that sucking sound
Bill
news:kmoovv8nd95edm4ms...@4ax.com:
> aw...@blackhole.nyx.net (arthur wouk) wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/html/uncomp/articleshow/4065
>>60.cms
>>
>>Silicon Valley falls to Bangalore
>>SATYA PRAKASH SINGH
>>
>>TIMES NEWS NETWORK[ MONDAY, JANUARY 05, 2004 11:05:18 PM ]
>>
>>BANGALORE: The inevitable has happened. Bangalore , which grew under
>>the shadow of America's Silicon Valley over the last two decades, has
>>finally overtaken its parent.
>>
>>Today, Bangalore stands ahead of Bay Area, San Francisco and
>>California, with a lead of 20,000 techies, while employing a total
>>number of 1.5 lakh engineers.
>>
>>Bangalore, which commenced its R&D activities in 1986 when Texas
>>Instruments set up its product engineering centre here, is currently
>>home to the who's who of the global tech fraternity.
>>
>>The recent recession in the US also forced most corporates there to
>>move thousands of jobs to India in addition to tech giants such as
>>Cisco, Intel , IBM, Oracle and i2 relocating some of their
>>Indian-origin employees from the US centres to Bangalore.
>>
>>Indian tech workers also returned home in large numbers as jobs dried
>>up in the US.
>
> What is there about the third world getting it's act together that you
> find so threatening? The world is changing, Arthur, and in the case of
> India it's unquestionably for the better.
>
> Jeff
Maybe. Dell just ended their call-centers in India. They were terrible. Their
standard answer to everything was. "Oh, yroo havea to berase yoo hardisca and reload
evyding. Dann call me buck. If I understood, which was doubtful - I had to hang up
and try the Indian roulette to get another almost-english speaker - then guide them
through their level one book to point them to the right answer to the right problem.
I could go on... but I spare you the details
The other thing is that it compares Bangalore to the "bay area, San Francisco, and
California" which is losing jobs, not just to India, but the other states because of
rising costs of doing business. I was fortunate to sell my house in Garland, Texas,
for a good price when Cisco systems relocated 5000 jobs from California to Texas. The
transplanted bay area buyers thought the prices cheap (which they are) compared to
California. Unless Arnold does something drastic Kelifornia will be losing more jobs
than gaining, with or without India. he also spoke, yesterday about saving their
military bases - as a patriotic duty of course- federal income barely mentioned. But
California has done such a good job in running the military-industrial complex out of
the state that they have almost nothing left to keep. No army bases, for e.g. And
the 2006 Base-closing "hit list" (not yet finalized) gets rid of almost all the ones
left.
--
Pull the string to reply
rumpelstiltskin
<justusc...@not-here.com> wrote:
>Situations like the one in California are ultimately self correcting.
>The socialists in Sacramento aren't operating in a vacuum -- although
>they think they are. In time, businesses will just leave for Garland
>Texas, and parts unknown.
? I thought Garland Texas was part of "parts unknown".
>Then the left wing rascals will get kicked
>out and California will adjust. Thing is, with a global economy,
>Garland has to compete with places that you and I can't pronounce, so
>Garland may have more in common with California than it realizes. And,
>while Arthur doesn't understand it, just like California can't pass a
>law prohibiting businesses from moving to Texas, the United States in
>the end can't legislate jobs from moving to India. We have to do what
>we do cheaper and more efficiently than the Indians, and if we can't
>they'll clean our clock. Personally, I think we can compete.
>
>Jeff
Bill
news:jedpvvosfe1nlhmtm...@4ax.com:
> On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 01:01:20 GMT, El Castor
> <justusc...@not-here.com> wrote:
>
>>Bill <billzz...@starband.net> wrote:
-stuff snipped-
>>>But California has done such a good job in running the
>>>military-industrial complex out of the state that they have almost
>>>nothing left to keep. No army bases, for e.g. And the 2006
>>>Base-closing "hit list" (not yet finalized) gets rid of almost all
>>>the ones left.
>>
>>Situations like the one in California are ultimately self correcting.
>>The socialists in Sacramento aren't operating in a vacuum -- although
>>they think they are. In time, businesses will just leave for Garland
>>Texas, and parts unknown.
>
>
>
> ? I thought Garland Texas was part of "parts unknown".
If you google on "Telecom Corridor" you will get reference to the section of US 75
running north from Dallas to Plano, Texas. In that stretch are located every single
telecom company in the world from Texas Instruments (HQ) in the south to Northern
Telecom (US HQ) in the north. In between are HP (optoelectronics), Erricson
(cellphones), Fujitsu (largest cellphone factory outside of Japan) Nokia, Motorola,
Rockwell, MCI, Cisco (7 new buildings housing 5000 people) NEC, SBC and I could go on.
Probably there will be a map. Outside of that there are the HQ of EDS, Perot Systems,
JC Penny, I could go on.
In brief Texas is doing everything it can to lure commerce from California, and
California has been doing everything it can to run commerce out of the state and replace
it with state organizations that will employ everyone, and they will all vote
Democratic. It is a recipe that will lower California to the status of a third-world
nation. But hey, I'm on a fixed income - I don't have to move to Mexico, or another
third-world nation, to take advantage of low prices. Mexico and a third-world nation is
coming here.
Garland, Texas (pop. 216,000) is on a course that will see it employ more people in
telecommunications than all of Silicon Valley. And California is doing everything it
can to help. There is nothing, from unions, to disability, to insurance, to building
and environmental that California has not done to drive commerce out of the state.
Garland is targeting telecommunications. Other states are getting aerospace (mostly
Seattle - did you notice that there is no longer any Lockheed, or Douglas, or Rockwell,
or Hughes airplane factories in California? They are all gone. The space that once
converted orange groves to factories can now convert back to growing oranges as
California marches proudly into the past. But then we can employ more illegal aliens
picking the oranges.
The California engineering schools will train the people that will move to Garland. I
know. In ten years in Garland I saw the demographics go from Texans to Californians. I
worked for a company that had me in California half the time. But they didn't have to
pay the California rates. All the people I knew, in Garland, were from Anaheim, Santa
Ana, San Jose, etc. Not only have they driven commerce away, they have a brain drain
that they don't have a clue about. Because politicians have no brains, only pockets.
Maybe Arnold can save the state, but I don't know. I'll bet the self-destructive
Democratic party will manage to wring defeat out of this anyway.
Maybe you are not one, but the average Californian has not a single clue as to how this
state is being eviserated, and not by outsiders, but by Californians. There is nothing
in the California press, but you can get the box scores from the Dallas Business Journal
who keeps track of the latest moves from California.
Garland, Texas motto: We got more Californians than you!
jim
wrote:
That can't be good news in the long run for Texas as those
carpetbaggers will be working hard to recreate the trashey world of
California there in Tx (I would bet.)
But they didn't have to
>pay the California rates. All the people I knew, in Garland, were from Anaheim,
I worked with a great number of people in Anaheim area on contracts
years ago. They were with Rockwell Corp and several other companies
and unlike many military contractors, they included more
anti-establishment types then any other place we had contracts (except
Boston). Prepare for some of the liberal bs coming your way I will
bet!
rumpelstiltskin
wrote:
>rumpelstiltskin <PleaseDoNot...@nowhere.net> wrote in
>news:jedpvvosfe1nlhmtm...@4ax.com:
>
>> On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 01:01:20 GMT, El Castor
>> <justusc...@not-here.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Bill <billzz...@starband.net> wrote:
>
>-stuff snipped-
>
>>>>But California has done such a good job in running the
>>>>military-industrial complex out of the state that they have almost
>>>>nothing left to keep. No army bases, for e.g. And the 2006
>>>>Base-closing "hit list" (not yet finalized) gets rid of almost all
>>>>the ones left.
>>>
>>>Situations like the one in California are ultimately self correcting.
>>>The socialists in Sacramento aren't operating in a vacuum -- although
>>>they think they are. In time, businesses will just leave for Garland
>>>Texas, and parts unknown.
>>
>>
>>
>> ? I thought Garland Texas was part of "parts unknown".
>
>If you google on "Telecom Corridor" you will get reference to the section of US 75
>running north from Dallas to Plano, Texas. In that stretch are located every single
>telecom company in the world from Texas Instruments (HQ) in the south to Northern
>Telecom (US HQ) in the north. In between are HP (optoelectronics), Erricson
>(cellphones), Fujitsu (largest cellphone factory outside of Japan) Nokia, Motorola,
>Rockwell, MCI, Cisco (7 new buildings housing 5000 people) NEC, SBC and I could go on.
>Probably there will be a map. Outside of that there are the HQ of EDS, Perot Systems,
>JC Penny, I could go on.
The name "Garland" sounded familiar. It struck me just now
that it was associated with the TV program "Hank of the Hill", so
I googled it up and found that Garland was the model for Hank's
home town of Arlen. I'm sure Garland has many more esteemed
claims to fame, but I'm not familiar with Texas. I've only been on
week-long business trips to Houston and El Paso, and when I
went to Houston I stupidly forgot to take my driver's license, so I
got to see the place even less than one usually has opportunity
for on business trips.
If I leave California, I expect it will be for Europe or for
New England/New York. I'm a yankeeized Englishman,
and a hidebound one.
My nephew asked me once about Texas, and I replied
that people from California don't go to Texas and people
from Texas don't go to California. I'm just having fun
there of course, the same as I do with the Irish: I use the
faux prejudice for friendly ribbing, but wouldn't want to
carry it past the point of banter. Hank Hill, on his motorcycle
trip around the country, planned to visit every state in the
Union - except California.
I don't know if my outlook is universal among those who
don't know much about Texas, but Hank Hill is the
representative of Texans for me.
One of my friends is moving to Kentucky, near the
Mississippi River. When I found that out, the idea of living
around there did strike my fancy, though I've never been
to Kentucky. I'm sure Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn are
80% behind the attraction, but Mark Twain himself of
course chose to spend his last years in upstate New York.
I did live in upstate New York for a year or two, and
wouldn't myself care to repeat the experience. I think I'd
be gloomy nowadays living anywhere but a city no smaller
than San Francisco, preferably quite a bit larger, or at
least with a (small-b) bohemian district of comparable size.
I was born in a village and raised in a not-very-populous
suburb, but as soon as I hit city life, I knew it was the life
for me. Texas strikes me as anti-bohemian, but of course
I haven't really spent any time there.
Anaheim and Santa Ana are definitely not part of "my"
California, I think, though I'm not sure if I've ever been to
either. Even San Jose is barely passable. I did visit
Disneyland once (which I found dreadful) which I think is
in Anaheim, but that wouldn't have given me a feel for the
town. I lived in Palo Alto and Redwood City for a year
about 1974, and just couldn't tolerate living there after a
while, with the streets deserted especially at night, and the
blue light of TV sets emanating from the windows of the
houses of ghostlike suburbanites. It felt so good when
I moved back to San Fran.
Bill
news:nd3qvvc6m9s5g65oo...@4ax.com:
Well, this has gone so off-topic I don't know what to say. Mike Judge is the person who
wrote "King of the Hill" about his growing up in Garland, renamed Arlen. That was the
Garland of his youth and has nothing to do with whazzup today...
http://www.ci.garland.tx.us/Home
or the Telecom Corridor...
http://www.telecomcorridor.com/
which is the area that is taking all of the telecommunications jobs from California.
I thought that the original point of this discussion was that "the sucking sound" was
taking all jobs from California. Well, that is what is happening. Probably in a year
or two Garland, Texas will have more Californians than San Francisco.
Not to mention, which I did, that all (that's ALL) of the aerospace jobs have also left.
The computer jobs are now leaving. You won't notice until you have to pay 1000% more
taxes to make up for all of the productive companies and jobs that have left Kelifornia.
I'm pretty much shielded. You are going to pay a lot more money to live in SF, because
the people who paid most of the taxes have left. That was the point. California is
losing all of the tax-paying companies and gaining illegal aliens. The state is sinking
into a third-world country.
It will take an absolute miracle to turn the situation around. I could go on, but why?
It's not about where you live.
Jim-Bob
> What is there about the third world getting it's act together that you
> find so threatening? The world is changing, Arthur, and in the case of
> India it's unquestionably for the better.
Free trade is only a net benefit to international corporations, not
American workers.
The only thing that the U.S. has that the others don't is technological
advances and secrets. Yet we don't value these, as evidenced by the fact
that we give them away.
rumpelstiltskin
wrote:
>Well, this has gone so off-topic I don't know what to say. Mike Judge is the person who
>wrote "King of the Hill" about his growing up in Garland, renamed Arlen. That was the
>Garland of his youth and has nothing to do with whazzup today...
My apologies for going so far off-topic. I'm retired, so I'm not
much impacted by job loss unless the money system collapses
as a result of job loss or of debt, so my attention did wander
from what was a pretty intently focussed thread, but I really
should have taken the intensity of the focus of others into
consideration.
Bill
4ax.com:
> On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 09:17:37 GMT, Bill <billzz...@starband.net> wrote:
>
>
>>>>In brief Texas is doing everything it can to lure commerce from
>>>>California, and California has been doing everything it can to run
>>>>commerce out of the state and replace it with state organizations that
>>>>will employ everyone, and they will all vote Democratic. It is a
>>>>recipe that will lower California to the status of a third-world
>>>>nation. But hey, I'm on a fixed income - I don't have to move to
>>>>Mexico, or another third-world nation, to take advantage of low
>>>>prices. Mexico and a third-world nation is coming here.
>>>>
> I have seen
> some of Texas by driving across the state on several occasions
> and visiting Houston
> on a couple of business trips. California I lived in for a couple
> of years and I visit three kids who live there, and have seen most
> of the state.
>
> If I were a Californian and had
> to move to Texas I would weep for a year or more. I believe the
> climate, natural beauty and other advantages California has
> over Texas will always make it a most desirable place to live.
> You seem to not make a comparison of this kind of desirability
> between the two states. Perhaps you think Texas is an
> attractive state to live in. Moreso than California. I think the
> difference between the two is so great that your prediction will
> never come true. People will always flock to an area that has a
> coastline like California's. And a climate like California's. And
> the overall natural beauty of California. California will solve its
> problems and people will not all pull out for Texas. If some do
> leave, they will make room for others who are champing at the bit
> to get in.
My wife is a Californian and when we moved to Texas (courtesy of Rockwell) she almost
wept for the entire ten years. But the point was that it doesn't matter what an
individual likes, the jobs are leaving the state. Entire industries!! The entire
aerospace industry is gone from California, soon to be folled by telecommunications,
then computers.
After ten years in purgatory we retired to the Sierra Nevada. The difference between
the California of the 1950s and 1960s and today is remarkable.
Remember Douglas Aircraft, Long Beach? Lockheed Aircraft, Burbank Air Terminal?
Rockwell/North American Aircraft, Seal Beach? Hughes Aircraft, Los Angeles? They are
all gone. Aircraft assembly is now in Washington and Texas. The largest
telecommunications growth is in Richardson Texas. The largest computer assembler is
Dell, in Round Rock, Texas. I could go on...
You take a bus in NYC and you see ads from commercial companies. You take a bus in
Sacramento and you see ads from county and stage agencies - "Got AIDS? See the county
health... Got on welfare? See the county... No medical? See the county..." no
commerce.
People will always flock to California, but the jobs are flocking out of California.
And the state has been doing everything it can to make the cost of doing business very
unfavorable compared to other states.
I think that the objective of past administrations was to have everyone employed by
the state or employee unions so that elections would always be for the incumbant.
Imagine the largest union being prison guards. There was an incentive to eliminate
industry, whose workers were not under state control, and they have done that very
well.
Arnold has a problem. No one in the California legislature wants change. They want
the status quo even if the state goes bankrupt. They think they can go to some court
and get a bankruptcy petition or something. The only hope (my thought) is to rule by
public referendum.
Anyhow, this has nothing to do with -what's a better place to live- it has everything
to do with the fact that the best and the brightest are being brain-drained out of
California (and being replaced by illegal aliens.) Nothing of this is heard in
California. But read the Dallas Business Journal, where they are keeping a box score,
and one can see what is happening.
Years ago I put together a consortium of university and commercial commmunications
entities in a beautiful building belonging to USC at Marina Del Rey. If I were to do
that today the focus would be at DF/W airport hosted by the University of
Texas/Dallas. That's how the focus has changed. No one in California seems to
notice. They sure notice in Texas. Look at the homepage for the Telecom Corridor in
Richardson, Texas. That's thousands of acres.
California has a real, and growing problem. They are increasing their spending and
debt while eliminating the industries, companies, and skilled workers who pay the
taxes. No one will publish a chart showing average tax payments (hint:going down) and
average state payouts (hint: going up.) And they have actually passed laws freezing
payouts!!
Well, enough of this. If I type some more I might get bitter or something.