Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Businesses Government Politics IT

Obama Says Offshoring Fears Are Unwarranted 763

alphadogg writes "The perception that Indian call centers and back office operations cost US jobs is an old stereotype that ignores today's reality that two-way trade between the US and India is helping create jobs and raise the standard of living in both countries, US President Barack Obama told a gathering of business executives in Mumbai on Saturday. President Obama's remarks come after some moves in the US that had Indian outsourcers worried that the US may get protectionist in the wake of job losses in the country. The state of Ohio, for example, banned earlier this year the expenditure of public funds for offshore purposes. US exports to India have quadrupled in recent years, and currently support tens of thousands of manufacturing jobs in the US, he said in a speech that was also streamed live. In addition, there are jobs supported by exports to India of agriculture products, travel and education services. President Obama, who is in India on a three-day visit, said that more than 20 deals worth about $10 billion were announced on the first day of his visit."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Obama Says Offshoring Fears Are Unwarranted

Comments Filter:
  • by sethstorm ( 512897 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @01:41PM (#34155304) Homepage

    The H1-b fraud is what kills it for most Americans that stumble upon offshoring's negative qualities.

    You don't go to India for US jobs, especially when you're millions of US jobs in the hole.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 07, 2010 @01:41PM (#34155312)

    The reality is that those jobs are already in India and aren't coming back.

    (Yes, I'm aware of the less than a handful of companies that reversed outsourcing of their call centers after constant complaints from customers about not being able to understand a word out of "Kevin" from Bangalore's mouth. Outsourcing firms are much better with the English these days.)

  • by Bloodwine ( 223097 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @01:50PM (#34155390)

    I am a software developer and I was hired for my current job to bring back all development from India. I was tasked with bringing all development back in-house because the offshore projects were behind schedule and suspect quality, not to mention the communication issues.

    What we do now is do a combination of in-house development and rural sourcing, which is hiring U.S. developers in the midwest and midsouth in areas of lower cost of living. They are more expensive than offshore developers, but much cheaper than developers in major cities and these rural developers are in the same timezone.

    I think you will see more and more rural sourcing cutting in to the offshoring of jobs. I don't think there will ever be a full reversal of offshoring jobs, just that rural sourcing will become more and more viable and desirable.

  • yeah right (Score:5, Insightful)

    by bartok ( 111886 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @01:50PM (#34155392)

    "Create job abd raise the standard of living in both countries".

    This statement is only true if you count the rich getting richer in the US. I fail to see how losing your middle class income job to outsourcing raises your stadard of living.

  • by mrnobo1024 ( 464702 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @01:56PM (#34155430)

    The developing world will keep developing and net flows of capital and standards of living are going to flow from more developed to less developed.

    If I live in a more developed country, why the fuck should I tolerate this? Being a sovereign nation means having the ability to regulate trade up to and including stopping it completely. Since, as you freely admit, foreign trade is utterly screwing us over, that sounds like a pretty good idea right now.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 07, 2010 @01:57PM (#34155442)

    It's ironic that people like you voice dissent at the Indian off shoring situation when you had no problem off shoring our manufacturing jobs to China by lining up at Walmart's feeding trough.

  • by mim ( 535591 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @02:05PM (#34155498)
    Is President Obama taking into account MY personal costs when I require internet tech support and have to use my cell phone minutes? Not to mention the difficulties of the language barrier when you can hardly understand what they're saying due to their thick accents that further complicates matters and takes up yet more of my valuable time? Does he understand that they can hardly understand me either, so we go back & forth repeating ourselves trying to resolve the issue, taking up yet more time and costing ME more money?? I think not.
  • Historic reality (Score:5, Insightful)

    by hackingbear ( 988354 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @02:05PM (#34155504)
    What he said about India could have well applied to China more, as the US exports more products to China than to India. But he, and the other politicians, did not say the same things to China. The only reason being that China is now the main competitor and so we have to demonize it and please countries like India and Vietnam, exactly like how we pleased China 30 years ago -- opened up our market without asked for the equivalent level of opening up, established relation with Mao's regime which was a million times more suppressive than the current one, and kicked out Taiwan from th UN, in order to fight against the then biggest competitor -- the Soviet Union. The problem with this strategy is that while we may constraint one competitor, we are creating another new major one for ourselves down the road. And we the common people pay the costs. History repeats itself again and again.
  • by Ritchie70 ( 860516 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @02:07PM (#34155524) Journal

    Indeed. I work with a lot of people who I assume are here on H1-b, with Patni claiming they can't find qualified Americans to fill these positions.

    And yet the tiny US-based consulting firm we use doesn't seem to have any problem finding qualified Americans.

    Of course, their people are mostly 40 - 50+ Americans, who are no doubt more expensive than 20-something Indians. But they also know what they're doing.

    I'm pretty sure the billing rate to my company is about the same for both of them. So you apparently can make money pimping out Americans, too.

  • Re:yeah right (Score:2, Insightful)

    by krypticmind ( 1369357 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @02:09PM (#34155544)
    Commodity jobs are being exported, the kind that you rather have someone else do anyway, as the profit margin of doing it at home is very low and you end up with subsidized industries for that exact reason (/me waves at the corn/christian belt and General Motors) The fact that alot of uneducated electorate seems to neglect is that economics in the most developed and rich country on the planet is something way beyond what their American Idol brains can fathom. The only source of information for the above mentioned "middle" class is Murdoch's Newscorp, but thats a different story. Back to the point, if we were losing so many jobs, why is it that at economic peaks we always end up with the same 4% unemployment rate, despite the last ten years being the golden age of outsource? The reality is that today's economy is far more dynamic and outsourcing something that produces little profit is the best way to keep an economy competitive (again, look at the US car industry and, say, Japanese/German cars) http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=usunemployment&met=unemployment_rate&tdim=true&dl=en&hl=en&q=unemployment+percentage [google.com]
  • by Doc Ruby ( 173196 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @02:11PM (#34155566) Homepage Journal

    The US trade deficit with India [census.gov] is already over $7B this year through August; heading to top $10B this year. That will be among the highest annual deficits, though Bush/Cheney got deficits as high as $12B+. August 2009 saw the only monthly trade surplus with India in well over 20 years, $34 million; the rest of the months total to something like a quarter $TRILLION more spent on India than India spent on the US. It's obvious that the parallel growth in the US and India leaves the US with less money from our jobs and more money in India for its jobs.

    Of course, the corporate profits on all those jobs are not counted in trade stats. The real competition isn't between US labor vs Indian labor. It's between labor in either country, and the corporate owners who run the system, keeping the profits among themselves and their banker partners.

  • by cob666 ( 656740 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @02:13PM (#34155586)
    I agree that H-1B seems to be more of an issue than outsourcing in general. There are a LOT of US citizens that are unemployed right now and there are many firms that are still hiring H-1B visa workers. The H-1B program should be cut back in areas where the US workforce has unemployed workers.
  • by sethstorm ( 512897 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @02:18PM (#34155630) Homepage

    The question is what happens if you had to hold the H1-b/etc. candidate to the same standards(and qualifications) as the US one? If firms like Patni can't prove that the foreign candidate can meet the same (impossible) standards, they haven't proven that a US citizen can't do it.

    Of course, that might mean that the qualifications get skewed to include language proficiencies and such things that US citizens obviously can't do. That could be addressed by having them act in good-faith towards the citizen, and hire them. Then give the hired person a bit more power by allowing them to report attempts to circumvent (e.g. their projects are designed to fail).

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 07, 2010 @02:22PM (#34155652)

    It's a disaster, it's always been a disaster. Managers get their bonus based on cost savings regardless of how much it wrecks their company in the mid-long term.

  • by DCstewieG ( 824956 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @02:23PM (#34155662)

    And Toyota and Honda assemble cars in the U.S. Sometimes you just gotta do stuff locally.

  • by TheNucleon ( 865817 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @02:35PM (#34155746)

    You lost me at "tax and spend". We should get past bumper-sticker assertions, especially when they're not even right. I guess "tax less but spend more" isn't as catchy, but it seems to work for the Republicans.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 07, 2010 @02:40PM (#34155798)

    And Toyota and Honda assemble cars in the U.S. Sometimes you just gotta do stuff locally.

    And other times it's purely to increase PR.

  • by Kjella ( 173770 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @02:45PM (#34155828) Homepage

    The rest of the world is evolving rapidly into highly educated, highly industrialized, highly technological countries that resemble the west - in certain parts and certain ways, anyway. The more similar their productivity is, the more similar standards of living they can demand but for a long time a series of favorable conditions and network effects have kept the US in a solid lead. The balance is shifting, but to say that it actually flows from one country to the other is fairly misleading. You could halt trade but it wouldn't halt these countries from modernizing, and they would also retaliate.

    The US currently has a very negative trade balance, meaning it imports far more than it exports. If it were to close the borders, the US would hurt the most. Medium to long term that could mean opportunity for domestic industry, but the short term would be a substantial drop in the standard of living as many goods become expensive or even unavailable. There was a time when a trade boycott with the US would be dire but today if you can maintain trade with the EU, Japan, China, India, Taiwan, Russia and so on most countries would do fine. Alternate suppliers of almost everything now exist outside the US.

    In short, the US is no longer in a position where they would have anything to gain from going protectionist. They'd be their own little isolated market of 300 million people while the world market - even subtracting the billions that are too poor to really participate - is much larger and would simply outpace the US. That's the nastier parts of the free market, once you've let it loose you might in the end become the victim of it, having to adjust your wages and standard of living to fight for jobs just like everyone else. But if there's one country that has no right to complain, it would be the US...

  • by Maxo-Texas ( 864189 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @02:49PM (#34155872)

    Don't get too comfortable. The indians are doing a very good job at my company. We have hundreds of them. They are extremely competent, good communication skills, and pleasant.

    Fact is, at $100k a year, the US salaries are going stagnate or drop while indians and chinese who can do the same things salaries will rise from $20k a year. There are a lot of them. The average is going to be on the lower end.

  • by kimvette ( 919543 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @02:49PM (#34155880) Homepage Journal

    Solution: Why not raise our import tariff rates to match that of our so-called trading partners?

  • by AnonymousClown ( 1788472 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @02:51PM (#34155898)

    He is what he is, another tax-and-spend Democrat ....

    I'll take that over the "borrow and spend" Republicans any day. Cash and carry. It's not good - but it's a little better.

    And people wonder why I "throw my vote away" on Libertarians.

  • by nloop ( 665733 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @02:55PM (#34155926)

    He is what he is, another tax-and-spend Democrat with delusions of grandeur like all the rest of the Washington crowd, and we're getting precisely the leadership for which we cast our votes. I did my research, and had a pretty good idea how he was going to turn out, and alas, I was not wrong.

    You sure did your research. For the past 30 years every Republican president has increased the debt while every Democrat has decreased it. Damn those tax and spending Democrats and their lowering of the national debt. Here's a clue: [wikipedia.org] stop repeating unfounded talking points.

  • Re:yeah right (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Rockoon ( 1252108 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @03:07PM (#34156010)
    If given the choice to trade places with a completely random person selected from the population of all the other countries on the planet, even the poorest Americans (for that matter, the poorest from any 1st world nation) would be well served by turning down the option to do so.

    This fact highlights a severe problem with your rationalization. You dont seem to have a real grasp of how bad it is in most places around the world.

    Literally billions of people around the world worry about where and when they are going to get their next meal, dont have a dime to their name, literally owning nothing but the rags they drape over their malnourished bodies. No hope. No future. No chance.

    Screw you idiots that spew the "poor get poorer" bullshit. In America, the poor get richer too.
  • by copponex ( 13876 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @03:07PM (#34156026) Homepage

    You didn't say shit for two paragraphs. "Tax and spend Democrat?" You left a little Limbaugh vomit dripping from your cheek. Might want to hit that with some sanitizer.

    The bottom line is that Bush was a complete fucking disaster. He lowered taxes and started two intractable wars, despite making campaign promises to avoid nation building, which are going to end up costing our country 3 trillion dollars. He refused to balance the budget after making campaign promises to do just that. He refused to regulate Wall Street, and eliminated the one guy in the Treasury department who had the balls to call him what he was: unquestioning and incurious. He appointed a witless crony to run FEMA with disastrous results. He failed on the economy, he failed on the war on terror, and he failed to uphold the constitution.

    When people asked what they could do to help their country, he literally said, "go shopping." This is not leadership. Erasing the very foundations of our personal liberty with the PATRIOT ACT is not leadership. Ordering the torture of prisoners is not leadership. Pretending that the Iraq war would cost 50 billion dollars is not leadership. Not telling your citizens the real truth about war and the costs in honor and treasure and blood is not leadership.

    Obama is no saint, but at least his cronies have two brain cells to rub together. He may be another member of the Business Party, but at least he has a slight interest in not pissing on the middle class and telling them that it's just raining.

    Bush is a fucking disgrace, probably executed the worst eight years of foreign policy decisions in American history, and none of your historical whitewashing will change that.

  • by orphiuchus ( 1146483 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @03:09PM (#34156042)
    The US trade deficit is about 4%, just like China, India, and Germany's surplus is about 4%. Its significant, but its being horribly miss-represented by our politicians. If we actually closed the trade deficit(and specifically went after China for currency devaluation which is what Geithner is doing now) we would lose the low cost of living we all enjoy(no more $.75 stacks lined paper at Walmart) and we would make it impossible for foreign creditors to buy any more of our debt. It sounds like a good thing to close this nefarious "Trade deficit", but remember that there are going to be 2nd 3rd and 100th order effects of tampering with trade and when politicians tamper with prices they get things wrong almost 100% of the time.
  • by FauxPasIII ( 75900 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @03:11PM (#34156062)

    Solution: Why not raise our import tariff rates to match that of our so-called trading partners?

    Because, obviously, that would be Communism.

  • by commodore64_love ( 1445365 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @03:13PM (#34156076) Journal

    You don't understand.

    Limiting H-1B is logical if you desire to help unemployed americans, but President Obama wants to *redistribute* the wages away from the "rich" americans towards poorer india, china, et cetera workers. He's said as much in his old college & other lectures. So he probably thinks H-1B visas are a great way to accomplish the goal, as it hands the money to much poorer non-americans. It's a way to spread the wealth.

    "The message I take away from this election is very simple
    "The American people are still frustrated & still want change."
      - Obama, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1DV4j2URWNo [youtube.com]

  • Re:IBM & company (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 07, 2010 @03:29PM (#34156178)

    > IBM alone has hired 80,000 people in India in the last 8 years.

    You say that like it's a bad thing. It isn't.

    Those 80,000 people are no less deserving of jobs than you are. This comes as a surprise to most Americans, but they are also human beings. Many of them probably have a big step up in life because of these jobs.

    America is not a competitive country, and it makes little sense to staff new jobs there. Labour is horribly expensive, there are stifling regulations and red tape, and the populace is increasingly uneducated in advanced math and science. Really, the only rational decision for the CEO of a multi-national company like IBM is to shift their focus outside of the USA. No one is "entitled" to a job. If you can reach a mutually acceptable agreement for employment, then great! If not, IBM doesn't *owe* you, even though that's what most Americans appear to think.

    This is not a bad thing. It puts food on the tables of 80,000 people in India. That's a *good* thing.

  • by walterbyrd ( 182728 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @03:30PM (#34156186)

    Because H1Bs can not easily quit. A US worker can go to his/her boss and say "I'm way over due for a raise, either increase my salary, or I will be forced to look for work elsewhere." If an H1B does that, he/she is on the next airplane back to India.

    There is nothing US employers hate worse than "training somebody for his/her next job."

  • Re:IBM & company (Score:4, Insightful)

    by SashaMan ( 263632 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @03:36PM (#34156222)

    While I understand your position, the statement "We aren't a group of chump manufacturing people" highlights the problems with many people's thinking. For decades we off-shored manufacturing jobs, and the general sentiment from college educated white collar workers was "Sorry, that's the way a dynamic economy works, you need to upgrade your skills." Thus, given that this way of doing business is now biting you in the ass, I'm surprised that you still think you are so different from "chump manufacturing people".

    The problem with our economy is that we are growing the classes of people who are fundamentally unemployable. While it's nice to say you need more training, the fact is that many people will never have the skills to be a software architect or a Hollywood director or a Wall Street banker. For millions of minimum wage people, blue collar workers, and growing number of white collar workers like paralegals, programmers, etc., capitalism is not working (and that doesn't mean I think any of the other ...ism bugaboos are the answer)

  • by Koby77 ( 992785 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @03:36PM (#34156224)

    Solution: Why not raise our import tariff rates to match that of our so-called trading partners?

    Because the politicians (and make no mistake, I'm talking both major parties in the U.S.) are bought and paid for by the multinational corporations. They have absolutely no consideration for the trade deficit, or the standard of living for citizens, as long as they can profit from the situation.

    Unfortunately, meaningful economic changes will not occur in the U.S. until there is a large shift in the way voters choose elected officials which allows outside independent candidates without connections to lobbyists to succeed at the ballot box.


  • Explain to me the effective differences in terms of actual fiscal policy between modern Democrats and Republicans.

    When the GOP demonizes "tax and spend" as the other party's problem, they mean "spend on domestic social programs" and deliberately exclude US military spending. I think that's a pretty accurate summary, actually.

    When you include US military spending as part of "spend", you will find that the GOP is worse on "tax and spend" than the Dems. They started a war that costs the US $1B a day, that has lasted 8 years, and provided no way to pay for it. That is a more egregious "tax and spend" program than any social program the Dems have initiated, "Obamacare" included.

    If the GOP proposes a balanced budget that included the military budget and preserving Social Security, they'd be worth listening too. I expect that if they fail to produce an actual budget like that, they will again be voted out in 2012.

    OTOH, if they do produce such a budget, Christ, I'll vote for them myself.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 07, 2010 @03:40PM (#34156258)

    Why do companies think they deserve to sell the same product to Americans for 10 times the price it sells for in the third world?

    Because they can. Stop paying them their asking price.

  • by TheEyes ( 1686556 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @03:40PM (#34156266)

    You lost me at "tax and spend". We should get past bumper-sticker assertions, especially when they're not even right. I guess "tax less but spend more" isn't as catchy, but it seems to work for the Republicans.

    Fine. How about "borrow and spend"? Because that's what he's doing. Is that an improvement over "tax and spend"? The reality is he's doing both.

    "He" who? George Bush? George H. W. Bush? Ronald Reagan? Each of these Presidents tripled, doubled, and quadrupled the national debt while in office, and each pretended to run on a platform of fiscal responsibility. The only one who hasn't in the past thirty years is Clinton and, to be fair, that really only happened because he got lucky with the economy.

    Right now Obama is running up the debt because that's what you do in a recession. Now, will he turn around in two years or so and put the brakes on spending? Maybe he'll try, but I doubt the "fiscally responsible" Republicans will let him, unless the Tea Partiers break ranks and actually let taxes rise and spending fall like they were elected to.

  • by yelvington ( 8169 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @03:48PM (#34156330) Homepage

    If I live in a more developed country, why the fuck should I tolerate this? Being a sovereign nation means having the ability to regulate trade up to and including stopping it completely. Since, as you freely admit, foreign trade is utterly screwing us over, that sounds like a pretty good idea right now.

    Because if you had to post on Slashdot using only domestically developed CPUs on domestic motherboards with domestic memory chips running domestic software communicating over domestic networking systems, speaking domestically developed languages and sharing domestically developed ideas, and so on and so forth, you'd be roasting wild squirrel over a cave fire and grunting.

    Human beings advance together or not at all.

  • Re:yeah right (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Rakarra ( 112805 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @04:07PM (#34156466)

    Because, while some jobs leave our country, goods made in their country are cheaper. If shipping a job to India lowers the average wage here by 10% but the price of goods goes down by 20%, that's a net gain.

    Only past a certain level. If someone is right on the line and the wage lowering pushes them below the poverty line, it's a great blow to standard of living, as they can't afford those goods anymore, even at a low price.

    Basic expenses, food, electricity, gas, even rents in most areas have not, and do not, as a trend, go down. There is a certain minimum that is required, and if wages go below that point, then that person is screwed. Oh, a new TV or a new car cost 20% less now? That's great, except they can barely make rent.

    So you have an expanding upper class, an expanding lower class, and a contracting middle class.

  • by sethstorm ( 512897 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @04:08PM (#34156470) Homepage

    That doesn't get rid of the fraud, killing the entire program and regulations will.

    What you suggest only leads to more disposable & desperate workers.

  • by sethstorm ( 512897 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @04:10PM (#34156486) Homepage

    That still doesn't fix the lack of jobs for US citizens. It only encourages more fraud, and the $20k becomes a hostage ransom.

    The only solutions that work are ones that put US citizens first and foremost, even at the expense of business.

  • by sethstorm ( 512897 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @04:13PM (#34156498) Homepage

    You're just making the qualifications overkill so you can create a "lack of qualified workers" out of thin air.

  • by Jah-Wren Ryel ( 80510 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @04:37PM (#34156666)

    Another point is that H-1B workers are required, by law, to be paid at least the "prevailing wage" based on their work and geographical location. While this is by no means perfect, it does provide some protection against wage depression.

    "Less the perfect" hardly describes the situation. In some career fields, jobs are very well defined, in IT it is just the opposite, i.e. a sysadmin may also be the DBA and/or a developer; or a developer may work as an admin, or a network engineer. In IT, the phrase "prevailing wage" is completely meaningless.

    Also, there is zero budget allocated for enforcement. Nobody in the government even bothers to check if employers are complying. But, the numbers that have been reported are indicative of massive violations: In 2007 the medium wage for new H1B hires was $50K, less than what new grads with zero experience make. Furthermore, 90% of H-1B employers' prevailing wage claims for programmers were below the median U.S. wage for that occupation and location, with 62% being in the bottom 25%.

    http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=201000479&pgno=3&queryText=&isPrev= [informationweek.com]

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 07, 2010 @04:53PM (#34156724)

    > Anyway, H-1Bs are good for 3 years, extendable up to an additional 2. This means that the theoretical maximum number of
    > legal H-1Bs in the US at any one time is 5 * 85k = 425k. That's less than 0.2% of the population and seems unlikely to
    > me to significantly affect the unemployment rate.

    H1-Bs are good for 3+3=6 years. Also, once you have greencard pending the H1-B can be extended ad-infinitum. Which is why you
    sometimes see posts like this:
    http://forums.immigration.com/showthread.php?292018-Help-10th-Year-H1B-Extension-Visa-Stamping-Advise [immigration.com]
    Add other visa's like L1-B and we soon talking 1million-plus total workers here... And dont compare that with the population
    of the US, compare with the number of people in the IT profession.

    The real problem though is not just that H1-Bs are allowed here, its that they dont have the same freedoms (ability to change
    employers etc) that citizens and permanent residents do. This forces them to work at hte mercy of the employer, who cna then
    push down their wages which depresses the complete market. We *do* need the best and the brightest to come over here and work,
    we just need to provide them the same protection from employers that native born workers have.

  • by Dan667 ( 564390 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @05:00PM (#34156760)
    It encourages companies to move U.S. jobs overseas. I have seen first hand the decisions being made due to this terrible law.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 07, 2010 @05:03PM (#34156778)

    > Train the US citizens first

    Americans do not want training. You can see this by poking your nose into any science, math, or engineering graduate program in the nation.

  • by shentino ( 1139071 ) <shentino@gmail.com> on Sunday November 07, 2010 @05:29PM (#34156932)

    When hiring is at will, they don't have to give you an excuse for not hiring you.

    Unless you can prove discrimination, you'll just have to accept that US companies are bags of sleaze that will happily screw you over to save their own pockets.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 07, 2010 @05:39PM (#34156992)

    they deserve jobs India can do for a cheaper price?

    Because they don't do them as well.

    Obviously people in India have the same capacity as people in the United States, but they have social, communication, political and economic challenges that prevent them from performing acceptably. Their education system encourages rote learning over problem solving, and cramming is common.

    It often takes as many developers to create specifications for offshore developers as it would take to code it in the first place.

  • by SmallFurryCreature ( 593017 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @06:17PM (#34157198) Journal

    No it doesn't but your worry DOES show the real problem the US has.

    There is some believe working in the US that makes it value to top. The interesting jobs, the well paying jobs. But that is not what the economy, the boring local economy, runs on. It runs on truck drivers, factory workers, construction, repair. This is what keeps that majority of the population employed. Silicon Valley, Redmon, Wall Street do not.

    Obama, and he is hardly the first, seems so pleased with 10 billion in orders. But how much of that money flows straight back out again because to produce those orders the US needs foreign goods? And those 10 billion are petty cash for the US. Meanwhile far more money is lost with outsourced call centers year in year out.

    And no, outsourcing a call center will NOT cost the country a fortune, just a local community. A local community that can't then tax the local salaries and use those taxes to fund local education, local road maintenance etc etc. Outsourcing is not about a cripling injury that instantly kills the economy. This is a slow bleed that isn't stopped.

    The call center goes, the local catering van can't break even anymore. The locals find far lower paying jobs and make ends meet by buying cheap Chinese imports instead of higher quality American goods. More and more American business got to cut costs to be able to meet the lower prices. They do so by outsourcing production to China and yet more Americans have just a bit less to spend.

    It ain't complex to see, but if you believe in Wall Street as a religion then this can't be. This is not how the market, the magic fairy market, is supposed to work. Obama, and democrats and republicans with him, is saying "let them eat cake". The famous saying that started the revolution showing that the ruling elite didn't have a clue about what was really happening. It is after all not in Washington or Redmond or Wall Street that the job cuts are hurting the most. Oh, they might have a bad year, but not decade after decade in which a factory town turns into a ghost town. How many of the powers that be come from Detroit?

    Yet the simple people, like the poster above think H1-b is the issue. Yeah right. The US has 300+ million citizens, and how many immigrants on these things? They are irrelevant. This is just the Redmond, Silicon Valley etc job. The get a lot of attention, but they don't keep the heartland working. Producing.

    Scream at the immigrant worker while another factory is shipped lock stock and barrel abroad including every single job. SethStorm is like a frenchmen who reacts to "let them eat cake" with: "But I don't like cake."

    But you don't have bread let alone cake.

    IT has done this a lot. Thinking that they would be save from the export of jobs and then it turned out those dirty filthy foreigners could not just knock out cheap goods but cheap code. Boohoo, now our jobs are going...

    Well, you didn't protest when every item in Walmart came from China, who is now supposed to care the next version of Windows comes from China?

    And don't you worry, the decline will be so slow and the average American so attached to his large house and larger car that he will bend over backwards to keep up with payments rather then protest. Because if you strike or protest, you miss a payment and then that SUV is gone.

    American citizens have managed to enslave themselves to Wall Street thoroughly. Willing slaves with guns. If you wrote this down in a book of fiction, nobody would believe it.

  • by andreasg ( 1010787 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @06:18PM (#34157210)
    America is hardly the place where prices are the highest. In Norway or Denmark it's around 50% higher.
  • by TW Burger ( 646637 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @06:19PM (#34157216)

    Correct, Obama is not the politician the American people hoped for, but he is what a pragmatist would expect. He could not get elected without owing several very powerful (wealthy) individuals and corporations no matter how much individuals gave to the campaign. He can not change a power structure that has developed and entrenched itself since 1776, at least not in two years. What he has done is concentrate on the one goal he had above all others, health care reform. This by itself raises the standard of living in the US for middle class Americans who make up the bulk of the source of both tax dollars and GDP. However, with the complexities of Washington and the perversely unyielding stance of the Republicans the White House has not achieved what the people who supported him expected Obama to achieve. Thus we had the backlash in the mid-terms. More of a throwing out of the incumbents over disappointment rather than enthusiasm for Grand Old Party candidates (in a two party system who else do you vote for when voting someone out?).

    It seems that a new party needs to be created, Democrats being ineffectual even when owning both houses, and the Republicans denying any help to the people (failing to pass unemployment extensions as an example) and screaming small government and less spending while doing neither. The Tea Party seems to instinctively know this, however, judging by the members, they certainly did not seem to plan it in a planned,
    sober or thoughtful way. America can use a third party but it will have to one that does not preach what seems to be thinly veiled anarchy (by the government, not the people) with a mind set bent on starting world war three. The TP are feeding off of the opportunity that the average American distrusts and fears the government. In Washington state the people voted down I-1098, which would have created a tax rate of 5 percent on annual income exceeding $200,000 for individuals and $400,000 for couples, and a 9 percent rate on income that tops $500,000 for individuals and $1 million for couples and cut the state portion of personal property taxes by 20 percent, about a 4 percent reduction in the annual overall property tax bill. Also, I-1098 also would have exempted an 118,000 businesses from the business-and-occupation tax on gross receipts. All of the money was to be spent on education (70%) and healthcare directly benefiting the poor and middel class. I-1098 lost with more than 65 percent of voters rejecting it, losing in every county. Obviously it was not only the people earning more than $200,000 that voted against it. My brother-in-law lives in Whatcom county Washington and I asked him why hew voted against the initiative. He said that if the state started to tax the rich they would not stop and soon he and everyone else would have to pay more income tax no matter how little they earned. He, like the majority, does not trust the government and the system in place is not working as anyone/everyone wants. But, it is stable and works to a degree that the standard of living in the USA has gone from thirteenth place in the United nations Human Development Index (HDI) list in 2009 to fourth (although in the Inequality-adjusted Human Development Index the USA places 12th) in 2010.

    This leads us back to offshoring:

    Since FDR reduced government controls of business in order to stimulate the economy in the thirties there has been less and less direct government control of the economy which, of course, led to the banking collapse of 2008-2009. This also caused more and more businesses to be able to move operations offshore or over border. Many large Manufacturing companies like GM increased profits (or be more competitive - depending on who you ask) by moving operations to Mexico. Oregon based Nike does not produce a single shoe in the US. Almost the entire US agricultural business is completely dependent on Mexican labor. IBM, Intel, Microsoft, and other IT firms have made large investments in India and other countries.

    The American economy is no longer based

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 07, 2010 @06:30PM (#34157290)

    Nobody deserves anything except for a chance to compete. The problem is that some people don't understand why "India can do for a cheaper price".

    1. Cost of living. It is very expensive to live in US. Does mister Obama think it is a good idea to lower our cost of living to India's rate? I hope not, because it means average Americans will have to live as an average Indian or even worse. Actually much worse.
    2. In most cases the comparison is not apples to apples. At least in IT it is very often efforts are counted in man/hours. Is 1 US man/hour=1 Indian man/hour? When confronted, the management would say something like you can hire N workers in India for the price of 1 worker in US. Are they going to produce the same quality product? Is there an extra cost of managing those "extra" workers? Is there an extra cost of having all those people spread all over the world? Where are the loyalties lie for those offshore workers? Do they work for the benefit of the company or the outsourcing company?Is there a cost of lost business when deliverable schedules are blown and the quality of the delivered product is horrible?

    The freshly minted MBAs are taught about the pros of the outsourcing but very few even more seasoned MBAs actually think about cons. It is always thought as a no loss strategy. The reality is much more complicated than the case studies, some of which are produced by paid shills.

  • by Pharmboy ( 216950 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @06:47PM (#34157394) Journal

    Another point he missed is by quoting the number as being .2% of Americans. Some Americans are 2 years old, or 80, want to stay home and raise the kids, or simply don't want to work. They also don't issue visas for all professions. It would be more accurate if you compared the number of visas to the number of job positions that they visas can fill (not sanitation workers, or fast food cooks). Still not a huge percentage, but not so misleading, however unintentional.

  • by TheRaven64 ( 641858 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @06:48PM (#34157400) Journal

    We need an intimate familiarity with DCTs, Fourier, and hardware micro-architecture

    You won't get that intimate familiarity from a new graduate, so you have two choices:

    • Pay enough that you can steal them from your competitors.
    • Hire people without those skills and train them.

    My guess is that you're not doing either. Are you offering internships to bright graduates who have a somewhat less than intimate familiarity with those subjects, but the ability to learn them?

  • Re:yeah right (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 07, 2010 @07:13PM (#34157518)

    Exactly. Even worse scenario is the "American Dream" of home ownership. US Employee has a job and buys a house at a given price, and pays a monthly mortgage. Now the average wage goes down by 10%, but that has no affect on the mortgage payment. So yes, other goods that will be purchased after the wage decrease may go down 20% and provide a net gain, it is only on those objects that are purchased after the wage decrease. The house and mortgage are still set at the original price, and so all the 10% decrease means is less money to pay for the house plus the other items a person buys (necessary and optional).

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 07, 2010 @07:21PM (#34157550)

    Because we have a set of standards and/or morals that dictate that our workers get certain rights/priveleges/etc. Such as, we don't think it's right to force people to work their fingers to bone for $0.10/hr. Instead, people believe in something called a minimum wage.

    Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not necessarily saying I support/believe/defend the minimum wage, I'm just pointing out that so far, the majority of our (read "USA") society has dictated that we have some sort of minimum wage.

    We'd be foolish to think of the issue as so simple as just pure economics.

  • by TheSync ( 5291 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @07:29PM (#34157580) Journal

    Why do companies think they deserve to sell the same product to Americans for 10 times the price it sells for in the third world?

    If you could sell it for 9 times, you'd win the market, so go do it if you are so smart!

    The truth is that most imports are incredibly cheaper than the cost of the same goods produced in the US. They have enabled us to live with a far higher quality at the same income level.

  • Re:yeah right (Score:3, Insightful)

    by TheSync ( 5291 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @07:35PM (#34157622) Journal

    The cost of manufactured things are small a small part of the budget.

    That's the point. Between automation and offshoring, manufactured things are cheap, service jobs (like education and health care) is where we spend our money these days.

  • by nbauman ( 624611 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @07:38PM (#34157634) Homepage Journal

    When hiring is at will, they don't have to give you an excuse for not hiring you.

    Yes, but this is not hiring at will. They're documenting that they tried and failed to hire U.S. citizens, in order to meet the administrative requirements for hiring H1-Bs. If you can prove it's not bona fide employee search, then you can prove they're breaking the law.

    It's not easy to prove, but something like that Cohen & Grigsby video, or similarly incriminating emails, could prove it.

    Even when they are caught red-handed, I'm not sure what happens next. I don't think you can force the employer to hire you. I imagine the INS might be able to fine the employer (though not as much as the damages for downloading music). If it's fraud they might be able to send the employer to jail, but there's a very high evidence standard to convict someone of a crime.

    They might be prosecuted by an honest federal attorney, and tried before an honest judge. Stranger things have happened.

    Well, maybe not.

    The ICE is busy deporting Mexican college students who have been in this country since they were 5 years old.

  • by PopeScott ( 1343031 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @08:48PM (#34157920)

    Of course, that might mean that the qualifications get skewed to include language proficiencies and such things that US citizens obviously can't do.

    Horseshit. ENGLISH is the DEFAULT language of international business. Everything else is a regional pretender that is marginal at best.

  • by Grishnakh ( 216268 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @09:30PM (#34158156)

    It might be more about wage-slavery than the actual wage. I.e., you offer them a decent wage, but then when they're locked in and working for you, you force them to work 16-hour days 7 days a week, because they can't quit or go work for someone else.

    We U.S. Citizens, by contrast, can't be abused so easily. If we get fed up, we can walk out of work that day with zero notice (like I did two months ago), totally screwing up the employer's release schedule.

  • by Walt Dismal ( 534799 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @09:35PM (#34158180)
    Inflated or for that matter deliberately impossible requirements. I've seen job ads that were packed with enough requirements that no one was likely to fulfill them, including one that demanded "experienced with FrameMaker 7.7". Adobe never issued a 7.7, they went from version 7.2 to 8. I called the shop to ask them about this.The recruiter insisted that 7.7 was absolutely necessary and mandatory and the client used it and specified it. Clearly this was a phony screening excuse in operation. I've also seen ads requiring 6 or 7 years of experience with Web technologies that have existed for only 2 years. All too often see such ads from Indian-run agencies so I expect there's a hidden agenda to bar all but the desired pre-selected candidates.
  • by kennykb ( 547805 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @09:45PM (#34158276)
    Just where in India, China or Russia are you finding folks who can do Fourier-domain image processing on hardware microarchitecture? I could use a few, and don't much care if they're American, Chinese, Indian, Russian, or beings from Aldebaran IV with green and purple feathers. Incidentally, I don't think that people like that are getting any rarer: we've always been few and far between. But the code monkeys are getting commoner, and the slushpile of CV's gets bigger and bigger with only the same few really promising candidates buried under all the others. (Summary: I'm an American, MSEE/PhDCS, and *can* do all the things you mention. I'm also, uhm, on the high side of fifty, quite expensive, and not in the market at the moment because I've had no trouble finding customers.
  • by Lord Kano ( 13027 ) on Sunday November 07, 2010 @10:03PM (#34158378) Homepage Journal

    Anyway, H-1Bs are good for 3 years, extendable up to an additional 2. This means that the theoretical maximum number of legal H-1Bs in the US at any one time is 5 * 85k = 425k. That's less than 0.2% of the population and seems unlikely to me to significantly affect the unemployment rate.

    You, sir, have forgotten anchor babies and arranged marriages.

    The problem that I have with H1Bs is that they drive down wages. Many employers quote industry average wages when posting for a job. That would be all well and good, but a few H1Bs earning $30k/yr will drive down the average.

    LK

  • by Moryath ( 553296 ) on Monday November 08, 2010 @12:10AM (#34158928)

    6-7 years of experience in technologies that are only 2-3 years old.

    10+ years of experience with operating systems that are less than 5 old.

    Version-number-specific job requirements for a version of a software package that never shipped or never even existed (e.g. requiring experience on version 8.5 when the company skipped straight from 8.3.4 to 9.0).

    Every goddamn "certification" known to mankind, including several not offered in the US or that are no longer issued.

    All this, and more, can be found on the "job requirements" of any company claiming they "need H1-B's" because they "can't find qualified Americans." Microsoft makes a daily practice of it, for instance.

  • by Billly Gates ( 198444 ) on Monday November 08, 2010 @12:33AM (#34159022) Journal

    Ok companies can search the globe for the cheapest possible labor and tax benefits.

    Can I do the same?

    Can I pay $1500 a month rent, pay $1,200 for student loans + other expenses for $6/hr? Indians get free eduction, health care, and much lower rents. I can't move to India because the Indian government actually cares about protecting jobs for its citizens unlike my own. Now tell me how that is fair? It is not.

  • Re:IBM & company (Score:2, Insightful)

    by mahadiga ( 1346169 ) <mahadiga@gmail.com> on Monday November 08, 2010 @01:10AM (#34159166) Homepage Journal

    Why can't IBM employees and Americans move to India and work there?

  • by xero314 ( 722674 ) on Monday November 08, 2010 @01:25AM (#34159218)
    Just wanted to add some corrections to the above statement.

    The maximum duration of the H-1B visa is six years, unless the alien has applied for citizenship, in which has it is effectively indefinite. This does not mean they need to have any intention of becoming a citizen, only that they have applied for a green card. (which I see is mentioned but some what buried in the above post).

    Prevailing Wage is based purely upon title, and not at all upon actual assigned duties. In many cases H-1B workers are hired with entry level titles but assigned senior level tasks. In other cases they are assigned similar but not exact titles (such as being titled and Application Programers title while doing Software Engineering, where the form title is often used by smaller lower paying companies).

    More importantly, though the number of H-1B workers appears to be low, it has a fairly large impact since they are used to fill the higher paying positions. This higher pay, which is often taken completely out of the country, has a large impact on the over all economy. The wages of an H-1B, though lower than they would have to pay an american citizen, is orders of magnitude higher than that of most illegal immigrants.
  • by HermMunster ( 972336 ) on Monday November 08, 2010 @10:06AM (#34160842)

    That's total bullshit. Certainly there are people in any technologically advanced country that would know that, especially the US. We aren't imbeciles that lucked into what we have. We learned and earned and we worked HARD to get there.

Thus spake the master programmer: "After three days without programming, life becomes meaningless." -- Geoffrey James, "The Tao of Programming"

Working...