Computer Consultants - How to slow down outsourcing

Author

How to slow down outsourcing

Zalek Bloom

2004-07-31, 3:55 am

Law that require that every worker that serves US customers be paid at
least US minimum wage as required by Federal law will slow down
outsourcing.

Other ideas: http://www.geocities.com/saveusajob...urcing_laws.htm

Zalek

beernuts

2004-08-03, 9:03 am

Zalek Bloom <ZalekBloom@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<tb3mg0tcr5bjalb257oh3730j1515bhe52@4ax.com>...
> Law that require that every worker that serves US customers be paid at
> least US minimum wage as required by Federal law will slow down
> outsourcing.
>
> Other ideas: http://www.geocities.com/saveusajob...urcing_laws.htm
>
> Zalek

That wouldn't help slow down IT outsourcing, or at least the bulk of
it, since the Indian IT guys I know tell me their compatriots in India
make about 20k/yr or around that, well in excess of minimum wage.

The Trucker

2004-08-03, 9:03 am

beernuts wrote:

> Zalek Bloom <ZalekBloom@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:<tb3mg0tcr5bjalb257oh3730j1515bhe52@4ax.com>...
>
> That wouldn't help slow down IT outsourcing, or at least the bulk of
> it, since the Indian IT guys I know tell me their compatriots in India
> make about 20k/yr or around that, well in excess of minimum wage.

What WILL slow down and even stop IT outsourcing is the elimination
of IP rents. At present the American OWNERS of the enterprise
collect all the rent (return to monopoly ownership privilege) on
the software created by the foreign producers. Outside US borders
the price of the software is minuscule as pirated copies are easily
obtained. Only Americans pay the inflated (rent s

ing) prices.
Same with pharmaceuticals. Middle class Americans pay the toll
as Bill Gates gets richer and richer. If the Indians are as good
as the Americans at producing software then why does Bill Gates
need to get the rent, and why does software cost so much? It is
my undersatanding that Indian manufacture of pharmaceuticals is
much the same kind of deal and if not then the Chinese probably
do the pharmaceuticals for sale in places other than the USA.
Again: Americans pay all the rent.

The American producer's anger with the Indians taking the jobs is
misplaced. The anger should be directed at our own government and
its continued reward to rent s

ers. If the software were
priced exclusive of rent, then we would all (Indians and Americans
alike) benefit from the comparative advantage. But as it is, so
called, "free trade" is merely exacerbating wealth disparity in
the USA and keeping foreigners from realizing the full return to
their efforts.

I can't imagine why the Chinese pay any money to Nike at all. They
have shown they can make tennis shoes. Why not tell Nike to take
a hike?

--
http://GreaterVoice.org (a work in progress)

Zalek Bloom

2004-08-03, 9:03 am

On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 19:19:26 -0700, beernuts wrote:

> Zalek Bloom <ZalekBloom@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<tb3mg0tcr5bjalb257oh3730j1515bhe52@4ax.com>...
>
> That wouldn't help slow down IT outsourcing, or at least the bulk of
> it, since the Indian IT guys I know tell me their compatriots in India
> make about 20k/yr or around that, well in excess of minimum wage.

This is not my Indian friends are telling me - the average IT salary is
less than $10/year. Many Indians told me that if salary in India reach
$20k/year, they will return to India, because $20K in India is equivalent
of $100k in the NYC. Food, clothes, houses entertainment is much cheaper
in India.

Zalek

Kamal R. Prasad

2004-08-03, 9:03 am

Zalek Bloom <ZalekBloom@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<pan.2004.08.02.10.52.42.594181@hotmail.com>...
> On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 19:19:26 -0700, beernuts wrote:
>
>
> This is not my Indian friends are telling me - the average IT salary is
> less than $10/year. Many Indians told me that if salary in India reach
> $20k/year, they will return to India, because $20K in India is equivalent
> of $100k in the NYC. Food, clothes, houses entertainment is much cheaper
> in India.
>
> Zalek

Salary varies depending on experience and the kind of employer -as in
the US. Lots of people get salaries of $20K per year, and the ones
stating their desire are probably scanning for a suitable oppurtunity.

regards
-kamal

ajv2003

2004-08-03, 9:03 am

Zalek Bloom wrote:

> Law that require that every worker that serves US customers be paid at
> least US minimum wage as required by Federal law will slow down
> outsourcing.
>
> Other ideas: http://www.geocities.com/saveusajob...urcing_laws.htm
>
> Zalek
>
>
>

Simple. Corporations that are American, who wish to participate in the
American market and who's services and production are done overseas will
pay a Value Added Tax, it's done in all European Countries. Thus the
real advantage for any corps wishing to sell services and products in
the US and who use US labor are exempted in that they are already
contributing to the society. It's not new like I said and it does not
run against the GAT, our competitors are doing the very thing.

Some will call it protectionism, I would call it infrastructure
maintenance. Hell we do it with farm producers as do the Europeans. the
Chinese do it by requiring all foreign corporations to take Chinese
partners to the tune of 51% ownership. No one calls that protectionism.

Stephen Kellett

2004-08-03, 9:03 am

In message <10gsko0kqpb5j6c@corp.supernews.com>, ajv2003
<albert@verbrugh.net> writes
>Simple. Corporations that are American, who wish to participate in the
>American market and who's services and production are done overseas
>will pay a Value Added Tax, it's done in all European Countries.

That is not how VAT works.

If you are a member of the European Union you pay VAT. The way you've
written it, you've got it the other way around. It also has nothing to
do with "who's services and production are done overseas". If you are
proposing something else fine, but don't confuse it with VAT, because it
isn't the same thing.

They have recently changed VAT collection law so that someone selling
into the EU electronically must charge VAT - but that change was
introduced to prevent EU companies selling their products via ecommerce
sites hosted outside EU boundaries.

....and yes, companies were doing this. Here is an example:

http://www.swreg.org

Offices in Hong Kong
Admin in Devon, UK.
Hosting, somewhere in, I think, the USA.

All perfectly legal, and until recent legislation changes, totally VAT
free.

Finally, could you please keep this irrelevant rubbish out of
uk.consultants. The clue is the "UK" part of the newsgroup name.

Stephen
--
Stephen Kellett
Object Media Limited http://www.objmedia.demon.co.uk
RSI Information: http://www.objmedia.demon.co.uk/rsi.html

Scott Auge

2004-08-03, 9:03 am

ing) prices.
> Same with pharmaceuticals. Middle class Americans pay the toll
> as Bill Gates gets richer and richer. If the Indians are as good
> as the Americans at producing software then why does Bill Gates
> need to get the rent, and why does software cost so much? It is
> my undersatanding that Indian manufacture of pharmaceuticals is
> much the same kind of deal and if not then the Chinese probably
> do the pharmaceuticals for sale in places other than the USA.
> Again: Americans pay all the rent.
>
> The American producer's anger with the Indians taking the jobs is
> misplaced. The anger should be directed at our own government and
> its continued reward to rent s

The Trucker

2004-08-03, 9:03 am

Scott Auge wrote:

> The Trucker <mikcob@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:<cekaug0231c@news4.newsguy.com>...
>
>
> So you're saying we should just steal stuff like the third world does?

What do you think is being "stolen"?

--
http://GreaterVoice.org (a work in progress)

ajv2003

2004-08-03, 9:03 am

Stephen Kellett wrote:

>
> Finally, could you please keep this irrelevant rubbish out of
> uk.consultants. The clue is the "UK" part of the newsgroup name.
>
> Stephen

I give you two years and you be crying with the rest of us.

Ian Illy

2004-08-08, 3:56 pm

ers. If the software were
> priced exclusive of rent, then we would all (Indians and Americans
> alike) benefit from the comparative advantage. But as it is, so
> called, "free trade" is merely exacerbating wealth disparity in
> the USA and keeping foreigners from realizing the full return to
> their efforts.
>
I just dont see how that is the problem. Surely the fact that an
Indian programmer can live on USD4k/yr means that however low western
government taxes are we could not compete down to that level of cost!
Wherever you live in the western world there will be a minimum floor
that cannot be lowered. We benefit from clean running water, a low
infant mortality, long life expectency etc, these are the things we
are paying for. If we want to compete at their level we will have to
forego those advantages. Do you suggest we do that?

The real question we sould be asking is is it right (in the moral
sense perhaps) that globalisation allows companies to exploit the
developing countries lack of infrastructure & cost base for their own
(greedy) ends? Before anyone suggests that we are helping the poor I
ask you this: are you happy to donate your job to India and then live
on the breadline yourself so that another family can be wealthy in
India? I'm damn sure I didn't volunteer.

> I can't imagine why the Chinese pay any money to Nike at all. They
> have shown they can make tennis shoes. Why not tell Nike to take
> a hike?

The Trucker

2004-08-08, 8:55 pm

Ian Illy wrote:

> The Trucker <mikcob@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:<cekaug0231c@news4.newsguy.com>...
> I just dont see how that is the problem. Surely the fact that an
> Indian programmer can live on USD4k/yr means that however low western
> government taxes are we could not compete down to that level of cost!

But that is not the point even though I disagree with your claim.
My point was that comparative advantage (even taking advantage
of overpopulation in less developed societies) SHOULD make prices
retreat to a level that makes it possible for people to work much
less or (as you would have it) get paid a lot less and still have
the SAME or even a better standard of living. But the delivery
of rent to the owners of the IP rights takes this away. The producers
are ripped off by the rentiers.

> Wherever you live in the western world there will be a minimum floor
> that cannot be lowered.

The Bush Regime is fighting real hard to lower it. The Republicans are
rent s

ers. They really want a very wealthy nobility through inheritance
that tells us all how to run our lives. They are truly anti-democracy
and anti-freedom as they do not believe that the common people are
capable of deducing and subscribing to a morality that is beneficial
to the ascent of man. It is a self fulfilling prophecy in that the
uninformed and misinformed are robbed of any means of self determination.

> We benefit from clean running water, a low
> infant mortality, long life expectency etc, these are the things we
> are paying for. If we want to compete at their level we will have to
> forego those advantages. Do you suggest we do that?

No. I'm actually suggesting a return to a much more progressive
income tax here in the USA, and a dramatic reduction in FICA tax.
This should allow us to recoup much more of the rent and at the
same time decrease direct wage costs here in the USA. Some
form of National Health Insurance to supplant the patchwork
employer insurance system would also dramatically reduce the
wage costs here in the USA and provide for better worker mobility
as a means to keep employers in line. Ye ole "take that job
and shove it" deal.

> The real question we sould be asking is is it right (in the moral
> sense perhaps) that globalisation allows companies to exploit the
> developing countries lack of infrastructure & cost base for their own
> (greedy) ends?

No. And that is why it is imperative to capture that economic rent
(the proceeds of the exploitation) for the good of the people here
in the USA. This will serve to marginally increase job opportunities
here in the USA while not destroying the Indian economy. Comparative
advantage will still remain while the rip off goes away.

> Before anyone suggests that we are helping the poor I
> ask you this: are you happy to donate your job to India and then live
> on the breadline yourself so that another family can be wealthy in
> India? I'm damn sure I didn't volunteer.

I was a heterogeneous systems administrator and damned good at what I
did. I was also a software configuration specialist and networking
know it all. I watched two Indians screw with a database installation
for two w

s before the management gave up and allowed me to show
them how to do it. I now drive a truck for a living but I like it
better than all the crap I had to put up with from the Republican
Business types. I make less dough but I really see a lot of this
country. I live in the truck and pay rent to no one. Of course
Bush is doing all he can to allow Mexican nationals to operate and
live in the trucks and take that job away too.
[color=darkred]

--
http://GreaterVoice.org (a work in progress)

Kamal R. Prasad

2004-08-09, 3:55 am

The Trucker <mikcob@verizon.net> wrote in message news:<cf60vf01f93@news1.newsguy.com>...
> Ian Illy wrote:
>

No. Indian companies do buy legal copies -to avoid lawsuits. The
software lobby in the US also pressurized the Indian govt into
demolishing CD burning companies which were mass-copying sw titles.
Piracy in India is at the level of an individual, and often a case of
getting an office copy home. Microsoft has put in an online
registration mechanism to prevent that too.
[color=darkred]

No. There is an (WTO) agreement on cloning generic drugs which
basically says that since consumers in poorer countries cannot afford
to pay the US pharma companies for their (life-saving) medicines, they
should be allowed to buy cloned drugs from India/Brazil. Its an
arrangement to skip royalties -but it is *consensual*.
[color=darkred]

Among other things -yes. There are lobbies in the US to inflate
pricing and fleece the consumer.
[color=darkred]
Well -that in itself is not going to level the playing field. Assuming
your cost of sw is same as mine, yout house rent is $1000/month wheras
mine is $100/month. My entire household expenses would be within $500
and that puts you out of the competition in how less a salary you can
agree to work for.
[color=darkred]
>

We pay taxes at about the same rate as in the US (30-35%) and we also
contribute to the equivalent of social security known as provident
fund at about 8.25% of the salary. The employer puts in his own
contribution likewise.

> But that is not the point even though I disagree with your claim.
> My point was that comparative advantage (even taking advantage
> of overpopulation in less developed societies) SHOULD make prices
> retreat to a level that makes it possible for people to work much
> less or (as you would have it) get paid a lot less and still have
> the SAME or even a better standard of living. But the delivery
> of rent to the owners of the IP rights takes this away. The producers
> are ripped off by the rentiers.
>

Overpopulation is not synonymous with poverty -as you might think.
Some countries like sub-sahara africa are less-populated and still
poorer than India. Likewise for some e. european countries. OTOH,
Japan, Singapore and many east asian countries are far more densely
populated and yet prosperous.
Japan is the 2nd largest economy on this planet and has a severe space
crunh.

>
Would you like to include all white-dominated countries into the
category of 'western world'?

> The Bush Regime is fighting real hard to lower it. The Republicans are
> rent s

ers. They really want a very wealthy nobility through inheritance
> that tells us all how to run our lives. They are truly anti-democracy
> and anti-freedom as they do not believe that the common people are
> capable of deducing and subscribing to a morality that is beneficial
> to the ascent of man. It is a self fulfilling prophecy in that the
> uninformed and misinformed are robbed of any means of self determination.
>
Looks like 2% voters are planning to cast their votes 49 times.

>
The water in my tap is clean, chlorinated and we have medical
facilities that are pretty decent. India is a preferred destination
for medical treatment for people from the middle east. There are
problems, but they emanate from large scale poverty -meaning the state
doesn't provide handouts to everyone, but those who have middle-class
income can get it.

> No. I'm actually suggesting a return to a much more progressive
> income tax here in the USA, and a dramatic reduction in FICA tax.
> This should allow us to recoup much more of the rent and at the
> same time decrease direct wage costs here in the USA. Some
> form of National Health Insurance to supplant the patchwork
> employer insurance system would also dramatically reduce the
> wage costs here in the USA and provide for better worker mobility
> as a means to keep employers in line. Ye ole "take that job
> and shove it" deal.
>

Canada has a scheme which you suggest, state funded healthcare. It has
its own drawbacks -but it boils down to whether you want your taxes or
your insurance premium to fund your treatment. The money has to come
from your pocket.

>

In a way -yes. I read an article that China has spent a lot of money
on developing its infrastructure. This renders your above complaint
invalid. But as an Indian economist pointed out [on TV here] -they
have to recoup the cost through higher taxes/cost of living. What this
means is that they will lose out to other destinations re;-
outsourcing, but that in no way means the work will return to the US.
SW development and design work [in contrast to manufacturing] requires
abstraction and v little infrastructure. So by not building
infrastructure -we retain our competitiveness vs other countries.

> No. And that is why it is imperative to capture that economic rent
> (the proceeds of the exploitation) for the good of the people here

Try reducing the influence of lobby groups. That will reduce the
disparity in income and fend off a middle-class squeeze.

> in the USA. This will serve to marginally increase job opportunities
> here in the USA while not destroying the Indian economy. Comparative
> advantage will still remain while the rip off goes away.
>

Indian economy is heavily dependent on the monsoon -not on offshoring.
The biggest occupation in India is agriculture(65%) not sw
development(2%). You can turn the tap off -and it makes little diff.
to this country's economic viability.

>

If it was a case of my survival, I would have requested you to donate
a few jobs. Unfortunately, despite being a sw engineer -I can do
without your donation. Industry shifts to cheaper locations for
reasons besides charity.

> I was a heterogeneous systems administrator and damned good at what I
> did. I was also a software configuration specialist and networking
> know it all. I watched two Indians screw with a database installation
> for two w

s before the management gave up and allowed me to show
> them how to do it. I now drive a truck for a living but I like it
> better than all the crap I had to put up with from the Republican
> Business types. I make less dough but I really see a lot of this
> country. I live in the truck and pay rent to no one. Of course
> Bush is doing all he can to allow Mexican nationals to operate and
> live in the trucks and take that job away too.
>
Looks like a common feature for many americans in calif.
[color=darkred]

Nike spends v little on manufacturing vs what it did when the jobs
were in the US -and probably more on designing new shoes or
advertising. The chinese can't take over those job functions yet -and
so things remain the way they are.

regards
-kamal

Ian Illy

2004-08-09, 3:56 pm

kamalp@acm.org (Kamal R. Pra

) wrote in message news:<181e352f.0408082056.1667d641@posting.google.com>...
> The Trucker <mikcob@verizon.net> wrote in message news:<cf60vf01f93@news1.newsguy.com>...
>
> No. Indian companies do buy legal copies -to avoid lawsuits. The
> software lobby in the US also pressurized the Indian govt into
> demolishing CD burning companies which were mass-copying sw titles.
> Piracy in India is at the level of an individual, and often a case of
> getting an office copy home. Microsoft has put in an online
> registration mechanism to prevent that too.
>
>
> No. There is an (WTO) agreement on cloning generic drugs which
> basically says that since consumers in poorer countries cannot afford
> to pay the US pharma companies for their (life-saving) medicines, they
> should be allowed to buy cloned drugs from India/Brazil. Its an
> arrangement to skip royalties -but it is *consensual*.
>
>
> Among other things -yes. There are lobbies in the US to inflate
> pricing and fleece the consumer.
>
> Well -that in itself is not going to level the playing field. Assuming
> your cost of sw is same as mine, yout house rent is $1000/month wheras
> mine is $100/month. My entire household expenses would be within $500
> and that puts you out of the competition in how less a salary you can
> agree to work for.
>
>
> We pay taxes at about the same rate as in the US (30-35%) and we also
> contribute to the equivalent of social security known as provident
> fund at about 8.25% of the salary. The employer puts in his own
> contribution likewise.
>

I'm sure that is the case in a high tech industrial park but is it
true for the average Indian worker? I suspect not and it may even be
the case that wages are so low (no such thing as a minimum wage either
I reckon) that the vast majority dont pay taxes.

>
> Overpopulation is not synonymous with poverty -as you might think.
> Some countries like sub-sahara africa are less-populated and still
> poorer than India. Likewise for some e. european countries. OTOH,
> Japan, Singapore and many east asian countries are far more densely
> populated and yet prosperous.
> Japan is the 2nd largest economy on this planet and has a severe space
> crunh.
>

A valid point Kamal. So population density is not the problem.

> Would you like to include all white-dominated countries into the
> category of 'western world'?
>

No, who mentioned 'white' or any other colour? I dont give a damn
about colour or ethnic origin, my beef is with the 'globalisation'
that in effect exploits cheap labour and denies work in richer
countries that cannot compete on cost alone.

The point I am making is that if India for eample had the same level
of infrastructure on average, not just in rich suburbs, then they too
would have to charge the same rates for labour, interlectual or
otherwise, as the western nations.

> Looks like 2% voters are planning to cast their votes 49 times.
>
> The water in my tap is clean, chlorinated and we have medical
> facilities that are pretty decent. India is a preferred destination
> for medical treatment for people from the middle east. There are
> problems, but they emanate from large scale poverty -meaning the state
> doesn't provide handouts to everyone, but those who have middle-class
> income can get it.

Well, this is not what you find from information such as this:
http://www.nationmaster.com/country/in/Health

and compare and contrast with this:
http://www.nationmaster.com/country/uk/Health

....see the infant mortality I picked as an example? 61.47 for India &
5.45 for the UK.

There is nothing special about this particular statistic, I have just
used it to highlight the fact that on average, in India there is a
lower level of health care. You could take life expectency or any
other index and see much the same trend. But this again is just an
example, there is also the availability of electricity, roads etc etc
all this has to be paid for and maintained.

>
>
> Canada has a scheme which you suggest, state funded healthcare. It has
> its own drawbacks -but it boils down to whether you want your taxes or
> your insurance premium to fund your treatment. The money has to come
> from your pocket.
>
>
> In a way -yes. I read an article that China has spent a lot of money
> on developing its infrastructure. This renders your above complaint
> invalid. But as an Indian economist pointed out [on TV here] -they
> have to recoup the cost through higher taxes/cost of living. What this
> means is that they will lose out to other destinations re;-
> outsourcing, but that in no way means the work will return to the US.
> SW development and design work [in contrast to manufacturing] requires
> abstraction and v little infrastructure. So by not building
> infrastructure -we retain our competitiveness vs other countries.
>

...and you are still left with a higher level of infant mortality. Are
you saying that is 'OK'?

>
> Try reducing the influence of lobby groups. That will reduce the
> disparity in income and fend off a middle-class squeeze.
>
>
> Indian economy is heavily dependent on the monsoon -not on offshoring.
> The biggest occupation in India is agriculture(65%) not sw
> development(2%). You can turn the tap off -and it makes little diff.
> to this country's economic viability.
>
>
> If it was a case of my survival, I would have requested you to donate
> a few jobs. Unfortunately, despite being a sw engineer -I can do
> without your donation. Industry shifts to cheaper locations for
> reasons besides charity.
>

Forgive me for not explaining the background to my statement above,
but here in the UK, our very own minister for trade and industry,
Patricia Hewitt, makes numerous trips to India encouraging Wipro and
the like to come over to the UK and export our development work for
the good of developing nations. However, as you point out though, at
2% of the Indian economy this is chicken feed, so it will not make any
significant difference whatever number of jobs are lost to India.

> Looks like a common feature for many americans in calif.
>
>
> Nike spends v little on manufacturing vs what it did when the jobs
> were in the US -and probably more on designing new shoes or
> advertising. The chinese can't take over those job functions yet -and
> so things remain the way they are.
>
> regards
> -kamal

Kamal R. Prasad

2004-08-09, 3:56 pm

ian.illy@go4.it (Ian Illy) wrote in message news:<4dd16c5.0408090530.493490f3@posting.google.com>...
> kamalp@acm.org (Kamal R. Pra

) wrote in message news:<181e352f.0408082056.1667d641@posting.google.com>...
>
> I'm sure that is the case in a high tech industrial park but is it
> true for the average Indian worker? I suspect not and it may even be
> the case that wages are so low (no such thing as a minimum wage either
> I reckon) that the vast majority dont pay taxes.
>

There is an organized sector which includes people at all levels
(peons, clerks, security guards etc..). The organized sector is
subject to tax at source + provident fund deduction -with tax
exemption for income below Rs 100,000 per year (~USD 2200). Im not
sure if the law mentions a minimum wage, but there is in addition to
this -an unorganized sector without these benefits.
The vast majority i.e. outside the organized sector doesn't pay taxes
essentially because agriculture is totally tax exempt. Some state
govts end up providing free electricity on the eve of elections to
farmers.

>
> A valid point Kamal. So population density is not the problem.
>
>
> No, who mentioned 'white' or any other colour? I dont give a damn
> about colour or ethnic origin, my beef is with the 'globalisation'
> that in effect exploits cheap labour and denies work in richer
> countries that cannot compete on cost alone.
>

Look at it this way -your cost/std of living is dictated by the
strength of your currency. But the purchasing power of the G-7
countries are nowhere near their stated exchange rates. On paper, you
may make 5xmy salary, but your living standard isn't 5x my living
standard. There is a distortion somewhere which puts you at a
di

vantage in terms of costs -and its not at our end.

> The point I am making is that if India for eample had the same level
> of infrastructure on average, not just in rich suburbs, then they too
> would have to charge the same rates for labour, interlectual or
> otherwise, as the western nations.
>

Possibly true. The govt is building out infrastructure rapidly to cope
with requirements of a booming economy -but that may not suffice to
eliminate your problems. There are other things like inflation, cost
of living etc.. which dictate wages.

>
> Well, this is not what you find from information such as this:
> http://www.nationmaster.com/country/in/Health
>
> and compare and contrast with this:
> http://www.nationmaster.com/country/uk/Health
>
> ...see the infant mortality I picked as an example? 61.47 for India &
> 5.45 for the UK.
>
> There is nothing special about this particular statistic, I have just
> used it to highlight the fact that on average, in India there is a
> lower level of health care. You could take life expectency or any
> other index and see much the same trend. But this again is just an
> example, there is also the availability of electricity, roads etc etc
> all this has to be paid for and maintained.
>

It is something of a proven fact the British were responsible for
widespread poverty and destructtion of local industries aka mass
unemployment in India -and many of the problems you mention can be
attributed to poverty, not lack of medical expertise. How can you hold
the govt responsible for conspiring against you when it is actually
trying to rectify the problems created by your govt? Try comparing
India's health & infratsructure statistics today vs 1947.

>
> ..and you are still left with a higher level of infant mortality. Are
> you saying that is 'OK'?
>

Its a problem that needs to be fixed. But infant mortality doesn't
have much to do with bulding glitzy townships. The govt has a policy
targetted at rural areas in terms of healthcare, infrastructure etc..
because that is where the voters are. That is tangential to issues
like offshoring & comparative advantage.

>
> Forgive me for not explaining the background to my statement above,
> but here in the UK, our very own minister for trade and industry,
> Patricia Hewitt, makes numerous trips to India encouraging Wipro and
> the like to come over to the UK and export our development work for
> the good of developing nations. However, as you point out though, at
> 2% of the Indian economy this is chicken feed, so it will not make any
> significant difference whatever number of jobs are lost to India.
>

Yes -it won't make a difference and as I said above, she isn't making
the trip for our good/improvement. She is helping the local industry
in the UK to reduce costs and improve profits. Wipro on its part views
it as business as usua; -and is more than happy to provide services in
return for payment. But the sky isn't going to fall on Wipro if she
does something different.

regards
-kamal
[color=darkred]

The Trucker

2004-08-10, 3:55 am

Kamal R. Pra

wrote:

> The Trucker <mikcob@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:<cf60vf01f93@news1.newsguy.com>...
>
> No. Indian companies do buy legal copies -to avoid lawsuits. The
> software lobby in the US also pressurized the Indian govt into
> demolishing CD burning companies which were mass-copying sw titles.
> Piracy in India is at the level of an individual, and often a case of
> getting an office copy home. Microsoft has put in an online
> registration mechanism to prevent that too.

I have no doubt that Indian companies pay for a few copies of IP
software. But the CD burners are back in business one day after
the demolition. But don't think that I mind in the least that
Gates gets ripped and that the Indians get the software. I don't.

>
> No. There is an (WTO) agreement on cloning generic drugs which
> basically says that since consumers in poorer countries cannot afford
> to pay the US pharma companies for their (life-saving) medicines, they
> should be allowed to buy cloned drugs from India/Brazil. Its an
> arrangement to skip royalties -but it is *consensual*.

The fact remains: The American consumer pays all the IP rents.

>
> Among other things -yes. There are lobbies in the US to inflate
> pricing and fleece the consumer.

No argument. You seem to think this is an attack on India. It is
not. It is an attack on IP monopoly privilege and the ridiculous
wealth disparity it is creating in the USA and in the world.

> Well -that in itself is not going to level the playing field. Assuming
> your cost of sw is same as mine, yout house rent is $1000/month wheras
> mine is $100/month. My entire household expenses would be within $500
> and that puts you out of the competition in how less a salary you can
> agree to work for.

There are jobs that cannot be exported. you can't drive my truck from
India. You can't tend to my sore toe in India. You can't build my
home, my office, or farm the USA land from India. You also can't be
a systems administrator on a network housed HERE while you stay in
India. So long as H1B is stomped out and Gates and his ilk do not
continue to get richer and richer by using your services and then
sucking all my money using government enforced monoploy rights I
have no problem with "free trade". I also have no problem with
REASONABLE immigration.

>
> We pay taxes at about the same rate as in the US (30-35%) and we also
> contribute to the equivalent of social security known as provident
> fund at about 8.25% of the salary. The employer puts in his own
> contribution likewise.

Irrelevant. AGAIN! If it is less expensive to produce software in
India then software should be produced in India. But I should be
buying that software at a reasonable margin over production costs.
As it is the Indian producers and the American consumers are being
ripped off by Mr. Business.

>
> Overpopulation is not synonymous with poverty -as you might think.

Horsecrap.

> Some countries like sub-sahara africa are less-populated and still
> poorer than India.

Let us focus on natural resources and infrastructure per capita,
shall we. But nice try.

> Likewise for some e. european countries. OTOH,
> Japan, Singapore and many east asian countries are far more densely
> populated and yet prosperous.
> Japan is the 2nd largest economy on this planet and has a severe space
> crunh.

Very good point. So we must consider wealth distribution an
infrastructure. We can see that the USA under Republican thievery
is now approaching the status of a fascist banana republic with
no bananas.

> Would you like to include all white-dominated countries into the
> category of 'western world'?

Not me:)

> Looks like 2% voters are planning to cast their votes 49 times.

Not sure what this means....??

> The water in my tap is clean, chlorinated and we have medical
> facilities that are pretty decent. India is a preferred destination
> for medical treatment for people from the middle east. There are
> problems, but they emanate from large scale poverty -meaning the state
> doesn't provide handouts to everyone, but those who have middle-class
> income can get it.
>
>
> Canada has a scheme which you suggest, state funded healthcare. It has
> its own drawbacks -but it boils down to whether you want your taxes or
> your insurance premium to fund your treatment. The money has to come
> from your pocket.

It is not quite that simple. e.g. It will cost me $600 - $1800 in
cobra (a bridging medical insurance system) to change jobs because
medical insurance at the new company does not take effect until
you have been there 1 - 3 months (depends on the company). This
does not include the loss of any deductible you might have
satisfied at the current employer. This is a real problem for
worker mobility. It allows companies to short change workers
because the workers do not have the funds to change jobs. It
could take as much as a year or more to "get even" after the
move, even if you could finance it. And the new employer has your
gonads in the same vice.

>
> In a way -yes. I read an article that China has spent a lot of money
> on developing its infrastructure. This renders your above complaint
> invalid.

No. It does not.

> But as an Indian economist pointed out [on TV here] -they
> have to recoup the cost through higher taxes/cost of living. What this
> means is that they will lose out to other destinations re;-
> outsourcing, but that in no way means the work will return to the US.
> SW development and design work [in contrast to manufacturing] requires
> abstraction and v little infrastructure. So by not building
> infrastructure -we retain our competitiveness vs other countries.

Yep. It is as it is. No profit in whining about it.

>
> Try reducing the influence of lobby groups. That will reduce the
> disparity in income and fend off a middle-class squeeze.

Once freedom is lost it is very difficult to reclaim.

>
> Indian economy is heavily dependent on the monsoon -not on offshoring.
> The biggest occupation in India is agriculture(65%) not sw
> development(2%). You can turn the tap off -and it makes little diff.
> to this country's economic viability.

But it makes a big difference to the SW people in India just as it
makes a big difference here.

>
> If it was a case of my survival, I would have requested you to donate
> a few jobs. Unfortunately, despite being a sw engineer -I can do
> without your donation. Industry shifts to cheaper locations for
> reasons besides charity.
>
> Looks like a common feature for many americans in calif.
>
>
> Nike spends v little on manufacturing vs what it did when the jobs
> were in the US -and probably more on designing new shoes or
> advertising. The chinese can't take over those job functions yet -and
> so things remain the way they are.

You miss the point. Let Nike advertise all they want. Just don't pay
em and sell the shoes anyway. The result would be that Nike would
stop advertising and we would all be better off. People buy good shoes
and they can tell which shoes to buy without all the lip gloss.

--
http://GreaterVoice.org (a work in progress)

nog

2004-08-10, 3:55 am

On Mon, 09 Aug 2004 19:45:34 -0700, The Trucker wrote:

> You also can't be > a systems administrator on a network housed
> HERE while you stay in India.

No? Things can be organised so that the only presence _ever_ required
on-site is a man & van.

Baxter

2004-08-10, 3:56 pm

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The Trucker" <mikcob@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:cf9cmm025tv@news4.newsguy.com...
>
> There are jobs that cannot be exported. you can't drive my truck from
> India.

But you can let Mexican truck drivers run their trucks in the US.

LastAmerican

2004-08-10, 3:56 pm

The Trucker <mikcob@verizon.net> wrote in message news:<cekaug0231c@news4.newsguy.com>...
> beernuts wrote:
>
>
> What WILL slow down and even stop IT outsourcing is the elimination
> of IP rents. At present the American OWNERS of the enterprise
> collect all the rent (return to monopoly ownership privilege) on
> the software created by the foreign producers. Outside US borders

Trucker, for a minute I thought you were my buddy Craig. He quit after
20 yrs IT to become a trucker too. A shame.

In the past companies were needed to organize people. Today
sourceforge does that for the software community. In the future, other
people may work together in an Open way. As in the times before
powerful, all-invasive governments, then people will cooperate because
they have a common goal. Working for a goal is ALWAYS more productive
than working for a MASTER - except for the MASTER of course.

What I mean is that Open source means all software is free for the
most part. If you are buying Oracle's database, Microsoft's OS, BEA's
web application server, or other products then 9 times out of 10 you
are buying these because you lack a good understanding of what you are
buying and 95 times out of 100 you are wasting money. In my
observation, the productivity in those using Open source surpasses in
the OS arena and the web server arena and is about on par in the
database arena. Just as offshoring replaced a few million US workers
with potentionally 20 million Indian and Chinese workers, Open source
replaces the <million tech workers with >50million IT and related
workers.

So I think open source IS the viable answer to offshoring. That our
President and the others in government are spending so fast they are
breaking the neck of the USA is a more general problem (P). Surely
they have to tax (T) those making the money and using the
infrastructure but they will not (N) as they are the owners of the
companies exploiting America. ~P iff T but N implies ~T. : P.

A very scary expression for those of us in the USA: we each just
went $5k more in debt in the last presidential term and just spent $1k
each on warring in Iraq. Surely I would not have chosen to spend my
money in this way so I am actively s

ing a replacement for my
government officials.

TimJowers
P.S> P->emigrate but hopefully the new government will be more
responsible and represent Americans rather than be Anti-American as
the current government has been. While I breathe, I hope. :-)

Kamal R. Prasad

2004-08-10, 3:56 pm

The Trucker <mikcob@verizon.net> wrote in message news:<cf9cmm025tv@news4.newsguy.com>...
> Kamal R. Pra

wrote:
>
>
> I have no doubt that Indian companies pay for a few copies of IP
> software. But the CD burners are back in business one day after
> the demolition. But don't think that I mind in the least that
> Gates gets ripped and that the Indians get the software. I don't.
>

Ive worked at small to mid-zized companies. You can expect legal
copies of Windows and MS Office at such places. Anybody who is worth
sueing won't buy pirated stuff. Im not sure how the demolition works,
but the govt is not hand in glove with the mass copiers. They need to
deal with the US govt which considers its full time job to promote the
interests of corporations in every forum.

>
> The fact remains: The American consumer pays all the IP rents.
>
Possibly -at the level of individual buyer.

>
> No argument. You seem to think this is an attack on India. It is
> not. It is an attack on IP monopoly privilege and the ridiculous
> wealth disparity it is creating in the USA and in the world.
>
There are several 'schools' of thought on this newsgroup. I figured
you belong to one of them -and that could be a misunderstanding.

>
> There are jobs that cannot be exported. you can't drive my truck from
> India. You can't tend to my sore toe in India. You can't build my
> home, my office, or farm the USA land from India. You also can't be
> a systems administrator on a network housed HERE while you stay in

True. There are many jobs that cannot be sent overseas and some that
can be.

> India. So long as H1B is stomped out and Gates and his ilk do not
> continue to get richer and richer by using your services and then

Well -its true the H1B discriminates against natives because their
expectations are higher thanks to full freedom to the native vs the
H1B. But thats not all there is to the H1B.

> sucking all my money using government enforced monoploy rights I
> have no problem with "free trade". I also have no problem with
> REASONABLE immigration.
>

Umm -I have no plans to immigrate to any other country from India. I
prefer citizenship without payment of any kind. Workers moving to the
US on an H1B is not much different than someone moving from colorado
to california for a job/assignment. Its the jobs that cause the
relocation -and once the jobs aren't there, the place isn't worth
staying at. But the problems caused by the H1B do compel people to
apply for the green card. Meaning, first the govt puts a noose around
the neck by way of contorted legislation and then it gives you an
oppurtunity to get liberated by contributing to an american business
so that the businessowner can claim he has contributed to my company,
so pl. give him the green card.

>
> Irrelevant. AGAIN! If it is less expensive to produce software in
> India then software should be produced in India. But I should be
> buying that software at a reasonable margin over production costs.
> As it is the Indian producers and the American consumers are being
> ripped off by Mr. Business.
>

Costs trickle down over a period of time. Just as a drop in Fed funds
rate does not trigger a drop in mortgage rates immediately, similarly
input costs to manufacturer are not instantenously reflected in
selling price. If 10 businesses improve profits by sending work to
India, some smart guy will lower prices to not less than input costs
and try to grab market share. It has to happen -but cannot happen
unless input costs come down. I can tell you that consulting companies
used to charge $300/hr and pay employees < $50/hr. With less ambitious
Indian companies like Infosys in the show, they are charging $50/hr
and paying < $10/hr [provided client agrees to work being done
offshore]. That is a reflection of lower prices thanks to offshoring.

>
> Horsecrap.
>
>
> Let us focus on natural resources and infrastructure per capita,
> shall we. But nice try.
>
India has more natural resources than Japan but per capita is out of
proportion to the ratio of natural resources. Canada has lots of
natural resources, but not enough jobs to keep Canadians at home.
Their per capita is also less than that of the US, and the stock
market is tiny compared to the US.

>
> Very good point. So we must consider wealth distribution an
> infrastructure. We can see that the USA under Republican thievery
> is now approaching the status of a fascist banana republic with
> no bananas.
>
They are approaching fascist status -but unfortunately the Iraqis have
other ideas than becoming the 52nd state of the USA.

>
> Not me:)
>
>
> Not sure what this means....??
>
2% voters (the rich) love GWB Jr and his policies. They want him to
get re-elected as badly as the other 98% doesn't want them to. And
since they don't want a softening of conservative policies, the only
way to nullify the other 98% is for each of the rich guys to cast his
vote 49 times (2x49=98).

>
> It is not quite that simple. e.g. It will cost me $600 - $1800 in
> cobra (a bridging medical insurance system) to change jobs because

I know what cobra is. If the employer hasn't gone bankrupt, he is
liable for the bulk of the premium and you pay around $50/month or
less for the first 3 months.

> medical insurance at the new company does not take effect until
> you have been there 1 - 3 months (depends on the company). This
> does not include the loss of any deductible you might have
> satisfied at the current employer. This is a real problem for
> worker mobility. It allows companies to short change workers
> because the workers do not have the funds to change jobs. It
> could take as much as a year or more to "get even" after the
> move, even if you could finance it. And the new employer has your
> gonads in the same vice.
>

Doesn't sound like it. You can get a job and resign and then join by
the 30th of a month. You become eligible on the last day of the month
for insurance coverage as an employee for the next month [onwards]. No
denying that the employer csn bully you in more than one way.

>
> No. It does not.
>
>
> Yep. It is as it is. No profit in whining about it.
>
>
> Once freedom is lost it is very difficult to reclaim.

McCain tried some reforms on campaign finance, but he met with a lot
of resistance from both sides. It turns out democracy is just another
system -as good or as bad as any other. There is no pt in spending
billions trying to bring democracy to Iraq if the same system is no
good in the US.

>
>
> But it makes a big difference to the SW people in India just as it
> makes a big difference here.
>
If offshoring is scrapped by a miracle [or Kerry] -25% of the Indian
IT work force will lose its jobs. They will start looking for jobs
like truck driving etc.. As long as there is economic activity, some
form of requirement will still show up [like automation of banking,
film animation etc..]

>
>
> You miss the point. Let Nike advertise all they want. Just don't pay
> em and sell the shoes anyway. The result would be that Nike would
> stop advertising and we would all be better off. People buy good shoes
> and they can tell which shoes to buy without all the lip gloss.

You have something called dollar stores in the US. Ive been to one,
and got for 1$ what you would buy in Radioshack for $10. The guy at
the counter knows just chinese and how many items to count and render
change. If it goes well, you might see them selling unbranded shoes
and do to Nike -what Linux is doing to Windows.

regards
-kamal

The Trucker

2004-08-12, 9:00 am

Kamal R. Pra

wrote:

> The Trucker <mikcob@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:<cf9cmm025tv@news4.newsguy.com>...
>
> Ive worked at small to mid-zized companies. You can expect legal
> copies of Windows and MS Office at such places. Anybody who is worth
> sueing won't buy pirated stuff. Im not sure how the demolition works,
> but the govt is not hand in glove with the mass copiers. They need to
> deal with the US govt which considers its full time job to promote the
> interests of corporations in every forum.
>
> Possibly -at the level of individual buyer.
>
> There are several 'schools' of thought on this newsgroup. I figured
> you belong to one of them -and that could be a misunderstanding.
>
>
> True. There are many jobs that cannot be sent overseas and some that
> can be.
>
>
> Well -its true the H1B discriminates against natives because their
> expectations are higher thanks to full freedom to the native vs the
> H1B. But thats not all there is to the H1B.

H1B discriminates because the H1B individual will be paid here while
he will consume in India. He takes a wad home, lives like a king
for a while and then returns for another load. Or perhaps he is
caring for a family in India. I admit that the H1B individual is
discriminated against by the employer as the employer holds the
reins on this deal. Natives can change jobs and H1B's can't. Yet
this is another way to drag down wages here in the USA. The employers
get whatever they want out of H1B and they get it very cheaply. That
forces native labor into concessions. It is ever the same: Mr.
Business gets richer and the H1B person gets to haul a lot of money
back to India and the native worker gets the shaft. The rationale
(excuse) for H1B is that we do not have the local expertise. That
is, in most cases, a blatant lie.

>
> Umm -I have no plans to immigrate to any other country from India. I
> prefer citizenship without payment of any kind. Workers moving to the
> US on an H1B is not much different than someone moving from colorado
> to california for a job/assignment.

Not so. The H1B person is held in a state of indentured servitude
while the money flows back to India and is worth considerably more
in India.

> Its the jobs that cause the
> relocation -and once the jobs aren't there, the place isn't worth
> staying at. But the problems caused by the H1B do compel people to
> apply for the green card. Meaning, first the govt puts a noose around
> the neck by way of contorted legislation and then it gives you an
> oppurtunity to get liberated by contributing to an american business
> so that the businessowner can claim he has contributed to my company,
> so pl. give him the green card.

It is simply a way to avoid paying respectable wages.

>
> Costs trickle down over a period of time. Just as a drop in Fed funds
> rate does not trigger a drop in mortgage rates immediately, similarly
> input costs to manufacturer are not instantenously reflected in
> selling price. If 10 businesses improve profits by sending work to
> India, some smart guy will lower prices to not less than input costs
> and try to grab market share.

Nope. Gates has a monopoly for instance.

> It has to happen -but cannot happen
> unless input costs come down. I can tell you that consulting companies
> used to charge $300/hr and pay employees < $50/hr. With less ambitious
> Indian companies like Infosys in the show, they are charging $50/hr
> and paying < $10/hr [provided client agrees to work being done
> offshore]. That is a reflection of lower prices thanks to offshoring.

Here again, so long as the work is actually done offshore and the price
of the software is cost of goods plus small profit then no problem.

> India has more natural resources than Japan but per capita is out of
> proportion to the ratio of natural resources.

INFRASTRUCTURE!!??

> Canada has lots of
> natural resources, but not enough jobs to keep Canadians at home.
> Their per capita is also less than that of the US, and the stock
> market is tiny compared to the US.

Canadians enjoy much more freedom than do Americans.

> They are approaching fascist status -but unfortunately the Iraqis have
> other ideas than becoming the 52nd state of the USA.

Looks that way....

> 2% voters (the rich) love GWB Jr and his policies. They want him to
> get re-elected as badly as the other 98% doesn't want them to. And
> since they don't want a softening of conservative policies, the only
> way to nullify the other 98% is for each of the rich guys to cast his
> vote 49 times (2x49=98).

Got it |:)

>
> I know what cobra is. If the employer hasn't gone bankrupt, he is
> liable for the bulk of the premium and you pay around $50/month or
> less for the first 3 months.

Nope. Cobra allows me to keep the same insurance and pay ALL of
the premium for not more than a year. The previous employer nor
the new employer pay any of the premiums.

>
> Doesn't sound like it. You can get a job and resign and then join by
> the 30th of a month. You become eligible on the last day of the month
> for insurance coverage as an employee for the next month [onwards]. No
> denying that the employer csn bully you in more than one way.

I am telling you that many trucking companies do not provide health
insurance until you have been employed by that company for 3 months.
You will lose whatever deductible you have satisfied with the previous
company and the cobra stuff will cost you a lot. Company provided
health insurance should be abolished.

>
> McCain tried some reforms on campaign finance, but he met with a lot
> of resistance from both sides. It turns out democracy is just another
> system -as good or as bad as any other. There is no pt in spending
> billions trying to bring democracy to Iraq if the same system is no
> good in the US.

You will not get an argument from me. Exporting the piece of crap we
have and calling it representative democracy is yet another exercises
in spin and hype from the Republican fascists.

> If offshoring is scrapped by a miracle [or Kerry] -25% of the Indian
> IT work force will lose its jobs. They will start looking for jobs
> like truck driving etc.. As long as there is economic activity, some
> form of requirement will still show up [like automation of banking,
> film animation etc..]

I would not want to see offshoring scrapped. I actually think that
it is good if it is done right because everybody wins. The problem
is the IP rights and the disparity in wealth and power created here
in the USA.

>
> You have something called dollar stores in the US. Ive been to one,
> and got for 1$ what you would buy in Radioshack for $10. The guy at
> the counter knows just chinese and how many items to count and render
> change. If it goes well, you might see them selling unbranded shoes
> and do to Nike -what Linux is doing to Windows.
>
> regards
> -kamal

Linux is the best!

--
http://GreaterVoice.org (a work in progress)

Kamal R. Prasad

2004-08-12, 4:00 pm

The Trucker <mikcob@verizon.net> wrote in message news:<cffafj0vo6@news3.newsguy.com>...
> Kamal R. Pra

wrote:
>
<snip>[color=darkred]
>
> H1B discriminates because the H1B individual will be paid here while
> he will consume in India. He takes a wad home, lives like a king
> for a while and then returns for another load. Or perhaps he is

He has to consume in the US when working in the US. For example, he
has to pay sky high rents if he is placed in silicon valley [the bulk
of h1bs go there].
The savings he makes are probably destined to remain in a USD account
either in the US or India[but seldom converted to Rupees]. A middle
class guy can never reach the status of a businessowner, so the h1b is
his best shot -but unlikely to give him the luxury of living like a
king.

> caring for a family in India. I admit that the H1B individual is
> discriminated against by the employer as the employer holds the
> reins on this deal. Natives can change jobs and H1B's can't. Yet

They can change jobs -but the discrimination exists and is subtle.
For example, a given position may have a certain market rate DOE. The
citizen will have 1 rate and the H1B another. Plus -you cannot annoy
the employer. He has legal rights to complain about the H1B to the
INS. If you apply for a green card -then you are a total slave to the
employer till the INS rewards you with a green card.

> this is another way to drag down wages here in the USA. The employers
> get whatever they want out of H1B and they get it very cheaply. That
> forces native labor into concessions. It is ever the same: Mr.
Yes.
> Business gets richer and the H1B person gets to haul a lot of money
> back to India and the native worker gets the shaft. The rationale
Well -it is a lot of money by Indian standards because our cost of
living is lower than yours. iF cost of living reaches uniformity, then
this problem wont be around.

> (excuse) for H1B is that we do not have the local expertise. That
> is, in most cases, a blatant lie.
>
In many cases, it is the problem of not getting local expertise at the
right price -yes. In some cases, it is a case of too few qualified
persons in the market causing high labour rates.

>
> Not so. The H1B person is held in a state of indentured servitude
> while the money flows back to India and is worth considerably more
> in India.
>
Not indentured -but coerced by a sleight of hand.
The money may not necessarily flow back to India -but does remain with
the H1B.
India does not have a mature banking system for outflow of foreign
exchange.

>
> It is simply a way to avoid paying respectable wages.
>
cheap tricks in collusion with politicians and govt officials -yes.

>
> Nope. Gates has a monopoly for instance.
>
He has a monopoly on a product because of technology traps he deceived
customers into -but that is not related to costs. If you are talking
of applications, there are fewer traps -and greater price competition.

>
> Here again, so long as the work is actually done offshore and the price
> of the software is cost of goods plus small profit then no problem.
>
That is probably where we are headed. Cost difference is huge between
US and India in terms of labour costs.

>
> INFRASTRUCTURE!!??
>
>
> Canadians enjoy much more freedom than do Americans.
>
>
> Looks that way....
>
>
> Got it |:)
>
>
> Nope. Cobra allows me to keep the same insurance and pay ALL of
> the premium for not more than a year. The previous employer nor
> the new employer pay any of the premiums.
>
I was referring to previous employer.

>
> I am telling you that many trucking companies do not provide health
> insurance until you have been employed by that company for 3 months.
> You will lose whatever deductible you have satisfied with the previous
> company and the cobra stuff will cost you a lot. Company provided
> health insurance should be abolished.
>
ah -I was talking wrt to IT sector. BTW -do you have an RV or just
sleep in the driver's seat? Is it safe living in a truck? how do you
access the internet?

>
> You will not get an argument from me. Exporting the piece of crap we
> have and calling it representative democracy is yet another exercises
> in spin and hype from the Republican fascists.
>
>
> I would not want to see offshoring scrapped. I actually think that
> it is good if it is done right because everybody wins. The problem
> is the IP rights and the disparity in wealth and power created here
> in the USA.
>
It is also because US is a capitalist+protectionist society. That is
the recipe for disparity in income.

>
> Linux is the best!

Hopefully -it will be the most popular freeware around.

regards
-kamal

The Trucker

2004-08-13, 3:56 pm

Kamal R. Pra

wrote:

> The Trucker <mikcob@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:<cffafj0vo6@news3.newsguy.com>...
> <snip>
>
> He has to consume in the US when working in the US. For example, he
> has to pay sky high rents if he is placed in silicon valley [the bulk
> of h1bs go there].
> The savings he makes are probably destined to remain in a USD account
> either in the US or India[but seldom converted to Rupees]. A middle
> class guy can never reach the status of a businessowner, so the h1b is
> his best shot -but unlikely to give him the luxury of living like a
> king.

Yet the fact remains: The H1B will be consuming some/much of his
earnings in India where the cost of living is a mere fraction of
the cost of living in the USA. This will mean that he can work
temporarily for a lot less and still retain a high standard of
living in India for his family or for himself when he returns to
India. This will undermine wages for those Americans who do not
have such a retreat.

>
> They can change jobs -but the discrimination exists and is subtle.
> For example, a given position may have a certain market rate DOE. The
> citizen will have 1 rate and the H1B another. Plus -you cannot annoy
> the employer. He has legal rights to complain about the H1B to the
> INS. If you apply for a green card -then you are a total slave to the
> employer till the INS rewards you with a green card.
>
> Yes.
[color=darkred]
> Well -it is a lot of money by Indian standards because our cost of
> living is lower than yours. iF cost of living reaches uniformity, then
> this problem wont be around.

Yep. The objective of H1B is increase the wealth disparity here in the
USA so as to create an elite caste of moral prancing fascist pigs to rule
the remaining serfs. The destruction of freedom is the objective here,
the continued subjugation of what was a thriving and propserous middle
class. This has little to do with any kind of agression or ill will
or intent on the part of foreign workers. It is an attack on the
middle class of this nation by the wealthy and powerful of this nation
with the objective of increasing the power of the elite.

http://GreaterVoice.org/econ/glossary/aristocracy.php

> In many cases, it is the problem of not getting local expertise at the
> right price -yes. In some cases, it is a case of too few qualified
> persons in the market causing high labour rates.

"The right price" is the tail wagging the dog. If a business maximizes
profit by shortchanging labor then that business does not do the
greater community any good. All the buiseness will be doing is increasing
the disparity in wealth between owners and workers. Looking at it in
that way, a business that does not provide American jobs is of no real
benefit to the middle class of the USA. I often ask, "Why do you think
I care who owns the company? So long as the same amount of tax is paid
to the US government I could care less whether Mr. Republican, or Mr.
India owns the thing". The "profits" of the company are not my concern.
Only the wages paid to Americans is of concern to American wage earners.
A declining wage in ANY sector of the American economy will spill over
to other sectors. e.g. I was a systems administrator and now I compete
for a trucking job and that lowers wages in trucking.

> Not indentured -but coerced by a sleight of hand.
> The money may not necessarily flow back to India -but does remain with
> the H1B.
> India does not have a mature banking system for outflow of foreign
> exchange.
>
> cheap tricks in collusion with politicians and govt officials -yes.
>
> He has a monopoly on a product because of technology traps he deceived
> customers into -but that is not related to costs. If you are talking
> of applications, there are fewer traps -and greater price competition.

I have asked this before: Why do enterprising Indians not take the
lead of "Lindows" and create and maintain an alternative to "Windows"
for the purpose of running all these applications? You would be
much appluaded by the American technology workers for doing it and
you could make some very big bucks indeed. Such an enterprise would
do much to restore competition in software. And it is
competition that creates jobs. Monopoly destroys jobs.

> That is probably where we are headed. Cost difference is huge between
> US and India in terms of labour costs.

And if those cost savings are actually realized by the American consumer
then all is well. In the current scheme the bulk of the difference
in wages is going into the pocket of the American monopolist.

> I was referring to previous employer.
>
> ah -I was talking wrt to IT sector. BTW -do you have an RV or just
> sleep in the driver's seat?

There is a large compartment called a "sleeper" befind the driver's
seat and that is where you sleep.

> Is it safe living in a truck? how do you
> access the internet?

The Truck stops have wireless ethernet so as to accommodate laptops
from the sleeper or the drivers lounge in the truck stop. The
truck stops are where you fuel and they offer resturants and showers
and such.

> It is also because US is a capitalist+protectionist society. That is
> the recipe for disparity in income.
>
>
> Hopefully -it will be the most popular freeware around.
>
> regards
> -kamal

--
http://GreaterVoice.org (a work in progress)

Slartibartfast

2004-08-13, 8:55 pm

LastAmerican wrote:

>I think open source IS the viable answer to offshoring.
>That our President and the others in government are
>spending so fast they are breaking the neck of the USA is a
>more general problem (P). Surely they have to tax (T)
>those making the money and using the infrastructure but
>they will not (N) as they are the owners of the companies
>exploiting America. ~P iff T but N implies ~T. : P.

So how do you accumulate leverage in an open source
world to take down stupid management structures?

Tian
--
http://tian.greens.org
There was a debate about weather the draft should come
back Wednesday at the Palo Alto Community TV studio.
One guy: "a National Service Corps would be better than
a military draft." The other guy: "the draft is bad."

Kamal R. Prasad

2004-08-14, 8:55 am

The Trucker <mikcob@verizon.net> wrote in message news:<cfimql02dd3@news2.newsguy.com>...
> Kamal R. Pra

wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> Yet the fact remains: The H1B will be consuming some/much of his
> earnings in India where the cost of living is a mere fraction of
> the cost of living in the USA. This will mean that he can work

About 50% of his post-tax income goes to living in the USA.
The rest is savings -some of which may be consumed in the US if he
gets a green card and decides to buy a house etc.. Since H1B visa is
valid only for 6 yrs, those that don't get a green card have no option
but to return and they wouldn't want to make too many investments.
Cost of living in India is about 1/5th that of US and we didn't have
to do anything to get into this situation. What you have in place is a
problem resulting from inflated currency. A rich american would love
to see the US dollar appreciate -to increase his buying power
overseas, but for those who don't have much of a savings that isn't
necessarily a good thing. It affects the export competitiveness of the
country and costs jobs. Some EU countries with high unemployment have
a policy of dragging down their currency to keep exports competitive
-and the fact your govt wants to do just the opposite is a reflection
of a pro-rich stance.

> temporarily for a lot less and still retain a high standard of
> living in India for his family or for himself when he returns to
> India. This will undermine wages for those Americans who do not
> have such a retreat.
>

If you want early retirement -a retreat is available for you in
numerous countries. Just that you need to go through an immigration
process and have ~100K in savings.

> Yes.
>
>
> Yep. The objective of H1B is increase the wealth disparity here in the
> USA so as to create an elite caste of moral prancing fascist pigs to rule
> the remaining serfs. The destruction of freedom is the objective here,
> the continued subjugation of what was a thriving and propserous middle

If they legalize any form of slavery -slave labour will always be
preferred over unindentured labour. So, it is a case of
class-conflict, yes.
But your troubles may not end with an end to the H1B program or even a
correction to it. United States is one of the most expensive countries
on this planet with a population of 250 million out of 6 billion.
There are more competent people outside the US than within and ready
to work for less [either because of lower expectations or cost of
living or both].

> class. This has little to do with any kind of agression or ill will
> or intent on the part of foreign workers. It is an attack on the

With Indians, you have the advantage that they would rather not settle
down in the US and go back to their land vs some other ethnic groups
that are more open to naturalization/inter-mingling. They come in when
the times are good and go back as soon as the situation worsens [like
migratory birds]. So that means less of a strain on the country's
resources/infrastructure during bad times i.e. no competition for jobs
when the savings aren't good enough.

> middle class of this nation by the wealthy and powerful of this nation
> with the objective of increasing the power of the elite.
>
> http://GreaterVoice.org/econ/glossary/aristocracy.php
>
Possibly true. I can only state that the levers of change lie in
economic policy. You can change it and everything will fall in place
-either for the better or for the worse.

>
> "The right price" is the tail wagging the dog. If a business maximizes
> profit by shortchanging labor then that business does not do the

Well -you should see the labour costs for other engineers in the US
[besides IT] or the costs for engineers in other countries to realize
that IT labour costs tend to be above the median. I actually know of a
ex-US coastguard worker turned sy

min who lived in a trailer truck
but managed to hit it rich with stock options and bought a 2-bedroom
apartment + SUV + bike. If they hadn't imported H1Bs in bulk to meet
the demand, you would have seen all kinds of people turned
millionaires. And there was no profit in many of those businesses
-only hype aka dutch tulip mania. Businesses offer compensation
packages based on current salary levels (which depends on demand and
supply) -not how much they stand to gain/lose by hiring the worker. Im
not sure if it fits into your ideology, but I just want to let you
know that yours is a thinly populated country with more 'help wanted'
signs and lower unemployment than just about any other country on this
planet.

> greater community any good. All the buiseness will be doing is increasing
> the disparity in wealth between owners and workers. Looking at it in
> that way, a business that does not provide American jobs is of no real

They provide jobs to individuals based on productivity per dollar
spent (ROI) not to the country. If they didn't hire foreigners
outside/inside the US -it is probably because means of transportation
of individuals & jobs weren't that good before.

> benefit to the middle class of the USA. I often ask, "Why do you think
> I care who owns the company? So long as the same amount of tax is paid
> to the US government I could care less whether Mr. Republican, or Mr.
> India owns the thing". The "profits" of the company are not my concern.

And I would like to attest from my experience that an Indian company
(either in India or in the US) wouldn't care less who the worker is.
They just care for whether he delivers the goods.

> Only the wages paid to Americans is of concern to American wage earners.
> A declining wage in ANY sector of the American economy will spill over
> to other sectors. e.g. I was a systems administrator and now I compete
> for a trucking job and that lowers wages in trucking.
>

When there is a paradigm shift, an industry sector empties out but if
the economy is doing OK -it translates to more jobs for individuals in
a different industry than in which they are trained for. Like the hw
manufacturing sector moved to Taiwan and there was mass unemployment
in that sector but the rest of the economy improved. The jobs didn't
come back -so people either left the valley or adapted themselves to
different work requirements. Same was probably true for auto workers
when the car industry moved from Detroit to Japan. They were probably
manual workers and couldn't adapt to any other industry and that
created social problems like ghetto violence etc.. If you are
educated, it enhances your ability to shift should new oppurtunities
show up [you never know when, but its not ruled out] -but there is no
such thing as jobs reserved for Americans. As a matter of fact, the
bulk of the money that goes into employing americans comes from
overseas.

>
> I have asked this before: Why do enterprising Indians not take the
> lead of "Lindows" and create and maintain an alternative to "Windows"
> for the purpose of running all these applications? You would be
> much appluaded by the American technology workers for doing it and
> you could make some very big bucks indeed. Such an enterprise would
> do much to restore competition in software. And it is
> competition that creates jobs. Monopoly destroys jobs.
>

Linux is doing pretty well -and contributors to Linux are not
necessarily all inside the US. But they are almost all individuals
with alternative sources of income/survival like students, academia
etc.. If I decide to stop working and owning some piece of linux, how
will I survive? Lindows itself was started by a disgruntled MSFT
employee, and he owns it + wants to extract revenge. RedHat and SUSE
both have viable business models. If Im right, Redhat has an office in
India. To start a company either to provide Linux distributions or
otherwise, investors need confidence -and they may not have that yet.
Most of the startups in India have a parent office in the US that does
more of the business critical job functions. V. few of them have an
India only office.

>
> And if those cost savings are actually realized by the American consumer
> then all is well. In the current scheme the bulk of the difference
> in wages is going into the pocket of the American monopolist.
>

Price competition will show up -and there are v few monopolies in the
IT sector to prevent that from happening. As a matter of fact, there
are v few big ticket software titles in the market vs some 20 yrs back
[wherein one had to buy ftp from ftp inc.]. Most sw companies bundle
sw with personalized services -to fend off competition.

>
> There is a large compartment called a "sleeper" befind the driver's
> seat and that is where you sleep.
>
>
> The Truck stops have wireless ethernet so as to accommodate laptops
> from the sleeper or the drivers lounge in the truck stop. The
> truck stops are where you fuel and they offer resturants and showers
> and such.
>
Must be quite a change in lifestyle. Thanks to the recession, I did
spend quite some time in extended stay lodges vs luxury apartments. I
planned to spend a night by the pacific in my car on I-1, but that
never happened.

regards
-kamal
[snip]

The Trucker

2004-08-16, 3:56 am

Kamal R. Pra

wrote:

> The Trucker <mikcob@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:<cfimql02dd3@news2.newsguy.com>...
>
> About 50% of his post-tax income goes to living in the USA.

And that would mean that the rest is spent in India (multiplied
by 5).

> The rest is savings -some of which may be consumed in the US if he
> gets a green card and decides to buy a house etc.. Since H1B visa is
> valid only for 6 yrs, those that don't get a green card have no option
> but to return and they wouldn't want to make too many investments.
> Cost of living in India is about 1/5th that of US and we didn't have
> to do anything to get into this situation.

This BLAME stuff is irrelevant. IT is as it is.

> What you have in place is a
> problem resulting from inflated currency. A rich american would love
> to see the US dollar appreciate -to increase his buying power
> overseas, but for those who don't have much of a savings that isn't
> necessarily a good thing.

This is well known by those of us with any brains of our own. But
most Americans are brainwashed by propaganda spouted by those of
wealth and power through the megaphone of Rush Limbaugh and Faux
News.

> It affects the export competitiveness of the
> country and costs jobs. Some EU countries with high unemployment have
> a policy of dragging down their currency to keep exports competitive
> -and the fact your govt wants to do just the opposite is a reflection
> of a pro-rich stance.

BINGO!

>
> If you want early retirement -a retreat is available for you in
> numerous countries. Just that you need to go through an immigration
> process and have ~100K in savings.

We see below that you do not wish to leave India. I do not wish to
leave the USA nor do I wish to exile my wife and Kids to Mexico
so as to provide them with a decent life style. I have considered
taking dangerous work in other sovereignties and bringing the
proceeds back to the USA in order to get
"ahead" but I have not done so and I don't think such a thing
should be necessary. And again, I do not BLAME the people that
come here on an H1B visa. The blame is to be placed on the lying
filth that claims there is not adequate expertise right here and
the Republican filth that keeps pushing for more and more H1B's
so as to maximize profits flowing into the hands of the owners
while shortchanging the actual producers (American an Indian
alike).

>
> If they legalize any form of slavery -slave labour will always be
> preferred over unindentured labour. So, it is a case of
> class-conflict, yes.

It is a case of information control, lying, and control of the
political process.

From Progress and Poverty -- Henry George ---------------------------

Where there is anything like an equal distribution of wealth - that is to
say, where there is general patriotism, virtue, and intelligence - the more
democratic the government the better it will be; but where there is gross
inequality in the distribution of wealth, the more democratic the
government the worse it will be; for, while rotten democracy may not in
itself be worse than rotten autocracy, its effects upon national character
will be worse ....

..... but in a corrupt democracy the tendency is always to give power to the
worst. Honesty and patriotism are weighted, and unscrupulousness commands
success. The best gravitate to the bottom, the worst float to the top, and
the vile will only be ousted by the viler. While as national character must
gradually assimilate to the qualities that win power, and consequently
respect, that demoralization of opinion goes on which in the long panorama
of history we may see over and over again transmuting races of free men
into races of slaves."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

From http://GreaterVoice.org ---------------------------------------

Our Constitutional government was designed to control the problems of
democracy. That is why there was a separation of powers; two legislative
bodies, an executive and and a judiciary. But what a difference the
limitation of adequate representation and the information age has brought
us. The mob is now the entire nation because through control of information
the separation of powers has been made utterly sterile. We have an
"elected" king that can exercise enough control over all of the sources of
information to unduly influence every vote for every position in
government, and to therefore appoint whoever he will to the Supreme Court
and have his appointee confirmed as a matter of course. Oh speak to us of
"demagogues" and tell us about "mobs". And then tell us what you would call
an entire nation who's primary source of information is from entertainment
enterprises such as "fix" news and "see'in in". These guys make money by
selling ads for SUV's and tires and gasoline, for Christ's sake. You think
they want to go back to programs about something as boring as peace?
Explosions and fires and shooting are cinema. This is the stuff that sells
tires, folks. Our American aristocracy would make war on Daffy Duck if
they thought it would exalt their existence and convince the common people
that economic policies favoring their caste are necessary to the safety and
security of the nation. At the root of these problems is the lack of even a
very basic and simple awareness of economic principles. Notice that
political economy is not part of the high school curriculum, that potential
voters of the nation are quite literally deprived of even the most basic
awareness of a subject that will determine much about how they, as
individuals, will prosper or fail (Note: Keynes ). And then this ignorance
is enforced as people are deprived of proper agency by limiting their
representation in such a way as to assure that only the those willing to
support the aristocracy will be sufficiently funded in the race for voting
power in the House of Representatives. Both of these perversions of
democratic principle are well addressed by our favorite quote from
Jefferson . By the deprivation of rudimentary economic education and a
continuing deprivation of proper agency the American people are mislead,
misinformed and misrepresented in such a way as to deprive them of their
fundamental rights to self determination.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

> But your troubles may not end with an end to the H1B program or even a
> correction to it. United States is one of the most expensive countries
> on this planet with a population of 250 million out of 6 billion.
> There are more competent people outside the US than within and ready
> to work for less [either because of lower expectations or cost of
> living or both].

Then those people should be creating and marketing goods and services
in their own nation and exporting same. NO reason for Mr. American
Rich XXXXX to be increasing his distance above the other people
of this nation by exploiting the Indians. And here we have my only
XXXXX about the Indians: They should tell this fascist to stick it
and just do their own thing.

>
> With Indians, you have the advantage that they would rather not settle
> down in the US and go back to their land vs some other ethnic groups
> that are more open to naturalization/inter-mingling. They come in when
> the times are good and go back as soon as the situation worsens [like
> migratory birds]. So that means less of a strain on the country's
> resources/infrastructure during bad times i.e. no competition for jobs
> when the savings aren't good enough.

I do not want ANYONE undermining the wages of Americans through
temporary migration. This does absolutely nothing but to increase
wealth disparity here. There is simply NO reason for Indians to
come here to do software development or systems support. The software
development can be done in India even if the Indian technologists are
equal or better than Americans. Americans need to be doing
system support services for systems that are HERE while Indians need
to do this in India. The way things have been going there are adequate
servers and end user system and such in India to allow plenty of
employment for IT support people over there. Absolutely no need for
H1B in any case. H1B destroys American wages for technologists
here thus destroying the incentive for education in this field. We
have a self fulfilling prophecy as the lie with which we started becomes
the truth.

> Possibly true. I can only state that the levers of change lie in
> economic policy. You can change it and everything will fall in place
> -either for the better or for the worse.
>
>
> Well -you should see the labour costs for other engineers in the US
> [besides IT] or the costs for engineers in other countries to realize
> that IT labour costs tend to be above the median. I actually know of a
> ex-US coastguard worker turned sy

min who lived in a trailer truck
> but managed to hit it rich with stock options and bought a 2-bedroom
> apartment + SUV + bike. If they hadn't imported H1Bs in bulk to meet
> the demand, you would have seen all kinds of people turned
> millionaires.

So what's the bad part? All you are doing is confirming that such
a development is a threat to the established wealthy. And THAT is
why we have H1B.

> And there was no profit in many of those businesses
> -only hype aka dutch tulip mania. Businesses offer compensation
> packages based on current salary levels (which depends on demand and
> supply) -not how much they stand to gain/lose by hiring the worker.

And the supply is increased by H1B thus ripping off the Americans that
spent a lot of toil and effort on becoming IT professionals.

> Im
> not sure if it fits into your ideology, but I just want to let you
> know that yours is a thinly populated country with more 'help wanted'
> signs and lower unemployment than just about any other country on this
> planet.

Gee.... I'm real glad you are here to tell me about my country. I would
have never have known this if you were not around to enlighten me.

Now let me tell you something: Your population problems are yours and
not mine. I do not support the idea that the USA is to be a relief
valve for the overpopulated nations of the world. You need to FIX
YOUR problem without screwing up mine. You want to immigrate? Then
in reasonable numbers please do so. You want to develop technology
in India? Do it. More power to ya. We will compete with you in this
way. But H1B is simply a rip off of American IT professionals.

>
> They provide jobs to individuals based on productivity per dollar
> spent (ROI) not to the country. If they didn't hire foreigners
> outside/inside the US -it is probably because means of transportation
> of individuals & jobs weren't that good before.

They are ripping off the producers in this country and in yours so
as to increase their own power and wealth. You have already admitted
that the Indian H1B can provide for a family in India while working
here at a lower wage and that while this H1B is here he will be very
much subject to the power of the company that brought him here and
thus more maleable than the American technologist of similar ability.
The Indian H1B is hauling a lot of loot to India and the boss is
getting fat and the American middle class is simply getting the shaft.
This stupid crap about competitiveness and the corporate level is
self serving profit enhancement and that is all it is. I do not give
a hoot whether Mr. Republican boss makes a profit or not. I do not
actually need him to "provide jobs". These jobs are available because
of the rise of technology and they will be there regardless of Mr.
lying Republican.

>
> And I would like to attest from my experience that an Indian company
> (either in India or in the US) wouldn't care less who the worker is.
> They just care for whether he delivers the goods.

In India this is not a problem. It is only a problem here. I don't
see H1B people overrunning India from the USA. H1B should be done away
with except as it is used by universities.

>
> When there is a paradigm shift, an industry sector empties out but if
> the economy is doing OK -it translates to more jobs for individuals in
> a different industry than in which they are trained for.

That is total horse crap. The rise of technology and the development
of real capital eliminates jobs. That's why humans do this stuff.
You think we WANT to work our butts off?

> Like the hw
> manufacturing sector moved to Taiwan and there was mass unemployment
> in that sector but the rest of the economy improved.

No problem. The people doing the work competed in their own society
with its cost of living as it was/is. This may well be "comparative
advantage".

> The jobs didn't
> come back -so people either left the valley or adapted themselves to
> different work requirements.

This as a case of offshoring and is in no way similar to H1B.

> Same was probably true for auto workers
> when the car industry moved from Detroit to Japan.

Again.. These people that were making the cars lived in Japan and
the capital investment was done by Japanese and the ownership was
in Japan and did not directly exacerbate wealth disparity here.

> They were probably
> manual workers and couldn't adapt to any other industry and that
> created social problems like ghetto violence etc..

Snore.........

> If you are
> educated, it enhances your ability to shift should new oppurtunities
> show up [you never know when, but its not ruled out] -but there is no
> such thing as jobs reserved for Americans. As a matter of fact, the
> bulk of the money that goes into employing Americans comes from
> overseas.

As to your "jobs reserved for Americans" I strongly disagree. Support
services in this country belong to the American Citizens. And if
there is a lack of educated American citizens then those that ARE
educated should be commanding a very high premium. That will insure
the expansion of skills in the area that has the shortage. Good
examples are health care, infrastructure development and support such
as communications and Information SERVICES in this country. And these
jobs should be long to the citizens of the sovereignty in any
sovereignty anywhere.

>
> Linux is doing pretty well -and contributors to Linux are not
> necessarily all inside the US. But they are almost all individuals
> with alternative sources of income/survival like students, academia
> etc.. If I decide to stop working and owning some piece of linux, how
> will I survive? Lindows itself was started by a disgruntled MSFT
> employee, and he owns it + wants to extract revenge.

The concept is quite valid but it is a fine example of what can be
much better done in India.

> RedHat and SUSE
> both have viable business models.

Red Hat has changed. They are going to be charging yearly subscription
fees and those fees are very steep. This new way of doing business
for Red Hat may or may not succeed, but I can see the rationale for
it. But the actual software people that prepare and support the
internals should perhaps be Indians in India. The people that build
physical networks and who upgrade machinery and integrate software and
hardware and provide local support services for Red Hat linux based
nets and heterogeneous nets should be Americans living and working in
America.

> If Im right, Redhat has an office in
> India. To start a company either to provide Linux distributions or
> otherwise, investors need confidence -and they may not have that yet.

Screw a bunch of "investors".

> Most of the startups in India have a parent office in the US that does
> more of the business critical job functions. V. few of them have an
> India only office.

These organizations need a marketing presence here only. They need not
have anything else here and certainly not a "parent" office.

>
> Price competition will show up -and there are v few monopolies in the
> IT sector to prevent that from happening. As a matter of fact, there
> are v few big ticket software titles in the market vs some 20 yrs back
> [wherein one had to buy ftp from ftp inc.]. Most sw companies bundle
> sw with personalized services -to fend off competition.

Microsoft is a monopoly that is doing all it can to prevent advance
and competition. The MySQL people, OTOH make ALL their dough through
services and they INVITE innovation and improvement.

> Must be quite a change in lifestyle. Thanks to the recession, I did
> spend quite some time in extended stay lodges vs luxury apartments. I
> planned to spend a night by the pacific in my car on I-1, but that
> never happened.
>
> regards
> -kamal
> [snip]

--
"I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of society but
the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough
to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy
is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by
education." - Thomas Jefferson. http://GreaterVoice.org

Gawnsoft

2004-08-16, 3:56 am

On 14 Aug 2004 04:57:55 -0700, kamalp@acm.org (Kamal R. Pra

) wrote
(more or less):

>Some EU countries with high unemployment have
>a policy of dragging down their currency to keep exports competitive

Oh? Which ones?

(hint: the highest unemployment rates in the EU are all in Euroland
countries, who cannot therefore amend their own exchange rates)

--
Cheers,
Euan
Gawnsoft: http://www.gawnsoft.co.sr
Symbian/Epoc wiki: http://html.dnsalias.net:1122
Smalltalk links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk) http://html.dnsalias.net/gawnsoft/smalltalk

LastAmerican

2004-08-16, 3:56 am

dontbefuelish@aol.com81849525 (Slartibartfast) wrote in message news:<20040813190439.04727.00002872@mb-m10.aol.com>...
> LastAmerican wrote:
>
>
> So how do you accumulate leverage in an open source
> world to take down stupid management structures?
>
>
>
> Tian

Good questions. How does Open Source make the USA programmer
competitive when the tax load is 6x that of the India programmer?

Take Linux for example. It costs no more for someone in the USA
than in India. The tax load has been eliminated. The developers cannot
be layed off and replaced with people in India. The developers are
volunteers in America, India, and everywhere. Because Open Source (and
by that I mean freely available software that is developed
cooperatively) is free, then it is used by all. The only way to break
a severe taxation without ending the system is to avoid the taxes.
This is why so many companies have expatriated
http://www.house.gov/neal/pdfs/expatriatelist.pdf. This is why so many
illegal aliens and US citizens do not report cash earnings. And maybe
this is how Open Source can combat offshoring.

My guesses. Who knows for sure?
TimJowers
P.S> Of course the USA government which has drastically overspent
EVERY YEAR for two decades has to come up with a new tax system to
combat adaptation. Tax income is down as companies have skirted taxes
using offshoring in both the accounting and the employment senses.

Kamal R. Prasad

2004-08-16, 8:57 am

The Trucker <mikcob@verizon.net> wrote in message news:<cformb01rqv@news1.newsguy.com>...
> Kamal R. Pra

wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> And that would mean that the rest is spent in India (multiplied
> by 5).
>
It gets 5 x as many goods & services as in the US -yes.

>
> This BLAME stuff is irrelevant. IT is as it is.
>
>
> This is well known by those of us with any brains of our own. But
> most Americans are brainwashed by propaganda spouted by those of
> wealth and power through the megaphone of Rush Limbaugh and Faux
> News.
>
>
> BINGO!
>
>
> We see below that you do not wish to leave India. I do not wish to
> leave the USA nor do I wish to exile my wife and Kids to Mexico
> so as to provide them with a decent life style. I have considered

Different people have different problems -and survival requires
different solutions. You have a problem of high cost of
living/education -which I don't.
I am not suggesting that you immigrate -but just wanted to let you
know that there are lots of 'could not make it' types who have
immigrated from the US to other countries. Some that have retired live
easy -some that earn their living have no option but to slog it out.
New Zealand has lots of such american citizens.

> taking dangerous work in other sovereignties and bringing the
> proceeds back to the USA in order to get
> "ahead" but I have not done so and I don't think such a thing
> should be necessary. And again, I do not BLAME the people that
> come here on an H1B visa. The blame is to be placed on the lying

That is exactly what the H1Bs do -take the uncertain road to 'getting
ahead'.

> filth that claims there is not adequate expertise right here and
> the Republican filth that keeps pushing for more and more H1B's
> so as to maximize profits flowing into the hands of the owners
> while shortchanging the actual producers (American an Indian
> alike).
>
Alright.

[snip]
>
> It is a case of information control, lying, and control of the
> political process.
>
> From Progress and Poverty -- Henry George ---------------------------
>
> Where there is anything like an equal distribution of wealth - that is to
> say, where there is general patriotism, virtue, and intelligence - the more
> democratic the government the better it will be; but where there is gross
> inequality in the distribution of wealth, the more democratic the
> government the worse it will be; for, while rotten democracy may not in
> itself be worse than rotten autocracy, its effects upon national character
> will be worse ....
>
> .... but in a corrupt democracy the tendency is always to give power to the
> worst. Honesty and patriotism are weighted, and unscrupulousness commands
> success. The best gravitate to the bottom, the worst float to the top, and
> the vile will only be ousted by the viler. While as national character must
> gradually assimilate to the qualities that win power, and consequently
> respect, that demoralization of opinion goes on which in the long panorama
> of history we may see over and over again transmuting races of free men
> into races of slaves."
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> From http://GreaterVoice.org ---------------------------------------
>
> Our Constitutional government was designed to control the problems of
> democracy. That is why there was a separation of powers; two legislative
> bodies, an executive and and a judiciary. But what a difference the
> limitation of adequate representation and the information age has brought
> us. The mob is now the entire nation because through control of information
> the separation of powers has been made utterly sterile. We have an
> "elected" king that can exercise enough control over all of the sources of
> information to unduly influence every vote for every position in
> government, and to therefore appoint whoever he will to the Supreme Court
> and have his appointee confirmed as a matter of course. Oh speak to us of
> "demagogues" and tell us about "mobs". And then tell us what you would call
> an entire nation who's primary source of information is from entertainment
> enterprises such as "fix" news and "see'in in". These guys make money by
> selling ads for SUV's and tires and gasoline, for Christ's sake. You think
> they want to go back to programs about something as boring as peace?
> Explosions and fires and shooting are cinema. This is the stuff that sells
> tires, folks. Our American aristocracy would make war on Daffy Duck if
> they thought it would exalt their existence and convince the common people
> that economic policies favoring their caste are necessary to the safety and
> security of the nation. At the root of these problems is the lack of even a
> very basic and simple awareness of economic principles. Notice that
> political economy is not part of the high school curriculum, that potential
> voters of the nation are quite literally deprived of even the most basic
> awareness of a subject that will determine much about how they, as
> individuals, will prosper or fail (Note: Keynes ). And then this ignorance
> is enforced as people are deprived of proper agency by limiting their
> representation in such a way as to assure that only the those willing to
> support the aristocracy will be sufficiently funded in the race for voting
> power in the House of Representatives. Both of these perversions of
> democratic principle are well addressed by our favorite quote from
> Jefferson . By the deprivation of rudimentary economic education and a
> continuing deprivation of proper agency the American people are mislead,
> misinformed and misrepresented in such a way as to deprive them of their
> fundamental rights to self determination.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
I have no difference of opinion on the above.

>
> Then those people should be creating and marketing goods and services
> in their own nation and exporting same. NO reason for Mr. American
> Rich XXXXX to be increasing his distance above the other people
> of this nation by exploiting the Indians. And here we have my only
> XXXXX about the Indians: They should tell this fascist to stick it
> and just do their own thing.
>

I wouldn't want to dispute with you on this -but just want to say that
the movement from US to India of jobs is many times more than the
movement of personnel from India to US. If you mean that the investors
should also be Indians and not a venture financier/corporation in the
US, that is probably hard sell. FYI -many of the Fortune 500
corporations registered in the US are not funded by american citizens.
Same probably holds true for lots of hi-tech industries. The US
'invites' capital with its strong property laws & protectionist
measures.

>
> I do not want ANYONE undermining the wages of Americans through
> temporary migration. This does absolutely nothing but to increase
> wealth disparity here. There is simply NO reason for Indians to
> come here to do software development or systems support. The software
> development can be done in India even if the Indian technologists are
> equal or better than Americans. Americans need to be doing
> system support services for systems that are HERE while Indians need

That is where things are headed -albeit for many other reasons besides
political correctness.

> to do this in India. The way things have been going there are adequate
> servers and end user system and such in India to allow plenty of
> employment for IT support people over there. Absolutely no need for
> H1B in any case. H1B destroys American wages for technologists
> here thus destroying the incentive for education in this field. We
> have a self fulfilling prophecy as the lie with which we started becomes
> the truth.
>
Yes -H1B does lower wages and given the high cost of education in the
US, I agree that it discourages students from taking loans in that
sector if the wages/jobs are not good enough. BUT -would students be
still taking loans to study comp. sc if there is a shift of the
industry to India?

>
> So what's the bad part? All you are doing is confirming that such
> a development is a threat to the established wealthy. And THAT is
> why we have H1B.
>

Im saying IT services in 1999-2000 was a seasonal product with a
ridiculous sticker price. Its like the dutch tulip mania when a dutch
tulip was sold for a ridiculous price -just because buyers were crazy
for it and ready to shell out anything. When people regained their
senses -things came back to normal. If you want a ridiculous price for
your services -you are being unreasonable and as you would expect mgmt
found a way out by getting H1Bs. As regards threat to the established
wealthy in the US, Im not one of them -and don't have a problem how
you duke it out with them.

>
> And the supply is increased by H1B thus ripping off the Americans that
Well -because the demand outstripped supply. businesses were forced to
shell out ridiculous salaries. But the demand was a result of
hype/tech bubble -not because investors were getting any profit out of
those dot-coms or the highly paid workers. Lots of 3rd rate engineers
got themselves 6 figure salaries -and if you look at their
productivity, you would realize they weren't capable of delivering.

> spent a lot of toil and effort on becoming IT professionals.
>
Well -I don't disagree here, but just to let you know that when demand
falls, it creates surplus /glut of manpower and that causes mass
unemployment + lower salaries. If the dot-com bubble hadn't burst -you
wouldn't have had a gripe with the H1B visa.

>
> Gee.... I'm real glad you are here to tell me about my country. I would
> have never have known this if you were not around to enlighten me.
>

Im making a relative statement. You may have never stepped out of the
US -but since I have, Im telling you the *difference*.

> Now let me tell you something: Your population problems are yours and
> not mine. I do not support the idea that the USA is to be a relief
> valve for the overpopulated nations of the world. You need to FIX

Overpopulation (nor poverty) is not the cause of the H1B problem.
There are lots of overpopulated and poverty stricken countries -but v
few from which manpower works in the US on an H1B visa. Population
growth is a problem among those that do not have education [and also
that cannot come to the US on an H1B].

> YOUR problem without screwing up mine. You want to immigrate? Then
> in reasonable numbers please do so. You want to develop technology
> in India? Do it. More power to ya. We will compete with you in this
> way. But H1B is simply a rip off of American IT professionals.
>
I do not want to immigrate -and the first step to making a local
industry is for established businesses to open subsidiaries in India
(which is what is happening).

>
> They are ripping off the producers in this country and in yours so
> as to increase their own power and wealth. You have already admitted
> that the Indian H1B can provide for a family in India while working
> here at a lower wage and that while this H1B is here he will be very
> much subject to the power of the company that brought him here and
> thus more maleable than the American technologist of similar ability.
Yes.

> The Indian H1B is hauling a lot of loot to India and the boss is
> getting fat and the American middle class is simply getting the shaft.
In a way -the middle class is being squeezed out in the US -yes.

> This stupid crap about competitiveness and the corporate level is
> self serving profit enhancement and that is all it is. I do not give
> a hoot whether Mr. Republican boss makes a profit or not. I do not
> actually need him to "provide jobs". These jobs are available because
> of the rise of technology and they will be there regardless of Mr.
> lying Republican.
>
No. The jobs are there because of viable business models. If investors
pour money into the US -then it is because they have reliability in
the american work force, the govt etc.. If they find it viable to open
companies elsewhere -regardless of how good the technology is, the
jobs won't be there.

>
> In India this is not a problem. It is only a problem here. I don't
> see H1B people overrunning India from the USA. H1B should be done away
> with except as it is used by universities.
>
Fine.

>
> That is total horse crap. The rise of technology and the development
> of real capital eliminates jobs. That's why humans do this stuff.
> You think we WANT to work our butts off?
>
>
> No problem. The people doing the work competed in their own society
> with its cost of living as it was/is. This may well be "comparative
> advantage".
>
Yes.
>
> This as a case of offshoring and is in no way similar to H1B.
>
>
> Again.. These people that were making the cars lived in Japan and
> the capital investment was done by Japanese and the ownership was
> in Japan and did not directly exacerbate wealth disparity here.
>
I have no problems with removal of H1B -and working in India. So I
don;t dispute you on any of this.

>
> Snore.........
>
>
> As to your "jobs reserved for Americans" I strongly disagree. Support
> services in this country belong to the American Citizens. And if
> there is a lack of educated American citizens then those that ARE
> educated should be commanding a very high premium. That will insure
> the expansion of skills in the area that has the shortage. Good
> examples are health care, infrastructure development and support such
> as communications and Information SERVICES in this country. And these
> jobs should be long to the citizens of the sovereignty in any
> sovereignty anywhere.
>
someday you will disagree.

regards
-kamal
[color=darkred]
>
> The concept is quite valid but it is a fine example of what can be
> much better done in India.
>
>
> Red Hat has changed. They are going to be charging yearly subscription
> fees and those fees are very steep. This new way of doing business
> for Red Hat may or may not succeed, but I can see the rationale for
> it. But the actual software people that prepare and support the
> internals should perhaps be Indians in India. The people that build
> physical networks and who upgrade machinery and integrate software and
> hardware and provide local support services for Red Hat linux based
> nets and heterogeneous nets should be Americans living and working in
> America.
>
>
> Screw a bunch of "investors".
>
>
> These organizations need a marketing presence here only. They need not
> have anything else here and certainly not a "parent" office.
>
>
> Microsoft is a monopoly that is doing all it can to prevent advance
> and competition. The MySQL people, OTOH make ALL their dough through
> services and they INVITE innovation and improvement.
>

Kamal R. Prasad

2004-08-16, 3:56 pm

Gawnsoft <xlucid@users.sourceforge.remove.this.antispam.net> wrote in message news:<af60i0t3v3d9dopv2r44v62jcfmd8s8vg2@4ax.com>...
> On 14 Aug 2004 04:57:55 -0700, kamalp@acm.org (Kamal R. Pra

) wrote
> (more or less):
>
>
> Oh? Which ones?
>
France and Italy both dragged down their exchange rates by maintaining
lower interest rates. Besides interest rates, they also finance lots
of industries just to ensure workers don't lose their jobs even if it
doesn't fall within the realm of fiscal discipline.

> (hint: the highest unemployment rates in the EU are all in Euroland
> countries, who cannot therefore amend their own exchange rates)

I was referring to the situation which existed before they were
strait-jacketed into one currency. The point I am trying to make is
that a country which is oriented towards the left would probably have
done exactly the opposite of current US policy.

regards
-kamal

The Trucker

2004-08-16, 3:56 pm

Kamal R. Pra

wrote:

> The Trucker <mikcob@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:<cformb01rqv@news1.newsguy.com>...
> It gets 5 x as many goods & services as in the US -yes.
>
>
> Different people have different problems -and survival requires
> different solutions. You have a problem of high cost of
> living/education -which I don't.
> I am not suggesting that you immigrate -but just wanted to let you
> know that there are lots of 'could not make it' types who have
> immigrated from the US to other countries. Some that have retired live
> easy -some that earn their living have no option but to slog it out.
> New Zealand has lots of such american citizens.

I've noticed this trendency in H1B supporters to ascribe personal
failure to those that get the shaft from H1B. Your own pronouncement
of 'could not make it' is a good example. I wonder if it is defensive
reaction on the part of H1B succubus's or if it is just an outright
offensive attack on the abilities or character of displace American
technology workers, or if it is just a mistaken slip of the fingers.

>
> That is exactly what the H1Bs do -take the uncertain road to 'getting
> ahead'.
>
> Alright.
>
> [snip]
> I have no difference of opinion on the above.
>
>
> I wouldn't want to dispute with you on this -but just want to say that
> the movement from US to India of jobs is many times more than the
> movement of personnel from India to US. If you mean that the investors
> should also be Indians and not a venture financier/corporation in the
> US, that is probably hard sell. FYI -many of the Fortune 500
> corporations registered in the US are not funded by american citizens.
> Same probably holds true for lots of hi-tech industries. The US
> 'invites' capital with its strong property laws & protectionist
> measures.

Precisely. Yet these strong property laws and IP rights (and there
are no real "protectionist" (tariff stuff) barriers) are enforced
with a tax on LABOR here in the US. The result is that all the
rent s

ers of the world want to OWN these rent producing properties
here in the US. But ownership produces NOTHING of value.

>
> That is where things are headed -albeit for many other reasons besides
> political correctness.
>
> Yes -H1B does lower wages and given the high cost of education in the
> US, I agree that it discourages students from taking loans in that
> sector if the wages/jobs are not good enough. BUT -would students be
> still taking loans to study comp. sc if there is a shift of the
> industry to India?

Of course they would. And the same is true of nursing and any other
sectors that are currently overrun with H1B. The original purpose
of H1B was to allow professors and scientists to enter the USA for
the purpose of teaching and knowledge sharing at the university
level. It was then highjacked so as as to provide this high level
capability to the private sector. It has now become a tool to
maximize gains from economic rent, specifically a tool to destroy
wages. There are a certain amount of jobs in the IT sector that
cannot be exported. If that were not the case then the current
abuse of H1B would not exist.

Most importantly, free and open source software comes from those
who are employed in IT but who create software simply because
they ENJOY doing it and because they desire the recognition and
possible fame that comes along with the open publoication of
such creation. It is not
done for the money/power/rent that will inure to the creator.
And this is the real threat. Monopoly privilege in software
is threatened by this natural inclination of truly intelligent
people to create. The way this is being managed is to make
sure that IT people have to work 80 to 90 hours a w

so as
to make ends meet. No free time to do anything worthwhile.
That is the more damaging aspect of H1b.

>
> Im saying IT services in 1999-2000 was a seasonal product with a
> ridiculous sticker price. Its like the dutch tulip mania when a dutch
> tulip was sold for a ridiculous price -just because buyers were crazy
> for it and ready to shell out anything. When people regained their
> senses -things came back to normal.

And again: What's the problem? What's the REAL problem?

> If you want a ridiculous price for
> your services -you are being unreasonable and as you would expect mgmt
> found a way out by getting H1Bs.

Nope. H1B simply distorted the economics as unscrupulous managers
were able to incorrectly project dramatically reduced personel costs
and thus get ever more venture capital into the game.

> As regards threat to the established
> wealthy in the US, Im not one of them -and don't have a problem how
> you duke it out with them.

Agreed. It is my position that the real problem is a United States
governent that legislates and then enforces laws that promote the
advance of rent s

ing non productive agents by trouncing the actual
producers in the economy. This results in and can actually be
measured by an exacerbation of wealth disparity in this nation and in
the world as a whole. While the H1B will gain from this distortion
that does not justify the trouncing of real producers (both Indian
an American alike) in favor of rent s

ers. If you are an H1B it
is NOT your problem. It is OUR problem. It is the American people
that elect these thieving crooks.

[color=darkred]
> Well -because the demand outstripped supply. businesses were forced to
> shell out ridiculous salaries. But the demand was a result of
> hype/tech bubble -not because investors were getting any profit out of
> those dot-coms or the highly paid workers. Lots of 3rd rate engineers
> got themselves 6 figure salaries -and if you look at their
> productivity, you would realize they weren't capable of delivering.

But the problem was created and exacerbated by H1B. The H1B visa
baloon predated and precipitated the high tech speculation. The demand
arose because the mangers thought they could dramatically reduce
the cost of sofware development and support services thus dramatically
increasing profits. All they needed to do was to bring the Indians
on line as though they were robots and that would produce gigantic
profir margins for the OWNERS of all the IP rights.

> Well -I don't disagree here, but just to let you know that when demand
> falls, it creates surplus /glut of manpower and that causes mass
> unemployment + lower salaries. If the dot-com bubble hadn't burst -you
> wouldn't have had a gripe with the H1B visa.

Totally wrong. Even if the H1B system was not a factor in the creation
of the bubble (which it was), reduced wage costs are antithetical to
the expansion of technological competence, freedom, and economic
security.

>
> Im making a relative statement. You may have never stepped out of the
> US -but since I have, Im telling you the *difference*.

You miss the point. I want to keep this country thinnly populated
so that economic rent is held in check and freedom reigns.

>
> Overpopulation (nor poverty) is not the cause of the H1B problem.
> There are lots of overpopulated and poverty stricken countries -but v
> few from which manpower works in the US on an H1B visa. Population
> growth is a problem among those that do not have education [and also
> that cannot come to the US on an H1B].

India is well on the way to taking care of its problems because of
the realization that education an truth are the key. Nonetheless,
the H1B system is not a good thing for Americans and I do not see
any reason to mess up my country.

> I do not want to immigrate -and the first step to making a local
> industry is for established businesses to open subsidiaries in India
> (which is what is happening).

Get on with it. Tell Micrfosoft and IBM to stick it and market your
own stuff in India with companies owned in India and with IP rights
protections funded by Indians. Quit sending money to these
Jackels and do your own stuff without US subsidies.

> Yes.
>
> In a way -the middle class is being squeezed out in the US -yes.
>
> No. The jobs are there because of viable business models. If investors
> pour money into the US -then it is because they have reliability in
> the american work force, the govt etc.. If they find it viable to open
> companies elsewhere -regardless of how good the technology is, the
> jobs won't be there.

I recognize that ownership of assets is a very good deal in the US.
But H1B shows that this is not due to the "reliablity" of the American
work force. It is due to the fact that the strongest military on
the planet will protect the IP rights of the companies that relocate
OWNERSHIP to America and these protections will be financed by taxing
the hell our of Amercian production. At the same time, that labor
is being squeezed out by offshoring, the H1B system is sucking up
all the joibs that can't be exported. The deficits exist because
of the overtaxation of the remaining American producers and this
forces more and more offshoring and H1B. There is nothig left to
tax, no way to fund the power that protects the IP rights other
than to simply print up the money.

> Fine.
>
> Yes.
> I have no problems with removal of H1B -and working in India. So I
> don;t dispute you on any of this.
>
> someday you will disagree.

Very unlikely. The globalization feaks simply do not understand that
sovereignty is a metter of religion and morality and that economics
is secondary.
[color=darkred]
> regards
> -kamal
>

--
"I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of society but
the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough
to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy
is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by
education." - Thomas Jefferson. http://GreaterVoice.org

Kamal R. Prasad

2004-08-17, 3:56 pm

The Trucker <mikcob@verizon.net> wrote in message news:<cfqphn01ub9@news2.newsguy.com>...
> Kamal R. Pra

wrote:
>
[snip]
The bulk of dollar denominated savings remain in USD accounts or are
used to buy property.

[snip][color=darkred]
>
> I've noticed this trendency in H1B supporters to ascribe personal
> failure to those that get the shaft from H1B. Your own pronouncement
> of 'could not make it' is a good example. I wonder if it is defensive
> reaction on the part of H1B succubus's or if it is just an outright
> offensive attack on the abilities or character of displace American
> technology workers, or if it is just a mistaken slip of the fingers.
>
The folks who move out to work -are more likely to be farmers or
blue-collar workers. The ones moving out to retire are just ones who
want to take life easy. I do not support the H1B in any way -and even
if I did, my opinion is not relevant to policy making in a country
where I do not have citizenship. [But it matters a great deal to the
establishment in India -which is why there won't be american bases in
India anytime soon.] Some get the shaft because they expect better
working conditions than H1Bs (like a 40 hr w

), some because they
are more expensive to hire than H1Bs and a few because H1Bs are better
skilled than natives.

[snip]
>
> Precisely. Yet these strong property laws and IP rights (and there
> are no real "protectionist" (tariff stuff) barriers) are enforced
> with a tax on LABOR here in the US. The result is that all the
> rent s

ers of the world want to OWN these rent producing properties
> here in the US. But ownership produces NOTHING of value.
>
Property laws guard against unions or left-wing govts [or any other
popular body] from confiscating property owned by an investor.
Protectionism is wrt other competitors. An investor may agree to put
$10B as investment if and only if the US govt provides an assurance it
will not allow another investor to invest in the same sector -or that
its market share will be protected from foreign/cheaper imports. It
doesn't have much to do with tax on labour. But one trend I noticed is
that big businesses have taken control of the US govt -and have forced
changes in tax code which shift the burden of tax on lower-income
groups and provide disproportionate tax relief to the rich. They don't
need campaign finance to do this -they themselves are the
beneficiaries.

[snip]
>
> Of course they would. And the same is true of nursing and any other
> sectors that are currently overrun with H1B. The original purpose
> of H1B was to allow professors and scientists to enter the USA for
> the purpose of teaching and knowledge sharing at the university
> level. It was then highjacked so as as to provide this high level
> capability to the private sector. It has now become a tool to
> maximize gains from economic rent, specifically a tool to destroy
> wages. There are a certain amount of jobs in the IT sector that
> cannot be exported. If that were not the case then the current
> abuse of H1B would not exist.
>
Anything that doesn't require a physical presence can be exported.
Even those that require a presence (like sy

min) can be tailored for
export. I was interviewed for one such position wherein the company
was providing remote sy

min for a data-center from India [and/or
possibly providing web-hosting from India itself].

> Most importantly, free and open source software comes from those
> who are employed in IT but who create software simply because
> they ENJOY doing it and because they desire the recognition and
> possible fame that comes along with the open publoication of
> such creation. It is not
> done for the money/power/rent that will inure to the creator.

Supposing you got a 20 hr work w

and 1/2 the salary -would you
accept it?
There is not a single open src company that is NOT for-profit.

> And this is the real threat. Monopoly privilege in software
> is threatened by this natural inclination of truly intelligent
> people to create. The way this is being managed is to make
> sure that IT people have to work 80 to 90 hours a w

so as
> to make ends meet. No free time to do anything worthwhile.
> That is the more damaging aspect of H1b.
>
Cmon -if you wanted to, you could root-cause every problem on earth to
H1B.
That said, you will not have more free time or better wages with the
current set of H1Bs out of the US.

>
> And again: What's the problem? What's the REAL problem?
>

Engineers expecting the CEO's salary or 3rd rate engineers expecting a
1st rate engineer's salary or dumbasses expecting to ride the dot-com
wave to instant-riches.

>
> Nope. H1B simply distorted the economics as unscrupulous managers
> were able to incorrectly project dramatically reduced personel costs
> and thus get ever more venture capital into the game.
>

They can show even more reduced costs by setting up an Indian office,
but venture capital inflow doesn't seem to correspond to lower
personnel costs. To get funding -you need to show a business model,
and paying 20% US salaries but getting 10% output isn't going to help.
They need to show productivity too for those drastically reduced
labour costs.

>
> Agreed. It is my position that the real problem is a United States
> governent that legislates and then enforces laws that promote the
> advance of rent s

ing non productive agents by trouncing the actual
> producers in the economy. This results in and can actually be
> measured by an exacerbation of wealth disparity in this nation and in
> the world as a whole. While the H1B will gain from this distortion
> that does not justify the trouncing of real producers (both Indian
> an American alike) in favor of rent s

ers. If you are an H1B it
> is NOT your problem. It is OUR problem. It is the American people
> that elect these thieving crooks.
>
You need a policy change to remove disparity, Even if all H1Bs leave
the US -that won't remove disparity. Prior to the 1990s tech boom,
there were v few H1Bs and yet disparity in the US was a lot more than
other countries. It is a reflection of a right-wing economic policy
and not immigration.

>
>
> But the problem was created and exacerbated by H1B. The H1B visa
> baloon predated and precipitated the high tech speculation. The demand
> arose because the mangers thought they could dramatically reduce
> the cost of sofware development and support services thus dramatically
> increasing profits. All they needed to do was to bring the Indians
> on line as though they were robots and that would produce gigantic
> profir margins for the OWNERS of all the IP rights.
>

Well -it was a new technology industry that gave rise to speculation
and hype.
There was no H1B when the railroads boom took place. But the boom
created a demand for cheap labour and lots of workers(slaves) were
imported from China.
H1B helped increase disparity among tech workers i.e. the CEO or
manager or investor would keep the loot to himself and pay peanuts to
the direct contributor either because he was an H1B or because he was
competing for jobs with H1Bs who had to accept lower salaries because
of the way the legislation has been created.

>
> Totally wrong. Even if the H1B system was not a factor in the creation
> of the bubble (which it was), reduced wage costs are antithetical to
> the expansion of technological competence, freedom, and economic
> security.
>
Well -I find it hard to say anything more than what I have written
above.

>
> You miss the point. I want to keep this country thinnly populated
> so that economic rent is held in check and freedom reigns.
>
Fine. Get your right candidate get elected and have him shut the
doors.

>
> India is well on the way to taking care of its problems because of
> the realization that education an truth are the key. Nonetheless,
> the H1B system is not a good thing for Americans and I do not see
> any reason to mess up my country.
>
Fine. BTW -the US govt ripped off ss contributions from my[H1Bs]
salary. Since you know how greedy it is -you may want to help get that
money back before they are asked to pack up and leave for your good.

>
> Get on with it. Tell Micrfosoft and IBM to stick it and market your
> own stuff in India with companies owned in India and with IP rights
> protections funded by Indians. Quit sending money to these
> Jackels and do your own stuff without US subsidies.
>
No subsidies. Only subsidiaries. Lots of MNCs have registered offices
in the US but offices in many countries in w. europe. So why should
you have a problem if they open one more office in India? SAP is a
german company that employs lots of americans in the US and so is
Seimens. I guess you don't have a problem with that either.

>
> I recognize that ownership of assets is a very good deal in the US.
> But H1B shows that this is not due to the "reliablity" of the American
> work force. It is due to the fact that the strongest military on
> the planet will protect the IP rights of the companies that relocate
> OWNERSHIP to America and these protections will be financed by taxing
> the hell our of Amercian production. At the same time, that labor

No. The US workforce has a history of doing a good job in the hi-tech
sector and so anything risky will almost be done in the US. The danger
to their assets comes from left-wing parties or unions that want to
confiscate their assets to remove disparity. The US constitution
guarantees that such a thing won't happen. OTOH -there is no risk to
their assets from the communist party of India or any other foreign
country. US military strength (while not the greatest outside the US)
has been used to help corporations improve their bottom line -as in
Iraq. You may want to read up what power-projection is. Basically, a
heavily armed country is powerful closer to home and as logistical
issues crop up, the same strength is not reflected far afield.

> is being squeezed out by offshoring, the H1B system is sucking up
> all the joibs that can't be exported. The deficits exist because
> of the overtaxation of the remaining American producers and this
> forces more and more offshoring and H1B. There is nothig left to
> tax, no way to fund the power that protects the IP rights other
> than to simply print up the money.
>

Do you know of any employer who will hire an unqualified H1B to
replace a qualified native? How will their business keep running after
that replacement? They might as well sack the native and hire nobody
to save the money and keep the business running on its own steam if
that was possible.

[snip]
regards
-kamal

q@q.com

2004-08-18, 8:55 am

LINUX is open source AND for profit.
Redhat used to distribute Linux for free
(Desktop version). Enterprise version for fee.
They charged for support.
Today Redhat Linux is NOT free (any version).
Lots of charges for support.
So much for free, open source!!

Kamal R. Pra

wrote:

> The Trucker <mikcob@verizon.net> wrote in message news:<cfqphn01ub9@news2.newsguy.com>...
>
> [snip]
>
> The bulk of dollar denominated savings remain in USD accounts or are
> used to buy property.
>
> [snip]
>
> The folks who move out to work -are more likely to be farmers or
> blue-collar workers. The ones moving out to retire are just ones who
> want to take life easy. I do not support the H1B in any way -and even
> if I did, my opinion is not relevant to policy making in a country
> where I do not have citizenship. [But it matters a great deal to the
> establishment in India -which is why there won't be american bases in
> India anytime soon.] Some get the shaft because they expect better
> working conditions than H1Bs (like a 40 hr w

), some because they
> are more expensive to hire than H1Bs and a few because H1Bs are better
> skilled than natives.
>
> [snip]
>
> Property laws guard against unions or left-wing govts [or any other
> popular body] from confiscating property owned by an investor.
> Protectionism is wrt other competitors. An investor may agree to put
> $10B as investment if and only if the US govt provides an assurance it
> will not allow another investor to invest in the same sector -or that
> its market share will be protected from foreign/cheaper imports. It
> doesn't have much to do with tax on labour. But one trend I noticed is
> that big businesses have taken control of the US govt -and have forced
> changes in tax code which shift the burden of tax on lower-income
> groups and provide disproportionate tax relief to the rich. They don't
> need campaign finance to do this -they themselves are the
> beneficiaries.
>
> [snip]
>
> Anything that doesn't require a physical presence can be exported.
> Even those that require a presence (like sy

min) can be tailored for
> export. I was interviewed for one such position wherein the company
> was providing remote sy

min for a data-center from India [and/or
> possibly providing web-hosting from India itself].
>
>
>
> Supposing you got a 20 hr work w

and 1/2 the salary -would you
> accept it?
> There is not a single open src company that is NOT for-profit.
>
>
> Cmon -if you wanted to, you could root-cause every problem on earth to
> H1B.
> That said, you will not have more free time or better wages with the
> current set of H1Bs out of the US.
>
>
>
> Engineers expecting the CEO's salary or 3rd rate engineers expecting a
> 1st rate engineer's salary or dumbasses expecting to ride the dot-com
> wave to instant-riches.
>
>
>
> They can show even more reduced costs by setting up an Indian office,
> but venture capital inflow doesn't seem to correspond to lower
> personnel costs. To get funding -you need to show a business model,
> and paying 20% US salaries but getting 10% output isn't going to help.
> They need to show productivity too for those drastically reduced
> labour costs.
>
>
> You need a policy change to remove disparity, Even if all H1Bs leave
> the US -that won't remove disparity. Prior to the 1990s tech boom,
> there were v few H1Bs and yet disparity in the US was a lot more than
> other countries. It is a reflection of a right-wing economic policy
> and not immigration.
>
>
>
> Well -it was a new technology industry that gave rise to speculation
> and hype.
> There was no H1B when the railroads boom took place. But the boom
> created a demand for cheap labour and lots of workers(slaves) were
> imported from China.
> H1B helped increase disparity among tech workers i.e. the CEO or
> manager or investor would keep the loot to himself and pay peanuts to
> the direct contributor either because he was an H1B or because he was
> competing for jobs with H1Bs who had to accept lower salaries because
> of the way the legislation has been created.
>
>
> Well -I find it hard to say anything more than what I have written
> above.
>
>
> Fine. Get your right candidate get elected and have him shut the
> doors.
>
>
> Fine. BTW -the US govt ripped off ss contributions from my[H1Bs]
> salary. Since you know how greedy it is -you may want to help get that
> money back before they are asked to pack up and leave for your good.
>
>
> No subsidies. Only subsidiaries. Lots of MNCs have registered offices
> in the US but offices in many countries in w. europe. So why should
> you have a problem if they open one more office in India? SAP is a
> german company that employs lots of americans in the US and so is
> Seimens. I guess you don't have a problem with that either.
>
>
>
> No. The US workforce has a history of doing a good job in the hi-tech
> sector and so anything risky will almost be done in the US. The danger
> to their assets comes from left-wing parties or unions that want to
> confiscate their assets to remove disparity. The US constitution
> guarantees that such a thing won't happen. OTOH -there is no risk to
> their assets from the communist party of India or any other foreign
> country. US military strength (while not the greatest outside the US)
> has been used to help corporations improve their bottom line -as in
> Iraq. You may want to read up what power-projection is. Basically, a
> heavily armed country is powerful closer to home and as logistical
> issues crop up, the same strength is not reflected far afield.
>
>
>
> Do you know of any employer who will hire an unqualified H1B to
> replace a qualified native? How will their business keep running after
> that replacement? They might as well sack the native and hire nobody
> to save the money and keep the business running on its own steam if
> that was possible.
>
> [snip]
> regards
> -kamal
>

Joe

2004-08-18, 8:56 pm

In message <41232BAB.5@q.com>, "q@q.com" <q@q.com> writes
>LINUX is open source AND for profit.
>Redhat used to distribute Linux for free
>(Desktop version). Enterprise version for fee.
>They charged for support.
>Today Redhat Linux is NOT free (any version).
>Lots of charges for support.
>So much for free, open source!!
>
Read the GPL. And use a different distribution. Or take Red Hat's GPL
code and distribute it yourself, free. Or use Fedora, the free Red Hat
distribution. Or...

And don't quote several K of discussion when your post does not even
refer to it.
--
Joe

AWOL Coward GW Chimpzilla

2004-08-18, 8:56 pm

Joe wrote:

> In message <41232BAB.5@q.com>, "q@q.com" <q@q.com> writes
> Read the GPL. And use a different distribution. Or take Red Hat's GPL
> code and distribute it yourself, free. Or use Fedora, the free Red Hat
> distribution. Or...
>
> And don't quote several K of discussion when your post does not even
> refer to it.

Red Hat is more of a beginner's distro anyway.

Andrew L

2004-08-18, 8:56 pm

q@q.com wrote:
> LINUX is open source AND for profit.
> Redhat used to distribute Linux for free
> (Desktop version). Enterprise version for fee.
> They charged for support.
> Today Redhat Linux is NOT free (any version).
> Lots of charges for support.
> So much for free, open source!!

You're getting

.

RedHat Linux is both not free and free. How can this be you ask? Well,
English has more than one concept called 'free'.

Yes, it is not free (as in free of payment).
Yes, it is free (as in free speech).

In French these two concepts have separate words, ISTR liberte = freedom
of expression, gratuit = free of payment.

It's easy, no?

Whether it's free [gratiuit] (as in payment) or not, all versions of
Linux are free [liberte] (as in expression - ie open sourced and freely
copyable, editable etc).

A

PS I know my French is very rusty, please forgive me.

Thom

2004-08-19, 3:56 am

On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 21:39:33 GMT, AWOL Coward GW Chimpzilla
<patriot-for-cash@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Joe wrote:
>
>
>Red Hat is more of a beginner's distro anyway.

NOPE! just the opposite. Almost all the Distro are the same and its
a matter of how many programs come with it. You are effectively
paying for the books in the Box.

The differences besides how many applications come with it are the
installation programs.
Mandarke has the best and is considered a beginners distro because of
that Its FDISK program is worth the price alone and can easily zap a
(Broken) Windows XP partition.
Red Hat has the hardest and it is also pointed towards the enterprise
market
SUSe is in the middle and uses a moderatly complicated install system
and is middle of the raod. It also has 2500+ applications and well
worth the $49 it sells for locally. The others have 3 disk sets and
SUSe has 7 CD's plus a single DVD.

THOM

Thom

2004-08-19, 3:56 am

On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 10:13:36 GMT, "q@q.com" <q@q.com> wrote:

>LINUX is open source AND for profit.
>Redhat used to distribute Linux for free
>(Desktop version). Enterprise version for fee.
>They charged for support.
>Today Redhat Linux is NOT free (any version).
>Lots of charges for support.
>So much for free, open source!!

There are other versions you know. I just got a complete Mandrake 10,
3 disk set on a magazine cover. By the way if your running a business
you should be using places like Red Hat for support you should have in
house staff.

THOM
>
>Kamal R. Pra

wrote:
>
>

Kamal R. Prasad

2004-08-19, 3:56 am

Joe <joe@jretrading.com> wrote in message news:<mZv+QhT5i8IBFw6E@jretrading.com>...
> In message <41232BAB.5@q.com>, "q@q.com" <q@q.com> writes
> Read the GPL. And use a different distribution. Or take Red Hat's GPL
> code and distribute it yourself, free. Or use Fedora, the free Red Hat
> distribution. Or...
>
> And don't quote several K of discussion when your post does not even
> refer to it.

This discussion has gone off on a tangent thanks to Mr. Q.
There are lots of UNIX variants that are available for free i.e the
src code is floating around on the internet -or they may be packaged
in a magazine issue or even handed out in stripped down version by the
vendor himself eg Sun.. I am not debating that at all.
What I am saying is that if a company buys office space, employs
engineers etc.. to roll in a distribution, it will have to generate
revenue i.e charge customers in order to survive. The guy heading the
operation would need to earn an equivalent of his salary from the
venture i.e. it will have to be a for-profit venture. If an individual
starts a one-man show to roll in distributions or some other package,
he will either need a large inheritance or generate revenue to cover
for his expenses in creating the sw + his food+home rent/mortgage
bills to survive. So it has to be for-profit.
An exception would be a student or professor or someone sitting idle
in a 9-to-5 govt office and contributing to open src for academic
interest.

regards
-kamal

Tim Jowers

2004-08-19, 4:03 pm

kamalp@acm.org (Kamal R. Pra

) wrote in message news:<181e352f.0408182154.5948a4b8@posting.google.com>...
> Joe <joe@jretrading.com> wrote in message news:<mZv+QhT5i8IBFw6E@jretrading.com>...
>
> This discussion has gone off on a tangent thanks to Mr. Q.
> There are lots of UNIX variants that are available for free i.e the
> src code is floating around on the internet -or they may be packaged
> in a magazine issue or even handed out in stripped down version by the
> vendor himself eg Sun.. I am not debating that at all.
> What I am saying is that if a company buys office space, employs
> engineers etc.. to roll in a distribution, it will have to generate
> revenue i.e charge customers in order to survive. The guy heading the
> operation would need to earn an equivalent of his salary from the
> venture i.e. it will have to be a for-profit venture. If an individual
> starts a one-man show to roll in distributions or some other package,
> he will either need a large inheritance or generate revenue to cover
> for his expenses in creating the sw + his food+home rent/mortgage
> bills to survive. So it has to be for-profit.
> An exception would be a student or professor or someone sitting idle
> in a 9-to-5 govt office and contributing to open src for academic
> interest.
>
> regards
> -kamal

Exactly Kamal. Open Source allows 20M IT people to contribute in
addition to 0.5M programmers. The tragedy of the commons is that
people will use and not contribute. The gestaldt effect is that people
will make the whole better. In a free SW world, the "tragedy" is no
tragedy as users always generate new requirements and find bugs. Heck,
I've been testing Windows for many years now! Still waiting on the OO
OS promised back in the days of Next!

I've used several free open sources from Source Forge and other
places and put a few out myself. Why? Used 'em cause I needed 'em and
didn't want to write 'em. Put 'em out because I thought they may save
someone time and someone else might add to 'em. E.g. I did a utility
which searched for duplicate packages in various jars and generally
told what jar a class was in and put that out in 2001 or so. Now such
functionality is an every unit item with Java IDE's. I'd never have
sold it as a product but sharing it as open source possibly gives some
value to others. IF, one might argue that when the SW monopoly decided
to start using "bundling" as a way to drive product prices to zero in
order to kill new product groups then the whole SW market suffered
and, therefore, the price of SW approaches zero; so, without a
compelling market strategy, open source is the only way to release new
software. True that. What's on the other side of the mountain once
Open Source kills the monopoly and the bid db company? Probably
expertise in the Open Source becomes the valuable commodity rather
than the source itself.

Linux aside. Open Source is kicking. Don't get kicked.

TimJowers

Thomas Bartkus

2004-08-19, 9:11 pm

"Tim Jowers" <timjowers@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:b1b4167f.0408191025.6b4cbdfe@posting.google.com...
<snip>
> What's on the other side of the mountain once
> Open Source kills the monopoly and the bid db company?
<snip>

The "monopoly" and the "big db" company are going down. Anyone who can get
past their historical successes and evaluate, unemotionaly, what these
outfits have become will see this as obvious. With or without open source.

Glad to see a few who recognize that there is something interesting on the
other side of the mountain.

Have you noticed Python yet?
Thomas Bartkus

The Trucker

2004-08-26, 8:56 pm

Kamal R. Pra

Joe

2004-08-27, 8:56 pm

In message <cglr7721tuu@news2.newsguy.com>, The Trucker
<mikcob@verizon.net> writes
>Kamal R. Pra

wrote:
>
>The fact remains: The American consumer pays all the IP rents.
>
You've heard of Europe, have you? Where we pay the same in Pounds as you
do in Dollars for most things, while the exchange rate is about 1.8
Dollars/Pound? The American consumer may pay, but he certainly doesn't
pay it all, not by a long way. I think what you're really aiming at is
government spending and taxation, and Europe leaves you primitive
Americans standing on that.

>
>Horsecrap.
>
>
>Let us focus on natural resources and infrastructure per capita,
>shall we. But nice try.
>
Let us focus on Luxembourg, or Monaco, or even Holland. Hong Kong
(pre-lease expiry), Taiwan, Japan as was mentioned earlier. The Channel
Islands. Compare their populations with their natural resources and
their relative wealth. A sizeable chunk of Holland is ex-sea-bottom,
while Monaco is pretty well entirely city. Not much in the way of mines
or wells. Japan imports almost all its raw materials other than fish and
whales. Now look at lists of population densities.

Generalisations do have this tendency to have exceptions. Except this
one, of course.
--
Joe

Sponsored Links