June 15, 2012 at 9:33 am
IceDread (6/15/2012)
First of all, I think a lot of jobs are being moved to countries where it cost less in several ways with employees because of salary, less health insurances and security of several sorts, employee security, building security etc.
I think this is overblown. So many people are still employed in the US, despite all the press about offshoring. We manufacture a ton of goods, the most by $$, but not by capita.
Follow me on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/way0utwest
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
My Blog: www.voiceofthedba.com
June 15, 2012 at 9:37 am
bwillsie-842793 (6/15/2012)
Guess who can't get jobs now that they have their "Poli Sci" degrees.
Personally, I am convinced we place far too much enphasis on "get a college degree" and not enough on "learn a marketable skill set."
Personally I think this is silly. The majority of people I know in technology don't have comp sci degrees. Most of the bankers I know don't have Econ/Accounting/Finance/Business degrees. Plenty have PolySci, Religion, Philosophy, etc. I know forest rangers that have engineering degrees.
College doesn't really teach a specific, marketable skill in most cases. It should teach you to manage yourself, communicate well, and understand something about an area, but a degree in xx doesn't really impact your ability to get a job in most fields outside engineering.
Follow me on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/way0utwest
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
My Blog: www.voiceofthedba.com
June 15, 2012 at 9:42 am
jay-h (6/15/2012)
No. It is not a zero sum game, wealth comes from productivity and circulation, neither of which are inhibited by certain people acquiring pockets of wealth. What do you think happens to money that people 'can't spend'? It does NOT sit idle under their mattresses, it goes into stocks, bonds and investments... and that provides future businesses and jobs.
Not sure that's true. A lot of the capital that goes into investments goes in a circle. Some of it goes to businesses that invest in the new jobs, but lots goes into trades that don't provide any jobs outside of the traders. Don't forget that once a company has done it's IPO, changes in it's stock price do not affect the company, nor do they provide more or less money for the company.
They can potentially affect its ability to raise money, but I'm not sure that it's substantial. Having studied economics, I'm convinced a lot of the models are fairly flawed and look at too ideal a world, not the real one.
Follow me on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/way0utwest
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
My Blog: www.voiceofthedba.com
June 15, 2012 at 9:48 am
College doesn't really teach a specific, marketable skill in most cases.
Agreed, college teaches a lot of "theory". College benefits the professors alot more than it does the students, nowadays anyway. 😀
"Technology is a weird thing. It brings you great gifts with one hand, and it stabs you in the back with the other. ...:-D"
June 15, 2012 at 9:53 am
Cade Roux (6/15/2012)
Future businesses and jobs are created by entrepreneurs and innovators, and only indirectly funded by investors. All demand comes from the bottom, having consumers being able to spend more money is the most effective way of fueling growth. Taking that money away with direct and indirect taxation or corporate subsidies reduces demand. Having more people being able to look beyond their needs is the only way to fuel growth.
If we are going to talk about demand, we must also talk about supply. All supply comes from the top and flows downward. Just as taxing the demanders reduces their ability to expand their demand, taxing and regulating the suppliers reduces their ability to increase the supply, both of what is directly demanded but also of what could be demanded (innovation).
When the government comes in and manipulates either supply or demand, the result is the wealth gap. The "rich" are the ones who are either connected to the government or are at least smart enough to use it to their advantage. The "poor" are those who aren't. The less government interference in the middle, the more able people are to move about the spectrum, thus the greater a middle class and ultimately the lower the gap between "rich" and "poor." The trend in the United States of the last 80+ years has been towards lareger and more powerful government. And yet, the "answer" to this problem from those in power is more taxes, more regulation and more "redistribution of wealth." Which only exacerbates the problem, to the benefit of the regulators.
Jay Bienvenu | http://bienv.com | http://twitter.com/jbnv
June 15, 2012 at 10:15 am
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (6/15/2012)
IceDread (6/15/2012)
First of all, I think a lot of jobs are being moved to countries where it cost less in several ways with employees because of salary, less health insurances and security of several sorts, employee security, building security etc.I think this is overblown. So many people are still employed in the US, despite all the press about offshoring. We manufacture a ton of goods, the most by $$, but not by capita.
Perhaps you are right, we still manufacture cars and other products in europe and usa. All thou it costs less to manufacture in china for instance but in both china and india salaries are going up. Having the workforce close has it's values, less cultural differences, which is at least very important in our industry.
June 15, 2012 at 10:21 am
A number of years back we developed an interesting Library system that really did put people out of work. Jobs disappeared and the workflow became easier and better. We did not look at it as letting people out onto the street, but freeing up Librarians to do the real word they should be doing, Helping people learn how to read and research, not running outdated computer and paper processes that took too long and did too little. What we did was to free people up to do what they were passionate about not the meaningless make work garbage they were forced to do without an updated system.
Not all gray hairs are Dinosaurs!
June 15, 2012 at 10:59 am
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (6/15/2012)
IceDread (6/15/2012)
First of all, I think a lot of jobs are being moved to countries where it cost less in several ways with employees because of salary, less health insurances and security of several sorts, employee security, building security etc.I think this is overblown. So many people are still employed in the US, despite all the press about offshoring. We manufacture a ton of goods, the most by $$, but not by capita.
I am not so sure, just because organizations like the WTO says so. The offshoring fear factor is still very alive and well in the US. There are $100,000-a-year jobs being offshored to four employees being paid $25,000 each or even less. We just can't compete with that. Also, it's not just about losing jobs, but also the lost taxes paid by companies and the contributions they and their employees make to this country and our economy. It's not just job numbers, it trickles down alot farther than you might think.:-D
"Technology is a weird thing. It brings you great gifts with one hand, and it stabs you in the back with the other. ...:-D"
June 15, 2012 at 11:01 am
jay-h (6/15/2012)
Cade Roux (6/15/2012)
bwillsie-842793 (6/15/2012)
.... This is very much due to the current state of wealth redistribution where wealth is being more and more redistributed to the top (to people who neither need nor can even spend a vast proportion of the money) while cutting support for leveling the playing field in many areas, whether it's enforcing the laws or simply manning the regulatory agencies adequately.
..
No. It is not a zero sum game, wealth comes from productivity and circulation, neither of which are inhibited by certain people acquiring pockets of wealth. What do you think happens to money that people 'can't spend'? It does NOT sit idle under their mattresses, it goes into stocks, bonds and investments... and that provides future businesses and jobs.
A large part of the rich's investments probably live in the derivatives zone which is essentially a big pile of money that simply moves from one place to another.
Still, this is an old debate that probably can't be proved one way or another, but I guess is fun to debate anyways!
June 15, 2012 at 11:13 am
As the agents of technological change, we are in positions of privilege and power that can blind us to the reality that there are many people without the capacity for adaptation that our technologies demand. While I don't think guilt is a fruitful response, I do think that humility and solidarity with our fellow human beings is.
James Martin in "The Wired Society: A Challenge for Tomorrow" suggested that those who are not capable of rapid adaptation could be assigned to gardening and other basic services to society. I'm concerned that with such a simplistic solution we may be merely replacing an old-money based class system with a technology-based class system. For example, even a current artisanal cottage industry is severely handicapped without expertly mediated technology. I think that we dismiss the problem at the peril of our humanity. I need to question myself - am I using my power to empower or to exploit those on the outside looking in?
June 15, 2012 at 12:35 pm
"What I want is the people who buy into the claim that "wealth redistribution" will fix all the world's social problems to understand there is a difference between "needs" and "wants". And, that happiness can exist despite the fact that only ones wants are fulfilled."
Income disparity isn't "wealth distribution". It's an acknowledgement of a 40 year period in US history. Review the stats and data, it's scary when you consider the economic and historical consequences. Just because our profession gives us a comfortable living, it doesn't make us immune to the possibility of massive social change.
June 15, 2012 at 1:25 pm
chrisn-585491 (6/15/2012)
"What I want is the people who buy into the claim that "wealth redistribution" will fix all the world's social problems to understand there is a difference between "needs" and "wants". And, that happiness can exist despite the fact that only ones wants are fulfilled."Income disparity isn't "wealth distribution". It's an acknowledgement of a 40 year period in US history. Review the stats and data, it's scary when you consider the economic and historical consequences. Just because our profession gives us a comfortable living, it doesn't make us immune to the possibility of massive social change.
What exactly is scary? Income disparity has been around since the dawn of time. Unless you do away with the concept of personal property and income per se, it will always be there. The ratios highlighted with the recent studies completely obviate the huge improvements that have happend for several hundred years leading up to now. Short-term trend are not always indicative of the long-term.
The question isn't whether disparity exists, it's whether the ability to move along the income spectrum exists.
As the OECD study on the topic pointed out - redistribution mechanisms only serve as short-term band-aids. The only long-term solution is to try to make opportunities available to as many folks as possible.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your lack of planning does not constitute an emergency on my part...unless you're my manager...or a director and above...or a really loud-spoken end-user..All right - what was my emergency again?
June 15, 2012 at 1:37 pm
Why wealth redistribution does not work.:-D
http://socialismdoesntwork.com/why-socialism-doesnt-work/
"Technology is a weird thing. It brings you great gifts with one hand, and it stabs you in the back with the other. ...:-D"
June 15, 2012 at 2:37 pm
Carl Grant (6/15/2012) I think that we dismiss the problem at the peril of our humanity. I need to question myself - am I using my power to empower or to exploit those on the outside looking in?
Carl, This is a most excellent question and one we should always seek an answer to. Further we should include in it the idea that we "first do no harm".
Not all gray hairs are Dinosaurs!
June 18, 2012 at 4:35 am
What exactly is scary?
The last time the US income disparity was at this point was right before the Great Depression. :w00t:
Imagine the economy as a database server. Right now the consumer economy of the US is I/O starved. If you are in a high paying career such as many of the folks that post here, it doesn't seem so bad does it? Imagine the US as Mexico.
Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 97 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply