Posted on 06/30/2008 10:29:58 AM PDT by kellynla
The high-priced corporate lobbyists walking Capitol Hill corridors have a new mantra: innovation. They demand that Congress bring in more guest workers, especially from Asia, in order to maintain American innovation supremacy.
The lobbyists' backup buzzword is "the best and the brightest." They argue that U.S. workers in science, technology, engineering and mathematics are in short supply and we must now import foreign engineers and scientists, i.e., allow the multinationals to bring in an increased or even unlimited number of H-1B visas.
Their argument lacks evidence: Economics 101 teaches that shortages in labor or goods produce higher wages or higher prices. In fact, we have no shortage of engineers or computer techies, so their wages are stagnant and are certainly not going up. In 2005, we graduated 271,000 students with bachelor's or master's degrees in science and engineering who were citizens or legal residents. The dean of Duke University Engineering School says that 40 percent of his graduates do not get engineering jobs. Bill Gates and other multinationals simply prefer to hire Asians, particularly from India, who work for low wages and can be trained on the job.
Professor Norman Matloff examined the H-1B record and discovered that H-1B visa recipients are mostly employees of ordinary talent doing ordinary work. Most of them work at levels I and II, described by the Department of Labor in terms akin to apprenticeship, while very few H-1B workers are at level IV, the level of expertise whose description is associated with innovation. "Aliens of extraordinary ability" and outstanding professors and researchers can come into our country in another category, EB-1, and we welcome them. Another argument used by the lobbyists is that international comparisons of math and science K-12 test scores show that Americans are weak. That cannot be used as evidence because India and China refuse to participate in those tests. Professor Matloff dispels the myth that our tech industry owes its success to math geniuses coming from Asia. The evidence does not support this "Asian mystique."
The Department of Homeland Security is doing its part to help the multinationals hire foreign graduates of U.S. universities instead of Americans by increasing the time foreign students can join the U.S. labor pool without an H-1B visa from 12 months to 29 months.
On a Friday afternoon, DHS quietly announced a new regulation that figuratively staples an H-1B visa to the diploma of all foreign graduates in science, technology, engineering or math. This bureaucratic edict really increases the H-1B cap by 23,000, which is the number of foreign students getting degrees in science, math and engineering this year.
Foreigners can remain in the United States for up to six years on an H-1B visa. That's plenty of time to have an anchor baby and stay forever, and there is no accounting of those who leave when their visa time is up.
The H-1B program was originally set up to help U.S. companies by allowing them to bring in specially qualified foreigners to fill jobs for which no American can be found. But six of the top 10 H-1B visa recipients in 2007 are based in India, and two others headquartered in the U.S. have most of their operations in India.
This year's keynote session of the American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, & Petroleum Engineers revealed how U.S. supremacy in technology is under attack in even more devious ways. A panel of speakers described the future role of U.S. engineers in the 21st century.
One speaker proclaimed that "pure engineering tasks" will all be outsourced, that our engineers must realize they are "citizens of the world," and that we must abandon "the engineer of the past, with a slide rule hanging from his belt," and change into a "personable manager with an engineering background" who will create personal relations with "external" clients.
A second speaker predicted that "engineering jobs will develop overseas and stay there since the technical resources will be there and the infrastructure will follow." A third speaker said that an engineer must "be prepared to jump from one place to another" because it's "risky for engineers to be focused on a very narrow aspect of any specific job."
A fourth speaker said that our challenge is "not so much the technical engineering but the sociopolitical engineering." A fifth speaker said, "The quality and quantity of R&D going overseas is increasing faster than it is here in the United States." We wonder if there is any longer a purpose in American students taking the scholarly road of engineering school. To paraphrase a once-popular TV ad, "Where's the innovation?"
The problem is that too much (even most?) of the H1B visas are for cheap people knocking off some Visual Basic code instead of the “best and the brightest”. Put in a bidding system for the slots and we’ll get more chemical and pharmaceutical researchers and fewer people able to line up three buttons in a dialog box.
She misunderstands the dynamic. It doesn't matter what we do in terms of importing foreign engineers and computer scientists so long as there is an internet. You can hire really good programmers in India and the Ukraine for $20-$25 per hour. They don't have to come here to write code. They just write locally and repository the written code in the US. That will depress American cs wages regardless if we never import another computer scientist.
This is not something we can change. The result is that large businesses are going to continue to hire mostly American programmers with some imports. Small businesses can rarely afford $80-$120 per hour for American programmers. So small businesses will hire overseas.
Given that most innovation and job growth in America comes from small businesses, that means most innovation and job growth in the CS market will happen, for the next 10-15 years, in India and Eastern Europe. It's a fact of life and it cannot be stopped.
The question for the large American companies is, are large American companies (who are paying MUCH more than $20 per hour for programmers) going to be able to remain competitive with foreign companies, who have much lower labor costs? We can make sure they don't by preventing them from hiring foreign programmers. Or we can accept that fact that, right now, the world economy doesn't work the way we would like it to (in terms of US programmer salaries) and live with it. Or, we could make the internet and email illegal.
Auction Citizenship.
Think about it.
This is the problem all around——people don’t want to pay decent wages for the goods and services they receive. That goes for engineer salaries down to restaurant workers, nannies, and construction workers. So we get a whole lot of cheap Chinese clothes and trinkets, shoddy construction, and a cheaper restaurant bill. As your post shows, these trends not only affect the working class, but the more middle class, college educated as well. Yes, it is true that certain foreign born (like those mentioned in post) as well as illegals will work for wages that no American will work for. Why hire an American when you can get an Indian, Chinese, Jamaican or Mexican for a lot cheaper. We should pay a bit more and have the satisfation that we’re taking care of our own first.
“Small businesses can rarely afford $80-$120 per hour for American programmers. So small businesses will hire overseas.”
So, you’re saying that the going rate for American programmers is $166,400 to $250,000 per year? Are these in house programmers or consultants? I seriously question that those rates are in any way the prevailing pay for American programmers, representing a range from new programmers to senior programmers.
interesting article...
ping
“Compensation
The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates the average yearly salary of computer programmers in 2006 to be $69,500. Here are average 2006 salaries in the industries that hire the most computer”
http://www.collegeboard.com/csearch/majors_careers/profiles/careers/106478.html
Computer programmers: average compensation in 2006 = $69,500, does not even make it half way to the bottom of your $80 - $120 per hour compensation for American programmers.
Go check guru.com. It's a market clearing house for freelance programmers and employers wanting "project" type work. They do tons of business. Do a random survey of the rates charged by Americans and British programmers and compare that with India and Eastern Europe. Occasionally, you find a competent American programmer charging $65 per hour. (And of course, you can find Americans who design websites for $50 an hour. But that's not real programming.) Guys who develop commercial applications and do a good job of it are minimum $65 and significant multi-tiered database experience moves the rate up quite a bit. Americans who will work for the lower end of that rate usually have a lot of other baggage I don't want to deal with.
You have to be VERY careful hiring freelance American programmers. There aren't all that many good ones on the market because the good ones are already working for IBM, MS, HP, Oracle, etc. for very hefty salaries (although I don't know those numbers precisely because I don't run in those rareified circles).
And, the other problem is, there are frequently significant drama issues (for lack of a better term) with American programmers that you don't get overseas.
I realize I'm painting with a broad brush and there are significant exceptions to all of the generalizations above. But they are based on a LOT of experience over more than a decade of hiring programmers here and overseas.
If anyone has been to the Post Office lately, I've found that half of the employees at the counter don't speak English and the other half don't know what they're doing... and don't get me started on some of the postal carriers who can't even read the street signs!!!
That's probably the same as the true statistic for California attorneys. Last time I checked that number, it was about $40,000 per year. The reason is, there is an oversupply of attorneys in CA and a lot of them don't make much money. But there's not an oversupply of good attorneys. They cost $400-$600 per hour and they are, practically speaking, only available to large companies.
My observation of the software engineer market is similar. The good ones are worth their weight in gold but they already work for HP, MS, Intel etc. Most that are available to small businesses aren't very good, are overpriced, and bring uniquely US "self-esteem" and "I want to be me" culture issues to the contract relationship.
Don't blame the businesses. Blame the US education system, which is producing too few good programmers that have attitudes.
Bluntly put, my business would not still be in existence were I required to hire only US programmers. We barely survived two of them a few years back.
BTTT Software Simian
“I realize I’m painting with a broad brush and there are significant exceptions to all of the generalizations above. “
You’re talking about a small slice of the programmers working in the US, the contract programmers who either free lance or work for a consulting firm that bills their programming services out on an hourly basis. Those billing rates are always double or more what an in-house employee would be paid, for programming, accounting, engineering or most any professional service.
I’m not sure what that type work tells us about the need for more or fewer work visas. But I think the entire work visa situation needs to be strictly reviewed and monitored as there is no shortage of businesses who’d work the system to reduce their payroll costs.
All these visa programs need very close scrutiny.
To destroy our technology edge.
1. Neuter all white males. Use affirmative action and promote feminism.
2. Stop all aggressive games in school eliminate male traits; no losers make everyone a winner.
3. Push more women into fields that they are not good at to equalize things.
4. Hire only foreign born, more affirmative action.
5. Push non-technical fields, like law, and Ethnic studies.
6. Attack anyone who studies engineering as a geek and ostracize them.
7. Make all college classes political and anti-American, anti-male. This will highly decreases the number of men wanting to go to college.
8. Attack all corporations as evil. Who wants to work for an evil corporation?
9. Destroy marriage, make divorce easier, and make it that the male can loose all. Divorced and single males are less likely to have a good work ethic or be motivated.
10. Attack males on TV and in commercials. Make them look dumber than there children and defiantly dumber than their wife. Great way to kill motivation.
“Don’t blame the businesses. Blame the US education system, which is producing too few good programmers that have attitudes.”
You’re discussing a lot of subjective and qualitative issues that can’t really be evaluated on a forum such as this. But I still think all these work visa programs need very close scrutiny by some independent reviewers. There a far too many opportunities for these programs to be little more than a salary cutting device for American employers. And that goes for everything from landscaping to programming and engineering, etc.
I can speak intelligently on this since I’m a Duke Engineering graduate. Biomedical Engineering made up about 30% of the Duke engineering graduates in my day. Most of my BME bretheren went to medical school. Others went to Wall St. or consulting firms (Anderson, MacKenzie, etc..). I’m one of the few that actually became an engineer. That’s where most of your 40% comes from.
People like to hire Duke BME’s because busnesses know these folks busted their tails in college. If you survive the ciriculum (many don’t), you will get a job somewhere. Engineering has a glass ceiling, and many Duke engineers realize this. That’s why they do other things. I’m getting my MBA now for that exact reason.
“Small businesses can rarely afford $80-$120 per hour for American programmers. So small businesses will hire overseas.”
Hey don’t let the engineering staff here see this $ quote... there would be mutiny a foot....
btt
Of course, she’s talking about engineers, not programmers.
The real problem is that US coders by and large have an entitlement attitude. They don’t deliver code on time, it is cr@p compared to coe you can get from Vietnam et al., and they whine about putting in 7 hours a day, let alone the 10 most off-shore coders are actually happy abou doing.
There are exceptions, and for truly innovative code you use US coders and put up with their entitlement attitude. But for bread and butter coding, you’d have to have a hole in your head to use Silicon Valley or most other US coders.
It’s the entitlement culture. Thanks, libscum, NEA, and dem pols.
“as there is no shortage of businesses who’d work the system to reduce their payroll cost”
Yeah, we don’t want them to do that! Who needs competitiveness? Why not just pass a law to ban it? /SARC
That’s probably not where you meant to go, but it is where you did go. Think about it.
“but big businesses often treat their engineers more like worker bees than anything”
Very true. Goes back to engineers largely being from the “working class” and being the only real professional degree that is a bachelors. Biz types in contrast have (mostly worthless but still ego bloating grad degree) MBAs, are connected to “old money,” etc.
As you note, small biz is the exception, but our system severely punishes small biz and entrepreneurs. This is intentional: big biz and big gov are in bed together, and big biz uses big gov to hamper competition, for example through over regulation.
“{That’s probably not where you meant to go, but it is where you did go. Think about it.”
You’re the one who needs to think about that, among other things. And, do you believe everything some employer whining about the need for immigrant workers says?
Shed that naivete, or maybe you have a dog in this fight.
I do - have a buddy with a startup in Silicon Valley, and the reality is as I’ve stated it above.
I see you have walked the same path I have. I think the problem was the 90's. There was huge demand then--even really bad programmers averaged 4 months on each job before they were hired away at a bigger salary. Unfortunately, that set a culture of entitlement in the US programming world. Most of it hasn't adapted well to a different economic environment.
“I do - have a buddy with a startup in Silicon Valley, and the reality is as I’ve stated it above.”
I wouldn’t believe a word of it until thoroughly investigated. I wonder how much time and effort Silicon Valley firms spend recruiting new grads and experienced programmers from all over the US, and from colleges all over the US? Or, do they just call up the international headhunter agency and tell them what they need?
The situation you are familiar with might be totally legit, or not. But there have just been too many stories and testimonials indicating that, as said on that youtube meeting of headhunters: “We don’t want to find a qualified American.”
And, we also had the recent thread of an Iowa meatpacker who followed the guidelines, advertising jobs locally at $6.00 PER HOUR. And, finding no takers, just had to bring in workers from south-of-the-border.
“I wouldn’t believe a word of it until thoroughly investigated”
Frankly, buddy, I don’t give a sh!t if you believe or not, doesn’t change the facts as I KNOW them to be. Maybe someone else will learn something from what I posted, and maybe I’ll learn something from them, but that isn’t happening here, so I’m done with this exchange.
Never thought about it in those terms, but makes a lot if sense. Maybe that’s why the newer younger coders and the “grey hairs” who kept up (on the rare occasion you can find them and a big co hasn’t snapped them up) are generally better - less “easy street” experience. Good points.
Similar problem and a lot of overlap. For different kinds of programming, you often need engineering skills on top of programming skills. Indian H1B's are driving the two communities buggy.
Same problem for policy. There are only three alternatives:
1. Let in H1B's. Plus is American companies can stay competitive against international companies. Minus is lower salaries for engineers and programmers.
2. Don't let in H1B's. Plus is theoretically higher salaries in America. Reality is US companies move operations offshore to preserve competitiveness and similar reduced salaries anyway.
3. Pass a law preventing US companies from moving offshore and eliminate H1B's. Plus is theoretically higher salaries in America. Reality is bankrupt American companies who cannot compete in an international market and unemployed engineers and programmers.
The reality is much engineering work and much programming work is going to be done by the very well educated, hard-working, and inexpensive folks in India and Eastern Europe. One way or the other. The wailing and gnashing of teeth in America isn't going to change that one bit. It will, however, elect socialists who will accomplish exactly nothing in this regard (they are ordering the tide out) but who will otherwise thoroughly trash things in our formerly great country.
Well, that's not really correct. I've been hiring programmers and engineers for more than ten years now for my business. I have a pretty good idea what is going on because I architect the code and design the algorithms. So I'm pretty involved in both the development, hiring and the coding process. Before that, I practiced Intellectual Property law and represented a bunch of small and medium size companies in software development and engineering.
Of course it's a salary cutting device. Companies outside the US don't have to pay American salaries to their engineers and programmers. A lot of countries turn out top notch technical people without the American attitudes. So how do American firms stay competitive? They cut salaries. The only way to do that is import help or to move offshore.
It's happening in every smart-guy service type business--even attorneys are increasingly outsourcing research and brief writing overseas. That can all be conducted over the internet. It cannot be stopped. Either the salaries fall or companies move overseas, or they go out of business in those markets.
Interestingly, American landscapers have a different situation. Sod has to be moved here in America. Bushes have to be planted in person. So by restricting immigration that competes with Americans, it would be possible raise salaries in those jobs. But not the jobs that mostly involve moving electrons in smart ways.
Frankly, I don't like it. But I've seen enough of it that I understand the reality. The emerging countries are going to put a damper on jobs and salaries in America in a broad range of professions that used to be steady and reasonably lucrative. If our schools did a better job educating Americans and spent less time instilling them with the attitude that they are GREAT!!!, it would still be a problem; but less of one.
“It cannot be stopped.”
Lol, of course it can be stopped. When enough Americans who aren’t employers catch how their standard of living is being lowered by outsourcing and both legal and illegal immigration, you might learn how it can be stopped. That’s still a sleeping giant of a political issue.
But, one last question, you do, while seeking the cheapest qualified labor offshore, still want the right to sell you product or service in the US market? Right?
Bill Foster: I helped build missiles. I helped protect this country. You should be rewarded for that. But instead they give it to the plastic surgeons, you know they lied to me.
Bill Foster: I am not economically viable.
Bill Foster: I'm the bad guy?
Sergeant Prendergast: Yeah.
Bill Foster: How did that happen?
Sure it's a giant of a political issue. It's not even a sleeping giant. Obama and the rest of the left is ready to go into heavy trade restrictions, or at least demagogue the issue. It's just that it won't turn out like Obama and you want. If you prevent American companies from being competitive with international companies, you don't get higher salaries and more employment in America unless you believe in Obama fairy dust. You get unemployed Americans and bankrupt American companies. Or, American companies withdraw from technology markets and concentrate on areas where they can compete. If that's your goal, then go for it.
Even worse, the bankruptcies would start with the small American companies, where almost all innovation and job growth take place.
But, one last question, you do, while seeking the cheapest qualified labor offshore, still want the right to sell you product or service in the US market? Right?
Absolutely. Just the same way the Indian, and European, and Russian and Australian companies who compete with me expect to be able to sell their product in the US. Are you going to require them to hire American programmers as a condition of selling in the US? Sort of a Kurt Vonnegut approach where you cripple everyone to equal levels by making dancers wear sandbags?
And even if you tried, and did not start a trade war in doing so, how can you stop Americans from ordering my competitors products over the Internet when they and their governments tell us to buzz off? Are you going to set up the "Cripple American Companies Police" to arrest folks who download Indian companies' software?
I don't particularly care for how things are. I tried to hire American a few years back Two of them almost put me out of business with all the drama and the high prices and eventually walking away on a uncompleted jobs.
Eventually, Indian wages will catch up with American wages. But in the meantime, it will put downward pressure on American wages in certain sectors, and programming and engineering are two of them. But go ahead and believe in fairy dust. It makes lefties happy to think they can just order the tide out and repeal the market and it will just happen with no unpleasant consequences. Maybe it can make you happy too.
“Eventually, Indian wages will catch up with American wages. But in the meantime, it will put downward pressure on American wages in certain sectors, and programming and engineering are two of them.”
See, that represents progress. For decades, politicians lied to the American public that the purpose of free trade was to increase exports and increase high paying American jobs. No one would have dared stated as you do, that the purpose is to lower American pay while bringing up pay in developing nations. Anyone who said that ten years ago was dismissed as the kookiest sort of scaremongering conspiracy nut. But here you are admitting it on a public forum, and not just admitting it, but bragging about it and saying: there’s nothing anyone can do about it.
But now even Republican pols are nervous with polls that show 60% of Republican voters no longer believe that free trade is in the nation’s best interest. And with folks like you bragging about how American pay will be lowered until it averages out with the world’s wages, well, that just speeds the day when this will really became a volatile issue.
Obama is an empty suit found and foisted upon us by DNC central casting. He lacks the understanding to adequately formulate any coherent policy positions beyond hope and change, and change and hope. He says something stupid and/or damaging, then the MSM and DNC operatives rush to cover for him, time and again. He’s not the one you need to watch.
But keep on bragging and boasting. You are providing a type of frankly, refreshingly new and honest ammunition for those who think our pretend free trade and pretend free market policies need to be reviewed for how they benefit the entire nation, and not just trans-national corporations and dual citizens.
Then why do you keep proposing trade policies that this man, who cannot formulate incoherent policy positions, would agree with 100%?
Or, if I'm wrong and I'm mischaracterizing your position by postulating that you support policies that BO would find all warm and fuzzy, how do you propose to solve the problem we have been discussing?
“Then why do you keep proposing trade policies that this man, who cannot formulate incoherent policy positions, would agree with 100%?”
I’m looking at reality rather than trade theories. I mentioned that 60% of Republicans now question whether free trade is a benefit to the US.
We have been allowing policies that bring, legally and illegally, 1.5 - 2.0 million immigrants into the nation each year, at a minimum. We are allowing the outsourcing of, by now, millions more jobs to primarily India and some less populated nations. India has a billion + people, China 1.3 billion, and hundreds of billions more in other nations where work has been outsourced. - In the foreseeable future, there is no limit to the outsourcing potential due to the large populations of underemployed, or unemployed offshore.
All those moves serve to cut the pay of Americans, from lower skilled, now into the professional ranks as you well know. And I’m not even mentioning here the outright export of manufacturing jobs to cheap labor nations such as China
and others. All our trade agreements actually trade, is American jobs for foreign cheap labor, and some raw materials. The cheap labor is used to produce goods once produced here, which will, of course, be sent back here to be sold.
At some point, the voters will stop listening to the politicians’ lies about the benefits of free trade. At some point the question will be, what’s best for this nation as a whole. And lowering the living standards and buying power of so many of its citizens will not be viewed as what’s best.
Many Republicans opposed NAFTA. Many know what these so called free trade agreements do. These nations have nothing to trade but cheap labor and maybe some raw materials. What does Columbia have to trade? Coffee, cocaine, and cheap labor, and we’re already buying the first two. It’ll just be more US jobs sent to cheap labor to make products once made here, and to be shipped back here.n - Our trade agreements are our biggest foreign aid program, and should be called that.
In the ‘80s politicians said, improve productivity and the jobs will stay in the US. It improved, but that made no difference. We’ve heard the retraining nonsense for twenty years, and most are bought out for early retirement, or move into lower paying jobs. Retraining is a joke, and a very few displaced workers benefit from it, or can benefit often due to age and skills.
We hear that more free trade creates more, higher paying US jobs. That’s nonsense. I did read an article about some of those new jobs created: producing fire hydrants. Wow, that’ll replace auto and steel jobs. Free trade occasionally benefits some small, specialty industries, but it hollows out the big, vital industries.
But the selling of free trade for years had been nothing but lies, benefiting the already affluent and cutting the living standards of many wage earners. People see the truth and will eventually rebel against all the lies. It hasn’t hurt me, but I know many who have been hurt.
It’s not Democrat or Republican, but what’s best for the US. And again, 60% of Republicans now question what’s best. It’s a simmering issue and people are tired of the lies.
Being angry isn't enough. Again, I ask. What do you propose. Tell me why it won't make things worse.
If you (or, heck, Obama) can come up with something that makes sense, say it. I'll listen. Unfortunately, I've been outlining the problems I see in protectionism in the industries I know. We (America as a whole) ends up worse off in a protectionist regime than under the current arrangements. I guess you think those are "lies." I think they are well reasoned probabilities based on simple economics and my knowledge of how those markets work.
You can't just wave your hands and say, "I'm angry. Something will work! So lets just do something." That's the way democrats think and that way of thinking is one of the reasons they make such a mess of things when they take power. Make a proposal and think it through.
I don't care for the way things work either in this regard. But just because something isn't to my liking doesn't mean that making big changes because people are angry is going to make things any better. It frequently makes things a lot worse. Or to paraphrase Churchill, "The free market is the worst of all economic systems, except for the alternatives."
Thanks for the ping. Interesting article and thread. BTTT!
“We (America as a whole) ends up worse off in a protectionist regime than under the current arrangements.”
The US survived its first 200 years of existence without free trade agreements with every poor nation on earth, and built the world’s largest economy. How did that happen? What you claim is so essential is scarcely two decades old.
We’ve traded with Europe since Jamestown, but that became a trade between nations with similar living standards. We were trading products and services for products and services, not jobs and technology for cheap labor. There is a vast different in those two types of ‘trade’.
You’re taking what has been only partially in place for a couple of decades and pretending the nation’s economy will suffer greatly if we don’t do more and more of it. And the old protectionism nonsense, people have been using that scare tactic until they sound foolish.
But free trade has benefited some and reduced the standard of living of many. The gov’t has been picking winners and losers, and that should and will become a political issue as more people look beyond the smoke screens thrown up to what the actual results are.
You’re just throwing out the old predictable lines that have been overused for about thirty years. As I’ve said, 60% of Republicans question whether so-called free trade (which is full of protectionism for favored industries) is in the best interest of the country. It will become a bigger political issue, and that will come out of the Congress and not the White House.
Your throwing out Obama’s name over and over is silly. This concern on the part of Republicans and Democrats was fermenting well before anyone outside Illinois ever heard of him.
The merchantilist argument is the best argument for whatever policy proposals you might suggest and is not a bad one considered in the abstract. What has changed from the merchantilist days though is cheap transportation and the internet. The US was sealed off from the rest of the world by long transportation times and slow communications.
In the smart-guys service industries we have been discussing (programming, legal services, engineering) the product is intellectual property of some form, easily converted to bits and bytes and easily transported around the world in seconds. (Ironically, the manufacturing industries may well come home in the next 10 years because transportation has become so much more expensive). But you are not going to bring the smart-guys service industries home without very radical measures.
China's totalitarian approach to the internet has had some success in limiting the internet as a political tool. We might adopt the same sort of approach and maybe it would have some affect on these "smart-guys" service industries.
But I keep coming back to the same question: What do you propose to change things? It's easy to be mad about what we see. It's a lot harder to do something specific that doesn't muck things up. Tell me how you would fix the smart-guys industries problem. How do we increase the salaries and employment in US smart-guys service industries?
On the contrary - we have a big shortage of gullible ones in their twenties who are willing to work cheap with low health care costs, rendering Corporate America's traditional and beloved "low age/low wage/high productivity" arbitrage inoperative. ;)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.