Re: India - Wave of the future

[eric -dot- dunn -at- ca -dot- transport -dot- bombardier -dot- com]

WRT:
>>  http://web.mit.edu/krugman/www/smokey.html
Mark L. Levinson "nosnivel -at- netvision -dot- net -dot- il" <nosnivel -at- netvision -dot- net -dot- il>
wrote on 09/03/2003 02:58:57 AM:
> Everything the author says is right, but I get the impression
> that he hasn't yet realized that an economics professor from
> India could very well replace him at MIT for half his salary.

Umm, that's doubtful. Perhaps his work could be done by an economics
professor in Elbonia at an Elbonian university for less. But as long as
MIT maintains it's US location and teaches students there, local economic
requirements will drive the salaries at MIT.

But, universities aren't free from international economics and any
professor that thinks so have their heads in the sand. A large part of
university enrolment campaigns is attracting out-of-state and overseas
students. And the competition IS international. Different factors attract
Elbonian students to the US for expensive educations due to prestige (real
or imagined) and cause US students to travel to Elbonia to get educations
that may be less or more expensive/prestigious than similar US based
universities. Like everything, it's more complicated than just cost of
tuition.

Whether education, widget manufacturing, or techwriting it's a complicated
formula. Quantity, quality, transportation costs and less tangible more
difficult to measure metrics such as prestige, international recognition,
consumer confidence.

> He's thinking "rising tide raises all boats", he's not thinking
> "zero-sum game."  There are, of course, elements of both
> phenomena, and it may depend on whether you're looking at
> individuals in the short term or economies in the long term...

I think it's clear he's looking at economies in the long term. The
examples of south-east Asian economies and manufacturing he uses are a
clear indication of that.

In another post:
>I think the word you want is "protectionism".  It's an economic thing.

Actually no. It's still a race thing. Even if it's "protecting jobs" it
still boils down to our products/jobs are superior because we are US and
you are YOU. Protectionism is also a thing of the past and a self
defeating approach. If you lock your borders to our produce and workers,
we lock ours to yours. Say goodbye to all US jobs dependant on
exportation. Because by the arguments against outsourcing or using
off-shore labour, there isn't one product an American company should be
allowed to sell outside the US and no US citizen should be able to take
any job outside the US.

If your job currently depends on overseas sales, you have no right
whatsoever to complain about overseas workers. With the frequency of
recurring threads on localisation and internationalisation I'll make the
assumption a number of Techwhirler jobs depend on the fact that they are
someone else's offshore worker.

If anyone can come up with a counter argument as to why they should be
able to export their work/product but others should be banned/limited from
exporting theirs that isn't largely based on US vs THEM, I'd like to hear
it.

Keith Cronin kcronin -at- daleen -dot- com wrote on 09/03/2003 10:47:05 AM:
>Unlike previous discussions of this topic, so far this thread has
>been civil and professional. Acknowledging or criticizing the effects of
>visa legislation on your own job is not bigotry.

As long as visa requirements are comparable in both directions. But if the
argument is lock out the OTHERS simply because WE should have the jobs
because we're one of US, then...

To question your motives in this issue ask yourself these questions:
How is the situation described in Tom Green's post any different from a
manager being brought in from across country and them bringing a few of
their prized staff with them?
Do your feelings about the situation change if you find out they happily
accepted, knowing full well the local cost of living, $5,000 less per year
than locals were being paid? $10,000?

Replace country with state/town/continent. List the points at which you're
outraged and why.

If someone is coming to your country to do your job, they have to live in
your environment and pay the same costs as you. Perhaps they have fewer
expectations wrt life style, but how is that different from another local
competing for the same job and asking for less pay? They have to come to
the table with comparable experience at least. Or, perhaps it could just
be that your education was overpriced and/or outdated. Why exactly should
you be paid a premium that isn't justified by the costs to train someone
else?

If people keep coming in for less pay, ALL local costs will be forced
downwards. Not saying the adjustment won't be uncomfortable for those that
were feeling comfortable before though. If the people coming in keep
creating unemployment because the locals can't re-train, the local economy
will soon balance the cost of local and Elbonian resources. Or,
unemployment back-to-work incentives will make local talent cheaper
(whether of Elbonian or "Supplanted the Aboriginals" decent).

The way to compete is the same regardless of where the competition is
coming from. Learn more, add more value, remain cutting edge, specialise
in sought after skills.

>Assuming that a good-paying job or the ability to afford to live in an
>expensive area is a *right* might be a bit short-sighted, but that's a
>matter of opinion.

But what is that opinion based on? Do the less well off in the US, Canada,
or Western Europe have the *right* to a given level of housing, food, and
clothing? If you're comfortable competing with the rest of the local
population, what's the qualms of competing with the world? Sorry, but
we're back to "Because we're US and they're THEM".

Could it be we want to protect our big fish in a small pond status?

The topics of discussion that are relevant to TECHWR-L aren't the moving
of jobs to Elbonia. The topics we should be discussing are which
technologies are becoming commodities and which aren't. And for the
commodity market jobs, if you want to maintain a high paid job in that
market what are the value added skills and specialisations you have to
develop to maintain your level of compensation.

Whether the jobs move overseas, to a member of a trade federation/union
(EU, NAFTA), to a neighbouring country, cross-country to the other coast,
cross state/province, or across town, the dynamics are identical. Only the
scale changes.

Protect things as they are, don't move forward and stagnate. Or, improve
talents and training towards more competitive skills and industries.

Eric L. Dunn
 Senior Technical Writer