what a load of CEO crap

[DKSuddeth]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=569&ncid=738&e=1&u=/nm/20040107/tc_nm/tech_ceos_dc

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Top executives from technology companies, facing criticism for moving jobs to low-cost centers such as India and China, said on Wednesday that the United States needs to boost education and offer more tax breaks to compete in the global job market.

Such heavy-hitters as Intel Chief Executive Officer Craig Barrett and Hewlett-Packard Chief Executive officer Carly Fiorina spoke on Wednesday at a Washington DC computer industry lobbying group roundtable with the media.


The technology companies also issued a report to lay out policies to keep a strong tech job market in the United States.


"America can only grow jobs and improve its competitiveness by choosing to compete globally, and that will require renewed focus on innovation, education and investment," said Barrett.


The lobbying group, which also includes International Business Machines Corp. (NYSE:IBM - news) and Dell Inc. (NasdaqELL - news), pushes for policymakers to support the industry by boosting high-speed Internet use and putting favorable trade policies in place, among other things.


While the group's appeals were not much different than usual, it is now tying its message to the fate of the U.S. technology workforce, which is fearful of losing jobs to cheaper overseas labor.


Jobs in computer services and customer call centers have been moved to countries such as India and China by most large tech companies, including IBM.


"We can either choose to compete with the rising powers of China and India and other would-be economic leaders and take advantage of worldwide business opportunities or we could retreat," said Bruce Mehlman, executive director of the lobbying group, called the Computer Systems Policy Project.


One analyst said that the group's message would not be lost in an election year, in which jobs moving overseas could become a hot-button issue.


"Right now there are eight to 10 million technology-related votes out there, that's a pretty big portion of the populace," said Meta Group analyst Howard Rubin. "This is a block of voters that no one has been paying attention to."


While their proposals are largely the same, adding the outsourcing of jobs overseas brings new attention to them, he said.


"If around these policies they are proposing they've had an agenda, well yeah, this issue brings new light to that agenda. But it would be nice if people were to think about what the right thing to do is at this time," Rubin said.


In the report released on Wednesday, the group said that the U.S. needs to set goals for the deployment of high-speed Internet technology, put in place a permanent research and development tax credit, and fund University-based research in the physical sciences, among other things.


The report, called "Choose to Compete: How Innovation, Investment and Productivity Can Grow U.S. Jobs and Ensure American Competitiveness in the 21st Century," also calls for a change in the depreciation of technology assets, a permanent tax moratorium on Internet access and changes in international income tax rules.

 

[eric]

Where is the load of crap you speak of ?

 

[wonderwench]

I was wondering precisely that.

What is wrong with lowering taxes and improving education?

Sounds good to me.

 

[DKSuddeth]

"America can only grow jobs and improve its competitiveness by choosing to compete globally, and that will require renewed focus on innovation, education and investment,"

You know, as well as I do eric, that thousands of american IT workers currently unemployed are some of the best educated out there. 'Improving your competitiveness' simply means accept what I'm willing to pay you.

so whats really being said is we should spend $20k plus for a college degree so we can make 35 to 40k a year.

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by wonderwench
I was wondering precisely that.

What is wrong with lowering taxes and improving education?

Sounds good to me.

companies already get exemptions from most local taxes just for building in an area because the local gov knows they will make it up in the tax base from the workers.

Improving education? again, what should we do, go out and pay 80k for a double masters so we can answer a phone saying "thank you for calling compusa tech support, how can I help you today?"

 

[jon_forward]

I watch a show on tv the other nite about this..high tech jobs going offshore....person here earns 80k, they get same job done in india for 8 to 10k. christallmighty, you get more than that here for bagging food up at the corner store. it all comes down to the bottom line....maybe we shouldnt do business with companys that are doing this....than you would have no puter,not alot to eat, naked and no fuel to heat the house or gas toput in car. I dont know what the answer to this is but someone in washington should be looking at this problem also maybe the folks that got displaced should be looking at themselves too. did they really have to make that much a year? I am no real smart fella just a auto mechanic...in my best year I made 35k gross and that was store manager...2 kids,wife and payments up the wazzu.but we lived just as good when I only made 18k working at a factory. where do you draw the line ???? its all good when you hit a homerun but that isnt what wins in the long game...singles do. I dont have to have designer clothes, a beemer in the driveway and 6 bedrooms/3 baths in the house. I call it excess. what do you need to live on???

 

[wonderwench]

That's not the reason why education is an issue.

It's more about affordable housing than the quality of workers. In CA, for example, the poor quality of public schools has driven housing prices in the few good school districts through the roof. This then puts pressure on compensation, and drives up the cost of doing business.

 

[eric]

People you have to get your facts straight, jon, I have to disagree with you on the issue of salary. Sure you can find people who work for 8 - 10 K a year, but for quality programmers the average has risen to about 25 K, and it is climbing all the time. You know I don't like this trend either, but being realistic, the American worker has brought much of this on himself. I have experience with hundreds of employees over the last couple of years and let me be quite honest, the work ethic is just not there for many people. They want to be paid more for less work and more benefits. Finding productive employees who take pride in their work is no easy task. More to come ...

 

[jon_forward]

when I was in business I had the same problem with employees. wanted a paycheck but did not want to work. this problem is not so in the midwest. by and large if a person walked in to my place of business and was from the midwest I knew they knew what a days work was. but you are right, I think they get taught this way in school or be there parents. sad but true

 

[Moi]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
You know, as well as I do eric, that thousands of american IT workers currently unemployed are some of the best educated out there. 'Improving your competitiveness' simply means accept what I'm willing to pay you.

so whats really being said is we should spend $20k plus for a college degree so we can make 35 to 40k a year.

Improving competitiveness doesn't just mean accepting what someone is willing to pay. It's also about overall working scenarios. I bet the people in India don't demand higher wages, health care, mandatory sick/vacation days, holidays, 401k's, stock options, lunch hours, cafeterias, windowed offices, telecommuting, job sharing, maternity leave, etc. All these things that drive up the cost of doing business. When your employer is paying you that 35-40K what is the ultimate cost to the employer including all the taxes that employer is paying pluss all your benefits? It's at least 25% higher. Add that up across the board and that's a lot of money. How can you fault american companies for doing just what you are? Looking for the greater amount to put in your pocket.

Furthermore the amortization of that college degree is less than $250 a month over 10 years at today's interest rates- a small price to pay when you can bring home $40,000 a year/$3333/mo. It comes out to pennies per day over your working lifetime.

 

[DKSuddeth]

I bet the people in India don't demand higher wages, health care, mandatory sick/vacation days, holidays, 401k's, stock options, lunch hours, cafeterias, windowed offices, telecommuting, job sharing, maternity leave, etc. All these things that drive up the cost of doing business.

At first, no, because the supply of labor was so great. Guess what? Now that the demand for labor is increasing over there, so are salary demands, granted not like it was here, but its happening.

How can you fault american companies for doing just what you are?

Its easy to do. Several years before offshoring started in the IT field (you could easily apply this to manufacturing as well) There were still people unemployed but the demand for IT workers was high. IT workers could demand, and receive, that higher salary. Simple payback for the knowledge and skills. All these corps did was lobby (read 'buy the legislation') to get access to a HUGE labor pool and drive down their labor costs. Now, what happened when the labor market gathered together for bargaining power? Talk about the mother of all smackdowns.

Furthermore the amortization of that college degree is less than $250 a month over 10 years at today's interest rates- a small price to pay when you can bring home $40,000 a year/$3333/mo. It comes out to pennies per day over your working lifetime.

Not to impugn your statement, but blah, blah, blah. I don't have time, energy, patience, or finances to get a college degree, especially when I've got enough skills, experience, and knowledge under my 15 years of IT work to beat any college grad hands down. pennies a day or 250 a month, it still does me no good. that would be like me trying to graduate junior high all over again.

 

[Isaac Brock]

I just stumbled on this. For DK.

Tech Firms Defend Moving Jobs Overseas

WASHINGTON - Leading technology companies urged Congress and the Bush administration Wednesday not to impose new trade restrictions aimed at keeping U.S. jobs from moving overseas, where labor costs are lower.


The companies said such policies would do little to resolve long-standing problems more broadly affecting America's global competitiveness, such as low-scoring schools and inadequate research spending. Erecting barriers, they said, "could lead to retaliation from our trading partners and even an all-out trade war."


The effort shows the industry's growing concerns that lawmakers may clamp down on the "offshoring" of U.S. jobs during an election year. Already, some Democratic candidates have criticized the practice.


"There is no job that is America's God-given right anymore," Carly Fiorina, chief executive for Hewlett-Packard Co., said Wednesday. "We have to compete for jobs."


In a report by a trade group for some leading technology companies, executives argued that moving jobs to countries such as China or India — where labor costs are cheaper — helps companies break into lucrative foreign markets and hire skilled and creative employees in countries where students perform far better than U.S. students in math and science.


"Countries that resort to protectionism end up hampering innovation and crippling their industries, which leads to lower economic growth and ultimately higher unemployment," said the Washington-based Computer Systems Policy Project, whose member companies include Intel Corp., IBM, Dell Inc. and Hewlett-Packard.


Intel chief executive Craig Barrett said the United States "now has to compete for every job going forward. That has not been on the table before. It had been assumed we had a lock on white-collar jobs and high-tech jobs. That is no longer the case."


Barrett complained about federal agriculture subsidies he said were worth tens of billions of dollars while government investment in physical sciences was a relatively low $5 billion. "I can't understand why we continue to pour resources into the industries of the 19th century," Barrett said.


A vocal critic of moving jobs overseas, Marcus Courtney of Seattle, dismissed the latest report. "This is not a recipe for job creation in this country," said Courtney, president of the Washington Alliance of Technology Workers. "This is a recipe for corporate greed. They're lining up at the public trough to slash their labor costs."


The issue of overseas jobs has emerged as the top debate in technology circles.


Democratic front-runner Howard Dean (news - web sites) said during a debate last month that America needs a president "who doesn't think that big corporations who get tax cuts ought to be able to move their headquarters to Bermuda and their jobs offshore."


Sen. John Kerry (news - web sites), D-Mass., introduced a bill in November requiring service representatives to disclose their physical location each time a customer calls to make a purchase, inquire about a transaction or ask for technical support. The proposal targets the increasingly popular decisions by companies to move their call centers overseas to capitalize on low labor costs.


A Commerce Department (news - web sites) report last month said increasing numbers of technology jobs are moving from the United States to Canada, India, Ireland, Israel, the Philippines and China — and predicted that "many U.S. companies that are not already offshoring are planning to do so in the near future."


The subject has been the focus of several congressional hearings, and some lawmakers have asked the General Accounting Office (news - web sites) for a study on the economic implications of moving technology jobs offshore.


Even as technology companies lobby against limits on offshore employment, they are urging the Bush administration to approve new tax credits on research and development spending, spend more on university research on physical science and adjust tax depreciation schedules for technology purchases. They said they also want improvements in education, especially in elementary through high schools.


"The problem is not a lack of highly educated workers," said Scott Kirwin, founder of the Information Technology Professionals Association of America. "The problem is a lack of highly educated workers willing to work for the minimum wage or lower in the U.S. Costs are driving outsourcing, not the quality of American schools."

All I can say, is that i'm with you in this one DK. However, in a globalized capitalist economy this is to be expected. Simple economics dictate that when other countries bridge the tech and infrastructure gap they will drive more and more jobs away from the US.

 

[Moi]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
Not to impugn your statement, but blah, blah, blah. I don't have time, energy, patience, or finances to get a college degree, especially when I've got enough skills, experience, and knowledge under my 15 years of IT work to beat any college grad hands down. pennies a day or 250 a month, it still does me no good. that would be like me trying to graduate junior high all over again.

I agree that if you have skills, going back to college isn't very appetizing. However, with 15 years under your belt it appears that you made the decision long ago between obtaining a college degree and having more choices. You chose to pursue a different path- bemoaning your fate now and blaming corporations for seeking to profit seems childish to me in light of your very obvious plea for more money. I doubt anyone of the people running these corporations were responsible for your earlier decision so why should they have to bend over backwards to provide you the solution you want.

Freedoms work both ways...we are free to follow our own paths and corporations should be just as free to follow theirs. If overseas workers choose to increase the costs to the US corporations than the corporations will still go with the better bargain...perhaps the americans who wish to be employed should give them a reason to look back at them. Perhaps american workers should be lobbying for laws that reduce the costs of doing business here in the US so that corporations will look favorably towards this alternative.

 

[eric]

Well said Moi, thank you !

 

[DKSuddeth]

it appears that you made the decision long ago between obtaining a college degree and having more choices.

wait, tell me why a college degree should open up more choices for anyone? Look at my choices for a minute. I enlisted in the marine corps right out of high school and without ANY college whatsoever I learned to control airplanes from an air traffic control tower. Not only that, but I did it in less time than it would have taken me to get a college degree. I also happened to do it at the worlds largest and busiest marine air station. Now, I picked up a book on how to build computers in 1991 and over the last 13 years progressed to being able to build LAN's and windows networks and I did THAT without going to any training schools or college. Tell me why not having a college degree limits my ability to advance or succeed even though I obviously have the intelligence?

 

[Moi]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
wait, tell me why a college degree should open up more choices for anyone? Look at my choices for a minute. I enlisted in the marine corps right out of high school and without ANY college whatsoever I learned to control airplanes from an air traffic control tower. Not only that, but I did it in less time than it would have taken me to get a college degree. I also happened to do it at the worlds largest and busiest marine air station. Now, I picked up a book on how to build computers in 1991 and over the last 13 years progressed to being able to build LAN's and windows networks and I did THAT without going to any training schools or college. Tell me why not having a college degree limits my ability to advance or succeed even though I obviously have the intelligence?

I said you made the decision between "getting a college degree and having more choices. When did I say that only a college degree would give you choices? In fact, I don't even think I implied it so if that's what you understood, let me clarify that I don't mean that. My post was about freedom of choice.

When you made the decision not to pursue one, you had a host of other choices. Apparently you chose the marine corps, air traffic control, self-taught IT. My point about choices is that you were free to make yours...just as the companies' have their choices as to whom to employ.

 

[DKSuddeth]

then my apologies moi, I did misunderstand your post.

Degrees and certifications are a really ugly issue with me, kind of like companies telling me I can't do a professional job because I have long hair.

 

[Moi]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
then my apologies moi, I did misunderstand your post.

Degrees and certifications are a really ugly issue with me, kind of like companies telling me I can't do a professional job because I have long hair.

I've told you before, if that's the reason they don't hire you than they are ignorant. Move to NYC...there are tons of long haired people working at good companies! Not all of them female :

 

[jon_forward]

Dk, I have the same problem with certification. as a mechanic I have never taken the time to get certified in any one field. so when I have applied for a position I am always asked if I am cert'd and if not why? all they have to do is give me half a day and the question about being cert'd falls by the wayside. just because you can read a book/test well does not a mech make. I once hired a 'cert'd' mech...told him to put a new battery in ford pick-up out in parking lot..an hour pasted and he was not done, thinking there were other problems I went out to see what was wrong..this is no shit, he was still looking in the manual to find out HOW to change a battery. needless to say I let him go on the spot. so much for being cert'd. was not worth anything

 

[DKSuddeth]

he was still looking in the manual to find out HOW to change a battery