On Fri, 09 May 2008 12:00:56 -0400, T.Keating wrote:
> A little wisdom from the past..
> This is a copy of one of my reply post directed towards JJ I
> composed/posted back in April 2001...
>
>
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants
> Message-ID: <3acd7331.64548103@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 08:45:44 GMT
>
>
> -----------
>
> On Fri, 06 Apr 2001 03:05:21 -0400, American Programmer
> <diogenes-no-s...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>>It's actually a good thing that managers did NOT grow to like
telecommuting.
>
> Too bad, since the U.S. was fairly close to being the ideal country
> for remote development, but the expansion of H1-B program pretty much
> killed off that fledgling industry. I.E. The cost of local tech
> industry development was being constrained by local factors, cost of
> housing, wage competition, relocation expenses, etc.
>
> A lot of the tech Industry was planning on the telecommuting becoming
> a substantial new industry. Ton's of fibre was laid, big investments
> in telecom., etc. When the new industry failed to materialize, it
> eliminated a lot of those business models, thus is another factor in
> the current tech wreck.
>
> That new model would have allowed the U.S. to transition to a more
> efficient work system. Where a teleworker's impact on the
> environment/society is greatly reduced. They no longer have a daily
> need for roads, cars, driving to work, office buildings, etc.
>
> Once H1-B was expanded, most of the constraining local factors driving
> telecommuting vanished. Housing, no problem for a single person
> living with seven room mates. Transportation, locating housing next to
> a 1st world industrial/office park is not an issue, when compared to
> living in a 3rd world country. Relocation expenses are nearly
> non-existant, maybe a plane ticket. Wage competition, well, I think
> we all know where that argument goes.
>
>>Think about it: If managers became comfortable with employees working
off
>>site, it wouldn't matter whether you're working from San Jose or
Bangalore.
>>Managers would hire people from the latter since the cost of labor is
MUCH
>>lower there. Anyone wanting to work from home that resided in a high
cost of
>>living area would ultimately be SOL.
>
>
> There are lots of other factors that deter foreign contracts.
>
> Some reasons are:
> Lack of a consistent legal system to enforce contracts and protect
> IP.
> Reliable low cost communication links are often not available.
> How stable is the local power grid, if it exists.
> High Import tarrifs/bribes required and other impediments for the
> transport of products/equipment needed for conducting business.
> Non-existant tech support/supply infrastructure to make even minor
> repairs, etc.
>
> Just some thoughts about a Golden age that may never happen.
> All thanks to Congress selling out to the tech industry, for a few
> measly bribes/campaign donations.
>
> Tim Keating
>
> ------------- New content ------------
>
> Fast forward to May 9, 2008
>
> Crude oil approaching $130 per barrel. Gasoline headed to $4 a
> gallon.. Gasoline proces will probably hit $7 per gallon before
> years end..
>
> Runaway inflation.
> Housing crash due to prices exceeding the ability of stagant(devalued)
> wages ability to carry debt load.
> Another couple of trillion dollars of debt accumulated and wasted
> pacifying areas of the middle east for zero effect. (DOD
> expenditures.)
>
> This outcome brought to you by a President Bill Clinton, The Neocons,
> and a Republican Congress.
I really get sick of the Clinton bashing. The blame for most of the stuff
you correctly see as a problem is squarely on the Republican Congress. It
is and was the constant "government is bad" and "free markets solve all
problems" from every bull horn in America that created the Republican
Congress and left Clinton in a very politically weak position. He could
"go with the flow" or just let the Republicans have a clear shot at the
White House in 2000. He tried, but he didn't make it. The Pukes took
over the entire world in 2001. There is no way that you will ever
convince me that a more "left" lean by Clinton would have stopped
Pinocchio Bush in 2000. As it was he actually won, as we know. The
Supremes crowned Bush Emperor in 2000, but Clinton tried. Al Gore tried to
go left and the world was lost.
> Shrub (Bush) had the power to mitigate the damages, but instead made
> things much worse. Invaded Iraq, signed several bills authorizing
> additional visa program expansions, and recently used, (April 2008),
> administrative powers to expand foreign tech labor pool in the U.S.
> by another 400,000.
The Republicans have always sought a caste society where the aristocracy
dictates the morality by ruling with an iron economic fist. Your position
in the society is based on your loyalty to the privileged caste. The
destruction of the US dollar is part of the destruction of economic man.
When there is no money then there is no way to keep score. The winners
are whoever the Republicans care to anoint. The Republicans create money
as they need it. They don't need no stinkin taxes.
--
"I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers
of society but the people themselves; and
if we think them not enlightened enough to
exercise their control with a wholesome
discretion, the remedy is not to take it from
them, but to inform their discretion by
education." - Thomas Jefferson
http://GreaterVoice.org/extend
|
