman sachs (and the
> > strong dollar policy) from policy making.
>
> Tap, tap, tap, dance, dance, dance.
>
everything I have stated above is factually correct.
> >> "We the people" of America cannot control the value of the Yuan, the
> >> Rupee, or the remenbi. All of those are controlled by the central
> >> banks of the nations that use those currencies. The people of the USA
> >> are at the mercy of these thieves but for tariffs. WE can use tariffs
> >> as WE need to arrest the thieving of both the offsore and onshore
> >> bankers and multinationals.
>
> > yes-you are at their mercy but the solution is to ensure that a state's
> > monetary policy is decided by public interest and not by private
> > interests. If you look at the last several treassury secretaries
> > -almost all of them have been from goldman sachs and benefitted them
> > greatly -just as dick cheney was from halliburton and benefitted them
> > greately after joining the govt. Tariffs just change the distribution of
> > wealth to a small extent (but no denying that it will help the
> > downtrodden in your country).
>
> None of that is relevant. Import tariffs cut through every bit of that
> crap. And so long as the proceeds of the tariffs are properly
> distributed, the American producers-consumers (one must produce to be
> able to consume) are better off.
>
I am not particularly interested in debating what is good for your
country -just that my statements are backed by irrefutable facts. So,
it cannot be crap for sure.
regards
kamal
> --
Me, ...again!
On Thu, 4 Feb 2010, kamal wrote:
> On Feb 4, 11:24 pm, Michael Coburn <mik...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> On Thu, 04 Feb 2010 03:34:14 -0800, kamal wrote:
>>> a tariff is nothing but a trade-distorting subsidy. It is levied not on
>>> the producer class but on the consumer class to narrow down the choices
>>> one has.
>>
>> Who suffers the burden of an import tariff is utterly dependent upon what
>> is done with the proceeds of the tax. If the tax proceeds are rebated to
>> the general public in the form of a "citizen's dividend" or in the form
>> of a "progressive" stimulus (the rich get nothing and the poor and the
>> middle get the refund) then the burden of the tax is placed on those who
>> produce in foreign sovereignties and those who purchase foreign goods.
>
> no -the burden is placed wholly and solely on those who purchase those
> goods (regardless of whether they are rich or poor).
Kamal, again you are wrong and Coburn is right.
To tax people
> outside your country, you need to infringe on the soverighity of their
> country (as in prey on the other country's populace).
India, itself, right now, has among the highest tariffs in the world, much
higher than any US tariff to any imports from the outside.
You again are misrepresenting the facts.
>
>> Those who produce domestically and those who purchase domestic goods see
>> an improvement in financial power.
>>
> yes -at the expense of those who consume within the same country.
> Producers in other countries are not liable to pay tax to US govt -but
> tariffs will definately make their exports uncompetitive by a
> fraction.
>
>> The same effect can be achieved by devoting the proceeds to tax cuts in
>> Medicare taxes or some other tax burden that weighs heavily on the middle
>> class and the poor. In that case we have a tax shift as opposed to a tax
>> increase.
>>
>> People who criticize import tariffs are Republicans, morons, and
>> neoconomists. In the latter case "efficiency" is being weighted more
>> heavily than real results. The point of tariffs is that they are
>> controlled by the people's government within a sovereignty while exchange
>> rates (currency values) are controlled by neocon central bankers and
>> cheats in large multinational corporations.
>>
> currency exchange rates cannot be controlled by a central bank.
This is a very big lie.
It is
> a market determined pricing -which central banks can *influence* but
> not *control*.
Another misrepresentation of reality. When during the present recession
the US Fed lowered interest rates to the lowest in the world, and below
European interest rates, speculators sold their USD holdings and bought
Euros. When holders of USD sell their USD, and buy up Euros, what do you
think that does to the price of USD and the price of Euros? You should be
able to figure that out.
The chinese central bank does not have a dictate out to
> the currency market that 1 USD should buy only so many rembimbi.
Yes, they do. You cannot buy renminbi because they are not fully
convertible. You have to explain to the Chinese govt what you are going to
do with renminbi before they give it to you. You show your plans for a
factory, and the costs, and all the arrangements, then deposit USD and
they give a statement and a check for the renminbi and it can only go for
that factory.
They
> just have a position that they will buy all rebimbi in the open market
> for so many USD/rebimbi.
Only at the currency exchange at the airports, and for very small amounts.
The only other place is if the central bank sells Chinese bonds for
renminbi.
That said -currency rates are almost
> certainly determined/influenced by vested interests which have sway
> over polticians.
Maybe corruption. And, trading internal to China by Chinese.
So, if you want the USD to depreciate vs the rupee,
> you will need to talk to your own reps as in dis-engage goldman sachs
> (and the strong dollar policy) from policy making.
Wrong. The only way to couteract the exchange rate is to put specific
controls on purchase of USD by China (and that does not exist), or
counteract by putting tariffs on Chinese exports.
Also, there are other ways, such as the EMS in Europe, but China would
have to agree and they will not.
>> "We the people" of America cannot control the value of the Yuan, the
>> Rupee, or the remenbi. All of those are controlled by the central banks
>> of the nations that use those currencies. The people of the USA are at
>> the mercy of these thieves but for tariffs. WE can use tariffs as WE
>> need to arrest the thieving of both the offsore and onshore bankers and
>> multinationals.
>>
> yes-you are at their mercy but the solution is to ensure that a
> state's monetary policy is decided by public interest and not by
> private interests.
China is deciding _for_ their public's interest and the interst of China.
If you look at the last several treassury
> secretaries -almost all of them have been from goldman sachs and
> benefitted them greatly -just as dick cheney was from halliburton and
> benefitted them greately after joining the govt.
As much as this happened, anyone with brains would want people with a lot
of experience with commercial aspects of business. Rarely do they pick
professors to run shows involving real life.
Tariffs just change
> the distribution of wealth to a small extent (but no denying that it
> will help the downtrodden in your country).
This is the only thing you've said that makes any sense to me and actually
fits in with anything that will help the helpless.
Me, ...again!
Yes.
and the loser is the consumer who has to
> shell out more for imported goods or make do with less desirable
> homegrown stuff.
No, because the imported goods may really be less desireable than
homegrown stuff.
> we have the exact same scenario described herein -in India, which has
> very high tariffs. Unfortunately, tarifffs haven't gotten us anyware
> close to utopia.
They are protectionist for the jobs in India that would be threatened if
cheaper ag products were dumped into India. Just another example of how
India cheats by refusing to lower Indian tariffs against cheap US ag
products that are cheaper than Indian ag products.
In the electronics market, there is almost no US industry, anymore, so it
does not matter.
It is
> probably because s/he can get a better deal for his/her money by
> buying stuff made in 3rd world sweatshops.
And, all thoese people working in those sweatshops would be unemployed and
poorer otherwise.
It is mostly your own misrepresentation of reality.
>>>> "We the people" of America cannot control the value of the Yuan, the
>>>> Rupee, or the remenbi. All of those are controlled by the central
>>>> banks of the nations that use those currencies. The people of the USA
>>>> are at the mercy of these thieves but for tariffs. WE can use tariffs
>>>> as WE need to arrest the thieving of both the offsore and onshore
>>>> bankers and multinationals.
>>
>>> yes-you are at their mercy but the solution is to ensure that a state's
>>> monetary policy is decided by public interest and not by private
>>> interests. If you look at the last several treassury secretaries
>>> -almost all of them have been from goldman sachs and benefitted them
>>> greatly -just as dick cheney was from halliburton and benefitted them
>>> greately after joining the govt. Tariffs just change the distribution of
>>> wealth to a small extent (but no denying that it will help the
>>> downtrodden in your country).
>>
>> None of that is relevant. Import tariffs cut through every bit of that
>> crap. And so long as the proceeds of the tariffs are properly
>> distributed, the American producers-consumers (one must produce to be
>> able to consume) are better off.
>>
> I am not particularly interested in debating what is good for your
> country -j
You have been complaining for at least five years about our "worthless"
USD, foreign policy, history, and any chance you get to complain with your
anti-white attitude and anyone can find these statements if they go to the
archives and look back.
> ust that my statements are backed by irrefutable facts.
Your statements are only connected with misrepresentations and
interpretations of sellectively chosen details.
So,
> it cannot be crap for sure.
It is at least 50% crap.