Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

A Job Fair For Jobs In India — In California

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the borders-aren't-everything dept.

Businesses 309

dcblogs writes "Indian and U.S. companies are holding a job fair at the San Jose Convention Center this weekend for jobs in India. The job fair is aimed at Indian workers in the U.S., but anyone with an interest in working overseas can attend. India is pitched as a 'sea of opportunity' in a PowerPoint presentation about the job fair. That's in contrast to another slide that makes the obvious point that the U.S. has 'barely recovered from a downturn,' with 'signs that it's headed for another.'"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered


Recovered? (5, Insightful)

fnj (64210) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034206)

What the FUCK are people smoking when they say the US has "recovered" from its "downturn."

Re:Recovered? (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38034226)

What the FUCK are people smoking when they say the US has "recovered" from its "downturn."

Ron Paul has never said such a thing.

Re:Recovered? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38034256)

Please spare us the political advertisements. He will never win and the endless Ron Paul plugs are getting tedious.

Re:Recovered? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38034312)

Ron Paul

Re:Recovered? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38034334)

a vote for Ron Paul counts as much as a vote for anyone else

Re:Recovered? (0)

ooshna (1654125) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034424)

I agree that he will never win but remember a vote for Ron Paul is one less vote that could go for Herman Cain or Rick Perry.

Re:Recovered? (1)

xmorg (718633) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034748)

Ron PAul!
how about your endless rick perry plugs, they are getting REALLY tedious. If i could change 3 things about rick perry fanboys i would change...uuuh...uuu....uuum...ahhhh...uuuum uuuuh.

Ron Paul? Isn't he the guy that (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38035110)

Invented Almond Joy?

Re:Recovered? (1)

Thing I am (761900) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034240)

The same thing our past fearless leader was smoking under the banner: "Mission Accomplished"

Re:Recovered? (1)

Kraftwerk (629978) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034254)

The same thing our past fearless leader was smoking under the banner: "Mission Accomplished"

Yet it's happening under a totally different administration, *4* years after the leader you're referring to.

Re:Recovered? (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38034328)

Hey now, don't you know that pointing the errors of another administration is the god given right of every American lunkhead? You actually expect a party to make progress? Fuck that. Just point out the other guys did the same thing and act smug about your own party fucking things up just as bad, if not worse. That's the American way!
Fucktards like "Thing I am" wouldn't have a leg to stand on if it meant having to own up, be a real human who wants real progress for other humans and accept that their little cult of choice is just as fucking worthless as the other one. It would hurt their poor little heads too much.

Re:Recovered? (4, Informative)

chrb (1083577) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034366)

Did Obama ever actually claim "the economy has recovered"?

Anyway, it's all about how you define "recovered" - some economists argued that the economy had "recovered" once it showed 3 months of consecutive growth. See this businessinsider article [businessinsider.com] for an example of that usage. The man on the street may well argue that "recovered" means the jobless % returns to previous levels, but others are arguing that may not happen at all in the "jobless recovery" [businessweek.com]. So, by what metric is "recovered" measured? Profitability? Employment? CEO salaries? Salaries for everyone else? Economic growth? Consumption? House sales? The deficit? And over what time period is this metric to be measured?

Re:Recovered? (2, Funny)

MechaShiva (872964) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034952)

I'm sick of all the liberal Bush bashing. Let's get one thing straight - Bush never smoked anything. He was a coke head.

Re:Recovered? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38035084)

sure he smoked some crack at some point. have you heard him speak...

Re:Recovered? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38034270)

The "economy" will NEVER recover. It's simply too good an argument to keep wages down "because of the tough times and everybody has to sacrifice*".

*CEOs not included

Re:Recovered? (4, Insightful)

Larryish (1215510) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034274)

"Sea of Opportunity"?

More like "Sea of Things I Don't Have Antibodies For".

Re:Recovered? (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38034330)

Well, to be fair, that statement is really intended for the illegal aliens (mostly from Mexico) that they are trying to get to go to India and take jobs from the folks in India.

Re:Recovered? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38034276)

By the methods economists have traditionally used people aren't really important, at least not directly. A "recession" is when there's negative overall economic growth. We're in positive territory now, and have been for a while. To these economists, that's "recovery." The assumption, which has been somewhat true in the past, is that eventually employment will begin to rise. That assumption may not be true this time. Or, at minimum, it may take much longer for employment to rise, and there may be some people who can never find a job.

Things may have changed fundamentally this time, and we need to do something about it. First, let's all stop listening to Ron Paul. He means well, but he's living in a previous century. ( the 19th) Second, we need new definitions for "recession" and "recovery."

Re:Recovered? (4, Insightful)

bryan1945 (301828) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034352)

Need new terms for a lot of things. When unemployment goes up less than expected, that's an "improvement." When less people file for unemployment one month to the next, that's an "improvement." When cutting the *increase* of the budget, that's "saving money."

Re:Recovered? (4, Interesting)

overunderunderdone (521462) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034492)

You're complaining that the definition of technical terms ("recession" and "recovery") having to do with one thing (economic growth) aren't a about another related thing (employment). There are already other terms that address the issue you think economists are missing (unemployment, underemployment, job growth etc.). And there's even qualifiers you might notice economists attach to terms like recovery, for instance "weak recovery" or "slow recovery" to describe exactly the situation we're in, a recovery that's too slow to add many of the lost jobs back.

An economy is a complicated thing with lots of moving parts. Dumbing down the vocabulary used to describe those parts to accommodate the ignorant it unlikely to help much. "Recovery" even qualified as "weak recovery" may sound too positive to people when it describes a situation with persistent high unemployment. On the other hand it's certainly more positive than the alternative.

Re:Recovered? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38035020)

Why is the term "recovery" considered a technical term of art of the field of economics? Why isn't it considered a more general political term? If economists want to use "recovery" as a technical term, let them do so within the confines of their journals and conferences. If it's used in popular media and political discourse, it needs to carry the definition that's most applicable to the audience. For that audience, the issue of employment is inherent in the term "recovery."

Specialists need to stop commandeering common-use vocabulary, then claiming the common people aren't using it correctly.

Re:Recovered? (1)

overunderunderdone (521462) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034336)

This [google.com]. It's technically true that the economy recovered. But, the sad fact is that it's only growing at the same rate as before the recession which is only sufficient to add new jobs about the rate that population growth is adding new workers. We're stuck with high unemployment unless we can grow the economy faster than before (which is what usually happens after a recession). If they're right that we're headed to another downturn unemployment will go up even further, at which point we're looking at something closer to great depression levels of unemployment.

Re:Recovered? (5, Insightful)

jrminter (1123885) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034620)

It is technically true that the economy has recovered because the GDP measure is terribly flawed. it is defined as:

GDP = private consumption + gross investment + government spending + (exports - imports)

Note that no distinction is made for government spending financed by tax revenue and that financed by borrowing. In his book, "Leverage" (p. 81), Karl Denninger has analyzed the official GDP data from the BEA GDP Series and debt from the Treasury's "Debt to the penny" source and has shown that when government deficit spending is removed from GDP, there has been essentially no growth in the past 30 years. This is why most of our wages have grown very slowly. The problem is that we have spent our way into a very deep hole that no matter what we do there will be a massive contraction in nominal GDP - a real depression. This is unavoidable. However, digging a deeper hole with with more debt will only make the eventual pain worse.

What we have here is an economy based on the foolish presumption that we can survive when our income and expenses are two diverging exponential functions. Our expenses have been growing much more rapidly than our income and it has all been financed with debt. This debt was used to fund immediate consumption, not to produce the means of generating more income. This is not sustainable for an individual family and is not sustainable for a nation. We now see both Greece and Italy on the verge of collapse. The US is just as vulnerable. The math says there is no doubt there will be a crash. It is only a matter of "when." We do not have the national political will to have an adult conversation about this and plan and carry out the triage approach to spending that will be required to turn this around. The best an individual can do is get out of personal debt and make preparations to survive a nasty situation.

Re:Recovered? (1)

Iamthecheese (1264298) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034926)

I agree with your first point but completely disagree with the follow-on. The US is, indeed, in the midst of a huge debt-fueled rut. A look at the per-person productivity numbers fueling this "jobless recovery" will show you there have been massive increases in productivity of the last decade. There's no reason to think that (a) these increases in productivity will cease as long as there is a demand for produced goods anywhere in the world. (b)there won't be sufficient demand anywhere in the world to drive the US economy over the next decade. I feel that if we just buy a little more time increased productivity will pull us out of our debt rut. And I'm not for debt spending!

Re:Recovered? (1)

overunderunderdone (521462) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034986)

I won't argue with that since I haven't read the book. It sounds frighteningly plausible. However, if I'm understanding it, it's not that GDP measures nothing. It's that it's not measuring something else we'd better be taking into account (and maybe we need another more prominent measure that does). We've experienced real growth over those years otherwise with population growth we would have seen increased unemployment and/or falling wages rather than modest wage growth and relatively higher employment (aside from the more recent unemployment which may be only a harbinger of what's to come). We're in the position of a guy who buys a new sports car, a big house and takes a huge vacation all with debt he can't possibly pay back. He has the real benefit of those things for a little while. The car, the house and the vacation are real for today but so is a painful bankruptcy tomorrow.

Re:Recovered? (2)

Pinky's Brain (1158667) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034710)

We're only stuck because of the neoliberal/globalist blinders we have on ... we need to stop caring about global competitiveness, it won't guarantee full employment either. If we really try to compete with the Chinese who the hell is going to consume any way, austerity is necessary ... but it's not sufficient. We need austerity so our economies can become relatively self sufficient (trade balance) giving us the room to rebalance them towards greater overall employment (even if it comes at a hit to efficiency, ie. work week reduction). We don't need austerity so our economies can become competitive, that race to the bottom goes off a deep cliff.

Re:Recovered? (1)

Iamthecheese (1264298) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034884)

I'm afraid high economic growth and output is now possible and becoming even more possible without adding jobs. We're heading for Great Depression levels of unemployment either way.

I think you may be confused (4, Informative)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034350)

I've not heard anyone say the US has recovered, what I've heard is that the recession is over and that is correct. A recession is a period where the economy shrinks. The US economy is no long shrinking, and has not been for some time now. However it has not been growing fast at all, and it shrunk quite a bit during the last recession, meaning that the economy is still quite far off its peak.

So it is not "recovered" as in back to or above its pre peak level, but it is no longer in a recession, though there is worry it could fall in to another one.

Re:I think you may be confused (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034758)

When the economy "grows" slower than the population, you're still in a recession, because each person has less money, so individual spending power is shrinking. The problem with the GDP measurement is that it fails to take into account population growth.

If the population were to shrink by 50%, and GDP to decline by 10% and incomes almost double, that would definitely NOT be a recession, despite what some would claim.

We are not in a recession - we're *only* part-way through the 2nd Great Depression, and don't expect a recovery before 2018 - 2020, if then.

Re:I think you may be confused (4, Insightful)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034912)

If you think this is a great depression I suggest you go talk to someone who lived through the real great depression so they can slap you upside the head and explain to you the vast, vast, differences.

Oh and by your measure, there is still growth. The US has a very low population growth, as do most industrialized nations. It is higher than many other industrial nations (some of which have negative growth rates) but it still only 0.9% annually. In 2010, the GDP growth was 2.9%.

Re:Recovered? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38034430)

You seem to forget - you are unimportant.

For those who count: Mr Market [google.com]

Re:Recovered? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38034450)

They mean this is as good as it will get. Its all downhill from here folks.

Re:Recovered? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38034546)

What the FUCK are people smoking when they say the US has "recovered" from its "downturn."

I know - the recovery has started when you have your $80K job where the boss says hi to you in the morning, even if you arrive at 10 a.m.

All politics is extremely local.

Re:Recovered? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38034656)

It's recovered in the Bay Area, startups are getting VC and are hiring like mad. So are big companies like Apple and HP. Tons of activity in social media, ad networks, games, analytics, and mobile. If you're any good and experienced with Hadoop, Javascript, iOS/Android, or scalable infrastructure on EC2 then you can easily get a well paying job. Don't forget all the companies can never find enough people with embedded experience or biotech domain experience.

It's gotten to the point where you don't even have to know the language and stack they use, they'll take someone that's smart and knows something similar. i.e. Rails shops not requiring that you know Ruby, Python and Django/Pylons/whatever and the ability to learn is enough. Web/mobile game companies are not requiring any game experience.

Re:Recovered? (2)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034784)

Tons of activity in social media

... most of it doomed to never make a profit.

Social media is a bubble, same as the previous tech bubble, same as the education bubble, same as the stock bubbles, same as the group buying sites bubble, same as the "cloud" bubble. If it fails, it loses money, and if it succeeds, it quickly becomes commoditized and goes from profitable to barely breaking even. It's not like past industries where there were significant barriers of entry.

Next (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38034216)

Indian users complaining about the bad English of all those US based call centers.

Re:Next (1)

wisnoskij (1206448) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034318)

If there were call centers setup in the US to cater to Indian clients then why would they be speaking English in the first place?

Re:Next (1)

LinuxGrrl (123916) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034386)

English is the closest thing India has to a common language.

Re:Next (1)

wisnoskij (1206448) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034496)

No that would be Hindi...
First off because it is the official language and secondly because way way more people speak it in India then English.

Re:Next (1)

wisnoskij (1206448) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034504)

And yet still you could say that still a lot of Indians speak English even if it is significantly less then Hindi, but basically every single one of those Indian English speakers has English as a second language and would rather/is just as comfortable in speaking a Indian language (mainly Hindi).

Re:Next (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38035120)

> First off because it is the official language

So is English. And other 30+ languages. All treated equally as Hindi - all are 'official' languages. And there is no national language.

Re:Next (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38035086)

english is the national language of india. that's why we outsource so much shit there. a billion people who speak english and work for dirt.

Good riddance to smelly rubbish (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38034258)

All of the Indian folk I have had the misfortune of working with locally in the valley have been dreadful. They are plagiarizing, uninsightful rote learners, who make terrible developers and sysadmins.

Re:Good riddance to smelly rubbish (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38034558)

We've got one of those. His English is incomprehensible, his personal hygiene is non-existent and his work ethic is nil: He pawns his work off on others whenever he can and points fingers at others for his mistakes.

Management hasn't done anything, despite complaints: The stench of cheap cologne mixed with body odor and (when speaking to him) halitosis is nauseating.

What's really weird is that his clothes are always clean and neat - how does that work? He'll take the time to do laundry but can't be bothered to bathe nor brush and floss?

Re:Good riddance to smelly rubbish (2, Funny)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034800)

We've got one of those. His English is incomprehensible, his personal hygiene is non-existent and his work ethic is nil: He pawns his work off on others whenever he can and points fingers at others for his mistakes.

Management hasn't done anything, despite complaints: The stench of ...body odor and (when speaking to him) halitosis is nauseating.

You work with RMS?

Let's compare the US to India, shouldn't we? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38034288)

According to the Heritage Foundation's Economic Freedom Index, the United States is 9th in the world. India? 124th. And according to Transparency International's Corruption Perception Index, US is 22 (next to Belgium) while India is 87 (next to Liberia).

I think I'll be staying in the US.

Re:Let's compare the US to India, shouldn't we? (2)

Alex Belits (437) | more than 2 years ago | (#38035144)

So according to a two American political organizations, US is among the top countries chosen by being favorable to American companies? Stop the presses!

Really? (1)

warp_kez (711090) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034294)

Or how to scam your fellow man by claiming their Windows has a virus even if they are using a Mac or don't even have a computer.

No, thanks! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38034302)

India is modern day slavery. The sight of shanty towns and poverty is unbearable.

One can't ignore these (or the stench of Mumbai) from the confines of cushy western living quarters and restaurant.

I Work With Indian Talent (5, Interesting)

Kr1ll1n (579971) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034306)

Some are great, others not so much. Same as local talent.
What can be said is that the more that return home for employment, the more jobs that open up stateside.
This is *NOT* a bad thing.

Many Silicon Valley companies use outsourcing firms to staff and have open arrangements with these firms which make it where they (the SV company) would be throwing money away with "finders fees". A good example of this would be 3-6 months of the consultant's\contractor's salary just to hire the pseudo-employee outright.

Being a contractor with any company for more than a year should *NOT* be a normal thing, I work with very talented and knowledgeable Indians that have been in the same company as me for >4 years. Given the opportunity to go home, or stay working for a company that will NEVER hire me, I believe I would consider it, no matter who the company is.

Re:I Work With Indian Talent (4, Interesting)

msobkow (48369) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034376)

Unfortunately my experience has been largely negative. It's clear that some of the so-called universities attended by Indian students are paper mills that don't do a decent job of educating them about programming.

There's also a cultural issue. For some reason, many of those I've worked with can't or won't search for internet howto's and help instructions on their own, though they'll follow those instructions if a senior developer sends them a link.

Obviously I've worked with a lot of good Indian developers as well, but there are clearly some cultural differences that can cause friction and frustration.

Re:I Work With Indian Talent (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38034458)

Some bit of frustration is to be expected. This happens with developers from most non-G7 countries. Think of it as the difference between made in China items and made in US items!

But for the savings in development costs - I can put up with these frustrations.

So? (4, Insightful)

Weezul (52464) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034576)

We invented languages like PHP and VB because we need many poorly skilled developers for drudge work. If you don't do brain dead easy work, then don't hire people trained for brain dead easy development.

There are *many* shitty universities inside the U.S. too, heck fraudulent education is a growth industry. You'd never hire developers from University of Phoenix though, simply because you already know they suck. Did you ever try asking your skilled Indian colleges which Indian universities are actually good?

Re:I Work With Indian Talent (1)

sgt scrub (869860) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034652)

It isn't about sending them back so there are more jobs here. It is about sending someone you have confidence in back so they can lead a team of low wage developers in India.
Indian companies need experienced people who can step into project management roles up to senior levels, said Bhushan.

The companies are typically looking for someone with eight or more years of experience and specific domain knowledge. The workers ahould have the ability to lead large project teams and run large Web sites, said Bhushan.

Long Term Contracts (1)

jmrives (1019046) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034908)

Perhaps, this is off topic. For that, I apologize. I see no reason that long term, multi-year contracts should not be normal. I am an independent software development contractor and have been for many years. I prefer to work for myself. I also prefer long-term contracts. I have had several. One lasted for 4.5 years. I was there longer than some of their employees.

Can you handle the truth? (-1, Troll)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034324)

So can you handle the truth?

The truth is that Socialist / Marxist [slashdot.org] / Keynesian ideas that are implemented all around the Western world are causing the mass exodus of capital from that world.

The truth is that government regulations on all facets of business and labor, even such 'small' things as minimum wage [slashdot.org] create mis-allocation of resources, create imbalances in the markets that are then corrected by the capital and the jobs shifting elsewhere.

The truth is that economy depends on production and not on consumption, consumption is a trivial consequence of production, especially consumption that is tax financed, vendor financed, debt financed, inflation financed consumption [slashdot.org].

The truth is that politicians use 'free cheese', such as SS/Medicare ponzi schemes [slashdot.org] in the mousetrap to push forward their own agenda of stealing more power for themselves and growing the government [slashdot.org] with all that stolen money and selling the power that the larger government then holds.

The truth is that printing money [slashdot.org] is not the same thing as producing something of value that market want and the truth is that the so called 'economists' that are supporting this agenda of money printing are just mouthpieces for the government [slashdot.org], and they are pushing this agenda that government wants and this is the biggest part of the sickness in the economy - 'free money', currency destruction, which results in gambling rather than investing [slashdot.org] and of-course results in stealing [slashdot.org].

The truth is that the people do NOT understand the real problem and the government is again very successful at playing the blame game, which misdirects the attention of the people from the real problem [slashdot.org].

The truth is that the real problem is the loss of liberties and individual freedoms, allowing the government to create a huge prison [slashdot.org] and fight perpetual wars, taxing, borrowing, printing ever more money, which go to the real owners of the system.

The truth is that the government is incapable of fixing this [slashdot.org] without getting out of the way and shrinking and becoming proportionate to spending rather than to income of the economy in totality.

The truth is that the loss of jobs is a result of the government policy of implementing a fascist state (merging of government and largest corporations/monopolies) by using socialist ideology (wealth redistribution and 'taking care of people'). All the money printing, income taxes, business regulations, all of the unelected departments creating regulations that then can be sold and can be used to prop up monopolies and prevent competition.

The truth is that it is the government that stands in the way of healing the economy. The economy is being destroyed by the government. The problem with people becoming poorer (socialists/fascists like to call that income inequality, but it's not income inequality, it's just poverty) and people are becoming poorer because they have no choice but either to work for very few companies or to be on welfare or even go without. This is all created by the socialist/fascist agenda of the government. That agenda is to turn the population into slaves of the system, prevent the people from becoming independent and to train the people to be depended on the SICK system.

The truth is that the system is sick, and it's sick because it rejects the ideas of individual liberty, personal responsibility, principles of real property ownership, principles of freedom to do business, it rejects those ideas.

Once those ideas are rejected, the socialist state is created, a large portion of population becomes poor and depended on the sick system.

Once you depend on the sick system, would you want that system to change, to get healthy, if the threat is that you will not be able to be depended the way you are used to be in the sick system? Will you get rid of the sickness, if the sickness makes you depended?

If the government breaks your legs, should you be grateful for the crutches it gives you?

Can you handle this truth?

Re:Can you handle the truth? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38034356)

So I should starve on slave wages instead?

fuck off you cunt.

Re:Can you handle the truth? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38034408)

So I should starve on slave wages instead?

fuck off you cunt.

You'd rather live a comfortable life and leave the eventual shit storm for your kids?

Re:Can you handle the truth? (1, Insightful)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034436)

I don't think that's the choice.

I think the choice is either to have a completely destroyed economy and to shift to dictatorial/totalitarian government, to lose all freedoms.


The other choice is to allow the restructuring of the economy, have a very hard 2 years, and eventually see the capital return to the US.

But to do that the government must be shrunk, the budgets must be balanced NOT by giving more revenue to the government, but by doing real cuts in spending (wars, SS, Medicare), by shutting down Federal Reserve, FDIC, Freddie/Fannie, FHA, HUD, IRS, FBI, CIA, DHS, dep'ts of education, energy, commerce, agriculture, EPA, FDA, FCC, FAA, etc., abolishing the income/payroll/corporate taxes, shrinking the federal registry.

This is not supposed to be a bad thing - more liberty and more freedom. This is supposed to fix the money, this is supposed to fix the environment for investment capital to return and re-open the production facilities. 1-2 years of this will be very hard.

I would go further than Ron Paul of-course in firing up to 99% of government employees, but I am not running, nor can I.

But this does NOT mean that people will be poorer for it. It means 2 years of real shake down and then it means reopening of production facilities, recreating the actual real economy, not based on vendor financed, debt/inflation financed consumption, but recreating the production, which allows real consumption and real money and real investments and real markets.

Re:Can you handle the truth? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38034482)

Yes, let's get rid of all our protections. Abolish it all. Our economy will prosper from all the dead people.

Re:Can you handle the truth? (1, Insightful)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034526)

There are no protections. There are no protections in your system. The people are not protected. Where do you see protected people?

The only real protections come from market regulating the behavior of individuals. Individuals are the real owners of property and businesses.

Corporations are not faceless, there are individuals behind the fictitious legal structures built by the government to protect those, who need that protection and are willing to 'share' with the politicians for those protections.

The protections are not to the average people, the protections that exist in your system are to the real owners of your government.

The only protections that exist protect the real owners of your political system and your government from YOU. From you, as a competitor. From you as an independent person. From you as a savor and investor of your own money into your own business and into your own future.

The real protections are only found in real free market - market free of government misdirection and mis-allocation of resources.

Market is the real democracy, with people voting on who is giving them the best value for their money.


As to the political system and the government, I think the best change would be to have people serve limited terms in the government, the way they serve in military in many countries. Yes, why not have people serve in government the way they serve in jury?

You can be drafted to serve in jury and you should be drafted to serve in government maybe? Maybe that's the real way to fix the problem of the broken political system.

Re:Can you handle the truth? (4, Insightful)

Pinky's Brain (1158667) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034804)

So if not the EPA who is going to regulate ... you can say they do more harm than good, but we have plenty of object lessons in third world countries of free market inspired environmental destruction to say that some government agency has to keep the externalities under control. Maybe market forces could be incorporated more, but someone still needs to make the regulations and police them.

A factory owner will never have a contract with every person on the planet breathing the air he pollutes, contract law can't solve everything ...

Re:Can you handle the truth? (1)

khallow (566160) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034744)

Yes, let's get rid of all our protections.

A lot of those protections, protect rent-seekers. For example, some agricultural subsidies might "protect" the US food supply in some useful way, but they most definitely protect the big agribusinesses and food processing businesses.

And as others have noted in the Chevy Volt story [slashdot.org], many countries have become nations of cowards. A few less protections would help us recover from that.

Re:Can you handle the truth? (3, Insightful)

overunderunderdone (521462) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034798)

What both you and the OP are missing is that there is a balance between costs and benefits. He is looking only at the costs of those protections, you are looking only at the benefits. I'll disagree with the OP and say that many of those protections are necessary and ultimately beneficial, but realizing that they have very real costs. On the other hand a great many of those protections are NOT worth the cost. If you assert that they are worth the costs you have no standing to complain when the bill comes due in the form of a slower economy and persistent high unemployment.

On thing to remember when evaluating those costs. It's not usually the big bad corporations, the villains of the morality play that usually bear those costs. They have the resources to comply with the regulations and in many cases welcome them as a barrier to entry protecting them from competition. The law preventing BigFoodCo, Inc. from poisoning children (like they really want) is at worst a minor inconvenience to BigFoodCo. They do what's required, file the paperwork, raise the price of milk by a few pennies and turn to some other scheme to fulfill their goal of poisoning children. The people who bear the cost are potential entrepreneurs who look at the costs and decide it's not worth it. Or those that go for it but end up bankrupt because the costs of compliance were too high. Or, those who don't comply and get caught like organic coops [theepochtimes.com] and Amish farmers [liveleak.com] raided by the police and FDA for selling raw milk to the tree hugging hippies who want it. Note that in the California case selling raw milk is legal, but they didn't have all the proper paperwork filed.

Re:Can you handle the truth? (1)

Pinky's Brain (1158667) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034778)

The US doesn't need capital ... it needs oil. The US is swimming in capital, the whole world is ... there just isn't anything worth investing it in, except for natural monopolies and governments (to protect your ownership of the monopolies).

The only end result possible of anarcho capitalism in the absence of economic growth is feudalism (rent seeking will keep concentrating wealth more and more). It's not a solution for the modern world of natural resource limits and automation.

After 2 years of "creative destruction" nothing will have changed about the fact that an US worker would be trying to compete with a Chinese worker with vastly lower wages ...

Re:Can you handle the truth? (1)

khallow (566160) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034878)

After 2 years of "creative destruction" nothing will have changed about the fact that an US worker would be trying to compete with a Chinese worker with vastly lower wages ...

I think this needs to happen. US labor is less valuable than it's ever been and with greatly weakened pricing power, yet people still want to be paid what they used to be paid. The faster we adapt to the real world, the less painful it'll be in the long run.

Re:Can you handle the truth? (1)

khallow (566160) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034894)

As another example of my previous statement, it's worth noting that capital has kept its value far better than labor has. I think this in large part explains the growth in income inequity over the past forty years.

Re:Can you handle the truth? (1)

Kraftwerk (629978) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034360)

If only a GOP candidate was running on the platform of limited government, personal liberty, deregulation, ending the federal reserve, and had a firm understanding of Austrian economics. Capitalism’s about profit and loss You bail out the losers there’s no end to the cost

Re:Can you handle the truth? (1)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034382)

The answer to the question: "Can you handle the truth?" is given in the moderation of the question.

Re:Can you handle the truth? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38034584)

You live in a fantasy land, history has clearly shown us what unregulated capitalism looks like (think industrial revolution you clod). Either you failed history and are simply ignorant or are being a bold face liar. Either way you couldn't be more wrong if you tried. Why is that the last 20 years of deregulation has only lead to an increase in the concentration of wealth? If you were correct we should have seen the middle class rise, not be stagnant while the rich grew their wealth greatly above the rate of inflation.

Re:Can you handle the truth? (2)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034630)

Yes, industrial revolution. The best thing that the free markets did for the people - allowing the people to be more productive by efficiently organizing land, capital and labor to increase productivity to the point, where under 5% of population could actually feed 100% of it. Allowing hundreds of people to work in factories manufacturing all sorts of products that would have taken tens or hundreds of thousands of people to produce purely by hand before that time.

Making the workers so efficient and productive that they didn't have to work 15 hours a day to feed themselves, but instead allowing a man to feed his family on his own income, eventually allowing the children not to go to work at a very young age as they have always done until the industrial revolution. Allowing the women to have to be baby factories to prop up subsistence farming to support the aging parents and thus shifting the role of women in society, actually allowing them to be free. Actually allowing the productivity of a free worker to become much higher of than that of a slave worker (slavery is very inefficient, it requires taking care of people's living and health and food, it's expensive, much more expensive than to hire people).

All those terrible things, like Ford being regulated by the MARKET, doubling the pay of his employees to reduce turn over, allowing them to buy the product they were working on with 4 months of salary, bringing down their working hours to 8 only and their working days to 5 in a week, paying them double what anybody else was, hiring the disabled people nobody else wanted, all because of that terrible industrial revolution, which increased the productivity so much, that even a partially disabled person could work on an assembly line building cars. Oh, incidentally he doubled his production capacity within a year after implementing those changes, paying his workers equivalent of 1.25 ounces of gold a week, which in todays prices is about 2200 USD or over 110K a year. That's without income taxes, that's without SS or Medicare. That's with those workers being able to support a family with a stay at home wife, 5-6 kids, paying for everything (health/education/pension) out of pocket and no debt.

Yes, the terrible industrial revolution, which only was the most innovative and inventive time in history, which allowed the US become the biggest creditor nation, biggest producer of high quality cheap goods nation on the planet.

Terrible thing of-course.

Re:Can you handle the truth? (1)

Osgeld (1900440) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034972)

The industrial revolution I read about had people working 15 hours a day in sweatshops for a bucket of piss at age 6, you are about 100 years off the mark there cheif, the industrial revolution did not happen in the 1920's

Re:Can you handle the truth? (2)

theskipper (461997) | more than 2 years ago | (#38035072)

Are you saying that no government regulation was necessary during that period? For example, without the Pure Food and Drug Act, the meat industry would have naturally corrected itself based on market forces? Pardon the pun, but it seems difficult to swallow after what was (eventually) proven true in Sinclair's The Jungle.

Whether the FDA and other agencies have grown too large is a different issue. Some regulation will always be necessary because the basis of capitalism is growing profit by any means necessary. Having regulations changes that to "by any legal means necessary".

Re:Can you handle the truth? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38034596)

The GOP and their lame policies over the last 30yrs are WHY the fundamental reason the economy is in the shape its in -- and you want to hire them back? It'll never cease to amaze me how people can live with their heads in the sand. Everyone wants the quick fix.

Re:Can you handle the truth? (2)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034658)

Are you telling me there is a difference between your parties and between your candidates? Are you telling me that Clinton was any better than any of the Bushes or Reagan?

Why? Is it all the wars he went into? Is it the US debt refinancing with variable rate short term borrowing? Is it the bubble that was inflated during his time by the traitorous Greenspan's policy of taking price of money down to 1%? Was it NAFTA maybe? Maybe it was the increase in drug war spending?

But I am not protecting any party, they are all corrupt.

Nixon took the world off the gold standard - that's the last beginning of the destruction of US economy. Of-course all the previous destruction (Fed, IRS, FDIC, SS, Medicare,) didn't help. The wars didn't hep. The education dep't and all the loans didn't help.

Obama just pust 1Trillion dollars on the US Treasury books (liability side). Single handedly, like a Boss.

No. None of that works. The only real change can come from people understanding that the government is not supposed to be involved in business regulations, loans, labor, economy, price setting, interest rates, money printing, education, health, insurances of any kind.

All of those things are moral hazards. All of those things end up growing the gov't and destroying the money and the economy and turning you into slaves.

Re:Can you handle the truth? (0)

nomadic (141991) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034962)

Why don't you tell us what country you're posting from? You're obviously not from the US, and you have a very poor grasp of United States history and government.

Re:Can you handle the truth? (4, Interesting)

Pinky's Brain (1158667) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034738)

If the US is Marxist/Keyenesian then why hasn't the Gini coefficient gone down? Sweden and Denmark might be called a Marxist/Keynesian fusion, but most of the west is crony capitalist.

Re:Can you handle the truth? (1, Interesting)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034782)

I don't know about Denmark, but Sweden is moving away from socialism towards less regulated free market. They have a long way to go of-course, but at least they are on the right track. If they don't do it, they are facing the same problem as the rest of the socialist world. As to them being 'keynesian', I don't know that for a fact. Sweden at least is an oil exporter. Maybe what they really are is a better way to be an energy exporter economy than say the Saudi Arabia or Russia or most of African exporters, where majority of wealth that is acquired from the exports ends up in very few hands.

flamebait on slashdot? OK! (3, Insightful)

sgt scrub (869860) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034830)

Globalism is failing because of a lack of minimum wage. Rich Republican cock suckers don't give a shit about one countries economy. All it means is wages drop in yet another country and the value of their investments in the global stock market go up. You dumb ass wrong wing radio listening morons can keep regurgitating bullshit from your born again bigot spin doctors or join the fight. Either watch the lying bastards suck down fat paychecks while leading you into the land of indentured servitude while the rest of us "liberals" [wnd.com] fight from the land of reality or get a fucking clue. Vote for Perry. He knows how to hand the keys to corporations in other countries [zimbio.com] while the people that live in his state fall further into abject poverty. Globalism is going to happen whether we like it or not. The way we don't want it to happen, without something to level the playing field ie. minimum wages and expectations, is the way it is happening. Controlling how it happens is up to us people that work for a living, aka "liberals".

Re:Can you handle the truth? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38034980)

How can this stereotypical talk radio rant (listened to only by people who never graduated from college) get modded "Informative"?

Hello, moderators? Anybody home?

Re:Can you handle the truth? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38035016)

Oh look, the Ron Paul bobbleheads found slashdot...

The economy depends is a system that depends on governance, not the other way around. Capitalism is not a magical force of nature that will lead us to prosperity if we all adopt some pie-in-the-sky lassez faire attitude. Capitalism probably works best when a fair marketplace is maintained by the government not when those that accumulate the most are allowed to abuse the system at will.

PS. I read your little treatise on SS. You seem to be missing the reason SS was started in the first place. That said, it is cute to couch an entire argument within one outlier (most people don't live to be 100). We should really just index the age of collection to life expectancy.

Troll successful!

Re:Can you handle the truth? - If it makes sense! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38035158)

The truth is that economy depends on production and not on consumption, consumption is a trivial consequence of production,....

What? That makes no sense.

Without consumption, production leads to oversupply. And of course without production, there's nothing to consume.

Re:Can you handle the truth? (2)

cjb658 (1235986) | more than 2 years ago | (#38035176)

When are we going to start requiring congressmen to take basic economics before serving office?

Re:Can you handle the truth? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38035236)

So why is the economy of the People's Republic of China booming? Remember, this is a dictatorship run by one of the last Communist parties in power. Any enterprise of any size is either dominated or directly owned by the government.

Oh, right - your definition of freedom is the freedom of enterprise owners to control their slave labor force, to prevent the population from effectively petitioning their government, and to restrict the population's ability to find the truth. The PRC is free by this definition, and hence is a paragon of capitalist enthusiasm.

Your freedom is the freedom of the slave owner to do as they wish with their slaves without interference

Work visa (1)

mr100percent (57156) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034354)

Last I read on slashdot, getting a work visa for India is extremely hard, meaning Americans can't as easily go to India for work as the reverse. Anyone have more info?

Re:Work visa (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034580)

Last I heard, India was like every other country in that if they really want you they'll break all the rules and bring you in anyway. If you have the specialty that they need, all that is irrelevant. Just like here, where we actually have seminars on how to disqualify qualified applicants so that you can hire an H1-B.

Re:Work visa (2)

sgt scrub (869860) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034868)

They are looking for Indians to go back and run projects for them so they don't have to pay an agency that handles management. It is cheaper to send someone back and set them up with a $7/h crew.

Re:Work visa (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38034822)

It is not that hard. I am in India currently and did not have much difficulty to obtain a visa. If a company wants you, you will have it, especially if it is an India based company (I was in a multinational and not officially hired by the Indian branch, so that created some complications).

I am quite sure it is *much* harder to go work in the States.

Um, there are lots of these (3, Informative)

antifoidulus (807088) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034358)

There are job fairs for jobs in Japan in the US, MIT does one for jobs in Europe [euro-career.com], etc. Nothing all that unique about doing one for India.

Re:Um, there are lots of these (3, Insightful)

funkatron (912521) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034400)

It's a sign of economic growth in India that recruiting from the US is now a possibility. A couple of decades ago there weren't many jobs out there that would be attractive to Americans.

Wage War in India (4, Interesting)

That_Dan_Guy (589967) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034448)

You are more right than you know actually. I work for an Indian outsource company. I was outsourced 3+ years ago. I talk to a lot of the guys over there and from over there. These companies now pay their people the same to stay in India as to come to the US. They used to pay them a lot more to come here. But in the last year or more there has been a pretty major wage war as the different India tech companies pilfer talent from each other at an alarming rate. It has led to a lot of turnover.

But then, I've been approached by recruiters here who want to pay me more than I get now. They are just desperate to oversell my skills (fine, unless they oversell to the point the client thinks they're getting a triple CCIE when they're only getting a CCNP/MCSE), and I currently have the best schedule ever being able to work from home anytime I want. If only I didn't have kids I could be making 30% more than I am now.

Best two years of my career (3, Interesting)

java_dev (894898) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034514)

I lved in India with my family setting up some engineering teams. Best two years of my career... but also the most challenging, simply because you have no idea how hard it is to adjust to living in a foreign culture until you have to do it.

Of course, if you have a crappy boss, it'll completely suck - like anywhere else..

Nothing new (1)

tompaulco (629533) | more than 2 years ago | (#38034734)

This is nothing new. The only difference is that the jobs themselves are in India. I get spam job offers every week from Indian companies advertising for consulting positions here in the United States, unfortunately, I am not qualified for them because I don't have an H1-B and I am not Indian. I am a natural born citizen of the United States and that is just not the sort of person these consulting firms are looking for.

Developers Wanted! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38034838)

Frankly when it comes to good talent right here in the US finding well qualified and talented Software Development people has remained very tough through out this downturn.

There are areas within our economy that have continued to perform quite well throughout this mess and software is one of them. We (The United States) are not creating nearly enough high tech talent that can think and are self-motivated.

There ARE jobs for those sorts of people. Good luck finding them.

There have been China job fairs for years (3, Interesting)

erice (13380) | more than 2 years ago | (#38035130)

Periodic fairs for jobs in China have been held in the SF Bay Area going back to at least early 2009 so this is nothing all that new. The Chinese jobs usually required fluent Mandarin. The Indian jobs might be more approachable for non-Indians since English is the language of the educated class. Not that it matters much to me. I traveled in India for six months and while it is a fascinating place to visit, I don't want to live there.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account