"Let them do the software in India; we'll do other things in this country"

[w4rma]

…
BROKAW: If you canceled NAFTA and WTO, I don't think it'll address a concern that Andy Grove, who is one of the founding geniuses that Silicon Valley, has, which is that he says by the year 2010, General Clark, in India, they'll have more people working in software and software services than we will have in this country. And he sees no evidence in either party of a public policy to address that critical component of our economic future.

CLARK: Well, I'm very concerned about exactly what Andy Grove has said, and canceling NAFTA and WTO will not solve the problem.

We have to have the right policies to create jobs in America, and to have companies that are hiring in this country stay in this country and not outsource.

So here is what I'll do: When I am president, the first thing I will have is $100 billion job creation program. Then we'll go and look at the tax code. We'll take away any incentives for companies that want to outsource or leave the country. And we'll have incentives for companies to create jobs in here.

But we need to go beyond all of that. We really need a national goals program. Software was great, the technology and the information revolution was great, but there are a lot of technologies out there. We've got great scientists in this country. We need to set some national goals. We have the mechanisms to do it, put the research money in to basic and applied research and let those inventions and discoveries come out in intellectual property that we can use in this country to create employment.

Energy and environmental engineering are two very fertile areas for the growth of American jobs.

CLARK: We want to be ahead of the software revolution. Let them do the software in India; we'll do other things in this country.

We can do that. All it takes is leadership.
…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10799-2003Nov24_3.html

I cannot support a candidate who supports giving away a whole industry to another country. I cannot support someone with this attitude towards American software engineers.

[bpilgrim]

1. we can all get McJobs or get a job gun sling'n in the ME

wooHoo

peace

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

don't attack him for that quote, it's worse than that

"We want to be ahead of the software revolution. Let them do the software in India; we'll do other things in this country."

That's the corporate spin that software bosses are giving - we'll send code-monkey work overseas and do "meta software engineering" here. It's one of those truthful but deceiving lines. How do we expect to train meta software engineers here unless they have significant code monkey experience?

The real damaging part of this exchange is that Clark is playing HANDS OFF with corporations - he'll take away the obvious tax breaks for offshoring and outsourcing, but he'll replace them with "incentives" - read: tax breaks, subsidies, cash handouts, to "keep jobs here".

What does that mean? That means the corporations will pay what they would have paid in India, and taxpayers will pick up the slack.

It seems Clark has NO new ideas about dealing with corporations and jobs, and is just repeating the same line told by Republicans and Democrats alike for 25 years. Incredibly disappointing - this is the best the supposedly genius political, military, and economic mind can come up with?

Clark, here's a hint - there are more of US than there are CEOs - exactly whose vote are you trying to get here?

[KittyWampus]

50. Protectionism Doesn't Work

It never had and now that we are in a Global Economy it NEVER will.

Clark has actually a better grasp of Economic issues than you think. You are just spewing kneejerk rhetoric with no real solid WORKABLE Economic Theory or even Plan behind you.

Since Krugman basically says the same thing... I think I'll go with his & Clark's expertise than your CommonSense bullshit.

[bpilgrim]

61. It worked for many fledgling industries before...

and still does so why would anyone believe that?

in fact we have many years of experiance to show how chasing the bottom - shipping our jobs abroad - hurts workers and fammilies... though, to be fair, there is a HUGE positive to the corporations bottom line.

is it simply PROFIT over EVERYTHING :shrug:

peace

[KittyWampus]

89. What FLEDLING Industry Has Clark Proposed Sending Overseas?

NONE.

I posted Krugman's article below.

Frankly, his opinion means alot more than others "Common Sense" half baked theories.

Please read the article I posted below, if you are sincerely interested in broadening your understanding of this topic.

Once upon a time, I also would have been a "Protectionist" but have been reading Krugman's columns and trying to learn.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

62. Protectionism has ALWAYS worked

and our economy has been global for hundreds of years, you're simply wrong. The United States became an economic superpower through public investment, protectionism. The East Asian countries that had strong protectionist measures are the ones that weren't destroyed in the 90's financial crisis.

A trade war between our economic partners is obviously going to hurt the economy, but refusing to allow state chartered corporations to offshore work to totalitarian and communist regimes, and allowing them to sell slave labor products in the US freely, is not the same thing as blindly taxing imports from Canada. I know that you like to pretend that's what we propose, but it's just a lie, as usual.

Kucinich proposes bilateral trade agreements - why should we pretend that Canada and China are the same? That's what the "free trade" agreements do. THAT'S bullshit, and bullshit without a hint of common sense.

[KittyWampus]

124. Proctectionism Is Appropriate In Developing Economies

But not for Industrial powers for the most part. Why should we keep jobs here and deny India from raising their standard of living?
Especially since WE ARE CAPABLE OF CREATING NEW JOBS AND TECHNOLOGIES HERE?

True, the US seems to be hypocritical. We say Free Trade and Open Markets and demand it of smaller developing countries who end up getting devastated and abused while we set up tariffs etc.

Clark has SAID he believes we need to tie Trade Agreements with Higher Standards and Wages.

ALL of the candidates have said this.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

130. so why does the US have strong protectionism for agriculture?

I don't hear Clark going to Iowa and saying - "we need to end all price subsidies for farmers and remove all tariffs and standards on imported produce" - no? Why is protectionism okay for agriculture - even tobacco - but not software engineering? If you want "free trade" for agriculture, how come Clark's not in Iowa making speeches about it?

"Clark has SAID he believes we need to tie Trade Agreements with Higher Standards and Wages."

The why isn't he saying "Kucinich is right, we need bilateral trade agreements tied to higher wages and standards?" Why is he saying to stay in NAFTA and GATT and trade agreements that are NOT tied to higher standards and wages?

[KittyWampus]

160. Because Clark Is Running As Dennis's Opposition :-)

:)

And it is HYPOCRITICAL of the US to be so protectionist in Agriculture. I agree there and said in my post that the US can be hypocritical.

Although on a personal note- as someone who grows her own food & who did macrobiotics- I think we should eat local and in season. :)

Who needs steriodal strawberries in February? They are huge, tasteless and underpriced for all the petroleum that is hidden in their existence.

IMO, small family farms SHOULD be subsidized.

Agribusiness should be put throught the crucible.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

165. When Clark says small family farms should be subsidized

he has my vote, count on it.

[KittyWampus]

171. How About Artists & Traditional Craftspeople Too!

Japan protects her traditional craftspeople ....

[knight_of_the_star]

314. That would be good!

I would love that being the art student that I am! We NEED to encourage the arts in this country, encourage the growth of culture. If we don't then what would be the point of living here (aside from all the otehr stuff)? Life without art is stale, dry, meaningless.

[redqueen]

355. Gee, another president did this during hard times...

subsidised artists & entertainers so that people could make a living and continue to enhance the lives of others through their crafts.

hmmmm, who was that?

;)

[Clark Can WIN]

216. Be careful what you ask for............

http://clark04.com/issues/agriculture/

<snip>

Wes Clark's Rural and Farm Security Plan

During the economic boom of the 1990s, many of America's rural communities didn't enjoy the same prosperity and growth as our cities and suburbs. And now, with the whole country enduring an economic downturn, the situation in rural areas has gotten even worse. Now is the time to turn the country-and the heartland-around. With his Rural and Farm Security Plan, Wes Clark will: fight for America's family farmers and ranchers, jumpstart the rural economy, explore the promise of new energy and provide access to quality healthcare and education to all Americans in rural communities.

FIGHT FOR AMERICA'S FAMILY FARMERS AND RANCHERS


Family Farms and Ranches First. Three years of misguided Bush spending policies could put the promise of the 2002 Farm Bill in jeopardy. Although the bill is a vast improvement over its 1996 predecessor, we must still do more to ensure that America's family farmers and ranchers can prosper in the future. As President, Wes Clark will work to provide that opportunity. <snip>




While we're at it here's manufacturing too:
http://clark04.com/issues/manufacturing/

<snip>2. STOP REWARDING COMPANIES THAT MOVE JOBS OVERSEAS AND START REWARDING COMPANIES THAT PRODUCE IN AMERICA

Require companies to disclose layoffs in America and job increases overseas. Consumer, investors, and workers all have the right to know which companies are moving which jobs overseas. As President, Wes Clark would work to develop a system of timely reporting to ensure that we have timely and accurate information on companies that export jobs.

Stop rewarding companies that shift jobs overseas. As President, Wes Clark would eliminate government incentives for companies to shift jobs overseas.

Stop tax breaks for companies that move overseas for tax reasons. Wes Clark would close outrageous loopholes in the tax code, like the ones that allow companies to avoid taxes by shifting income to Bermuda. In addition, Wes Clark would institute a 90-day review of all tax and spending provisions affecting large manufacturing firms. The review will focus on eliminating tax and spending provisions that give manufacturing firms incentives to move jobs overseas.

"Buy American": As President, Wes Clark would strengthen America's manufacturing base by developing "Buy American" guidelines for defense and other government procurement.

Deny government contracts to firms that move headquarters overseas for tax reasons or shift substantial numbers of U.S. jobs overseas. Wes Clark believes that companies should not be rewarded for moving their headquarters to overseas tax havens or shift substantial numbers of U.S. jobs abroad. As President, he will look for ways to make certain these companies are not rewarded with government contracts.

Start rewarding companies that create jobs in America. As President, Wes Clark would seek to implement tax and spending initiatives - above and beyond the $10,000 job creation tax credit - that provide manufacturing firms the incentive to keep existing manufacturing jobs in the United States. <snip>

[Bread and Circus]

262. I am glad "Who Counts the Votes" will now be voting for Clark:

"Wes Clark's Rural and Farm Security Plan

During the economic boom of the 1990s, many of America's rural communities didn't enjoy the same prosperity and growth as our cities and suburbs. And now, with the whole country enduring an economic downturn, the situation in rural areas has gotten even worse. Now is the time to turn the country-and the heartland-around. With his Rural and Farm Security Plan, Wes Clark will: fight for America's family farmers and ranchers, jumpstart the rural economy, explore the promise of new energy and provide access to quality healthcare and education to all Americans in rural communities.

FIGHT FOR AMERICA'S FAMILY FARMERS AND RANCHERS


Family Farms and Ranches First. Three years of misguided Bush spending policies could put the promise of the 2002 Farm Bill in jeopardy. Although the bill is a vast improvement over its 1996 predecessor, we must still do more to ensure that America's family farmers and ranchers can prosper in the future. As President, Wes Clark will work to provide that opportunity.

Reinvigorate American Agriculture and Rural Communities. Wes Clark believes that we must provide increased opportunities for America's farmers and ranchers to add value to their product and to effectively capture that added margin. By exploring new market opportunities, family farmers and ranchers can diversify and increase their income. He will:

Support farm program policies that allow farmers and ranchers the flexibility to raise new crops or livestock.

Work to ensure that U.S. producers receive increased access to capital through tax credits and other incentives as well as technical and financial assistance they need to take advantage of these opportunities.

Free and Fair Trade. Americans cannot shy away from global competition, but Wes Clark believes that America must insist that the market not be distorted in ways that disadvantage American farmers and workers. The time has come to have an administration that can effectively ensure that the global marketplace is not stacked against our farmers and ranchers. Wes Clark will seek to:

Fight to further open markets to American goods.

Ensure that U.S. trade laws are strictly enforced.

Ensure Competitive Markets for Family Farmers and Ranchers. Wes Clark will make sure that the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Justice, and others have the leadership and resources necessary to enforce anti-trust and marketing laws for the benefit of family farmers and ranchers.

Protect and Enhance. Effective conservation measures are in everyone's best interests. Wes Clark will:

Fight for full funding of the Conservation Security Program and other farm bill conservation programs so that farmers and ranchers can maintain operations that are both profitable and environmentally sustainable.

Support new and promising initiatives that, like the CSP, offer the potential for improved farm policy in the future.

Better Risk Management Tools. As President, Wes Clark will:

Work to provide improved risk management tools so that family farmers and ranchers can better protect themselves against production and marketing uncertainties.

Look seriously at significant crop insurance reform.
JUMP START THE RURAL ECONOMY


Sustainable Rural Development. Our success in revitalizing America's rural economies will not be determined by farmers, ranchers and manufacturers alone. The economic landscape is changing. New businesses and innovative ventures will also be critical. Many small business owners and entrepreneurs need access to capital, technology, skilled workers and many other tools if they are to thrive. Wes Clark will do more to help local development groups that provide localized development assistance by:

Facilitating public-private partnerships and inter-industry cooperation.

Providing workforce and entrepreneur training.

Providing incentives for businesses to locate in rural communities.

Promoting home-ownership in rural areas.

Jobs. Under President Bush, three million private-sector jobs have been lost- the worst job losses under any president since Herbert Hoover. Instead of addressing the problem, President Bush has pursued the only policy he believes in: tax breaks for the rich, meanwhile working families worry about job security and the unemployed struggle to find work. Wes Clark has a real plan to let America get back to work. His three-part strategy devotes $100 billion over two years to jumpstart job creation without increasing the deficit.

Upgrade rural infrastructure. Wes Clark knows that to achieve a vibrant rural economy, we must fix the crumbling highways, bridges, rail and water systems that serve our agricultural heartland. But these days, information as well as commodities moves from coast to coast and beyond. Wes Clark will:

Make repairing and upgrading rural America's pipes, roads, bridges and broadband infrastructure a national priority.

Devote the resources necessary to achieve universal broadband access as quickly as possible to allow rural hospitals and schools to better serve rural populations and to level the playing field for rural businesses.
THE PROMISE OF NEW ENERGY


Renewable Energy and the Rural Economy. The potential impact of the wind, ethanol and biomass energy industries on America's rural economies is significant. Renewable energy is a great way to diversify struggling rural economies. Increased production of renewable fuels has the potential to create millions of new jobs and revitalize America's economy-starting in heartland. America's farmers and new generation of rural entrepreneurs can lead the way. Wes Clark will:

Work to ensure that farmers and ranchers receive the increased access to capital through tax credits and other incentives and technical assistance they need to take advantage of opportunities to increase profit through renewable energy production.
ACCESS"


_______

I think Clark will be working toward subsidizing small farms, so
now he owns "WhoCountstheVotes" vote.
_______

Maybe folks should start reading Clark's policy papers before the
call him names and infer he is just a "corporate" crony.

http://clark04.com/issues/

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

354. he didn't say that

Clark didn't say he would subsidize family farms - in fact, I'm not sure exactly what he means when he says he'll "fight" for family farms, or "provide increased opportunities for America's farmers and ranchers to add value to their product and to effectively capture that added margin".

I think I know what he means by "exploring new market opportunities, family farmers and ranchers can diversify and increase their income" - try to get the EU to stop subsidizing their farmers? More free trade?

This is just DLC biolerplate, just like Dean's proposals. So far there is NOTHING new here.

[TexasPatriot]

182. ok - this is a tough subject

more of a long conversation but...
Historically, Protectionism in developing countries (i'm talking import substitution industrialization tarrifs here) will generate local business, and create substandard products at artificially high prices - while the price and quality of those same goods will fall over time in the rest of the world. The created industries do not survive reintegration with global trade.

This is one of the myriad of ways the western european imperial powers screwed south america. SA kept having to fall back on raw material exports (they still do). Now look at Brazil - which has literally mountains of iron... when they went and borrowed massive amounts of western capital to build modern steel manufacturing plants - the west was perfectly willing to loan them the money to build the stuff, but as soon as it started to produce we slapped down quotas and tarrifs since the government intervention in the industry was considered 'unfair'. Not that we were as kind when it came time to ask them to pay the interest on their loans...

So, specifically, lets talk about overseas computer service outsourcing (programming, IT, etc). I've worked with Russian programmers. They're damned good. So they have a cost of living that's a lot lower than ours - duh - thus they're going to get paid a lot less. That's the way the world works... hell, it works that way in the US right now. Programmers in Cali get paid a lot more than programmers in Atlanta. Even the Govt pays people based on their geographic location and the cost of living in each region.

At the end of the day, the American programming talent is still the best in the world. But - for grunt work stuff you're going to have to understand that a lot of those little core library functions are going to be written by talent overseas. Consider it 'raw material' production. Will it decrease the number of US programming jobs? probably... but this happens - look how Quark destroyed the engraving business.

Everything changes - and it changes faster and faster as we move forward. The fact is - we, America - change faster than anyone. We're the quickest on our feet, and the rest of the world will NEVER be able to keep up. It's like basketball. They may be learning the concept of the fast break, but we're the Lakers...

The worry I have is Virilio's apocalypse... but that's another conversation.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

198. what jobs will American high school graduates get?

Everyone can't be a higly paid professional or a top notch software engineer. How much will those Americans get paid? Will they have to adjust to the living standards of peasants in rural China? How much does Walmart actually pay?

[TexasPatriot]

222. That's the problem

There was a bill moyers program a couple years ago... downsizing of america... talked about how our top 10% was the highest educated and best trained in the world, but our lower 50% of the workforce was on par with the up and coming industrialized world.

This is a result of our pathetic education system.

What we need is a MASSIVE infusion of money into sending people back to school to pick up new skills, and a serious serious increase in the amount of money spent on education in this country.

Of course, tell that to an Alabaman.

[no name no slogan]

295. But still the question persists:

we can "retrain" people all we want for these great "new" jobs that will be created, but we will STILL have people on the low end of the work spectrum-- the maids, waiters/waitresses, taxi and bus drivers, ditch diggers, nannies, etc. who work an honest days work, and deserve a living wage.

No matter how much "outsourcing" we do to other countries, we're STILL going to have people in this country doing the scut work that needs to get done-- the basic service work that NO highly-trained high-skilled worker will do. Even if you're a software engineer, you're still going to need somebody to flip your burger at McDonalds.

We need to face the fact that not EVERYONE wants/needs a highly-skilled job. Some people simply are not talented in those areas. Still, they deserve to be paid a LIVING WAGE that will provide them with dignity and enough money to pay their rent, buy their food and clothing, and pay their bills without having to worry about something happening that could put them on the street.

[RapidCreek]

328. They'll do scut work if that is all there is to do

We need to face the fact that everyone CAN'T have a "highly skilled" job...because their aren't enough of them to go around....and at the rate we're going now there'll be less and less, every day that passes.


RC

[Myra]

cryingshame, could you please ID where Krugman said that?

I'm not trolling, or getting in your face, honest.
I truly would like to see Krugman's thoughts on
the subject, since I respect and trust him.

Thanks.

[KittyWampus]

111. I Posted "Lumps Of Labor" Below

Way down this thread.

Also, here is a link with some balanced discussions regarding Free Trade vs. Protectionism
http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/FreeTrade/ProtectOrDeregulate.asp

[Myra]

152. Thank you cryingshame! Much appreciated.

eom

[RapidCreek]

325. Protectionism doesn't work?

Tell me cryingshame...what job is there in this country that couldn't be done more cheaply in India? When you come up with an answer tell me if everyone in the country can earn a living doing it.

RC

[SahaleArm]

327. Cheaper? Yes - Better? No.

You don't win on cheap, you win on quality and effeciency. The same way the Japanese kicked our ass in the car market. Now most foreign car companies build their cars in America.

[RapidCreek]

330. I guess I miss your point....

Most foreign car companies build their cars in America? Where'd you come up with that? The only cars foriegn car companies build in America are cars which will be sold in America. The reason they do so is because it is cheaper to avoid paying import duties and shipping charges....not because we build them better or more efficiently here. Do you honestly believe that Japanese auto manufacturers build cars here and ship them back to Japan to be sold to the Japanese? No they don't. They build the cars which will be driven by Japanese in Japan. They pay Japanese workers a living wage to build them....and they do so because they realize that before a Japanese person can buy the car he built, he must have the money to do so.

Qaulity means nothing, if those you are trying to sell product to cannot afford to pay for it. If you export your manufacturing jobs to third world nations those in your own nation will have not have the money to afford quality. When you don't pay the workers in that third world nation enough to purchase the products they are building they can't afford quality either. So you end up with an economy based upon cheapness of labor and cheapness of product. People buy what they need....and they pay what they can afford. Think I'm wrong? Tell me why Walmart is the richest corporation in the WORLD.

RC

[SahaleArm]

370. IT Services vs Manufacturing

If outsourced software fails to work (unusable, buggy) then that company will lose money. Companies will go with local talent if the benefits outweigh the costs. Manufacturing is a very different animal that software development. Software developers are not being underpaid (in local currency) like textile workers. Kicking up the minimum wage is a good start, it's not like Walmart can outsource in-store customer service.

[Vitruvius]

155. Software is built into every car, TV, VCR, machine tool, airplane,

spacecraft, cellular telephone, appliance (microwave, stove, washing machine) that has one or more embedded microprocessors. Give up software and you give up making all of these things; without embedded software, you're stuck with the obsolescent technology of 30 years ago, and the result is a unit that costs twice as much to make, does half as much, and which nobody would buy.

Giving up software means getting out of manufacturing and becoming an agricultural and raw-materials economy. Not a bright idea.

That said, Clark still is a new candidate -- and still is coming up to speed on many issues. He's a bright military man who has shown himself a quick study on the civilian issues that he understandably ignored while serving his country. I urge all DUers who support him to help educate him on this issue, e.g. by e-mailing his campaign.

Vitruvius

P.S: Normally, you design the unit (e.g. a washing machine or an automobile engine) and the software together -- making design tradeoffs between them. Therefore, if you lose the software, you lose ALL of the engineering.

The things you can do by embedding software are amazing. One interesting limiting case is airplanes; some new fighter aircraft are aerodynamically unstable and rely upon the on-board (computer) control system to be able to fly at all. The advantage is that you can optimize for manuverability, fuel efficiency, and a low radar cross-section (stealth) without the constraints imposed by requiring aerodynamic stability...

No software would mean no F117, no Raptor, and none of the next-generation fighter aircraft.

And we are starting to see design studies on how to use on-board computer control to allow commercial transports to be optimized for fuel economy above all else...

"Let them do the software in India" or China, and we won't be doing ANY other things -- except agriculture and raw materials.

Clark made a mistake. But compare that with Dubya -- who's nothing but mistakes all-day-every-day. And Clark learns -- Dubya doesn't.

[SahaleArm]

261. Those jobs aren't going to India and China

Real product development is still being done right here in the US.

Embedded Systems
Platforms/Runtime/Compilers
Product Development (Apps, Games, etc.)


The following are gone, protectionism won't help (call Wipro, Tata, etc.)

Call Centers/PSS
Certificate Developers (GUI, PHP, Web)
Consulting/Contract jobs

[Vitruvius]

340. Err -- some companies are already trying to outsource embedded systems

development to India; last April, I turned down a consulting gig for an outfit that had done so, ran into trouble, and wanted me to help bail them out.

And interesting software ideas & features have a way of migrating from the desktop PC to embedded systems; if the desktop goes, embedded systems may well follow. The short-sighted corporate MBA types who are calling the shots certainly hope so.

And if software development goes, don't expect the development of compilers & platforms to stay in the US.

And isn't it interesting how our European and Japanese competitors do NOT export technical jobs to the third world, yet manage to compete just fine...

Vitruvius

P.S: Putting it more specifically; many future embedded systems will have software features found on desktop PCs today; give up the one, and the other will follow.

[redqueen]

356. I work for a firm that outsources IT work

Can't say much because I don't want to violate any rules.

But you're so wrong. So very, very wrong. :(

[SahaleArm]

372. You could tell us what kind of jobs are being shipped.

Without divulging specifics;)

[redqueen]

381. Good god...

Big risk here (they probably have spyware but WTH)... right now working on a proposal to design and develop an enterprise application integration system.

Most of the work is new systems development. We send people to go onsite, learn what needs to be done (existing systems, processes, expectations of new system, etc.), then they go back to India and do it. Lead analysts, architecture, etc. ... all is in India. Our client list is impressive.

We do everything from architecture to 'code monkeys' to business process outsourcing (call centers, etc.)

[FrenchieCat]

194. I am amazed how

one sentence from Clark in a debate that "he won" can generate 180 posts in a thread. The sentence was thrown out in a debate and yet it was jumped as though it was a policy paper. It only shows me how desperate those who support others are. That one sentence was not detailed enough to warrant the extended discussion. Many are making assumption of what it all means and have added much more to the possible meaning of his words. I heard it more to mean don't think that the only solution of outsourcing is protectionism. There are many other ways of dealing with the problem, like being out front with technolology and other developing sciences. He's saying there should be enough work to go around...it's just a matter of making job creation a priority in this country, and being ahead of the pack in innovations.

But of course this was a perfect excuse to attempt to deflate the fact that Wes Clark did the best in these debates.

The bottomline is CLARK CAN BEAT BUSH......and none of the other can, including DEAN...with his non foreign policy experience, his giant tax increase for the middle class and his "Pie in the Sky" health plan that wouldn't pass, especially if, and that's a big if he won.....because the congress would remain Republican.

So I look at this thread and see a great discussion...and I am glad that Clark can stir so many into a debate.

Apart from that, those who want to lose perspective as to what this election is all about.......GROW UP!

It reminds me of those Generals, you know Larry, Curly and Moe. It's called Jealousy and frustration. Get real folks!

[Vitruvius]

209. I like Clark and would support him if he's nominated, BUT he stepped in it

this time.

Accordingly, I hope you and the other DU Clark supporters help straighten him out on this issue. I hope the many engineers on DU pitch in as well. The primaries are not only to choose the nominees, the primaries are also a way to force the eventual nominees to get their act together and think their positions through so that they are ready for the general election.

Everybody makes mistakes in the primaries. Those who learn from them have a chance to get the nomination AND win the election.

Clark is not my first choice for the presidential nomination, but I think he's well-qualified -- and I will support him if nominated.

BUT I hope Clark learns more about this issue -- because software is such a strategic technology -- both commercially and militarily. And you don't give up a strategic technology. Ever.

I shall e-mail his campaign with the Engineering 101 points I made in my other post (plus points I do not choose to discuss in a public forum), and I hope every DU Clark supporter and every DU engineer & scientist will e-mail him as well. Because he needs constructive criticism on this issue.

Vitruvius


P.S: There are many software engineers on DU -- and they are hurting. And the posts show it. Why are there so many? Because software is built into practically every product of any sophistication nowadays. And those are the products we MUST keep making in America...

[KittyWampus]

266. NOWHERES Did Clark Say He Supported Software Developement Going Offshore

NOWHERES.

And the jobs that are already gone aren't coming back.

The jobs have already gone- Clark had nothing to do with it.
No new jobs have been created- Clark had nothing to with it.

Clark proposes creating NEW jobs in Science and Technology by developing Green Tech and keeping the higher paid jobs here by using tax code.

ALL he said in the debate was the jobs are gone- lets make new ones.

How freaking hard is this to understand?

[Vitruvius]

343. "The jobs that are gone aren't coming back" is a defeatist attitude,

and not what I'd normally expect to hear from a can-do type like Gen'l Clark.

In normal commercial competition, companies lose and gain ground all-the-time. The same goes for normal commercial competition between nations.

And what we have here is not normal commercial competition; it's short-sighted corporate MBAs saving a few nickels today by willfully exporting a key American technical advantage. If a European company's management tried this, they'd be in trouble with their government, investment banks, stockholders, and employee unions.

And I suspect Clark will learn from his mistake and not repeat it. Especially if DU Clark supporters and DU engineers contact his campaign with some constructive criticism on this matter.

If you want to help Clark, don't defend his (rare) mistakes -- help ensure he does not repeat them.

Handled properly, this could yet turn out to be an advantage for Clark -- or any other Democratic candidate who takes up this issue. American companies SHOULD be barred from exporting key US technology and jobs -- same as European companies are effectively barred from exporting their nations' competitive advantages.

Vitruvius

P.S: For a start, any Democratic candidate could say: "If elected, I will bar all future U.S. Government contracts to corporations who export strategic US technologies -- such as software."

[Bread and Circus]

255. Consider that most people are employed by small businesses...

and as a small business owner, I like Clark's ideas.

The days of Charlie Chaplin vs. the Machine are over.

The goal for the next 100 years needs to be about energy,
not about C++ and other tedious coding issues.

Parse what Clark is saying...

As much as the GOP can be reactionary, so can folks on the left.
Our fight can't be the "workers" vs. the "ceo's". It's about
everyone working together toward a bold vision. I've been both
a worker and now I am a boss. I have been on both sides of the
table. It is a challenge no matter where you stand, and frankly
being a boss has sucked far worse than being a worker. Therefore,
I don't buy all the anti-boss rhetoric.
It rings hollow. There is a way we all need to work together
to raise all boats and increase overall
prosperity. NAFTA doesn't work, but neither does frank protectionism
either. I think that is what Clark is saying. I grow weary of
being in the middle of such perfunctory objection to "all things
business" as much as I grow weary of the GOP giving public cash
to the pigs at the trough. Both paths are beset in a mire of
ideology that dares not to dream of a third way that combines
talent, energy, vision, execution, and fortitude. Give me something
more to believe in than such a binary way to look at the problem.

Keep the eyes on the big prize, energy independence -- I think
that's where Clark is looking. He is not making this the
"verbal" cornerstone of this election because to win, the message
has to be about besting Bush on Foreign Policy. But Clark is
a dreamer at heart and a visionary, you will see. He will be the
one to start us on a path of energy independence.

[camero]

2. We can do other things

Yeah, like work at Wally World.

[KittyWampus]

23. Or How About Retooling The Economy For Green Technology

which is what Clark was talking about!

Designing, building, installing and maintaining Energy Alternatives.

And having a middle class in India helps American by providing an outlet for our EXPORTS!

[Donna Zen]

34. Bingo!

And I'm sure since he was talking about closing tax loopholes and creating job incentives, that he does not intend to sell out the industry.

[Classical_Liberal]

48. Why can't that be done in India?

?

[KittyWampus]

128. Well, Since Clark's Plan Is To Invest In Jobs In the US

and structuring the tax code to keep them here....

What are you talking about?

[Classical_Liberal]

129. They aren't leaving because of the tax code

They are leaving for lower wages? Besides if he thinks it will work why did he say it was ok if India did those jobs?

[KittyWampus]

180. Yes, But Tax Code Structure COULD Help Preserve New Jobs

That are created under a Clark Administration..

Jobs going to India for lower wages isn't necessarily a bad thing. As long as India has fair wages and standards.

An Indian Middle Class is a good thing.... they will have money to buy American products.

The problem now is Junior isn't creating jobs at all.

It is natural to want Protectionism but that is, in Krugman's term "fatalistic" it breeds the notion that we CANNOT create more jogs. That there is a finite amount of jobs.

Jobs and wealth are NOT a zero sum proposition.

[redqueen]

3. I agree.

There just aren't going to be enough jobs in energy and environmental engineering ...

[Clark Can WIN]

224. Why not?

Of course there are not now, but we have to move forward.

If we move the nation away from fossil fuels and lead the way for the rest of the world we will have a cleaner and more peacefull planet. That should create alot of demand, no?

[xultar]

4. In some respects he is correct. Let them have the simple low paying

software jobs, we'll innovate and create new IT stuff and that will generate new jobs.

I am in IT. I will say it was quite tough to hear. He's right though. No one is complaining about the sweaters and shirts being made in Afghanistan, what about all of the electronics in Japan.

It isn't enough for me to give up on Clark

HE IS THE ONY GUY WHO CAN BEAT BUSH

[w4rma]

9. You don't understand. When we give away an industry we give away our

innovation. Americans won't have an industry to work and learn in. There will be *no* more American IT innovation if this is allowed to happen. It will be Indian innovation, instead.

[ant]

I don't know about that

I might be wrong about this, but I don't think there's a lot of innovation in the work being outsourced, like tech support, for instance. It requires relatively smart people but it does not produce anything new.

New technologies = money, which means top research will continue in the US. And IT affects a lot of different industries, some of them touching on national security issues, so I think it's safe to assume there will still be a lot of that work going on in the states.

I think Clark is right. I keep thinking of that interview with the Nike guy in Michael Moore's video, where the guy says Americans don't want to make tennis shoes in factories. While I realize there are plenty of Americans who would kill for any job in tough times, I think the goal of moving the entire economy forward into new industries is a good one. It's not easy, though, and there are no easy answers, so I hesitate to bash Clark just because he doesn't have some perfect plan. I'm willing to bet no one does. (And I don't think dumping our trade agreements is a good idea. They could certainly use some reform in the labor/environmental area, but you can't stop progress, and globalization IS progress.)

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

67. The press has announced that 10-20% of IT workers laid off THIS YEAR

10-20% of the IT jobs GONE, poof, outsourced and offshored to China and India. What jobs are replacing those? The people who still have jobs are going to feel downward pressure on their pay now.

So corporations reduce labor costs - where do the savings go? Lower prices or higher profits? Who are the investors that get those profits? Do corporate profits go to the majority of Americans, or do they go to a minority of investors who have a lot more money than the rest of us?

I'm tired of this "investor first" policy - this is little more than "supply side" and "trickle down" dressed up with a few liberal sounding phrases.

[ant]

169. I don't disagree with you, necessarily

My post was a response to the claim that outsourcing would reduce the US' potential to innovate and move forward. I don't think that's true.

I found this interesting:
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/03_34/b3846027.htm

I tend to agree with the "yes" author when he says,

The only way the U.S. will keep one rung ahead of the rest of the world is to ensure that we have a broadly educated workforce that keeps learning. At the corporate level, training programs would help current employees move up to better positions. And the government should overhaul jobless benefits to allow displaced workers the time and money to enter new careers.

Optimists argue that the U.S. will keep its innovation lead because it has invented new products before. But that underestimates the risk of being overtaken as skill and education levels rise elsewhere. Unless we focus on maintaining a better-educated workforce, that risk will only rise.

About two years ago I was working on my PhD in physics. Faced with a tight job market, I decided to change course and find a new field for my skills. I switched graduate programs and moved into international security, and now I work on nuclear nonproliferation issues. While I realize it's not easy for everyone to aquire new skills or adapt their old ones to new careers, and while I realize the economy is shitty right now and finding a job can be hard, it's not impossible.

I also don't understand how you can argue that Clark's position is an "investor first" policy when he seems to advocate investing in programs to help workers move into new fields. The world is not static, it changes and adapts and shifts, and we need to be able to do the same.

[0rganism]

161. You're wrong about this

I've worked in mega-corporate network engineering. I've seen what they're outsourcing, because one of my jobs was to arrange data sharing between design centers and fabs in India and Malaysia with the USA.

One of the design centers in India had electricity HALF THE DAY. That means their server uptime was 50% what it is in America. Do you know what a pain in the ass it is to bounce huge designs back and forth across an unreliable trans-pacific network to a factory that's only operational half the time? In the process, we wasted huge amounts of AMERICAN engineering hours, in waiting for the successful transfers to occur.

This wasn't done for any reasons other than cutting salary costs and avoiding environmental regulation. Even if an Indian designer does half the work and it's only available half the time, when you can pay him a tenth of what you pay an American, it's still worth doing from the major stockholders' perspective.

Of course, if you're cool with Americans joining the rest of the 3rd world in terms of wages and living conditions, then you won't see a problem with this. My hunch is a lot of us are uncomfortable about the prospect, but we won't see any action from the voting public until a lot of damage has already occurred. When we have sewage running through the street, an electrical grid with 50% reliability, a complete rollback of environmental regulation, a minimum wage of $1/day, and no controls on child labor, parity will be achieved and our coroporate masters will give us back our jobs.

[Nlighten1]

95. Not only that but.

those manufacturing and software developing jobs used to provide a good income and benefits to the struggling middle class. Fewer middle class means less economic churn in middle America.

[Clark Can WIN]

228. But that isn't the plan for goodness sake

"So here is what I'll do: When I am president, the first thing I will have is $100 billion job creation program. Then we'll go and look at the tax code. We'll take away any incentives for companies that want to outsource or leave the country. And we'll have incentives for companies to create jobs in here. "

That hardly sounds like giving away industries.

[bpilgrim]

10. SW Developement is NOT low paying here... cept for the 1 percenters maybe

maybe i should say WAS :shrug:

peace

[HFishbine]

31. Um

You should know that there are a LOT of people (some 40,000 laid off this year alone) in NC who are complaining about textiles jobs being shipped overseas. I'll give you a 100% guarantee that any candidate who even remotely gives the appearance of not wanting to help stop the export of jobs will NOT win NC.

In fact, Bush's innaction on textile imports from low-wage countries is one reason why a democrat has a remote chance of winning this state. You might be surprised at the letters to the editor from people who voted for Bush and are vowing not to do so again because of this single issue. Bush recently responded by throwing us a bone limiting the INCREASE in imports from China. I suspect he's not done yet.

The only reason the recession in NC hasn't been worse is because of the high tech engine in Research Triangle Park (Raleigh). If that starts shrinking, NC will sink with it.

Clark's remark may not be enough for you to give up on him, nor should it be, but a devil-may-care attitude about jobs going overseas will do him no good in NC.

[Classical_Liberal]

53. Low paying?

Get off!

[madfloridian]

59. These are jobs at $70,000 or so here, about $10,000 less there.

That is true of one level of jobs. I will find it in my files. Some show covered this thoroughly one night.

These are not menial low cost jobs going now.

[politicat]

313. Here's the problem: R&D and Development follow the basic jobs.

Mr. Politicat is a Senior Developer, currently acting as Project Lead and will be an architect (certified) by this time next year.

I asked him about this and his reply was: "<sigh> Okay. Guess I better go back to grad school and get an environmental engineering degree. Can we afford tuition?"

Development follows the junior programmers because the junior programmers aren't comfortable being junior programmers forever. Who would be? Everyone wants to advance and boredom is the # 1 job dissatisfaction problem for programmers. So these junior programmers become senior programmers, then data modellers, architects, project managers....

and our R&D follows, because R&D is EXPENSIVE. Far more so than basic programmers.

The scary part is, no, we can't afford tuition (we're paying off his ex-wife's debts and mortgage as well as our own because Mr. Politicat made the mistake of settling with her instead of fighting her in divorce court). I have a useless degree, he will have a useless degree and we're stuck with a mortgage on a house we can't sell.

See you on the bread lines,

Politicat

[dean4america]

5. i wonder how many of his campaign staff winced

hopefully he clarifies that statement, because it looks pretty bad on its face, and also like he was just winging it.

[KittyWampus]

25. No Need To Clarify- YOU Need To Understand Protectionism Doesn't Work

It didn't work in the past and it won't work now.

[Classical_Liberal]

57. Citation of actual history!

would be nice.

[KittyWampus]

107. I Posted Krugman's Article Below

If you are sincerely interested in broadening your perspective.

Here's a link to a fairly balanced look at the issues.

http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/FreeTrade/ProtectOrDeregulate.asp

[Classical_Liberal]

115. The Krugman article didn't show that

.

[neuvocat]

6. You overlooked this part.

"So here is what I'll do: When I am president, the first thing I will have is $100 billion job creation program. Then we'll go and look at the tax code. We'll take away any incentives for companies that want to outsource or leave the country. And we'll have incentives for companies to create jobs in here."

Next time try to pay attention. It isn't too much to ask.

[w4rma]

12. "Energy and environmental engineering are two very fertile areas for the "

I paid attention. His $100 billion job creation program will do nothing for software engineers. His program might help energy and environmental engineers.

[KittyWampus]

28. Why?We're Not Sending SOFTWARE DEVELOPEMENT OVERSEAS

Jeez!

[w4rma]

37. "Let them do the software in India; we'll do other things in this country"

Clark disagrees with you, cryingshame.

[KittyWampus]

56. Who Will Do The Software For The Emerging Green Technology?

Where did he say Software DEVELOPEMENT? You are inferring it for whatever biased reason....

[bpilgrim]

65. the Indians

:shrug:

peace

[ulysses]

85. semantics

"doing the software" is software development.

[KittyWampus]

270. Look, Those Jobs Are ALREADY GONE

and THAT is what Clark was saying.

They are gone and not coming back... and that isn't Clark's doing.

And NOWHERES does Clark say "let's keep allowing highpaying jobs to go offshore.

In fact, he said the opposite. He would create new high tech jobs and keep them here using tax code.

[greendog]

353. taste....the flavor of the moment

last week it was software, next week - energy development, then environmental engineering, then something else, and so on.

Taste it, get a good whiff of the aroma, enjoy it while it lasts........but damn sure bet they'll take the plate away before you've finished your meal.

Welcome to the brave new world of extreme demo-republicanism.

:)

[HFishbine]

47. And you're not paying attention

By the end of 2004, one out of every 10 jobs with U.S.-based IT vendors and IT service providers will move to emerging markets, according to Gartner Inc., as will one out of every 20 IT jobs within user enterprises.

While the economic benefits of offshore outsourcing are well-known, Gartner is warning CIOs and other executives about the impact offshore outsourcing may have on business strategies. Gartner cites three areas of concern: loss of future talent, loss of intellectual assets, and loss of organizational performance.

"To many CIOs and business executives, the decision to outsource activities offshore is fiscally sound — the cost, quality, value, and process advantages are well-proven," said Diane Morello, vice president and research director at Gartner. "At a time when IS organizations are struggling with poor credibility and IT is being scrutinized, offshore outsourcing is becoming a tool for improving service delivery and a source of highly qualified talent in greater numbers."

Many workers in the high-tech sector might question whether it is the number of highly qualified workers looking for jobs offshore or the price at which they are willing to work. In the United States, the computer industry lost 3,473 jobs in June of 2003, while telecommunications lost 5,528, reports Challenger, Gray & Christmas, a Chicago-based outplacement firm that tracks job cuts and hiring trends. The two sectors combined lost 54,278 jobs between January and May 2003, which is 67 percent fewer cuts than the 165,391 logged in the same five-month period last year.


http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article.php/2241641

[KittyWampus]

278. #1. Which Candidate Will Make Those Jobs Magically Reappear

#2. Clark had nothing to do with those jobs leaving the country
#3. Clark said he would create new high tech jobs (energy environment) and use tax code to help keep them here.
#4. Clark did NOT say that he WANTED OR SUPPORTED better paying Software Development jobs to go overseas.

[kcwayne]

101. Huh?

If you believe this, you know nothing about the industry.
Software development is a lost industry to the US. Within 10-15 years, there will be virtually no development done here.

Every software company (Oracle, IBM, etc) has major operations in India. Every large corporation is doing more of their work in India. Even small companies (< 20 million) are finding it cost effective to outsource their IT to Indian companies. The cost dynamics are simply too compelling for the trend to reverse itself.

I have been in the business for 25 years. It is clear to me that it is time for a career change.

[0rganism]

168. You are so wrong, it's not even funny

Wake up. Smell the coffee. Things aren't the way they were ten years ago.

[neuvocat]

73. No you haven't.

You just want to bash someone based on your own point of view.

I mean, look at this: not only do you fail the read everything he said, you're throwing in statements that Clark never even made.

You know what, just stop putting up posts like this and wasting everyone's time.

[eleny]

163. Software engineers will have to learn to do something else

It's a terrible reality to face. But that's probably the way it has to be.

Back in the late 1970s, the oil industry here in Colorado disappeared overnight. Middle Eastern crude prices fell and it was also easier to refine. Our oil shale jobs went first and then the regular caterpillar pumps fell silent and to this day sit rusting on the Plaines.

We were very close friends with a petroleum geologist back then. Every one of the geologists in his company was laid off except him. His old workmates would come to his office, prop their feet on his desk and stare at the ceiling, agonizing about what they would do to support their families. Our friend often worried about suicides.

At that time, my husband, the lowly auto mechanic, still held a job. We bought our home and he went to community college at night to learn digital electronics. Old fashioned auto mechanics were going by the wayside and he read the writing on the wall. The geologists had to retrain, too. Many went back to school to learn to be programmers while they drove cabs at night.

This current reality is worse because we're being f'd by our own gov't. They aren't even trying to cover their involvement. But the course of action is still the same for workers. Get ahead of the crowd by facing the fact that you won't be doing what you thought you would do for your life's work. My heart aches for young people. Having lived through layoffs and job changes over and over my whole working life - uncertainty, anguish and change can be a constant where career is concerned. The '90s was only a freakish blip on the radar screen.

[ulysses]

167. but wasn't

software the great hope when we started sending manufacturing jobs overseas? Wasn't IT what we were going to train everyone to do?

Someone page Bill Clinton...

[eleny]

191. Yes, you're right

And back in the 70s, many people out here in the west felt that way about the petroleum industry. And my father and others in his generation thought that working in factories in New York City was a great thing that would last forever, having come from dirt farms in Eastern Europe after the turn of the century. But dad's job went to Asia in the 60s, geology work went to the Middle East and now IT jobs are going away, too. It's as if economic history cyclically screws each generation. We can't get too far ahead when corporations require a cheap labor economy.

Here's an illuminating essay on Cheap Labor Conservatives. http://www.conceptualguerilla.com/blurbs.htm

[ulysses]

203. it's not even generational.

It's not as if my dad was in IT and now I can't follow in his footsteps because the jobs are gone. I was in IT for four years - did the work to get myself there - and am now teaching and making between a third and a quarter of what I was making in IT.

We're being sold a bill of goods.

[eleny]

227. I didn't mean that people should follow in the footsteps

of their parents. I just meant that each generation seems to get the same screwing.

Please believe me, I'm on your side. What I wish for you is that you could define your own life and career and make changes when you decide you're ready.

I posted to share my experiences to illustrate that this current situation is not new. I understand how awful it feels, having gone through several layoffs in my working life. My heart aches while reading the postings. And I will vote, march and do what I can to make changes in our government because you are worth every effort.

[ulysses]

232. some generations, evidently,

get screwed multiple times.

Please believe me, I'm on your side. What I wish for you is that you could define your own life and career and make changes when you decide you're ready.

Please don't patronize me. I'm 34 and have "defined my own life and career and made changes" whether I was ready or not quite a few times. I currently make just under $20k/year teaching on a year-round schedule. I'm lucky to have what I do.

[eleny]

301. I'm pushing 60

By the time I was 34, I had also experienced several unwanted changes. My viewpoint on the situation of people young enough to be my daughter or son is heartfelt. I remember how painful it was for me to go through the layoffs and upheavals. Perhaps it's not as bad for you and I misinterpreted the tone of your postings. But my feelings about what folks are going through, now, remains the same.

Please take the last word, if you wish. I've had mine.

[0rganism]

233. And back in the '30s, my grandpa bartered apples for his rent

Without a bit of old-fashioned protectionism, we're headed for an economic crash that'll make the Great Depression look like a luxury cruise.

Depleted Middle-Class -> Fewer Consumers -> Lower Sales -> Lower Profits -> More Living-Wage Layoffs -> Depleted Middle-Class...

This is the reversal of FDR's New Deal. Get ready for the Old Deal coming down the pipe.

[redqueen]

18. Are these companies shipping work overseas because of tax incentives?

I thought it was just the cheap labor...

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

72. nope, not tax incentive, simply lower wages

so Clark's proposal will do nothing, nada, zip, to stop it. Then again, what is Dean's propsal? I doubt it's different at all.

[bpilgrim]

19. lol

i feel so much better now... he's got a 100 billion to create a new industry :shrug:

what industry i wonder does he have in mind?

peace

[KittyWampus]

33. Energy Alternatives-Guess You Didn't Listen To The Debate

[bpilgrim]

41. no i didn't

but feeding the trend to export our jobs is something i usually don't miss... i'm sure i'm not alone :hi:

peace

[Donna Zen]

51. The $100 billion has nothing to do with it.

The $100 billion is jobs, here now. Ordinary jobs. And yes, if companies are taking any jobs off shore and using loopholes then shut 'em down.

During an online session someone asked him if he supported Star Wars. His answer was "we need to review all of our R & D and put the money into things that will build our future."

The other day in Keene he also said that is a high priorty for him. Setting the R & D goals and then funding them. Putting the two together, I would say the money will be sourced from wasteful Pentagon programs.

[bpilgrim]

64. R&D for star wars... i'm sure many SWD/E would look forward to that job

wonder how many head counts they got open... ah the future sure does look bright :nuke:

peace

[Donna Zen]

220. I'm sorry my post is confusing

I believe he will take the money from Star Wars and divert it into R & D that will be meaningful to we the people. Wesley Clark: last job, investment banker in emerging technologies. Oh, and CEO of wavecrest, manufacturers of hydrogen engines.

[politicat]

296. Great... for the energy and environmental engineers out there. Bad

for the software developers.

Here's the real world problem:
Ms. Jones has a Master's in Computer Science, emphasis in programming. Her job gets exported to India or China or somewhere else. She has a 100K mortgage, a kid, a car payment, 1 credit card payment and her 70K a year job just vaped on her. Unemployment pays her 1/3rd of her former income for 6 months.

There are no other programming jobs available because all of the companies have done this exporting.

At the same time, the president and the congress pour 100 billion into job creation in the fields of environmental engineering and alternative energy and, incidentally, with oils supplies now drying up and fossil fuels being a bad idea due to Kyoto protocol sign-on, we add a few million oil, gas and coal workers to the mix of the newly unemployed. Since these new workers have experience in the energy field, they are going to be the first picks for hiring, putting Ms. Jones at a disadvantage.

The local engineering firms are going to have to do some software development, true, but it's going to be on a contract basis - not permanent, no benefits, the worst possible working conditions. AND since they're probably bidding on projects and need to get a low bid (and I'm the child of a civil engineer and a construction project manager - I know how projects work, both public and private) they're going to estimate their costs using the lowest possible pricing - in other words, they're going to subcontract their programming needs to the lowest bidder... where the exported jobs went.

Ms. Jones, unable to get a job as a programmer, will have to go back to school (and lose her house and car and credit rating in the process) on funds that come from government loans and grants and STILL be underqualified when push comes to shove because she doesn't have 15 years in oil and gas....

What a freaking fabulous way to make hackers. Informational terrorism will SKYROCKET. Don't piss off your knowledge workers... we know how to make life really unpleasant.

Politicat (who is married to a potential Ms. Jones, though he's male.)

[brokensymmetry]

7. Frankly -

I agree. I like a lot of what Dennis Kucinich stands for, but his candidacy doesn't seem to be going well. And I like Dean more as time goes by.

[eileen_d]

8. I support Clark, but I don't like this either

I think he'll be hearing from a few unemployed folks in the IT industry... including me. :(

[JM]

11. Proof he doesn't get it

Anyone who understands marketing and industry life cycles understands you don't give away anything at the front end of the curve. The front end of the curve is high margin revenue. In addition, you don't kill industries that are essentially infrastructure and national security.

Later,
JM

[Must_B_Free]

93. Can't teach an old conservative

new progressive tricks.

Clark is a washup. I am getting excited about Dean, even though Kucinich is closest to my position.

I find that the Kucinich supporters are their own worst enemy.

I have given money 3 times and they still keep calling and calling asking for more money and time, after you ask them to stop.

[CWebster]

13. What is this "national goals program"

the taxpayer providing R&D for corporate interests?

[KittyWampus]

43. How Else Do You Think We'll Retool For Green Technology?

There is only a short window of opportunity to do this.

[CWebster]

60. the drug companies claim their astronomical pricing

is to fund R&D but actually the government provides a good percentage of it. The money goes for advertising and the bottom line. Without strong regulatory oversight and accountability, an area that Clark is not strong on, and has not been questioned extensively on, who is to say it won't be another black hole for corporate greed?

[Julien Sorel]

82. Really? What makes him 'not strong on' these areas?

[CWebster]

99. Clark sided with Lieberman and the DLC

against future regulatory enforcement of notably media and energy sectors. The article was in UStoday and the Wash Post last week. Havent got the bookmark on this computer and am signing off now. Later.

[Julien Sorel]

136. Pure invention.

Clark supports enforcing existing legislation, not enacting new regulations. Notice that this is different from your claim that Clark is 'against future regulatory enforcement....'

Here is the article, and here's what Clark had to say:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/2003-11-19-clark-dean_x.htm

The retired Army general, in the harshest assessment of a rival to date, said Dean's plan to re-regulate U.S. businesses is a major departure from Clinton, who strongly backed deregulation of energy and telecommunications markets.

"The results in the '90s spoke for themselves," Clark said at a brief news conference in which he referred to Clinton by name six times. "Regulation is not going to get our economy moving again. It failed in the past, it will fail again."


...

Clark said he would increase efforts to hold corporate America responsible for misconduct and indicated that in some instances, would go beyond the Clinton administration. But he said he would do so without writing rules and regulations.


No where in there does he say he won't enforce regulations. You made it up, and then ran off. What shocking behavior, especially for a Whoreard Dean supporter.

[Bread and Circus]

258. Pure invention with the intention to deflate Clark's steam...

Clark is beginning to hit his stride and those that
seek to foist another upon the throne can't stand it.

As far as I can tell, Clark is more intelligent and more
insightful than the rest. He is clearly the best and he is
clearly the antidote for the poison known as Bush.

So, the detractors are back to the old canard of calling
anyone that stands in their way of losing it for everyone:

"Republican Lite"

It seems to be the ace they keep trying to play over and over.
Problem is, they are using a stacked deck.

[CWebster]

335. tsk-tsk

Knew there was a good reason to bookmark this:

"The retired Army general, in the harshest assessment of a rival to date, said Dean's plan to re-regulate U.S. businesses is a major departure from Clinton, who strongly backed deregulation of energy and telecommunications markets.

'The results in the '90s spoke for themselves,' Clark said at a brief news conference in which he referred to Clinton by name six times. 'Regulation is not going to get our economy moving again. It failed in the past, it will fail again.'

Dean, the former Vermont governor, said Tuesday that if elected president, he would move to re-regulate business sectors such as utilities and media companies to restore faith after corporate scandals such as Enron and WorldCom.

Responding to Clark's criticism, Dean spokeswoman Tricia Enright said Wednesday, 'Under the Bush administration, the balance of power has shifted against the American people and toward greedy pharmaceutical companies, powerful energy corporations and media monopolies. If Democrats are not concerned with protecting consumers, workers and the average American, then they are truly out of touch.'"

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/2003-11-19-clark-dean_x.htm

Deal with it.

[CWebster]

337. Really, Bunter?

Here is the key:

But he said he would do so without writing rules and regulations.

How the hell is he going to do it? Have corporations volunteer? Gee, where have we heard that idea before?

This is essential to stemming the corporate dominance of our Democracy and it should be shouted from the rooftops -instead of everyone swept up by the latest pop culture icon.

Christ, doesn't anyone care about this????

[SahaleArm]

338. Uh, we have rules and regulations.

Except the enforcer has no clothes. Clark never precluded tougher rules.

[Tom Rinaldo]

345. Clark likes enforcement

more than new rules, in general, at the moment. He has been unfairly labled as a "deregulator" however, he hasn't promoted any deregulation. Actually the statement you bookmarked was an early version, within hours he clarified and stressed that because of developments that have occurred since Clinton left office he believes in some areas further regulation is needed. Clark currently puts his stress on not letting corporations continue to get away with avoiding the rules already on the books, which he states routinely happens under the Bush Administration. In my opinion Clark can't currently be considered progressive as a Democrat on this one. Neither do I see him as a conservative Democrat like Lieberman. I think he is ever so slightly left of Clinton on this issue at the moment. I also believe he will shift further left from Clinton as he gets more time to personally study this issue. Unlike Lieberman, for instance, Clark has not spent a lifetime shouldering up to Fortune 500 types at campaign fund raisers and in Country Clubs. He relates more to the grunts and cares more deeply in their well being than someone like Lieberman.

[Julien Sorel]

347. There are existing regulations.

He did not, contrary to your invention, state that he wouldn't enforce regulations.

[redqueen]

358. Existing Rules and Regs were either defanged or repealed

That's why it WAS called 'DE-regulation'.

The deregulation is finished.

The old rules are laregly gone. From both media and utilities, to cite the two areas already mentioned. Most definitely from others, too.

The fact that people think we can just stop de-regulating now -- now that we've lost all those old rules, or in more cases, just lost the teeth in the regulations to enforce the rules -- and that everything will be okay if we just enforce whatever's left of the old rules, with whatever ground-down teeth are left ... it's ... it's just astonishing.

:wow:

[HFishbine]

14. Ooops!

Yep. For all the "Clark won the debate" talk, I was wondering if this tidbit was going to get lost amongst an ohterwise great showing. But it is indeed important.

The export of jobs (hi and lo tech) is a HUGE issue. To say that we'll create new jobs in environmental and energy sciences is one thing, but to roll over on job losses in ANY industry is a major mistake. Hopefully Clark will be able to clarify it as a rehtorical mistake and explain that it was not an official policy view.

[KittyWampus]

58. Are You Advocating Protectionism Then?

That is what many on this thread are essentially doing.

And anyone doing this had better be prepared to reject Krugman's analysis as well.

[HFishbine]

90. No, a nuanced position

like Dean's.

[Julien Sorel]

178. What is Dean's 'nuanced position?'

I looked over his website and can't find it; the only thing he says is the same stuff all the other candidates say, and it's as vague as any of them.

[camero]

106. I would really like to know

How we are going to create new jobs in those fields without an investment in education and retraining?

And the fact that it's not really the kind of jobs that we have but the low wages and union busting that goes with these jobs. Not to mention no benefits. People most likely would work at a Wal-Mart if the wages and benefits were better. I think the strikes in California have proven that.

I'm agreeing with you. But i'm just adding some points. And we really need to reinstate the Taft-Hartley Act.

[HFishbine]

110. I agree with you

but leaveling the playing field and investment in education and R&D are not mutually exclusive. Gephardt once mentioned a plan he called "Apollo II" to invest in alternative energy development. It sounded good at the time, but I haven't heard him talk about it since. Maybe it didn't poll well.

[camero]

123. or the RWingers talked him out of it.

I mean, if we're going to go higher tech. Where will the brain power come from to support these jobs? Employers are already saying that they are having a hard time finding qualified people to fill these positions. I know thats just a half truth but in order to keep even those jobs here, we have to invest in education. And retrain our unemployed(not just the people who are laid off) for the new jobs.

[JanMichael]

15. He was 90% right in his response. He just screwed up one line.

So here is what I'll do:

"When I am president, the first thing I will have is $100 billion job creation program."

We really DO need a restructuring of our economy. Walmart is NOT the answer dammit.

"Then we'll go and look at the tax code. We'll take away any incentives for companies that want to outsource or leave the country. And we'll have incentives for companies to create jobs in here."

I like that idea, I'm sick of economic leeches.

"But we need to go beyond all of that. We really need a national goals program. Software was great, the technology and the information revolution was great, but there are a lot of technologies out there. We've got great scientists in this country. We need to set some national goals. We have the mechanisms to do it, put the research money in to basic and applied research and let those inventions and discoveries come out in intellectual property that we can use in this country to create employment."

Mostly true.

"Energy and environmental engineering are two very fertile areas for the growth of American jobs."

They certainly are.

"We want to be ahead of the software revolution. Let them do the software in India; we'll do other things in this country."

A rash statement.

"We can do that. All it takes is leadership."

We can do anything with the right leadership.

[w4rma]

55. If he doesn't address this statement, later. I cannot consider

it an unintentional "screw up". I'll have to consider that his plan is to jettison this industry from American soil.

[SahaleArm]

302. Congrats on the hissy-fit.

High-tech McJobs will come back to American, just like car manufacturers came back in the '90s. R&D will always be right here in the US, provided we invest in education. Ever wonder where the ARPANET came from?

[Occulus]

16. you missed a lot of meaning

there.

First, open source software is the future of software development in this country. With so many 'official' programming jobs going offshore, programmers will be left to.... what? Well, many programmers I know of feel they do something that's an art as well as a science. Clean, functional, bug-free code is the end result of their attention to detail. With more free time to pursue their own software projects, I think we may see a burgeoning groundswell of freelance programming activity somewhere in the near future.

But that's not what he meant at all. What he is talking about is the notion of our government giving our scientists goals to work toward, like building a sustainable Mars colony, developing new fuel technologies, things of that nature. Software programmers will surely be needed to control the computing portions of such a plan.

I think he's onto something here. True, I do think he's being a bit too cavalier about the job losses going on now, but that could easily be stopped by, as he said, removing the incentives for corporations to do so.

One thing he might possibly consider is making it a crime to ship jobs offshore when jobs are already being lost nationwide instead of created. He may also consider raising taxes for corporations that do so.

I'm tentatively in favor of the thrust of his argument here.

[bpilgrim]

24. ah... setting up shop off shore is part of the problem...

now if they were TAXED fairly to compensate for the reduced cost of business off shore THAT would be a whole nother story.

peace

[KittyWampus]

44. Clark SAID Using TAX CODE!

He said that as part of his answer during the debate.

[bpilgrim]

49. he said a lot of things, like it's ok for our jobs to go overseas as well

thats what has folks upset. reinforing this trend doesn't sound like a good idea to me.

maybe he just miss-spoke :shrug:

peace

[KittyWampus]

114. Since You Can't Make A Case For Protectionism

Why do you really have to contribute to the conversation here?


Protectionsim for a DEVELOPED country such as the United States, by the way.

[Classical_Liberal]

118. What about the Asia Pacific region?

?

[camero]

116. Well, I hope he takes my idea then

Which is a tax on Multi-Nationals so that it makes it more expensive to make products in other countries than it is to make them here.

I don't think we need to be protectionist either. I would like to try other countries cultural foods and products that are different from ours. But at the same time, I think it is just another way for monopolistic corporations to take advantage of other countries wage and labor laws. And environmental laws also.

If they want to have plants in other countries, that's fine too. But don't ship those products back here. Use it to expand the market.

[Demobrat]

17. Wow. That will help him a lot around here.

Not.

[alfredo]

20. Software has become a commodity. Let's go where there is still

room for innovation. Let the Indians do yet another update to Outlook, let's look for something more cutting edge and profitable.

[w4rma]

26. If the other country's programmers are cutting their teeth on that

then there is nothing for American programmers to cut their teeth on. The result is lower wages and a phasing out of the American IT industry.

You want programming work done in 10 years after Clark's plan? Hire an Indian firm.

[bpilgrim]

27. all comodities should move offshore?

we haven't seen any fruit from that plan yet cept the 1 percent maybe.

the trend continues...

peace

[alfredo]

306. No, we should stop treading water and start moving.

Like they say about drug firms, it is not what is on the shelfs, it is what is coming down the pipeline. We need to look for new technologies. Not much is coming down the pipeline because Bush has killed our creativity, unless you are looking for more creative ways of killing people, or to spy on each other.

Do you know how we can get the software industry back? Can we make MS, and the other software companies bring their jobs back to the US?

[KittyWampus]

21. Clark Said To Keep Jobs Here Using TAX CODE

and creating new jobs by investing in science and technology

SPECIFICALLY ENERGY TECHNOLOGY

The fact is, Protectionism is a failed policy of the past and Democrats ought not embrace it.

Krugman, whose expertise is cited here often by many DU'ers agrees on this point.

He wrote and article entitled "Lumps of Labor"

Jobs are not a finite resource like gold or land. They can be created. The problem with Junior specifically is that he is NOT CREATING JOBS!

Also, having a middle class in India creates consumers for AMerican exports.

So I suggest that some DU'ers here stop their kneejek reactions to economic policy and do some freaking HOMEWORK.

[w4rma]

30. Expertise is the resource. That expertise is transfering to India. (n/t)

[Julien Sorel]

42. Behind the curve. The expertise is already there.

That's why companies are going there to get it.

[w4rma]

46. No. The expertise is being created there, instead.

At salaries 1/10th of American salaries.

There is no incentive to hire an American software engineer when one can hire 10 Indian software engineers for the same price.

And this problem isn't limited to software (as Clark seems to believe). It is also, accountants, all scientists, all engineers.

[Julien Sorel]

81. The ability to write code is something any reasonably bright

12 year old can do. We don't have the power, to paraphrase your great leader, to force other countries to stop teaching their citizens how to develop software.

[Classical_Liberal]

87. Nor can we stop them from usurping this green technology savior

Unless you think everyone in America is smarter then a reasonaby bright twelve year old. What is your point?

[Julien Sorel]

100. You're stuck in the same mindset.

We were dominant in software/technology for 25 years or so; in that time we made trillions from it. We move to the next area, get a lead in that, and when/if the rest of the world catches up to that, move on again. Just as we were once the undisputed leader in manufacturing and agriculture, and then moved that domination to technology and information as the rest of the world caught up. There is no end; that's why it's called progress. You can stick your head in the sand and cry for protectionism all you want, but progress will happen in the world whether we as a nation lead it, participate in it, or hide behind protectionist tariffs while other countries move ahead. I'd rather be the leader in new industries than just another player in the old ones, especially when other people can do the same thing cheaper.

Notice that manufacturing and agriculture still make up a significant part of our economy. As a nation, we simply expanded beyond that economic model. It's the only way to keep a relatively high income: we have to have, and continue to find, a competitive advantage, something other countries can't do at all or as well. The fact that U.S. companies are willing to move these jobs offshore should tell you that we have no competitive advantage in software any longer.

[Classical_Liberal]

108. Since those jobs aren't low tech it shows me there

is no high tech industry where we have a competative advantage, and that would include green technology.

[Julien Sorel]

159. Still stuck.

Those jobs are becoming 'low-tech.' That's what the market is telling us. Technology is a function of capability and knowledge, not complexity, for the purpose of this issue. It is probably true that the innovational 'catch-up' cycle is becoming shorter, but there's nothing we can do about it, and protectionism isn't going to do a thing except keep us wasting capital on a stagnant and increasingly commoditized industry. That's how societies and economies stagnate.

[Classical_Liberal]

249. Whatever that means, with no citation or examples provided as usual

You guys were saying the same things in the 90s promising to unionize service industries, and retraing, and it didn't happen. I learned computer skills to get out of the stupid service industry and you stick me in it again. After a while people just don't give a shit anymore.

[Must_B_Free]

119. Both you guys are full of crap

1. The reality is that India is a different culture and even fluent english speakers cannot communicate effectively with Americans because they speak India-British english, not American corporate english.

2. Americans know they are being scalped and sold out, so they are generally not that excited about working with indian "scabs" - which is what they effectively are - people working for less to take away your job.

3. The expertise is not there - here's why. Take a high paying job - typically based around a high cost American software package. They don't use that stuff in indian industry because it is cheaper to code from the gound up, so the expertise is from the pure code level, not from experience level. That being said, there are many brilliant exports out of the billions of people in India. Every desi I've worked with recently has been very good.

4. If you don't spend time in the US you won't have the cultural skill to take over a high paying job. Hindus in American culture are like a deer in the headlights. They stand out as much as an American in Hindu culture. Standing out and being different or having special needs is not a plus in corporate environment. Eating veggies only doesn't fit in well when everyone else is ordering meat. Wearing a dot in the middle of your forehead scares american people (Try a wedding ring instead.)

5. Indian workers have a bad reputation for the lies they have to tell to make up to compensate for #3. Typically, they take liberties in lying on resumees, usually at the behest of the visa holder who is losing money on benched resources. And if your name is Patel, for example, you can't even get a visa anymore, because they figured out that all Patels are born scheisters.

6. People resent customer service coming from a foreign culture. It's bad enough that you have to call for help - having to communicate across a launguage/accent/culture barrier is insult ontop of injury.

7. Cultural conventions wreak havoc on the work. If you are Asian and you don't understand something, you are taught to nod you head, smile, pretend that you do, and then figure it the heck out when you are not in the meeting. Americans have no problem admitting that they didn't understand something and asking for clarification. In asian culture, this is a sign of weakness, so it is not done.

8. Shaking your head from side to side means "yes" in many parts of India. Wobbeling your head from side to side means "I'm thinking about it", but generally is just scary to Americans.

9. The Indian-British politeisms are annoying. "Kindly make it as such" and other things that Americans just don't say sometimes are just annoying if not laughable.

[w4rma]

127. You're arguing on a basis of cultural and/or ethnic superiority?

:puke:

You think they are dumb? You think they can't learn? At 1/10th of the salary you don't think that a few cultural differences wouldn't matter all that much?

[Must_B_Free]

148. Familiarity, not superiority

big difference.

A little difference is all the difference in a failure situation.

"Noone ever got fired for buying IBM" - i.e. cut corners and fail and that savings wasn't worth it.

[w4rma]

170. 1/10th of the salary

Keep saying that, because if you are an engineer, an accountant, a scientist then you are competing against someone who will work at 1/10th your salary.

Language problems? X big buisness can require them to know english or cheeply send them to a school that teaches english. Cultural problems? You don't think they'll pick up American culture after a year or two or three of working at X big buisness? Their culture is to cut corners? That fits right in there with corporate culture, even if I thought that this was true about Indian culture.

[Must_B_Free]

218. Response

Keep saying that, because if you are an engineer, an accountant, a scientist then you are competing against someone who will work at 1/10th your salary.

Been hearing it for years. how come I am still employed at the same rate? And Integration is done on site. How do you outsource onsite work? have you ever considered the challenges of relocating operations to a country where electricity and water are not on 24 hours?

And "1/10 the salary" is only in India (where rates are now rising) I'd say that H1B's work for half the money of an American, and they do it to break even in hopes that after 3 years of indentured servitude, they will get a green card and finally cash in and never go back to India. Word on the street is that Romania is eating India's lunch on H1Bs because they are better English speakers.

Language problems? X big buisness can require them to know english or cheeply send them to a school that teaches english.

They already do, and look at what it got Dell...

Cultural problems? You don't think they'll pick up American culture after a year or two or three of working at X big buisness?

"1/10the salary" is only in India, where living is 15th the cost in the US. How do they pick up american culture while still living in India?

Anyway, it takes more than 36 months to fit into a culture. One of my best friends is here a little more than that time and he is not fully acclimated still.

Their culture is to cut corners? That fits right in there with corporate culture, even if I thought that this was true about Indian culture.

Your interpretation of my statement is wrong. I said that the visa holders, i.e. the head hunters, will put together fake resumes to get their bench people hired. I hardly call this "cutting corners", I call it "fraud". It has nothing to do with the integrity of the resource who is being abused by working for sub standard wages for the position that used to belong to an American.

[w4rma]

238. I hope you don't really believe this

(India is) a country where electricity and water are not on 24 hours.

Dell said they did too much, too fast. I take that to mean that they'll ship them off slower and less obviously.

How do they pick up American culture while still living in India? By talking to Americans over the phone they'll pick up enough, they don't have to be perfect - American nerds aren't always fantastic socially either, to be worth their price which is less than an American minimum wage.

[Must_B_Free]

317. I do believe this

(India is) a country where electricity and water are not on 24 hours.

Matter of fact. In Bombay it is on 24/7 maybe, but not in most places.

Look - all of what I have said is from experience. I have been an IT contractor for the last 7 years and practically everyone I know is Desi. I ask them all about India, Hindu culture, and what it is like where they live. My friends come from all over India and it is an immensely diverse place in itself. One of my friends told me he grew up in a two room house and that was not at all uncommon. They sleep on cotton mats. Many people sleep outside, on the roof, because it is cool up there.

My friend was selling water filters before he became an programmer. He told me of how one customer showed him how he hooks up the filter, this big electric device - he goes out and casts bare wires over a nearby power line. This is what it is like in India.

I don't know what kind of place you think it is. You think it's just like Orange County or something?

[redqueen]

359. Stop talking to people and read

This perception you have that India is mostly rural is 9/10th's right, but that last 10% is going to bite you in the ass, and soon.

My company has at least four immense development centers in India, all located in large cities, in which, yes, they have electricity 24 hours a day.

Yes the 'middle' classes live shabbily. That's what happens when you have cheap labor. It drives down wages across the entire spectrum of the workforce. That's why programmers are cheap there, because other jobs pay low.

However we're going to be joining them soon if we don't stop this now, or enforce organized labor rights in trade bills. I say this as if Americans can even organize and bargain freely here! :eyes:

Regarding your situation, you're right, some work has to be done onsite. However that's not much, and as communications improve it will be less and less. We have whole new SYSTEMS being done in India.

The tsunami of jobs out of the country has barely begun.

The denial on this thread is really really mind-blowing.

But then again, if I hadn't worked where I am now, I suppose I'd be blind to it as well.

Media's not really keen on telling us bad news lately, are they?

[kcwayne]

366. People made similar arguments about

Japan in the 60s. Guess where electronics manufacturing moved to.
They made the same argument about Taiwan and Korea in the 70s.
Guess where very high tech semi-conductor manufacturing and fab moved to in the 80s. We don't even make RAM in this country any more.
Or plasma screens, or TV's, or radios, or ......

Software is no different than any advanced high tech manufacturing process. It is on the early part of the huge ramp up in its cycle to be sourced overseas, and it won't come back any more than any manufacturing is coming back.

[politicat]

113. Not quite. Any bright 12 year old can write basic code that will perform

80% of the time.

It takes a "code artist" for lack of better term to write robust, quick code and make legacy code work.

Anyone can learn to do oil changes, but a you take the 1957 Chevy to the Master Mechanic who knows classic cars.

American code these days is like a coral reef, barnacled, layed and pasted over with updates, patches, and re-work. Good programmers - really good ones, like Mr. Politicat, who is in the top 1% and is highly sought after - have to know a little bit of everything, from assembly to C to Java. No bright 12 year old, or for that matter fresh college graduate, can possibly compete. In fact, they f#$k up the systems as often as they fix them.

If we ship all our skript kiddy and code monkey jobs overseas, then when it's time for Mr. Politicat and his peers to retire, we're sunk. No one will be coming up behind to replace them.

Clark's missing a major issue here - we have to keep a base for training our future software engineers here.

Politicat

[Must_B_Free]

150. good assessment and analogy

politicat... it's not as simple as 12 year old kids cranking out code.

[Julien Sorel]

174. And is Mr. Politicat in danger of being out of work any time soon?

[politicat]

299. Actually, yes. His contract can be cancelled with 30 days' notice.

While they have funding through June, the company can dissolve the contract at any time and give the local consultants' jobs to the Indian firm.

He's been looking around; wages are way down, and moving is not an option since we have a house and housing sales are down, too.

I can't find work because I don't have the 50K to buy into a practice and the state is in a hiring freeze so the state funded psych positions are frozen. I've worked as a tech writer, but those positions are vaped, too....

It's a scary place to be. I would wish it on no one.

Politicat

[Noordam]

22. Fuck you Clark

I posted that somebody was looking to do radiology(sp) in India and put out of work people making $250,000 per year.

Once you start moving the $250,000 per year jobs oversea because they can be done by people making $25,000, then only McJobs will be avail here.

[sandnsea]

29. Always look forward

That's what he was saying. It isn't so much that we lost routine software jobs, but that there was no investment in technology to create the next generation of jobs to immediately replace the lost jobs. I think that's an important part of the economic picture, foreign countries actually do have to have jobs and sound economies. I would rather they have jobs than having to live on UN food handouts and live in total poverty getting angrier at the US. But I also think there has to be more in the way of fair trade agreements to truly lift them up into a middle class standard and also allowing US companies to compete. I don't know what Clark's entire jobs and economic program is, but I doubt this one comment is the whole picture.

[gulliver]

32. I diagree with Clark on this one.

We don't need to be giving away high paying software jobs to India. That's one I don't think he has thought through yet. Hopefully he will correct it. Who does he think is running his web site?

On edit: I haven't actually seen the debate yet, so I may have missed his point.

[Julien Sorel]

35. He doesn't want to 'give away' the whole industry to India;

he wants to allow competition to make certain we, as a nation, are allocating our capital, intellectual as well as monetary, in the most efficient way possible. When the Indians, and the Chinese, and soon, the Thais for all anyone knows, can do the same thing we can in a certain field for 1/4 the cost, it's a screaming sign that that field has become commoditized, and excess profits, and therefore large salaries, aren't to be found there any longer. We can enact protectionist legislation, and have other countries be able to sell equivalent software for almost 1/4 the price our companies can, or we can lead the way into a new field, and seek excess profits there.

The booming future right now seems to be in environmental technologies and so on; if we can develop a lead in that field, we can set our price -- much as we did in software for so long. The days of software dominance are over, and all the protectionism in the world isn't going to bring it back. Want to remain dominant? Have some vision and stay ahead of the curve; don't hang on to industries that anyone can compete in. If you're doing the same thing everyone else is, why should anyone pay you any more than they pay the other guy??

Time to reply with a massive information dump from Whoreard Dean that has absolutely nothing to do with the topic, but will at least give you the appearance of having made an argument.

[ulysses]

36. we'll do what, exactly?

What jobs - flipping burgers? What incentives - tax cuts for corporations?

Clark needs to get a grip.

[KittyWampus]

63. YOU Need To Stop Posting Bullshit And LEARN

from the other DU'ers posting here.

I used to believe in Protectionism (although I didn't realise that was what it was called) until I started really paying attention closer to Paul Krugman's columns.

He wrote an article about a month and a half ago called Lumps of Labor.

I suggest you read it.

I will look for the clipping so you can check it out.

[ulysses]

66. well, hello.

Instead of telling me what to do - I don't generally respond very well to those kinds of things - perhaps you could answer the question. What is it that we're going to be doing if not high-paying jobs like those that used to be had in IT? What jobs aren't going to be exported?

[KittyWampus]

117. Green Technology & Environmental Reclaimation

That is what Clark said during the debate

That is what I've already posted throughtout this thread

But you are not interested in discussing an actual issue.

Just reguritating your own limited view and hackneyed rhetoric.

[Classical_Liberal]

120. What keeps green tech from going to india?

?

[KittyWampus]

344. Clark SAID HE'D USE TAX CODE~Jeebus You Are Dense

I have posted that umpteen times and yet you persist in NOT HEARING IT.

Didn't you listen to the debate or read the transcript?
Haven't you read any of Clark's Policy Papers?

During the debate Clark simply acknowledged Software jobs have ALREADY LEFT!

He didn't say he agreed with this or supported it or wants it to continue.

He then went on to say he plans on creating an environment where NEW high tech jobs will be created and KEPT HERE USING TAX CODE.

Damn!

[ulysses]

133. and when those get sent overseas

what then?

[Classical_Liberal]

69. I read it. He didn't explain it either

He just said it was a falacy but didn't explain why, nor did he document it.

[in_cog_ni_to]

38. If he does what he said he would do

like "We'll take away any incentives for companies that want to outsource or leave the country. And we'll have incentives for companies to create jobs in here.

I doubt that many IT jobs will continue to go to India. If they are given an incentive to keep those jobs here, I think they would. If their incentive to outsorce is taken away, they AIN'T going anywhere. IMCPO

We have other avenues we can grow...Energy and Environmental engineering. How long have we been screaming for an alternative fuel source? Clark WANTS to give incentives to further the technology. I say it's about damn time a president wants to explore and further the developement of an alternative fuel. We need it and he's ready and willing to do it.

[sujan]

39. go Clark

I agree with him on this.

[madrchsod]

40. he`s right

it`s nice to have someone who understands the future.

[bpilgrim]

45. another good reason for exporting our jobs overseas to benifit big $$$

the future is NOW, eh :shrug:

peace

[Noordam]

74. What Future working at McJobs for you nt

[kcwayne]

52. Clark does not understand the nature of monetizing innovation

R&D cannot be the economy's salvation when there is no way to capitalize the innovation by turning it into products from which businesses in OUR economy can be generated.

Large corporations are moving their engineering and R&D into cheap labor countries at an escalating rate. The resultant products will be produced in these cheap labor countries, not here.

The expectation these companies have is that there will be a market here for those products. This will be a dwindling market as there are no industries or services that can absorb the level of lost opportunities, and income declines.

Electronics, manufacturing, and software development have exited America and will not come back. Next up is biotech and food generation/processing. We have more engineers and scientists than any country in the world, but to what purpose will they be engaged? There are no industies on the horizon that will grow in the US that can use these skillsets.

Most of the innovation that has occurred in the US over the last 150 years has centered around building products faster, cheaper, and better. If we no longer build products, the need for US based engineers and scientists declines precipitously. We (engineers and scientists) will need to emigrate to other countries, the same way Indians and Chinese immigrated here over the last 30 years looing for opportunity in the field.

Our mantra over the last 30 years of heavy outsourcing has been that we will shift into services. But even the services sectors are being decimated in favor of cheap labor. And services are only needed in quanity by advanced economies. India and China have not advanced along the economic maturity curve to represent opportunities for US based services as yet.

No politicians are addressing this fundamental dislocation of our economy, and the implications are just as devastating as the worst abuses of the Bush Administration on security and domestic policy.

[kentuck]

54. Clark is trying to follow Clinton's policy on Nafta and WTO....

Somebody needs to tell him Clinton was way wrong.

[KittyWampus]

70. Krugman Making Clark's Point

Economists call it the "lump of labor fallacy." It's the idea that there is a fixed amount of work to be done in the world, so any increase in the amount each worker can produce reduces the number of available jobs. (A famous example: those dire warnings in the 1950's that automation would lead to mass unemployment.) As the derisive name suggests, it's an idea economists view with contempt, yet the fallacy makes a comeback whenever the economy is sluggish.

Sure enough, the lump-of-labor fallacy has resurfaced in the United States — but with a twist. Traditionally, it is a fallacy of the economically naïve left — for example, four years ago France's Socialist government tried to create more jobs by reducing the length of the workweek. But in America today you're more likely to hear lump-of-labor arguments from the right, as an excuse for the Bush administration's policy failures.

snip

But I was puzzled at first by the enthusiasm with which a relatively academic paper was seized upon by usually bullish, supposedly hardheaded business commentators. The puzzle vanished, however, when I read these remarks more carefully: they were mainly trying to make excuses for the administration's dismal job record. You see, they say, it's not that an economic policy consisting largely of tax cuts for the rich has failed to deliver. No, it's a structural problem with the economy, which just happens to have arisen now, and nobody could have done better.

Oh, well. But partisan politics aside, the growing lumpishness of American thinking about jobs is dangerous, in two ways.

First, it encourages fatalism — if politicians and the public believe that new jobs can't be created, they will stop pressuring our leaders to find more effective policies. And that would be a shame, since the Bush administration has resolutely refused to try the, policies most likely to improve the employment picture.

Since 2001, sensible economists have been pleading for federal aid to state and local governments so schoolteachers and police officers needn't be laid off because of a temporary fall in revenues. They've also urged the administration to stop dragging its heels on much-needed homeland security spending, not just because such spending is needed to make the country safer, but also because it would create jobs and put more income into the hands of Americans likely to spend it. (And if you're worried about spending's leading to increased deficits, why not cancel some of those long-run tax breaks for upper brackets?) Until we've done the obvious things, there's no reason to despair about job creation.

Second, lump-of-labor thinking — and the policy paralysis it encourages — feeds protectionism. If the public no longer believes that the economy can create new jobs, it will demand that we protect old jobs from new competitors in China and elsewhere.Economists can explain until they are blue in the face why limiting exports from developing countries would be a bad idea — why keeping our markets open to new producers is in America's interest both economically and diplomatically. But theoretical arguments for free trade will count for little if the real-world experience of jobs lost to Chinese competition can't be offset by a credible promise that new jobs will be created to replace them.

History seems to be repeating itself: a similar rush to blame foreigners for U.S. problems happened during Bush I's jobless recovery (which looked like a hiring boom compared with recent experience). Remember the president's literally nauseating trip to Japan in the company of auto executives? But if the early 1990's flirtation with protectionism had the feeling of farce, today's employment stagnation — and the protectionist talk now emanating from both parties — has the makings of tragedy. If we don't get some real job creation soon, the politics of jobs may become dangerously self-destructive.

Originally published in The New York Times, 10.7.03

[Classical_Liberal]

76. Doesn't do it for me

sorry. Tell me what jobs can't be done in India other than Wal mart workers waitressing and gass station attendents?

[KittyWampus]

86. Rejuvenating Our Environment & Retooling Our Economy For Green Technology

Homeland Security. How about developing the software to run these new technologies. Movies and entertainment.

And when we develope a solar oven how are the Indians going to afford to import them if they have no middle class.

And what would be wrong with working in Walmart if there were better wages and benefits?

I worked as a grocery store cashier when I was in college and LIKED the job. It was unionized and I got double time on weekends and health benefits.

Are you saying that there's something intrinsically beneath Americans to take those jobs?

Bascially, I trust Paul Krugman when it comes to Economics (especially since we are now in a GLOBAL Economy).

what the heck do you know?

[Classical_Liberal]

92. The indians can create their own businesses like we did

.
Most of those jobs do not have good wages and benefits. Unionized cashiers are rare. Clinton did nothing to change this either. If you weren't in college at the time you probably would have viewed it as being beneth you.

I don't want to lower this countries standard of living. I reject this completely.

If the IT jobs can be done more cheaply in India so can these green technology jobs. The masque is coming off Nafta. They want to lower the standard of living of all of us. The fact that it isn't grunt blue collar work that is leaving America now proves this.

[kcwayne]

91. Krugman's most salient point in this op-ed are

But theoretical arguments for free
trade will count for little if the real-world experience of jobs lost to Chinese competition can't be offset by a credible promise that new
jobs will be created to replace them.

and

If we don't get some real job creation soon, the politics of jobs may become dangerously self-destructive.

From my experience in the high tech and manufacturing industry for the last 25 years what we are seeing now is a sea change. Capital investment is occurring almost solely in China and India. Even Mexico is losing manufacturing base to China over the chase of cheap labor.

The loss of heavy manufacturing was offset somewhat by the creation of the consumer electronics industry in the 70's and 80's. There is no replacement industry for the loss of the electronics industry on the horizon. We are losing industry after industry, and without replacement opportunity, we are on the road to perdition, as Krugman suggests.

There is nothing we can sell to the Chinese that they can afford. If we development something that they can afford, they will copy it, violate our patents without compensation, and sell it back to us via the Wal-Mart distribution channel. As such there is no incentive for a US company to invest in R&D for products that they cannot get a return on.

Meanwhile, China offers up an endless supply of slave labor, and has meaningless R&D expenditure. We cannot compete with that, period.

Perhaps allowing patent holders to sue Wal-Mart for selling Chinese products that violate their patents would be a way to start leveling the playing field. Just one idea...

One approach wou

[redqueen]

362. I usually like Krugman, but he's waaaaay off on this one.

You can keep looking at him on that pedestal, and belive every word he says if you choose. I'm not a degreed economics professor at Princeton, but there are some really troubling assertions in this piece.

"Economists call it the "lump of labor fallacy." It's the idea that there is a fixed amount of work to be done in the world, so any increase in the amount each worker can produce reduces the number of available jobs."

He thinks there are infinite jobs avaialble? Is this the same Krugman that has trouble sleeping at night due to his own anticipation of a problem due to scarcity of capital? With no capital to create businesses, where will the 'infinite' number of jobs come from?

"A famous example: those dire warnings in the 1950's that automation would lead to mass unemployment.) As the derisive name suggests, it's an idea economists view with contempt, yet the fallacy makes a comeback whenever the economy is sluggish."

Here he's comparing a sea change in the way work is done -- which has only become possible in the last few years due to huge improvements in the speed & reliability of T1's and whatever other connections they use to send work back and forth -- to the minor shift of automating work in the 50's. At least with machines doing the work, you had to have people to build the machines, to maintain the machines, etc.

Now work is being done by people in another country. There are no machines. If there are, they're built and located in another country.

"First, it encourages fatalism — if politicians and the public believe that new jobs can't be created, they will stop pressuring our leaders to find more effective policies. And that would be a shame, since the Bush administration has resolutely refused to try the, policies most likely to improve the employment picture."

"More effective policies"? Huh? I really fail to see how changing policies will result in 3 Million new jobs anytime soon. :shrug:

"Since 2001, sensible economists have been pleading for federal aid to state and local governments so schoolteachers and police officers needn't be laid off because of a temporary fall in revenues. They've also urged the administration to stop dragging its heels on much-needed homeland security spending, not just because such spending is needed to make the country safer, but also because it would create jobs and put more income into the hands of Americans likely to spend it."

This sounds like homeland security stuff. Great. That's fantastic, except once the middle class has been decimated, whose taxes will pay for all this wonderful security? This is gov't subsidized work. Is he advocating pure socialism now? ;)

"Second, lump-of-labor thinking — and the policy paralysis it encourages — feeds protectionism. If the public no longer believes that the economy can create new jobs, it will demand that we protect old jobs from new competitors in China and elsewhere.Economists can explain until they are blue in the face why limiting exports from developing countries would be a bad idea — why keeping our markets open to new producers is in America's interest both economically and diplomatically. But theoretical arguments for free trade will count for little if the real-world experience of jobs lost to Chinese competition can't be offset by a credible promise that new jobs will be created to replace them."

Not going to get into the argument about whether anyone here will be able to afford these exports from China once our middle class has been decimated due to myriad factors... that's a whole other thread.

But would like to point out that Krugman, in this article, is talking about manufacturing. We're not. This thread is about intellectual capital. Once the majority of these jobs leave the US, graduates will follow. In India, they called it 'brain drain'. I'm betting they'll be using that term less and less as time passes.

"History seems to be repeating itself: a similar rush to blame foreigners for U.S. problems happened during Bush I's jobless recovery (which looked like a hiring boom compared with recent experience). Remember the president's literally nauseating trip to Japan in the company of auto executives? But if the early 1990's flirtation with protectionism had the feeling of farce, today's employment stagnation — and the protectionist talk now emanating from both parties — has the makings of tragedy. If we don't get some real job creation soon, the politics of jobs may become dangerously self-destructive."

I wonder if Krugman perceives the oncoming near decimation of the middle class. I don't think I'm alone in anticipating it, given the current circumstances.

[Donna Zen]

75. This is all written down

http://clark04.com/issues/manufacturing/

2. STOP REWARDING COMPANIES THAT MOVE JOBS OVERSEAS AND START REWARDING COMPANIES THAT PRODUCE IN AMERICA

* Require companies to disclose layoffs in America and job increases overseas. Consumer, investors, and workers all have the right to know which companies are moving which jobs overseas. As President, Wes Clark would work to develop a system of timely reporting to ensure that we have timely and accurate information on companies that export jobs.

* Stop rewarding companies that shift jobs overseas. As President, Wes Clark would eliminate government incentives for companies to shift jobs overseas.

* Stop tax breaks for companies that move overseas for tax reasons. Wes Clark would close outrageous loopholes in the tax code, like the ones that allow companies to avoid taxes by shifting income to Bermuda. In addition, Wes Clark would institute a 90-day review of all tax and spending provisions affecting large manufacturing firms. The review will focus on eliminating tax and spending provisions that give manufacturing firms incentives to move jobs overseas.

* "Buy American": As President, Wes Clark would strengthen America's manufacturing base by developing "Buy American" guidelines for defense and other government procurement.

* Deny government contracts to firms that move headquarters overseas for tax reasons or shift substantial numbers of U.S. jobs overseas. Wes Clark believes that companies should not be rewarded for moving their headquarters to overseas tax havens or shift substantial numbers of U.S. jobs abroad. As President, he will look for ways to make certain these companies are not rewarded with government contracts.

* Start rewarding companies that create jobs in America. As President, Wes Clark would seek to implement tax and spending initiatives - above and beyond the $10,000 job creation tax credit - that provide manufacturing firms the incentive to keep existing manufacturing jobs in the United States.

* Work to raise standards globally, creating a win-win for America's workers and for international development. Wes Clark would work with other countries to help raise their labor and environmental standards, transforming a race to the bottom into improvements benefit for America's workers and encourage international development. This will eliminate the rush of manufacturers to open factories in countries with hazardous factory conditions, forced labor, child labor, and suppression of freedom of association.

3. CREATE THE CONDITIONS FOR THE MANUFACTURING SECTOR OF THE FUTURE


* Reduce labor costs by making healthcare more affordable. The National Association of Manufacturers has stated that "the rising cost of health care coverage is one of the biggest impediments to sustained recovery in the manufacturing sector." The AFL-CIO's manufacturing agenda features health care reform as a central element. Wes Clark's health care plan would establish universal access to more affordable health care, while ensuring that America's families and employers get better value for their health dollars. Wes Clark also supports a comprehensive, meaningful, and affordable prescription drug benefit for Medicare.

* Promote Pension Reforms. Wes Clark will fight for pension reform to strengthen "defined benefit" pension plans. He will also explore ways to relieve companies of some pension burdens that make American companies less able to compete with the foreign manufacturers.

* Lower the cost of capital through deficit reduction and tax reform. Wes Clark's "Saving for America's Future" plan reduces the budget deficit every year, lowering interest rates. Lowering the cost of capital will allow America's companies to invest and grow. In addition, Wes Clark favors tax reform that makes the tax system simpler, fairer, more progressive, and more pro-growth.

* Implement regulatory reforms that are pro-market and pro-consumer. Too often, the Bush Administration has used regulatory reform to bail out corporations rather than promote true competition. As a result, regulations are standing in the way of efficiency improvements in many industries that would benefit consumers and businesses. Wes Clark would implement regulatory reforms that use market-based incentives while protecting the environment and consumers against abuses.

* Increase exports by consolidating and improving trade promotion. According to the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, ten federal agencies help U.S. firms export their products abroad. As President, Wes Clark would consolidate the trade promotion activities of the U.S. government into fewer agencies, which will save money and simplify government, helping manufacturing firms get what they need from their government and enabling more effective promotion of U.S. manufacturing exports.

* Invest in education and training. Wes Clark will soon release a detailed plan to improve education from cradle to grave. It will address improving the quality high schools and expanded access to college. It will also focus on improving job training programs and expanding continuing education for workers.

* Invest in innovations to keep U.S. manufacturing competitive. New technologies represent the future of American manufacturing. Wes Clark believes that America needs a new and more ambitious technology policy to encourage research and development to produce the next generation of breakthrough innovations.

* Expand the Manufacturing Extension Program (MEP). Wes Clark will reverse the Bush Administration's budget cuts for the Manufacturing Extension Program (MEP). This program is proven to help small and medium-sized manufacturers get the help they need in business planning and low-cost loans to be successful.

There is more at the link. Plus there is another section specific to job creation and the $100 billion. If you want to read it you might find it interesting, or you might prefer just hysterical postulating. The later will bring gossip, the former will bring knowledge...and it doesn't sound like Nafta-BigDawg. I can hear ol' Wes' handlers now...."not all IT jobs!!!" But we will lose some with or without goofy trade agreements. And yes, India really does have a very highly skilled work force, because they built on the British technical schools from the Raj. The secret is to be growing the next jobs, the replacement jobs of the future. And that means R and D and that means the government spending $$$ on us. Do nothing and hello third world. We want the highest paying jobs.

In Keene he was talking to someone about the Chinese developing high---high---high milage cars. In Clark's words, "there gonna hose us if we do nothing." This is happening now.

[BootinUp]

68. If you're going to criticize Clark by

taking one phrase out of context..then this can surely be done to any candidate. Read Clarks policy statments on his website and you'll see he has well thought out plans for this stage in the campaign. He was trying to make the point that for America to stay the leading economy in the world we must plan for the future not look to the past.

Jeez! Get a Clue folks

[w4rma]

78. Do you even know what context means? His whole statement is in context

above.

If you have some information that clairifies this statement, then you should provide more context to the context I've already provided.

[BootinUp]

96. The out of context

was probably unfair as a reply to your original post since you did include a lot more. However, when you say he is going to giveaway an industry that implies your interpretation ignored the context. I have already said read the man's positions in detail and someone I see has posted a plethora of info for you to read.

He certainly did not say he wanted to give anything away, he did say that the best answer to a problem that is already happening and is projected to worsen is a combination of tax incentives and new R&D spending supported by smart government policy. His choice of words could have been better as this is certainly a personal issue for many.

[w4rma]

98. Darn straight it's projected to wosen.

But, I am reading that Clark will do *nothing* to prevent software engineering jobs from being exported to Inida. He will, instead, tell American software engineers to retrain for some jobs created by his $100 billion plan that, IMHO, are in equal danger of being exported after that money runs out.

A software engineer spends *years* training to do that work and even more building up the experience and expertise neccessary to handle it well. That talent will no longer exist in decent numbers within America in a few years under Clark's plan.

[BootinUp]

126. I agree that this sounded bad

You said...
'I am reading that Clark will do *nothing* to prevent software engineering jobs from being exported to Inida'

That is just not accurate! He clearly said he would put incentives in place to slow down outsourcing!

I hope his campaign issues a statement about this, this was not a good way to express his policy.

[Classical_Liberal]

131. He also says it's ok if those jobs go over sees so why

is he trying to slow it down?

[BootinUp]

142. The ok part

was the part he f'd up...I thought I conceded that. But I do not believe he thinks its ok for Americans to loose jobs even software jobs.

[ulysses]

80. so...what's the future?

He was trying to make the point that for America to stay the leading economy in the world we must plan for the future not look to the past.

What does that future look like? I'm all for planning for the future, but for what, exactly, are we planning? Do you know? Does Clark?

[BootinUp]

97. 100 Year Vision

Well you kinda set this up neat so I hope no one minds me posting it. Taken form the www.clark04.com/vision page



The 100 Year Vision

by Wesley K. Clark


Looking ahead 100 years, the United States will be defined by our environment, both our physical environment and our legal, Constitutional environment. America needs to remain the most desirable country in the world, attracting talent and investment with the best physical and institutional environment in the world. But achieving our goals in these areas means we need to begin now. Environmentally, it means that we must do more to protect our natural resources, enabling us to extend their economic value indefinitely through wise natural resource extraction policies that protect the beauty and diversity of our American ecosystems - our seacoasts, mountains, wetlands, rain forests, alpine meadows, original timberlands and open prairies. We must balance carefully the short- term needs for commercial exploitation with longer-term respect for the natural gifts our country has received. We may also have to assist market-driven adjustments in urban and rural populations, as we did in the 19th Century with the Homestead Act.

Institutionally, our Constitution remains the wellspring of American freedom and prosperity. We must retain a pluralistic democracy, with institutional checks and balances that reflect the will of the majority while safeguarding the rights of the minority. We will seek to maximize the opportunities for private gain, consistent with concern for the public good. And the Clark administration will institute a culture of transparency and accountability, in which we set the world standard for good government. As new areas of concern arise - in the areas of intellectual property, bioethics, and other civil areas - we will assure continued access to the courts, as well as to the other branches of government, and a vibrant competitive media that informs our people and enables their effective participation in civic life. And even more importantly, we will assure in meeting the near term challenges of the day - whether they be terrorism or something else - that, we don't compromise the freedoms and rights which are the very essence of the America we are protecting.

If we are to remain competitive we will have to do more to develop our "human potential." To put it in a more familiar way, we should help every American to "be all he or she can be." For some this means only providing a framework of opportunities - for others it means more direct assistance in areas such as education, health care, and retirement security. And these are thirty year challenges - educating young people from preschool until they are at their most productive, helping adults transition from job to job and profession to profession during their adult lives; promoting physical vigor and good health through public health measures, improved diagnostics, preventive health, and continuing health care to extend longevity and productivity to our natural limits; and strengthening retirement security, simply because it is right; first for our society to assure that all its members who have contributed throughout their lifetimes are assured a minimal standard of living, and secondly to free the American worker and family to concentrate on the challenges of today. Such long-term challenges must be addressed right away, with a new urgency.

We have a solid foundation for meeting these challenges in many of the principles and programs already present today. They need not be enumerated here, except to argue for giving them the necessary priorities and resources. We can never ensure that every one has the same education, or health care, or retirement security, nor would we want to do so. But all Americans are better off when we ensure that each American will have fundamental educational skills and access to further educational development throughout their lives; that each American will have access to the diagnostic, preventive and acute health care and medicines needed for productive life, as well as some basic level of financial security in his or her retirement.

To do this we will have to get the resources and responsibilities right. In the first place, this means allocating responsibilities properly between public and private entities. Neither government nor "the market" is a universal tool - each must be used appropriately, whether the issues are in security, education, health or retirement. Then we must reexamine private versus public revenues and expenditures. We need to return to the aims of the 1990's when we sought to balance our federal budget and reduce the long- term public debt. Finally, it means properly allocating public responsibilities to regulate, outsource, or operate. This means retaining government regulation where necessary to meet public needs, and balancing the federal government's strengths of standardization and progressive financing with greater insights into the particular needs and challenges that State and local authorities bring.

As we work on education, health care, and retirement security we must also improve the business climate in the United States. This is not simply a matter of reducing interest rates and stimulating demand. Every year, this economy must create more than a million new jobs, just to maintain the same levels of employment, and to reduce unemployment to the levels achieved in the Clinton Administration, we must do much more immediately. This is in part a matter of smoothing the business cycle, with traditional monetary and fiscal tools, but as we improve communications and empower more international trade and finance, firms will naturally shift production and services to areas where the costs are lower. In the near term we should aim to create in America the best business environment in the world - using a variety of positive incentives to keep American jobs and businesses here, attract business from abroad, and to encourage the creation of new jobs, principally through the efforts of small business. These are not new concerns, but they must be addressed and resourced with a new urgency in facing the increasing challenges of technology and free trade. And labor must assist, promoting the attitudes, skills, education and labor mobility to enable long overdue hikes in the minimum wage in this country.

[ulysses]

164. that's fine

as far as a truckload of platitudes and nice-sounding catch-phrases goes. I'm still left curious about what Clark thinks we're all going to be doing in five, ten or fifteen years. He brought it up.

[in_cog_ni_to]

71. Another thing to point out about Clark is

the man use to TEACH economics. He is NOT a dummy! He has a Masters degree in ECONOMICS. He may just know a thing or two about what he's doing, just maybe. He sure knows a HELL of a lot more than that asshole squatting in the WH.

[Noordam]

77. Well he can teach in India

I will not vote if he is on the ticket.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

125. we should trust him because he has an economics degree?

Bush is an MBA, from HARVARD no less, doesn't mean a thing. Clark is full of it here:

"as we improve communications and empower more international trade and finance, firms will naturally shift production and services to areas where the costs are lower. In the near term we should aim to create in America the best business environment in the world - using a variety of positive incentives to keep American jobs and businesses here, attract business from abroad, and to encourage the creation of new jobs, principally through the efforts of small business."

We have to make ourselves attractive to corporations - yet our state governments are the ones who charter them? Why? We should allow our state chartered corporations to send jobs wherever it's cheapest for them, and we'll just hope they keep enough here at good wages for us?

Why do we have to give corporations "positive incentives" to hire people from the state that created them?

We've heard all this before.

[htuttle]

79. That's what we said about manufacturing!

Remember the 1980's, when all the tool and die makers were supposed to go back to school and get into computer professions?

Just saying.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

94. exactly what Clinton said to us, and what they said to Mexico about NAFTA

They said, don't worry about losing our all manufacuting jobs to Mexico, we'll all be highly paid computer programmers here. That lasted what, 5 years?

Now Mexico is complaining because after letting US corporations uproot whole cities to live in factory towns, and polluting the environment so badly children are being born WITHOUT BRAINS, they have fired everyone and moved to Communist China.

[Tom Rinaldo]

83. Wrong read

First, Clark is not advocating sending jobs overseas. Note again this comment:

"When I am president, the first thing I will have is $100 billion job creation program. Then we'll go and look at the tax code. We'll take away any incentives for companies that want to outsource or leave the country. And we'll have incentives for companies to create jobs in here."

He wants to make it harder, not easier, for companies to outsource jobs, and he wants new incentives for companies to create jobs here (and I will bet my bottom dollar he doesn't mean creating incentives for fast food restaurants, they don't seem to need any incentives).

You may or may not agree, but I think Clark's view is essentially that the world will eventually catch up tommorrow with technology created by the USA today, so we need to to use the advantage of our advanced post indudtrial base to stay ahead of that curve by constantly remaining on the cutting edge of creation. It is not that Clark literally wants to give away industries to anyone. Once, when I was very young, "Made in Japan" was a real put down, a sign of poor quality workmanship (late 50's I believe). That sure turned around. General Motors didn't want to give away the bulk of the automobile industry to Japan in the 1970's. The old textile mills in the North East of the last century didn't want to increasingly be replaced by third world production. That's not the point. Migration of skills resouces and technology can be managed to a point, and should be, to buffer dislocation and allow tiime for new industries to emerge. We do need to preserve a manufacturing base, but no government is powerful enough to completely freeze the status quo in place.

The information revolution that we spearheaded feeds into that dynamic. No longer does a third world nation need a completely modern infra structrure in order to turn out technologically current products for the market place. Computers are everywhere, and where there are computers, essentially all information is available, and software products do not need a good system of roads bridges, harbors, trains, ships and trucks to be economically transported. Distance is irrelevent. They are writing software in India, they will keep writing software in India, and they can write in cheaper than we do here. Even if good labor unions protected Indian workers, and sound environmental standards were enforced, Indian labor will remain cheaper than American labor. These facts can not be competely overridden by any policy of any government. Simplistic fortress America is no longer a viable option.

Globalization is a huge problem but it is not exclusively a political one. There are things a government can do to help preserve and protect jobs, and I know Bush isn't doing it, and I hope Clark is prepared to make a full scale effort to do so. I think he will. But Clark is also right about the overall shape of the future and he thinks we should do everything we can to be prepared for it. I think that is what his comments were directed at. I think he's right about that.

[robbedvoter]

84. His point: Let's not stop development - let's lead it!

We need to be on the cutting edge of technology - invent the newer software, while others get employment from our old skills. You really think you'll get those jobs back? Nope. We need to create the next software (and other things) jobs. Like the going on the moon thingy...

[w4rma]

88. How does America train new American developers to develop

How does America train new American software engineers to innovate if the only entry level positions are in other countries?

Note, it's not only entry level positions or only software engineering positions being exported it's the positions of experienced and expert engineers and scientists and accountants being exported. And the wages of those of us in America are dropping partially because of this.

[neuvocat]

102. Wrong

There aren't enough people in this country with Masters or PhD's in the technology fields. There are more MBA's than anything else, so
R & D suffers considerably.

[w4rma]

103. Where is the incentive to go into those fields if

the jobs are going to be exported out of the country?

Especially if you have to pay for over 8 years of education to get a PhD. And if all the software engineers are in India, why wouldn't the R&D be there too?

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

109. the top 10% of engineers will be paid quite well

The other 90% will be competeting with the 90% of Chinese and Indian engineers, so that US corporations can "reduce labor costs".

The result will be lower wages, which is always the point. Corporations want profit for management and shareholders, and want to pay as little to employees as possible - of course, that's the way the system is designed.

If 90% of Americans owned substantial shares of US corporations, and they made as much money off of that as they do in a job, then SURE, it would be great.

OBVIOUSLY that's not the case, and ignoring that fact is simply being deceptive.

That's why most people don't bother to vote, frankly.

[neuvocat]

122. I happen to be studying for that field.

So are a lot of people. The engineering program I'm in has a large number of students. A lot of them (not most) plan on pursuing graduate degrees, like myself.

[Tom Rinaldo]

132. This may not be popular, but I think it's blaming the messenger.

Clark wasn't laying out a sweeping economic proposal, he was giving a 60 second answer in a debate. He said he would look at the tax codes to see what could be done to prevent job export by creating financial disincentives to do so. He said he would create new incentives for creating jobs in America. He is concerned about job loss and will look into ways the government can counter it. But even if no American firm ever hired a single additional Indian software writer, Indian, and French, and British firms still will. And those firms will create finished software products that will compete with American software products, and they may sell at a lower price point. No one has a gun to my head making me buy shoes made in China but I can't remember the last pair of shoes that I bought that was exclusively made in the USA, can you?

Clark may or may not back the best proposals to maintain American jobs in America, but there is no one magic silver bullet to solve this problem. He was saying America needs to remain a leader in all emerging technologies, because technology migrates, with and without our direct help. That was his point. I don't care who is elected President. Even if Gephardt or Dennis gets the job, there will be more and more people writing quality soft ware in India and China ten years from now than there are now. They will do it cheaper than Americans. That is reality.

[w4rma]

137. Everything in can be done in China cheeper than in America

That's because their standard of living is lower and their salaries are lower.

Btw, this problem isn't limited to software engineers. It's every job that can be done through telecommunication, mail or over the internet.

Also, this problems involves *expert* and *middle-class* jobs. That means we are exporting our expertise and our middle-class.

[Tom Rinaldo]

143. Buy America Campaign

Are you suggesting that we bring that back? I pay extra for organic produce, to a point, then I buy the commercial crap because I can't afford the organic anymore.

[w4rma]

145. Nope. Because it won't work. It didn't before. I support changing the law

I do not support a consumer-oriented campaign. I support regulations to protect American workers, the American middle class, American expertise and American national security.

[Julien Sorel]

147. No, it can't.

And your statement reveals a shocking degree of ignorance. China does not have the infrastructure to compete with the U.S. in many different areas. China's roads and railroads are so backwards that transporting raw materials, labor, and finished goods adds huge costs to their production cycle. China is behind us in education. Language is an issue. The environment is an issue, and the efficiency of their physical capital is an issue. All these things add to the cost of production. It goes far beyond mere labor costs.

[w4rma]

153. Bull. China is building their infrastructure.

They have billions of destitute folks in rural China who provide manual labor for pennies who are building that infrastructure.

They have a strong educational system in their urban areas which is busy teaching them English, engineering, buisness, etc.

You greatly underestimate the capability of humans to grow and learn.

[SahaleArm]

297. We're educating the best China has to offer

Why not provide incentive to stay here. Back in '96, I was finishing my degree in computer engineering from a major university with an excellent engineering track record. 90% of my TA's were foreign students. How do we change that and how do we create incentives for foreign students to stay in America (H1-B's)? How do we get more Americans to take education seriously?

[Julien Sorel]

319. They *are* building infrastructure. It isn't built yet,

and it will take decades before they catch up to where we are now, let alone to where we ourselves will be in decades. And as they build, they pollute, which adds costs of its own to their ability to compete.

And no, I'm not the one who underestimates the ability of humans to grow and learn -- you are, with your whiny advocation of protectionism. I believe that Americans can out-grow, out-learn, and outcompete the rest of the world, because we start with the advantage of being the most developed country in the world. But if we take our ball and go home, and hide behind protectionism, we will stop growing and learning, as we cling to what worked in the past, while the rest of the world continues to advance. Protectionism is the fool's gold of economics.

[robbedvoter]

239. You can't take those back - create new ones!

You propose to shake down indians to give them back? Man has a solution to a problem. What's yours.

[ozone_man]

104. Unbelievable.

We flip burgers, while we send software to India? Sending services and now software to India and manufacturing to China is not a recipe for a healthy country. In my opinion, it is a recipe to shore up the corporate bottom line.

[Selwynn]

105. As a person in the software industry - can't say I like that sentiment

But we'll just have to see..

[Scott Lee]

112. First time I've seen Wes Clark put his foot in his mouth so far

It was bound to happen, I guess.

But hey, it might take some of the hate away from Dean for a few minutes.

[Walt Starr]

121. Clark was wavering as number one or two on my radar screen

until I read this.

I now place him squarely behind Lieberman.

[IranianDemocrat]

134. Are you kidding me?

Since when do you agree with a candidate on EVERYTHING.

[Walt Starr]

138. This one hits home

I work for a software company. As of right now, I'd vote for Bush over Clark.

[IranianDemocrat]

139. I have nothing more to say to you then.

/ignore

[DoveTurnedHawk]

146. Don't Believe the Hype, Walt Starr Has NEVER Been a Clark Supporter

He has said many negative things about Clark in the past. He appears to enjoy playing an "undecided" just to lend credibility to his oh-so-sincere conversions, however.

DTH

[Walt Starr]

151. Quote a single negative post of mine about Clark

You can't because I have never posted a negative thing about Clark before a few minutes ago.

Of course now, I'm nothing but negative on Clark now. He wants to export my job to India. He'll never get my vote.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

157. Ask and Ye Shall Receive: Walt Starr COLD BUSTED

This was an easy one, there are also others, including your sign-in to an "Anti-Clark Roll Call." This one was particularly apt, however, as it shows you doing the exact same thing you're doing now, namely taking one single issue as a litmus test against Clark.

It's really quite amusing.

DTH

--

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=424186#426309

Walt Starr (1000+ posts) Sun Sep-28-03 04:33 PM
Response to Original message

79. I think this has cost Clark my vote

I'm very disappointed. No vote for Clark in my state's primary.

Probably not, anyway.

SAVE MARTHA! If her stock sale was legit

[Walt Starr]

172. WTF is negative about that post?

You're reaching big time.

Read what I fucking said. Did I say I would not vote for him if he was nominated? NO, I said I was disappointed and it might have cost him my vote in my state's primary, yet it did not. Look at other posts of mine.

You're reaching and you know it. You're fishing because Clark fucked up big time with the software industry and you know it.

His bullshit is not going to hold up with software negineers now. He has lost as of today.

[Walt Starr]

173. WTF is negative about that post?

You're reaching big time.

Read what I fucking said. Did I say I would not vote for him if he was nominated? NO, I said I was disappointed and it might have cost him my vote in my state's primary, yet it did not. Look at other posts of mine.

You're reaching and you know it. You're fishing because Clark fucked up big time with the software industry and you know it.

His bullshit is not going to hold up with software negineers now. He has lost as of today.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

187. LOL! Now I'm Having Fun.

Here are some more, it's really quite easy, all you have to do is a simple archive search and scan your name in any Clark threads around late September and early October.

You hop around from candidate-to-candidate. There's nothing wrong with that, but for you to say you were never negative on Clark before is simply inaccurate. For you to imply that the loss of your support is supposed to be some kind of major deal is simply laughable.

DTH

--

Walt Starr (1000+ posts) Tue Sep-30-03 06:48 AM
Response to Reply #7

37. Yeah, I was almost sucked into the Clark trap

I was actually a Clark supporter for a few days, until the truth about his past started coming out on these boards.

Unfortunately, those days will probably be long gone as of tomorrow afternoon...

SAVE MARTHA! If her stock sale was legit, you must acquit!

--

Walt Starr (1000+ posts) Tue Sep-30-03 07:00 AM
Response to Reply #43

45. It's not the "meeting with party insiders" that is the problem here

It is spending his time meeting with party insiders on the last day of fund raising for the quarter.

SAVE MARTHA! If her stock sale was legit, you must acquit!

--

Walt Starr (1000+ posts) Wed Oct-01-03 06:51 PM
Response to Original message

45. I'm sorry if you're offended, but I prefer my Democratic Candidates

to actually be Democrats.

Failing to even register as a Democrat before announcing he was seaking the Democratic nomination has made Clark look like a fool, IMO.

SAVE MARTHA! If her stock sale was legit, you must acquit!

--

Walt Starr (1000+ posts) Wed Oct-01-03 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #41

83. He's running to have the Democratic label after his name

on a ballot for the presidency.

One would think he was sincere about wanting that label by taking it on with his voter registration.

I will not be voting for Clark. If he wanted to be the Democratic nominee, he should have registered as a Democrat before announcing.

SAVE MARTHA! If her stock sale was legit, you must acquit!

[Walt Starr]

201. Ahhh, all after it came out he was almost a Republican

It pissed me off, but I got over it.

And you know what, I might get over this one too, but he needs to clarify before I get over it. This one hits home bbecause where I sit, he wants to ship my job to India.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

204. My Hat's Off to You, Then

I actually respect that viewpoint.

Peace.

DTH

[IranianDemocrat]

135. BTW I can't believe you support Protectionism.

.

[Walt Starr]

140. I support me having a job

Right now, I'll vote for Bush over Clark.

[Myra]

183. If you've decided to vote Republican, aren't you on the wrong board?

I didn't think this was a gathering place for Bush boosters.

I thought we were here to discuss alternatives to Der Bush.

[Walt Starr]

186. Anybody who wants to ship MY job to India is a WORSE alternative

than Bush.

[wyldwolf]

141. You've said in two other threads you won't vote Clark if he gets the nod..

...you even implied you'd rather vote for Bush.

[Walt Starr]

144. Yep, today, after reading his statement

For the past week and a half, Clark was my number one choice right in front of Dean.

Not any longer, Clark is behind Bush after this bullshit statement.

My job comes before everything else.

[oxymoron]

149. yeah right...

I have seen your posts. You have consistently been against Clark. I am an undecided but, I am leaning heavily towards Clark. I don't make my decision based on a soundbite.

[Walt Starr]

154. Prove it

Link to one thread where I posted anthing negative about Clark before the timestamp on this thread.

You can't because they don't exist. I've been going between Clark and Dean for weeks now, and the past 10 days or so I was sure I was behind Clark.

But no, you are spewing misinformation about my past posts.

So back up your claims. Link to one thread where I have ever posted anything negative about Clark that is timestamped prior to this thread.

[oxymoron]

158. You alluded to it yourself.

...see above?

<on edit - I am speaking from memory, and if I am mistaken, I apologize.>

[Walt Starr]

162. Where, show the thread where I posted anything negative

prior to the timestamp on this thread.

It is this specific statement from Clark that set me off on him. He was mu number one choice before this crap came spewing from his mouth.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

166. Again I Call Bullshit

I told you two examples (and quoted one) above in post #158 where you've pulled the same BS against Clark in the past. I remember it well, you were very negative on him shortly after he came out.

Now I challenge YOU to come up with any public statements that Clark was your "number one choice" before this issue.

God, and that's even aside from the fact that you're taking one sound bite and morphing that into an entire position that he doesn't even hold.

DTH

[Walt Starr]

175. Nowe I call BULLSHIT

That was not a negative post. You are really reaching.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

189. Now See Post #187

This is fun. :-)

I also note with great interest that you have been unable to prove up with any recent posts of your own where you publicly claim Clark was your #1!

DTH

[w4rma]

197. In defense of Walt Starr

This doesn't show that Clark was his #1 choice, but it does show that he supported Clark over Kerry, Lieberman and Bush.

Hell, I'll even vote for Lieberman or Kerry if they win the nomination (Mon Nov-24-03 09:03 AM)

Okay, after today, I'm back to ABB (Sun Nov-23-03 03:59 PM)

[DoveTurnedHawk]

202. I Want To See a Recent Post That Backs Up His Claim That Clark Was His #1

I'm not contesting that he didn't feel Clark was the anti-Christ before his one-liner.

DTH

[Walt Starr]

205. If the search was working for me, I could show you one...

from a couple of weeks ago where I stated explicitly I was wavering between Dean and Clark.

And since about the middle of October, I have. But tell me, how the fuck can you expect me to support a guy who just we may as well let my job get exported to India?

[DoveTurnedHawk]

210. Now See My Post #204

Once we get past all the rhetoric, I think we can actually have a reasonable conversation.

My only request would be that you read his writings on this at his website, and to listen over the next couple of days to see if he clarifies. Until then, it was one line, probably inartful, but please reserve judgment. I've heard him speak on this issue many times, and I am confident he's not a job-exporter.

He is a pragmatist and a realist, however, and he might not be as protectionist as some (including me) might want, but he sure as hell will do a lot better on this issue than Bush, and I bet he'll have other proposals and ideas up his sleeve to deal with this issue as the inevitability of India as an IT/software powerhouse continues to emerge.

DTH

[Walt Starr]

219. I'll give it a cooling off period

but he better clarify it. Nothing scares software engineers more than their job ending up overseas.

[arewethereyet]

156. on the one hand, the saddle makers decried the automobile

saying it would destroy their industry. And the automotive industry rose from those ashes.

But sofeware is different as it is not just another cog in the machine. It defines the business and if we give out our competetive advantage then we risk much.

[redqueen]

363. BINGO!!!!!!!!!

Not to mention security issues!

What systems are American firms farming out?

How desperate are the workers there? Will they sabotage the systems for monetary gain? How many muslim terrorists are in India?

[quaker bill]

176. Here is the damn problem with this theory

"We have got great scientists in this country", true, no doubt. But they never make up that large a portion of the population.

If the machine shops and fabrication facilities make these great ideas into useful products are off-shore, where do the people who are not and will never be great scientists, find work?

Don't tell me that better education is the answer. Educate all you wish, some people are just not born with the gifts to be great scientists.

The problem with unfettered free market economics is that types of employment move to areas with competitive advantage. This is exactly where the theory comes into conflict with population biology. The theory is very good for capitalism and very poor for compassion.

Our market and our economy may be transformed by the free market process, but our population is not. There is and will always be a significant portion of the population that needs reasonably well compensated work without major intellectual challenge (GW Bush for example). Levelling the playing field between them and folks in Mexico who will work for a small portion of their salary, and they will lose every time in a free market.

Income disparity will grow and the society will become increasingly two tiered. Those with the knowledge and the skills will design things and the rest will flip burgers for them.

Regulation (protectionism) is the only reasonable answer to this and the many other adverse effects of unfettered capitalism.

[DemCam]

177. Good grief...

Do you for one minute believe he was proposing to move all software companies to India?

He means that we need to invest in research, new technologies, new industries. We have the educational institutions, we have the wealth to fund research, we have a highly trained work force....all that needs to be utilized for jobs creation.

Honestly...that was one tiny sentence that cannot be taken literally. Remember the "vision thing."

Clinton was masterful at grasping the big picture. Clark is too. He gets excited about ideas and creativity.

Contrast that with four more years of Bush and what's happened to jobs.

Can you honestly say you want to stay with these idiots who don't have one single ounce of creative strategic planning except world domination and outsourcing all jobs except for a few of our very, very big and rich friends?

[neuvocat]

179. That's what I tried to tell him

but if he doesn't want to like a candidate then there's nothing you can do.

[Ksec]

181. steel has been fighting for help for years

where were you software guys ? No help me no help you.

[ulysses]

184. "Clinton was masterful at grasping the big picture. Clark is too."

Ok, fine. WHAT IS IT?

[BootinUp]

200. Would you take a look

at his issues page. There is quite a lot there that supports his vision with details. www.clark04.com/issues here are some of the topics there:

Policy Briefs:
-Wes Clark's Rural and Farm Security Plan
-Manufacturing Security Plan
-Al Qaeda Plan-Iraq Strategy A Real Plan for Success in Iraq
-Making Good on America's Promises-Wes Clark's commitment to American Indians and Alaska Natives
-Restarting the American Jobs Engine-Ensuring that Americans have the opportunity to get back to work as soon as possible
Standing Up for America's Workers-Protecting workers' rights to bargain collectively for the greater good
My Economic Vision: Jobs and Growth for All Americans-Growing the economy through responsible fiscal policies and smart stimulus programs
Invest in the Education of America's Future

there is more...

[ulysses]

229. the Cliff's Notes version would be fine.

Care to condense it for me? You can start with what the hell Clark thinks we'll all be doing in five, ten or fifteen years.

[BootinUp]

236. LOL

I don't think I can take you seriously...first I post a condensed version of the vision and that was just bs for you, then I show you where you can read more, and you want a condensed version. How can anyone answer this. If you want answers perhaps you can re-phrase the question for us?

[ulysses]

243. I want specifics.

You've posted a handful of links and a lot of tripe from Clark about a whole bunch of nothing that's meaningful. As to rephrasing the question, I've asked this one several times on this thread and have gotten no answer - what does Clark envision us doing for work five, ten or fifteen years from now?

[BootinUp]

259. I'll try

I think he wants to enable you and other Americans to have the job you want to have.

Clark's plan for the economy includes short term stimulus, direct job creation in the homeland security area, helping states fund education by returning some money to the states, improving healthcare by addressing the problems in the system. It is a deficit neutral plan that rolls back tax cuts on the wealthiest 2%. It does not increase burdens on those making less than 200K. He has positions on trade, monetary policy, etc.

His healthcare plan has gotten some very good reviews.
He also has proposals for education reforms and has talked about whats wrong with Bush's No Child Left Behind.

He borrows some of the best parts of the Clinton economic plans of the 90's and adds his own stimulus package and maybe that is how to best capture it in a sentence.

Cheers
Jim

[ulysses]

263. thank you

but he wants to enable you and other Americans to have the job you want to have isn't much of an answer to my question. I don't mean to rag on you, I just don't think Clark has much of a clue on the jobs front.

[Walt Starr]

185. Then Clark had better clarify his statement

Where I sit it sounds like he wants to export my job to India. He'd better move fast because there are tons of liberal Software Engineers in this country terrified of shit like what Clark just spewed!

[w4rma]

188. Yes. I do. At best, IMHO, he'll do nothing as specific industries leave

I do think he supports exporting this industry (and likely other industries which can be done via telecommunication and mail) to another country.

Read the defenses of so-called "free-trade" in this thread defending Clark

[Zynx]

190. I disagree with Clark on this one, but I could easily still vote for him.

[Walt Starr]

192. Are you a software engineer?

Didn't think so.

[Zynx]

195. No. But to me it was just a gaffe. As a Dean supporter it would be

hypocritical for me to criticize Clark for this. We all say dumb things after all.

[Walt Starr]

I would feel the same way about Dean if he said this crap!

But then again, this sort of shit directly affects my livlihood, so I have a vested ingterest.

When it comes down to where the rubber meets the road, I have to vote to keep my job and from where I sit, Clark is not the man to keep my ass employed.

[kiahzero]

208. No, but I am

And I can still support Clark.

[Walt Starr]

211. Then you're more secure in your postion than I am

I can't vote for anybody who says they want to ship my job to India.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

193. Oh Look, It's a Clark-Hating Thread From W4RMA

Surprise, surprise!

:eyes:

DTH

[FrenchieCat]

196. yep...

Pretty pathetic, I might add.

funny how 6 words from Clark can generate such furor!

Hope the policy paper will be read now.

CLARK CAN BEAT BUSH.....Get over it!

[w4rma]

199. If you think that this is *just* a Clark hating thread then you are naive.

FYI, this issue is *the* priority issue of mine and of many many other folks in America right now.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

206. Not *Just* a Clark-Hating Thread

But I'm glad you appear to concede your own (at least partial) motive in posting this.

I'll certainly agree that the broader issue is important. I vehemently disagree with taking a one-liner out-of-context with his longer writings on the very same subject, however.

DTH

[w4rma]

214. Do you even know what context means? His whole statement is in context

above.

If you have some information that clairifies this statement, then you should provide more context to the context I've already provided.

Yes, I am repeating myself:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=770078&mesg_id=770397&page=

[DoveTurnedHawk]

217. Yes I Know What Context Means

And context is not just the line before/line after, it's also the big picture of a candidate's expressed views. He has position papers on job outsourcing at his website. They're consistent with the earlier part of his quote above. You're pointing to one single sentence in a fast-moving debate.

Should we dissect every poorly-worded sentence spoken by YOUR candidate now?

DTH

[w4rma]

225. His whole statement is in context above. I read it. I understand it.

If you have additional context from another source, please provide it.

[oxymoron]

237. then why are you ignoring...

"We'll take away any incentives for companies that want to outsource or leave the country. And we'll have incentives for companies to create jobs in here."?

[w4rma]

240. "Energy and environmental engineering are two very fertile areas for the "

I paid attention. His $100 billion job creation program will do nothing for software engineers. His program might help energy and environmental engineers.

That said, the statement you pulled out is the only part of his statement that gives me some hope for Clark.

[BootinUp]

207. What would you do

about outsourcing of IT-semiconductor jobs by HP, Intel, AMD, IBM, microsoft etc,...honest question.

edited company list :)

[w4rma]

213. Regulate outsourcing. (n/t)

[BootinUp]

221. I wonder though

Can a candidate win the general election with that policy? Perhaps if it was a component of a plan but the Republicans will turn it against you and judging by past elections it seems easy to convince America that regulation is bad. So I think it would need to be presented carefully.

[w4rma]

230. For starters Clark could come out against H1-B visas by supporting HR2688

H.R.2688, To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to repeal authorities relating to H1-B visas for temporary workers.

Summary:
Amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to repeal H-1B visa (temporary/specialty worker) and related authorities.

Current Status:
Refered to the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims
http://www.house.gov/tancredo/Immigration/legislation.html#hr2688
http://www.h1bvisasucks.com/H1BDiscussions_solutions_tancredo.htm

Or a similar bill.

[SahaleArm]

326. Support Tom Tancredo and his anti-immigrant policy?

I hope Clark never supports that abomination.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

234. does you average Republican and independent love outsourcing?

Do you think that Republicans and independents, in a Bush vs. Clark race, are going to react negatively with Clark saying "American companies shoud hire American workers"?

No way. If Clark can't say that, he's not trying to win the votes of Democrats, and independents and Republicans, he's trying to get the corporate media vote.

[BootinUp]

241. You overlook history and underestimate

the opponents.

There are many liberal economic policies that in yours or my mind make sense and should be easy to sell. For some reason we the Democrats, the party that looks after the average American, have lost the Executive branch, the House, and the Senate.

Personally, after listening to all these candidates, I believe Clark and Dean are the best 'salesmen'. Dean recently made his re-regulation statement. Clark said he disagreed. Neither presented much in detail 'substance' on the issue of regulation. The reason why is its dangerous territory going into the general election and they want to have it both ways they want wiggle room, both of them.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

The one that says openly that I should get a raise gets my vote

America wants a candidate that will raise American living standards. America wants a candidate that is for middle class working Americans, and we don't give a damn about the profits of rich people.

If Clark lets Bush pull some nonsense because he's too afraid of looking "protectionist" or "pandering" or "liberal" to the corporate press than he's not worth my vote.

Clark has great sybolic potential, instead of ground level political experience like Gephardt has. If Clark won't use his sybolic potential to help my side, then I have no use for him, and instead the election will be about gay marriage. Clark's a smart guy, he can decide if he wants to win or not.

[FrenchieCat]

212. Look...

You never supported Clark. Yep, I think it's jealousy and desperation. Call me naive.......But I think not.

I have been here long enough to know what's up.

and it ain't pretty, considering that most of us are grown up folks.

But that's OK....go ahead, you've made my day and proved my point.

[w4rma]

215. I supported Gen. Clark for Vice President. I no longer do.

I am extremely unsatisfied by so-called "free-trade" defenses of Gen. Clark's statement.

Note, DoveTurnedHawk's post #210 in defense of Gen. Clark is probably the best defense I've seen on this thread. He suggests a wait and see approach:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=770078&mesg_id=771052

[neuvocat]

223. News flash for you:

Clark isn't running for VP, so supporting him as such doesn't mean a thing.

[neuvocat]

231. Just another Clark hating thread.

But you must think its special because you posted it.

ZZzzzzzz....

[neuvocat]

226. I noticed one thing about all this:

you wouldn't have paid Clark any attention if he weren't a threat to Dean.

[w4rma]

242. Again, I'll repeat myself.

If you think that this is *just* a Clark hating thread then you are naive. FYI, this issue is *the* priority issue of mine and of many many other folks in America right now.

[neuvocat]

244. This is just another Clark bashing thread.

Quit repeating yourself and quit wasting everyone's time.

[w4rma]

246. Now you're repeating yourself.

If you think that this is *just* a Clark hating thread then you are naive. FYI, this issue is *the* priority issue of mine and of many many other folks in America right now.

[neuvocat]

247. Why not bash some other candidate?

Why not just use a few choice words and use them to try and completely discredit their campaign?

[w4rma]

250. Has another candidate said this or something similar?

Other than Lieberman?

To my knowledge, no other candidate has.

[neuvocat]

251. But you'll leave Lieberman alone apparently.

Sad.

[w4rma]

253. You still don't get it.

Look at how quickly this thread exploded and look at the size of it. Most of the remarks are wholehartedly against Clark's position on this. Do you really think this is a wise position for Clark to take?

[neuvocat]

256. I *DO* get it, unfortunately.

You're trying your best to discredit Clark based on a few words that he mentioned during the debate. You take them out of context and then you also add your own content for good measure. That's just sad and desparate.

If you were so concerned about this thread, what posessed to start off with something so juvenile and inflammatory? Did you really think you weren't gonna get called on this little stunt you're trying to pull right now?

AND if you were paying attention to the earlier parts in the thread you'll notice that I'm in that same field you mention. If you really were in it like you say you are you wouldn't feel so threatened by those remarks because you'd have a clue as to what's going on.

I just called you on the Clark bashing again and you took the dodge again. You wouldn't be acting like this if Clark wasn't such a threat to the Dean candidacy, pure and simple.

[Tom Rinaldo]

290. I don't think this is an intrinsically Clark hating thread

and I support Clark. I agree that the issue being discussed is critically important to most if not all of us. I have been torn between wanting to follow this thread and wanting to see the debate rebroadcast, which I missed seeing live. It just ended, so I have not read most of what has been said here, and I would not be surprised if some bashing weren't taking place here since it has on every other DU thread about any candidate, but there is real substance here too. I managed to slip in a couple of posts earlier, and I apologize if some have addressed my chosen themes without me now being aware of what you wrote.

My main point is/was that a lot of emotional content was projected onto Clark's short debate comment about "let India write the software". I think it was a quickly thrown off rhetorical phrase, poorly chosen I would conceed. It wasn't some type of Royal decree by which Clark was officially ceeding the future of software development to India. It was said in the tone one might use when someone says "but what if the neighbors find out and gossip about this" and one replies, "let them talk!" It is a tone of defiance and optimism about the American inventive capacity that Clark was trying to strike. That being said, the issue of job loss is very real, and the loss of software jobs is a very real compoonent of job loss.

Underlying Clark's short comment I believe was what some might feel is a near fatalistic assumption; Countries less developed than the U.S. are continually striving to advance their own economies and create wealth for their own citizens, same as we do here. Even if somehow the U.S. Congress were to pass legislation submitted by a Democratic Party President that somehow forbade the outsourcing of a single American software job, software programming will continue in grow in India, and elsewhere. If no U.S. company were ever again allowed to replace a single American software writer with a foreign one, British companies still might. And even if British companies didn't, new Indian companies would eventually emerge to create and market their own new software program packages. And if those packages were good enough, and if they were cheap enough by a wide enough margin, they would find an eager world market and displace American products. U.S. companies making similar more expensive products would suffer. Even if U.S. consumers and companies were somehow forbidden to purchase foreign products, or if new trade barriers imposed high enough tarrifs so that U.S. products remained competitive in our own domestic market, both the cost of living and the cost of doing business in this country would rise, making the U.S. less competitive in other areas, with economic consequences. These are complex issues.

Clark wasn't "giving away" U.S. jobs and industries. The rest of his comments indicated that he would make an effort to preserve current U.S. jobs, and create incentives to replace those jobs that can not be saved. Clark's comments were forward looking on the topic of investing in America much more than they were a commentary about what steps could or could not be taken to protect jobs in American industries currently under seige. It was a 60 second extended sound bite, not an fully developed economic blue print. It left unspoken what forms of regulation, or reregulation, or derregulation, Clark would or would not support. And no one else in that debate offered anything more specific either. Clark is now on record favoring the repeal of all tax incentives that contribute to the outsourcing of American jobs. He wants new tax incentives for American companies to create American jobs. He wants to invest money supporting emerging areas of new technology, such as energy and the environment, that he feels the United States can and should dominate far into the coming decade. He said no more, or no less, than that in a 60 second off the cuff reply to a detailed question that he had no opportunity to preview.

The problem Clark had was he tried to honestly answer the question as opposed to spinning off immediately into some pre rehearsed spiel about the importance of jobs to America. That's what most politicians do at a moment like that. They duck the question and say what they always planned to say anyway. Suppose Gephardt or Dean or Kerry had said something like this: "I feel for the family of each and every software writer who sees his job being shipped off to India. The jobs that we are loosing every year under the Bush administration are good paying jobs, jobs that support the American dream. Bush praises the economic turn around he sees in the latest statistics, but he fails to note the increase in part time jobs, of jobs without benefits, of low paying food service jobs replacing managerial jobs, and manufacturing jobs. Bush doesn't get it but I do. We are facing a growing economic crisis, and I promise you this. One of the first things I will do when I take office is submit legislation to ensure that no American corporation will ever again receive special interest tax credits while they are busy shipping American jobs overseas."

Would that have given anyone any more real information? That's what politicians usually say when hit like that with a specific question about the projected growth rate of the software industry in India over the next ten years. One it would be impossible to specifically prep for. Sometimes Clark gets in trouble for being thoughtful when he should stay rhetoric. There are unanswered questions about Clarks detailed economic plans sure, but to somehow twist his simple bravado comment about American ingenuity into a premeditated policy to surrender the software industry to India is much more than a stretch.

[CivilRightsNow]

235. Clark... NED... Republican Lite

Spin some more, oh spin masters. It's okay. Cause if you want to believe in anything enough, it makes it real.

Just like Pinocchio.

This statement doesnt surprize me, but then again, I havent fallen for the BS. Bush and Clark are two sides of the same coin.

Ive watched half of my friends and family lose their jobs in the last year. Californians make more then Georgian programmers??? AHAHAHAHAHA. Yeah, okay. 5 years ago, maybe. 3-5K more when the cost of a shack in cali is a quarter of a million dollars.

But everyone keeps falling for it hook line and sinker. Listen to all the other words he said, that's just one sentence.

It is one sentence that speaks VOLUMES.

And Krugman is a raving lunatic.

We're doomed if Clark and Bush are the only options on the ticket.

Sadly, that is exactly what is going to happen. It's so obvious that we are pretty much powerless to stop it.

Ill vote green because the Democratic party will offically have been taken over by the think tanks.

[FrenchieCat]

245. Go ahead.....

Make Bush's day

[CivilRightsNow]

252. Bush = Clark

One day you guys are gonna figure that out and feel like crap for what you've enabled.

It's like everyone puts their fingers in their ears and screams la la la la regardless of how many things that come out that are negative.

If Dean or Kucinich get the nomination Ill believe there is some hope.

[Bread and Circus]

267. Your statement = a big lie.....

The "Republican lite" ace played yet again.

How many times can it be played?

I don't know, it is a stacked deck.

[FrenchieCat]

269. Dean vote = bush win....

Yea, I said it, and I'll say it again:

Dean vote = Bush Win

[Bread and Circus]

248. Good, Energy is where we need to go....

C++ is not.

[annagull]

254. The candidate who's promoting FAIR trade will get my vote

I think Clark has the same philosophy as Clinton did, and although Bill was a great president, I always thought omitting wage and environmental rules from NAFTA and the WTO were terrible mistakes that we are now paying for. Outsourcing is just the latest case, as long as corporations can screw workers in other countries, our jobs will continue to go overseas.

[BootinUp]

264. Well does this get your vote?

http://clark04.com/issues/americasworkers/

snip
Promote free and fair trade. Trade has the potential to raise living standards both here and abroad, but we must ensure that the terms of trade are fair, and that we are competing on an equal playing field. Labor rights are human rights, and I'll treat them that way -- internationally-recognized core labor standards must be central elements of all new trade agreements. We must also improve our enforcement of labor provisions in existing agreements. Finally, we must be vigilant in our approach to unfair practices outside of the treaty context. For example, Bush has failed to prevent China from manipulating its currency, hurting American workers. As President, I'll do better.

snip

[SahaleArm]

257. Cry me a f*ckin River.

So a bunch certificate-driven web and gui jobs are going overseas? A majority of real software engineering (product development) is done right here in the US. If you want these jobs they're available and require a real degree (CS/EE, Masters, or PHD), not a certificate from ITT. That's right web-monkeys need not apply.

[bpilgrim]

260. yeah, if you ain't got a PHD who needs ya!

i hear ya...

peace

[SahaleArm]

265. Sorry I won't cry for the PSS/call center and web-monkey jobs lost.

Real innovation/product devlopment jobs can be had for people with CS/EE undergrad degrees. Certificate holders need not apply.

[bpilgrim]

271. of course you wont since you think so poorly of them

how considerite BUT another flaw in your argument that it also includes sw developement jobs as well not the sterotype you claim.

but who cares, right :shrug:

:hi:

peace

[SahaleArm]

277. No call center jobs are not software jobs.

If you want to know why the web-jockey market failed look no further than higher-ed. Foreign countries are cranking out masters and Phd candidates for American Universities. Most Americans are about the quick buck: MSCE, CCNA, Certificate-X, not undergrad EE/CS degrees.

[bpilgrim]

281. and it is not JUST call center jobs...

puleaze... and it IS about CORPORATE GREED, plain and simple, PROFIT over EVERYTHING. so save your spin for someone who doesn't know.

:hi:

peace

[SahaleArm]

282. Quit parroting the company line,

What software companies are outsourcing product development (R&D)?

[bpilgrim]

285. Microsoft, IBM, and others...

also that is only PART of the problem... software is need by all business today and more and more are goin abroad for not only developement but for support, management, security, call centers, etc.

it is a whole industry, think about it and stop trying to PRETEND this is a MINOR issue.

peace

[SahaleArm]

288. You are wrong, care to give me your source?

R&D locations for product development:

IBM (NY-State, Silicon Valley)
Microsoft (Redmond, Silicon Valley)
SUN (Silicon Valley, Boston)
HP (Silicon Valley, Boston)
Oracle (Silicon Valley)

Call Centers (India)
Contract Work (India - Wipro, Tata).

[bpilgrim]

292. Slowdown sending tech jobs overseas

U.S. tech services companies are also in on the game. Tech consultants such as IBM Global Services; Accenture, a Bermuda-based Arthur Andersen spinoff; Electronic Data Systems; Computer Sciences; and PricewaterhouseCoopers are all racing to set up overseas operations. Many go to India. Other hot spots include Ireland, the Philippines, Eastern Europe and China.

Although most of the overseas software work remains basic maintenance and applications development, vendors are moving up the value chain to software architecture, strategy and systems design. The Philadelphia Stock Exchange recently hired Cognizant Technology Solutions, which has a New Jersey headquarters and 10 development centers in India, to build new software architecture for its computer networks to run the exchange in real time.

more...
http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/news/4332672.htm



IBM Plans to Accelerate Offshore Outsourcing


Those whose jobs are being replaced say the move by IBM and other companies such as Microsoft, Oracle, and Hewlett-Packard is short-sighted and holds dangerous implications for the flagging U.S. economy.

“Sending many of the country's best paying and highest skilled jobs overseas is a dire economic threat to employees and their families,” says former IBM employee Lee Conrad. “It jeopardizes the financial well-being of middle-class professionals.”

Conrad says he wonders how an economic recovery can begin at home if high-tech companies such as IBM are laying off U.S. workers to create more jobs overseas.

more...
http://www.techsunite.org/news/techind/030722_ibm.cfm


MD State Lawmaker to Fight Export of Jobs

Studies estimate that at least 3.3 million private-sector white collar jobs will be exported in the next decade to nations such as Russia, China and India. There, workers with similar skills would perform them -- at much lower cost -- for firms such as Microsoft, IBM, the Bank of America and Hewlett-Packard.

Meanwhile, high-tech workers here at home would be jobless -- and the vaunted "information economy" which was supposed to make up for blue-collar job losses would not do so.

Menes admits her bill would affect few state government jobs, but it would have more impact on state contractors. And its real impact is as a signal to Maryland's high-tech companies. "It's a way to influence them," she points out.

"We have to take people to Annapolis who know the problem and get them to talk to the (legislative) committees about it" at next year’s hearings, she said. "That way they would understand its importance to you and to the rest of the labor movement."

more...
http://www.techsunite.org/news/techind/031020_md.cfm


Offshore Outsourcing: Global Economy Devalues U.S. Developers

U.S. companies are saving lots of money by sending IT jobs overseas. And angry, disillusioned developers are talking about everything from political activism to organized labor in the hopes of stemming the tide of lost jobs.

more...
http://www.projectcool.com/DevX/Article/17475

:hi:

peace

[SahaleArm]

294. The phony IT industry comes back to roost.

Consulting jobs are not product development. Opening Visual Studio, drawing your app, and clicking a button to hook it up to a database would be considered App development, but not product development. Those kind of jobs are not coming back.

Are you surprised that those jobs are being outsourced?

[bpilgrim]

298. the 'phony' IT industry built the sw that allows me to school you online

the references i posted above mention application developement as well as many other areas so stop SPINNING.

PROFIT over EVERYTHING i've known about for years...

peace

[SahaleArm]

304. Really, did the IT-services industry build the router, your browser?

Your argument is phoney and the software industry will thrive again provided we continue to do R&D.

[bpilgrim]

305. application developers and network engineers

application developers were mentioned in the article i posted and the fact that many router manufactures are racing to the bottom is no secret at least for me as i work for a large network hardware company.

i am glad that this medium leaves a record so folks can see your SPIN in chronological order so it won't be as confusing as sound-bytes.

peace

[SahaleArm]

309. A tech union web-site? Must be membership drive.

Router companies are moving R&D overseas, which ones? Cisco, Avaya, or Juniper are still doing R&D here in the US. What positions are moving overseas? VLSI design, Logic design, Fabrication?

[bpilgrim]

311. APPLICATION DEVELOPMENT - hello...

how many times do you need to hear it?

and i provided a bunch of links the first time you asked which you have chosen to ignore in front of everyone reading this thread.

can't debate with someone who ignores facts, good night.

peace

[SahaleArm]

315. Application development is a loaded term...

Does it mean contractor doing simple RAD? Outsourced.

Or embedded systems software? Not Outsourced.
Or building platforms/OS level components? Not Outsourced.
Designing router software? Not Outsourced.
Startups in Silicon Valley? Not Outsourced.
R&D or Hardware Design? Not Outsourced.

I could go on for days...

What kind of work do you do on the networking side?

[bpilgrim]

316. BS now you are try'n to shift from 'call centers' to RAD developers

like i said before if you don't got a PHD apparantly you don't care.

you are arguing that the underlying systems are more 'complex' than the software the rides on top of it? well i guess thats your opinion but i would say that is certainly debatable but there is no arguing that the applications that run on top are not complex even if they developed with RAD tools - another sw application

i find taking care of the hardware and network the easiest part of what i do and writing the code the MOST challenging... of course thats not hardware or OS design but the fact is the application developement side is certainly complex.

what do you do? let me guess... Linus Torvalds, B. Gates, Steve Wozniak or Jobs?
or you on the unknown hardware side?

and why do you support the exportation of not only jobs but our last best chance for the middle class since the end of wwII our high tech industry to benifit the few?

:shrug:

peace

[SahaleArm]

320. No, the middle-tier and top level are complex

But the complexity, in 90% of the cases, is not outsourced. Apps are still developed in the US (Adobe, Microsoft, Oracle, Peoplesoft, etc.). The jobs that are getting outsourced are contract work of building simple apps for end-customers (Wipro & Tata). That it's being outsourced due to lack of required skills should not be surprising.

And you can stop lying about phd's. I said undergrads, masters, or phd's; education priorities in America are completely out of wack.

[bpilgrim]

351. more BS

at least i provided sources all you do is rant and rave and change your story as your BS gets refuted.

hope that doesn't reflect poorly on clark.

and they are NOT out sourcing due to a lack of required skills but due to PROFIT you are now trying to have it BOTH WAYS... first they were just the less complex but now you are saying it is because we don't have enough skills.

you are just a shill for corporate propaganda, thanks for revealing yourself :hi:

peace

[SahaleArm]

368. You're the one fear mongering - How about some hard data?

Posting a tech union websites and an article about offshoring does not equate to *most* development leaving the work. Since when has anecodtoal information counted as fact?

If the job growth was strong - we wouldn't be having this argument as there would be enough work here and abroad. Outsourcing has been going on since the mid-90's, except the job market was growing so there was nothing to bitch about.

Job losses in the U.S. due to outsourcing of financial
services and technology work to low cost destinations like India will
be offset by new employment opportunities in emerging sectors of the
American economy, says a survey.

http://www.talkaboutinvestments.com/group/sci.econ/messages/197588.html

[bpilgrim]

373. you posted nothing cept 1 link, to a blog, to hide the source INDIA - lol

next

peace

[SahaleArm]

378. Since you won't post hard data - There's nothing to argue *nm*

[gulliver]

273. I think that is generally true....

However, the H-1B and L-1 visa programs and their current level of abuse have the potential to cut IT to the bone. The real tough software work is all but impossible to just ship overseas. It requires extensive knowledge of infrastructure and business domain that can't simply be sent over the Internet.

But with these two visa programs being abused, it becomes possible for foreign workers to "gestate" much more robust software skills. Since software is the business for so many businesses, deep mentoring of illegitimate H-1Bs and L-1s is simply handing over the keys to all future businesses to other countries.

[DemCam]

268. Got 'em all riled up now, Wes

Hang in there defenders...you're doing great. I like it when there's so much buzz.

[bpilgrim]

272. yeah, way to piss off potential supports

your campaign manager must be PSYCED :bounce:

peace

[neuvocat]

276. And who are you rooting for again?

You're not helping in this at all.

[bpilgrim]

279. democrats

who are gonna take this country back from corporate rule

peace

[neuvocat]

280. I like that answer. Seriously.

I take back my previous response to you and apologize.

[bpilgrim]

283. i figured you would ;-)

i really don't wanna fight with anyone here just tryin to stay focused... there are a few issues that i've had enough of, the exportaion of jobs aka 'the race to the bottom'.

i am willing to admit he probably gaffed but i am not willing to ignore posts that are tryin to sell that message here.

:hi:

peace

[FrenchieCat]

275. Me Too!

This is the most exciting candidate we've had in a long time.....

GO WES!

[politicat]

274. Come work in software for a while, Clark. Cuz they can't do it. They can't

compete.

Mr. Politicat is a consultant for a major software/hardware firm right now. They (the major firm, not Mr. Politicat's company) have just hired a group of Indian consultants at 27K a year plus housing (which puts them at about 40K) to do jobs that local programmers could do for about 55K a year and do properly. The Indian programmers are in country on HB-1 visas, and Mr. Politicat is effectively their team lead.

Mr. Politicat is having to teach these guys a lot of basic conventions. Things that, as a poster above noted, "any bright 12 year old can do". These guys are university graduates, have work experience in India and the UK, but don't know CODE. That's a problem.

I don't care if the next version of Outlook crashes and is bloated because it was crafted by code monkeys in some developing nation who don't know how to program well. That's minor.

I DO care if the software that handles air traffic control, water quality, the electrical grid, the gas pipelines, and the hundreds of other areas of infrastructural software controls crash occasionally. These sytems have to be bullet-proof, as the saying goes in the software industry and code monkeys can't do that. It takes software artists to write really, really good code.

Then there's the national security issue. The infrastructure software that runs this country was built here and presumably, since nothing has happened, was built by people unwilling to "soil their own nests". If we export all of the software jobs, that's an invitation for someone with a grudge to write software for us that will fail. No one would have to fly a plane into a building - they could just modify our air traffic control software during a planned update so that it fails.... and planes crash. It was just a bug, after all....

There are a few trillion reasons not to.... every line of code.

Politicat

[neuvocat]

286. They don't know code?

That's rather surprising. The national security issue I can understand but the coding? Interesting.

[bpilgrim]

291. nor do they do tech suppot well - Dell to bring some jobs back home

AUSTIN -- In a surprising about-face, Dell is returning some technical-support jobs from India to the United States.

The new U.S. employees will provide phone-based tech support for business customers. Dell employees in India have been answering some of those calls. Calls from individual customers will still be routed to call centers in India.

"We felt a little noise and angst from our customers, and we decided to make some changes," said Gary Cotshott, vice president of Dell's services division. "Sometimes, we move a little too far, too fast."

Dell's reversal comes as many U.S. companies are rushing to outsource operations to India and other nations with low labor costs. It suggests the savings some achieved by moving jobs overseas may sometimes be outweighed by the cost of antagonizing loyal customers.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/business/2242314


The squeaky wheel gets the grease--if it's a business wheel.

source...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=238549

:hi:

peace

[politicat]

303. It's the conventions they don't know. They know the languages, but the

conventions (documenting your code, commenting in the code, check in, check out, KISS, etc) are the things they're missing.

He says they can parrot the Java language (that's what they're using primarily) but seem to have never heard of basic concepts that our "bright 12 year olds" get - don't use 30 lines of code when 3 will do; comment each section of code as to what it is supposed to do in process of writing it; document the code in a word doc as you go along; always ensure that the legacy code remains uncorrupted; always use test machines, never production machines for testing.....

To use a linguistic analogy, It's not the words they're missing, it's the grammar, the idioms, and the structure.

And since computer languages are highly idiomatic, grammatical and structured, they're missing a big part of the language.

Politicat

[neuvocat]

321. Do you suppose the same is true for other cultures,

for example the russians and phillipinos because I vaguely remember jobs were being sent to their countries too.

(sorry if I used the wrong word to describe vastly different groups of people.)

[politicat]

334. I've had experience with 4 ethnic groups as HB-1 workers - Irish, Brits,

Russians and Indians.

The language barrier is a big issue. The idiom barrier is a bigger one.

My Russian co-workers and I did fairly well because I happen to speak Russian, so if we had a concept we couldn't make clear to each other, we could go back and forth between English, Russian and whatever computer language we were working with until we got it clear. However, my non-Russian speaking American colleagues had a rough time when our Russian colleagues didn't have good technical English. However, like most immigrants, Russians are reluctant to admit when they don't have a skill or knowledge that they feel we expect them to have and so will sometimes "overestimate" their abilities. (It seems to be universal whenever someone is uncomfortable with the environment they are in to downplay weaknesses. Probably related to survival.)

I separate Brits and Irish because they consider themselves distinct groups and I do as well. However, they have some things in common - as native English speakers, we had very few issues, except when it came to idiom.... and then well... idiom is always a problem. Idiom can be a problem between REGIONS of the same state. (The Babel effect is the curse of the human race....)

Cultural issues ,such as procedural issues, however, can vary greatly. The issue I see most often, however, is an unwillingness to adapt to styles and procedures of a new culutre if different ones were learned "at home". While this is a universal with some people, it seems to be a real issue with non-americans. It may be a mark of our culture that we are adaptable and self-confident enough to admit when we don't know something and change procedures when needed. Having not worked in all regions, I can't say if that's entirely true, but I have a suspicion it might be.

Our natal cultures dictate how we behave because what we grow up with is what is right and natural and obvious. I'm not saying that one is superior to another, but that two cultures can be very different and hard to integrate together or very easy to integrate. I believe that American culture and Indian culture may be two of the hard ones to get meshed.

For what it's worth.....

Politicat (who will get this article done tonight....)

[SahaleArm]

336. I find that H1-B's who do post-graduate degrees here in the US

are well integrated into the culture, speak english with good enough proficiency, and have no problems communicating. I know a lot of people here don't like H1-B's but we should be educating and keeping as many high-trained foreigners as we can. They're self-starters and made an effort to come here for a good education and a better way of life.

[politicat]

346. And you will find that I have no issues with highly trained workers of

any nation (provided they are living here and contributing to our economy if they're taking a US based paycheck - hopefully that's clear.)

Most end up staying, becoming citizens (or at least, their US born kids are) and being productive members of the multi-cultural society that we must be. (Look, my grandparents are immigrants - I'm not anti-immigration. I'm anti-exporting jobs and against importing unnecessary workers.)

I realize you have issues with certificate holders (who are not all bad; I've worked with several that are excellent at what they're trained to do) but not all americans are lazy, non-self-starters, and most want a good education and a better way of life. Please don't slander us that way... the freepers love to take things like that out of context and say (here I go.... Freeper soundbite...) "Liberals think Americans are not self starters and don't make an effort to get an education and don't wnat a better way of life."


Eep.

Politicat (Who WILL get this article done before noon!)

[SahaleArm]

371. I never said or implied that...

all americans are lazy, non-self-starters (except for myself:)). I'm against bringing in L-1 workers but believe that H1-B's will be a necessity if more americans eschew core science and math degrees.

I doubt freepers would err on the side of protectionism, unless they've caught Buchanan disease.

[Myra]

289. You know that's a really good point Politicat

(Tho' it would sound better if you didn't refer
to Indian software engineeers as "code monkeys".
That kind of talk can lead to culture bashing discourse
on the level of fuckedcompany.com.)

But there should be someplace to draw the line,
and programs that involve national security
are a good example. Maybe also programs that
are paid for with tax dollars.

It would be good for Clark to consider this issue
further, and possibly ammend his position. Give it
more granularity.

Does anyone remember a brief news story allowed
thru the almost impervious media whore wall
about how the GOP was outsourcing fund raising to India?
Gee, that might be a good thing for Clark point out.

(And just for the record, I'm a software professional
who'se job was outsourced to India recently and I had
to train my replacement. So this isn't a remote issue for me.
And also for the record, I have a higher opinion of
the general skill level of Indian software engineers than
you seem to. Maybe you're dealing with an inept company.
They exist everywhere.)

[Myra]

308. My apologies to Politicat for jumping on a phrase

that's more of an industry term.
I was PM'd and kindly educated on the subject.

[SahaleArm]

293. The same can be said of US citizens who get certificate degrees

99% of R&D (product-dev) is still done right here in the US. For many of the reasons stated above product development and engineering jobs will stay in the US. The best H1-B's are the ones educated in the US for post-graduate degrees and acclimated to the culture. They are as good as any US educated software engineer.

[politicat]

307. Sure... but the problem is when we use H1B instead of locals for standard

process.

Look, I don't have a problem with bringing in people from other places to do software here, as long as they are the best available. (They put the money right back into the economy and it's all good.)

I do have a problem with bringing in inferior outsiders when we have our own inferior programmers. (Oh... that doesn't sound right, does it? *grin*) Rephrase: I have a problem with bringing in international workers to do jobs that local workers can do. This area has a 14% unemployment or underemployment rate for tech professionals and these jobs weren't even offered locally. That is totally not acceptable, and while it's a corporate culture issue at the remaining nameless big hardware/software firm in the area, it's a corporate culture issue everywhere.

I know for a fact we have people in the area that could do the job that aren't working. And they'd do it for 40K ... but they have to have health insurance and FICA and SS matching and... and... all of the things that a foreign company doesn't have to have. They cost more. Therefore, even though they are better at what they do, they are not acceptable.

I do want R&D to stay here, but R&D will be where the junior programmers are... in about 3 years after the junior programmers start out. It takes about 3 years for a junior programmer to learn to be a Developer. And then... the R&D jobs will follow and what will we have then? Nothing.

Politicat

[SahaleArm]

310. You're right about bringing in inferior talent.

Regardless, most H1-B's are not just shipped here, they are educated at our institutions because 'locals' want entitlement not an education. It's as much a societal problem as anything else. Just look at the president:).

[politicat]

318. Actually, I disagree with the entitlement portion of that statement.

I'm on and off campus pretty heavily (CU Boulder, FWIW) and the kids going through school don't consider themselves "entitled" to anything - but they do believe that if they work hard and get a good education, they will be able to survive in the job market.

That said, very few people are like *. (Fortunately) He's an exception to every rule.

Possibly a mutant.

Which would explain a lot, wouldn't it?

Politicat

[SahaleArm]

322. Entitlement referred to non-degree certificate holders.

Any CS/EE major worth their salt will not strive for low-level jobs of drawing Apps using Visual Studio. Upper degree candidates in CS/EE were mostly foreign when I was in school. We need more students in America who want to get into those fields. Unfortunately math and science classes in most high-schools are pathetic.

[RetroLounge]

284. Ease up people! It was one sentence...

Clark did a great job tonight. Scored some great hits on the bush*.

It was one sentence, one that he can easily clarify tomorrow.

I will give him the benefit of the doubt. If he clears things up, then fine. It's not like I was going to vote for him anyhow, but really, it's one sentence. Sheesh.

Clark's line about bush* visiting british families of war dead and avoiding ours scored more points than anything.

Clark did great. Sharpton did great. Dean did great. Edwards impressed me. Kucinich is rocking. CMB was on as always. Kerry looked petulant and petty when he kept going back to Dean this and Dean that. And while he whines, Clark kicks his ass.

Good debate overall...

[returnable]

348. Thank you

A voice of reason in a sea of insanity.

:toast:

[ErasureAcer]

287. I agree with a Dean supporter on something...amazing.

With 6 percent of America unemployed, with those numbers really being more like 10-12% due to shoddy tracking of the unemployed, the last thing we should be doing is handing over an entire industry to another country.

This doesn't work one bit. The whole automotive fallout to other countries proved that all people end up doing when they lose their job is eat rabbits to survive for there is no job.

I'd rather have a software job than eating rabbits.

Clark's domestic policy sucks. Face it people.

[FrenchieCat]

300. I strongly disagree...

and so does Paul Krugman....

So There!

[Myra]

312. Oh great googly moogly I agree and disagree with everything here!

Ahhhhh!

I couldn't see the debate since I don't get MSNBC (dammit!)
so I'm depending on quotes.

I do think outsourcing is an important subject, but one line in
a (whore controlled debate) isn't an entire policy.

However, I would like Clark to flesh out his policy more because
I think it's a huge geo-political-economic issue.
And a huge domestic issue. Half the people I know are unemployed.
No shit. In NJ; in WA; in IL; everywhere I've lived.

As gulliver & politicat said, the H1 visa system
has been abused by the gov't big time to benefit companies.
Hell, Microsoft customizes some job descriptions so that they
can only apply to a preselected H1 (cheap) candidate.
There are a ton of H1 visas in the same jobs for which there
are a ton of jobless Americans.

No doubt, this is a huge problem, and an area I *HOPE*
Clark (and all Dem candidates) looks at.
That's a really important point you made gulliver & politicat!

That's separate from the issue of whether Indian tech workers
do a good job, and that's a matter of individual opinion
and different experiences. (I think they're generally a
well trained workforce.)

[bitchkitty]

323. Other things?

Thanks a lot, Wesley. I can't make a living doing what I love, so what do I do, move to India? Or drop my rates to $5 an hour so I can compete?

[Mairead]

324. One thing that too few people --amazingly including Clark, apparently,

seem to understand: you DON'T let basic industries--steel, software, etc.--escape. You protect them because if you don't, you're handing over control of your future.

Imagine if some bright spark decided that we should outsource the military. Keep the generals and admirals, but sack all the grunts and hire Russians and Indians instead, since they get paid much less. Would that be a good idea? If so/not, why?

The same is true, if not so glaringly obviously so, about steel and software and all the other basic industries.

Dennis Kucinich understands this, even if others don't or don't care.

[SahaleArm]

329. Protectionism isn't the answer - Adaption and Value-Add

Much to the chagrin of the protectionists on DU, product development jobs in the software industry aren't leaving the US. It's a cultural thing and the reason why US has always been on the forefront of driving technological change.

Why is Europe able to complete in the steel industry but not the US without protecionist measures? The Japanese have shown how to go from a nation without raw resources to a global economic powerhouse. How? By importing low-margin raw materials and exporting high-margin goods for the global market. If people here in the US expect to sit on our collective fat ass and have the world kiss our feet, we're in for a rude surprise.

I would highly suggest reading the Krugman piece above.

[Myra]

332. "...development jobs in the software industry aren't leaving the US."

Ok, now you totally lost me.
My former company laid off its entire
QA team and outsourced the function to India (then had us
train our replacements). They are sending development
to India incrementally, phasing it in.

So...you totally lost me with your declaration that
"...development jobs in the software industry aren't
leaving the US."

Do you mean they're not leaving in statistically significant
numbers?

[SahaleArm]

333. In order of magnitudal changes - Most Affected

(1) Call Center Jobs (enhanced by IP-Telephony)
(2) Simple Contract Jobs (RAD UI/DB)

That would cover about 90% of offshoring of jobs; Another 10% in various areas. Most companies are not offshoring their product development teams Dev, QA, Project Managers (lifeblood). We're aleady seeing the effects of the "too fast, too soon, not enough benefit" in call centers staring to return to the US.

What company did you work for?

[bpilgrim]

352. again with NOTHING to back up your claims

typical.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=770078&mesg_id=771876&page=

peace

[SahaleArm]

369. That link provides no hard data - But thanks for playing.

Read the link below 1 in 10 jobs, not the whole damn industry.

[Myra]

380. I'm sorry SahaleArm, that's just false

--"In order of magnitudal changes - Most Affected"
--(1) Call Center Jobs (enhanced by IP-Telephony)
--(2) Simple Contract Jobs (RAD UI/DB)
--That would cover about 90% of offshoring of jobs;
--Another 10% in various areas.

Please site a source and date for these statistics.
Also, are you in the software industry?
Furthermore, given the huge number of call center jobs
now in India, it doesn't mean that the number of outsourced
Dev and QA jobs is insignificant if it doesn't match the
huge number of outsourced call center jobs...yet.

--Most companies are not offshoring their product development
--teams Dev, QA,...

I don't know about "most," but a lot are.
Here are some companies from my state who are
(in addition to my former company):

http://www.washtech.org/wt/news/industry/display.php?ID_Content=4632

"AT&T Wireless Exporting Tech Jobs to India...as 70 percent of approximately 3,900 IT employees, most based at company facilities in Redmond and Bothell, Wash., will lose their jobs, say reliable sources at the company who asked not to be named.
...
India-based offshore outsourcing company Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) authored the plan. It details the scope of the project through the process of transferring software development and “sustainment” from AT&T Wireless employees to their Indian counterparts from TCS.
...
the average number of employees working in the state's wireless telecommunications industry stands at 12,983. If the estimated number of job cuts at AT&T Wireless proves to be accurate, the number of wireless telecommunications employees in the state could be reduced just over 20 percent to about 10,230."

http://seattle.bizjournals.com/seattle/stories/2003/08/11/story3.html

"Sea change: Overseas outsourcing could pose problems for tech sector
...
When Rajeev Agarwal left Microsoft Corp. in March 2000 to start his own custom software development firm, he knew it would be difficult to find qualified programmers here.
...
A few months later, Maq opened a software development facility in Bombay, India, where Agarwal said the costs of recruiting talented programmers is one-fourth what it is here.
...
Today, the 50-employee firm has 10 workers in Redmond, with the balance in Bombay. Several other Puget Sound-area companies -- including Amazon.com Inc., vCustomer Corp., RealNetworks Inc. and Click2learn Inc. -- also have large numbers of employees overseas."

There are really too many examples, from all over the US,
to list.

--What company did you work for?

That would be too much information for me to share in
this kind of forum. It's just personal.
But they already outsourced QA, 100%, and are phasing
dev to India.

--

On edit, trying to remove bizarre little frowny faces...
they're actually pretty funny.

[SahaleArm]

382. You and I both know WashTech has an agenda

albiet for greater good. Seems like a good way to drum up support:).

Smith said he requested the study after talking with members of the Washington Alliance of Technology Workers, or WashTech, a Seattle-based labor union with 350 dues-paying members, and TechNet, a lobbying organization for the technology industry with offices in Washington state, Texas, California and Massachusetts.

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

Today, the 50-employee firm has 10 workers in Redmond, with the balance in Bombay. Several other Puget Sound-area companies -- including Amazon.com Inc., vCustomer Corp., RealNetworks Inc. and Click2learn Inc. -- also have large numbers of employees overseas."

No mention of what types of jobs have gone over seas? Real's development work is done right on the waterfront.

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

According to Cambridge, Mass.-based Forrester Research Group Inc., as many as 473,000 American computer-science positions are expected to be moved offshore by 2015.

To turn this economy around we'll need 300,000 new jobs/month. It seems like there's a lot of worry about a small percentage of that work moving overseas as though we won't hit an eqilibrium point. IT is not manual labor, are we doing a good enough job in education?

[LauraT28]

331. Taken out of context I think...

I think you're mincing words here... He's obviously not SUPPORTING giving away a whole industry. He's simply pointing out that there is more than one facet to technologies, and fine if they think they want to send software over to India (for now), we'll keep another part of it here.

That's how I took it anyway...

I enjoy the following:

<CLARK: Now, we know that we're not safer today and we know he's made mistakes. But we also see those ads.

And so I think the real question is before this party: Who is the person best able to answer the questions America will ask? Who can stand toe to toe with George Bush and argue foreign policy and security policy and the values that we, as Americans, believe in?

I'm the only person on the stage who's led major forces in an alliance in war. And I'm the only person here who's negotiated or helped to negotiate an agreement to end a war.

I am the candidate who can stand with George W. Bush and win this election.>

I would love to see him toe to toe with GWB debating the issues. There would obviously be no debate, and Clark would smack that smirk right off his stupid face. Do you think by the last line he means he's going to stand by George's side and win the election with him?? HELL NO. I think the India comment may have been a word mix up... and taken out of context.

Laura

[wyldwolf]

339. A very drudge-like post...

Scanning the news sites and networks this morning, only one source is spinning this quote in a negative way. Yep! w4rma at democratic underground! THAT speaks volumes.

[returnable]

349. Amazing, isn't it?

:eyes:

[w4rma]

361. Freepers scared Dems might use outsourcing issue against them

Where the Good Jobs Are Going
Forget sweatshops. U.S. companies are now shifting high-wage work overseas, especially to India
http://www.time.com/time/archive/preview/from_redirect/0,10987,1101030804-471198,00.html
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=102329

Outsourcing to usurp more U.S. jobs (1 of every 10 IT Jobs)
http://msnbc-cnet.com.com/2100-1022_3-5057087.html?part=msnbc-cnet&tag=alert&form=feed&subj=cnetnews
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=40609&mesg_id=40609&page=

Tech jobs leave U.S. for India, Russia
Job exports may imperil U.S. programmers
http://edition.cnn.com/2003/TECH/biztech/07/14/moves.offshore.ap/index.html

Will your job move to India?
Millions of U.S. jobs will be exported in the coming decade, forecasters say. Here are the jobs that are especially vulnerable, plus 5 that aren't
http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/invest/extra/P62115.asp
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=439869
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=438039

I.B.M. Explores Shift of White-Collar Jobs Overseas
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nyt/20030722/ts_nyt/ibmexploresshiftofwhitecollarjobsoverseas
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=63492

How do you DUer's feel about outsourcing?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=471629

India winning higher-status jobs from US
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0618/p01s03-wosc.html
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=117120

IT Sweatshops Breaking Indians
http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,59477,00.html
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=25985

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
October 3, 2003
Contact: Press Office, 802-651-3200
Where Are the Jobs George Bush Promised?
Bush Tax Cuts Fall Short of Delivering Promised Jobs

WASHINGTON--Democratic presidential candidate Governor Howard Dean, M.D., issued the following statement today:
" New employment figures released today confirm that the latest Bush tax cuts have failed to live up to President Bush's promises. In February, President Bush predicted the economy would create 5.5 million new jobs in 2003 and 2004 if the 2003 tax cut were passed. Not one of them has materialized.

"By this time in his presidency, President Clinton had created over 7.5 million private sector jobs. In contrast, President Bush has lost over 3.2 million jobs in his 33 months in office.

"The Bush Administration tax cuts have not provided the short-term stimulus the economy needed. Instead, the Bush tax cuts have rewarded the President's wealthy contributors at the expense of the economy, and furthered an extreme, ideological agenda that aims to destroy Social Security, Medicare and public education."
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=9528&JServSessionIdr001=tlwxsz8f21.app196a&security=1&news_iv_ctrl=1301
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=474949

…
While U.S. unemployment improved in June, Dean said it’s still at a nine-year high and ignores the underemployed, which he pegged at 6 percent.

“These are people who had $50,000 good jobs and now they are making $25,000 or $30,000, and they have two of them, in some cases,” Dean said. “I am tired of having an economy where our best jobs are shifted elsewhere in the world.’’

Dean fans made up a thick portion of the crowd, often turning Dean’s 25-minute stump speech into a rally of revival proportions with interrupted calls of “amen’’ and “yes, yes.’’
…
http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/Main.asp?SectionID=25&SubSectionID=377&ArticleID=85948
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=108&topic_id=11856&mesg_id=11856
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=124665&mesg_id=124665

Bush Announces "Bold" New Job Plan for India:
GOP Hires 75 Telephone Marketers in New Delhi Suburb to Raise Funds for the Republicans, Exporting Away American Jobs
http://www.buzzflash.com/analysis/03/02/16_India.html
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=117115
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=11219
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=240787

Freepers scared Dems might use outsourcing issue against them (class war)
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/956435/posts
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=112815

President blames unemployment on lack of skills
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=45247&mesg_id=45247

Freepers Actively Jumping Ship
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=40475&mesg_id=40475&page=

Will someone tell Bush* and big business that foreign outsourcing is bad?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=46681&mesg_id=46681&page=

[wyldwolf]

365. Like I said, only one source is taking the quote out of context and...

...spinning it negatively...

NOT Drudge.

NOT Newsmax.

NOT FOX.

You.

[NashVegas]

341. kcik

.

[markus]

342. He lost my vote tonite. It's that simple

Hell, I work in this industry (testing/QA and project management, but code monkey). Hell, I'm one of the people who might get to keep their job under this insane proposal.

It was an incredibly stupid thing to say to a highly educated segment of the population. Hell, these are the sort of jobs the post-industrial workers are supposed to be retraining for.

[MadHound]

350. One of the reasons I won't be voting for Clark

His support of NAFTA and other "free trade" agreements is a huge negative. Before you jump on me, yes I support free trade, but not the way these alphabet agreements are structured. Being the number one consumer country in the world, the US could use this clout to bring the wages, working conditions and enviromental regulations of developing countries up to our current standard. Unfortunetly, with NAFTA and the ilk, all we are doing is lowering our standards down to that of the developing countries. The only ones who benefit are the large corporations and the power/monied elite.

Besides, if Clark agrees with NAFTA, then he must by extension support the sweatshops, child labor, massive unemployment, massive enviromental damage, and loss of US sovereignty that comes along with NAFTA.

Sorry, I won't support somebody who has such a callous disregard for such issues.

[BootinUp]

357. Callous?

My take from your post is that you disgree with his position on how to combat the problems, to call him callous is rather unfair.

I am not an expert on NAFTA and the WTO but can these not be used more effectively assuming better leadership? No flames please.

[MadHound]

360. Well, what else could you call a person that supports NAFTA

It has been well documented that NAFTA overrides US sovereignty(see NAFTA agreement, Chapter 11), promotes sweatshop and child labor(examples, China and other Asian producers), disregards and promotes extreme enviromental damage in developing countries(you can go down to the Tex-Mex border and see for yourself, or Mother Jones had a very good article about this a few months ago), strips the US of well paying manufacturing jobs(just look into the unemployment reports, or listen to the news) and really only benefits the corporations and the rich and powerful elite.

And the abominations that are NAFTA, FTAA, GATT, WTO cannot be used for anything except for making more money for the already rich at the expense of the middle class and poor, both here in the US and abroad. Clark's support of these treaties is callous and disregards the damage that they are doing to our society, developing nations, and the world in general. By expressing his support for these treaties he shows that he is nothing more than a DLC Dem who is willing to sell out his country for some of that filthy corporate lucre. We do not need another president, Dem or 'Pug who is controlled by the corporate interests. Unfortunetly it looks like Clark has already been fitted for his corporate collar.

The only way to fairly implement free trade in this world is to use our clout as the number one consumer country to force other countries to bring pay and working conditions up to the US standard. Dragging us down to the scale of third world countries only benefits the rich and powerful few at the expense of the rest of us, and our enviroment.

[BootinUp]

364. I'm going to get back to you

But my initial impressions:
Agreeing to a trade agreement doesn't override our sovereignity. We were a sovern nation when we agreed to it, and we will be a sovern nation if and when we violate it.

I am guessing that the consensus of reputable sources of information is not going to agree with your take on multi-lateral trade agreements. But that doesn't mean I disagree with you, it just means its going to take me more time to form an opinion. Maybe I'll start a new post about it once I feel I have something 'informed' to say.

[MadHound]

374. Go read Chap 11 of the NAFTA agreement

It does strip our sovereignty away. An example:

There is a Canadian funeral home chain that was doing business in Louisiana. An issue concerning, if I remember correctly, pollution that the chain was causing was brought before the EPA, and taken to the court system. The Canadian chain lost both the initial court case and the appeal, and judgment in the several millions of dollars was awarded to the plaintiffs. The chain turned around under the auspices of Chap. 11 of the NAFTA agreement and claimed that the court system of the US was interfering with their ability to due business. The World Trade Court, on which we have no representation, nor can argue in front of, found in favor of the Canandian chain, thus forcing us, the US taxpayer to pay the amount of damages that was meted out by the appeals court. This case was only found out through dumb luck and some good journalistic digging. All cases brought before the World Trade Court our done so in secret, and the results are also kept secret, thus there may be many more such like cases that you and I are having to pay for without knowing it.

You can find the full story of this case in a Mother Jones article from a couple of months ago. I also suggest you read Chapter 11 of the NAFTA agreement. It is an eye opener, one that usurps the sovereignty of the US, and forces us, the taxpayer, to pay out millions of dollars to foreign corporations without knowing why, when, or how, and without allowing the US to have any sayso in the matter, since we are not represented on the court, nor can we argue any case in front of this court.

And this travesty of justice and sovereignty is what your man Clark is supporting. Not a good idea.

[Mairead]

376. "Agreeing to a trade agreement doesn't override our sovereignity"

These particular trade agreements do. Google +nafta +override +protections.

Why do you suppose Dennis Kucinich is determined to drive a stake through their hearts as his first act in office!?

[redqueen]

383. Two posts have already addressed this,

but since it can't hurt, I'll help:

Chapter 11 of NAFTA.

Companies can sue governments for loss of EXPECTED profits.

For reference see California MTBE case.

Taxpayers of California should all know very well that sovreignity is dead, when corporate profits are at stake.

For any country that signs these bills, their government's major function is no longer to provide for the well being of the people. Now the major function is to provide for the profitability of wealthy, and therefore powerful, multinational corporations.

[Larkspur]

367. As a software engineer, Clark has lost any hope of ever getting my vote

even in the general election.

I'll vote Green, and I'm no fan of the Greens, before I vote for Clark, should he win the nomination.

[Tom Rinaldo]

375. Over reacting

Not to the problem in any way, which is huge, but to Clark's off the cuff remark. In abbreviated form this is why I think so.

Clark wasn't "giving away" U.S. jobs and industries. The rest of his comments indicated that he would make an effort to preserve current U.S. jobs, and create incentives to replace those jobs that can not be saved. Clark's comments were forward looking on the topic of investing in America much more than they were a commentary about what steps could or could not be taken to protect jobs in American industries currently under siege. It was a 60 second extended sound bite, not an fully developed economic blue print. It left unspoken what forms of regulation, or reregulation, or deregulation, Clark would or would not support. And no one else in that debate offered anything more specific either. Clark is now on record favoring the repeal of all tax incentives that contribute to the outsourcing of American jobs. He wants new tax incentives for American companies to create American jobs. He wants to invest money supporting emerging areas of new technology, such as energy and the environment, that he feels the United States can and should dominate far into the coming decade. He said no more, or no less, than that in a 60 second off the cuff reply to a detailed question that he had no opportunity to preview.

My main point is/was that a lot of emotional content was projected onto Clark's short debate comment about "let India write the software". I think it was a quickly thrown off rhetorical phrase, poorly chosen I would concede. It wasn't some type of Royal decree by which Clark was officially ceding the future of software development to India. It was said in the tone one might use when someone asks "but what if the neighbors find out and gossip about this" and one replies, "let them talk!" It is a tone of defiance and optimism about the American inventive capacity that Clark was trying to strike. That being said, the issue of job loss is very real, and the loss of software jobs is a very real component of job loss.

Maybe Clark does not deserve to be your first, or second, or third choice for the nomination, based on your priorities. But I think you are making a knee jerk response to something that personally hits you very hard, based on a sound bite that was offensive to you. If that's the most serious thing you have against Clark, I would reconsider "throwing away" your vote agaisnt Bush if it came down to that.

[SahaleArm]

377. Your analysis is spot on

Unfortunately you're arguing with a poster who would say the same thing if Clark said we should stop trade with India.

[incapsulated]

379. As a Clark supporter, I am disappointed...

but not terribly surprised. I saw this in his general approval of NAFTA and other remarks he has made.

This is why I don't become emotionally involved with candidates, or any politians for that matter. They will let you down eventually, on some issue that is important to you. You have to take the big picture and the long view.

Which is why this will not sway me in my support of Clark. I still believe, more strongly now than ever, that he his the only one that can beat Bush. I hope that he will implement the changes to the trade agreements that he has outlined. I also hope that he does not blow this pro-global horn too loudly because it could hurt him in the south, california and regions that have lost lots of manufacturing jobs.