Bhooshan Iyer wrote:
> Stan--
> 
> 
>>The cold war saw many an engineer to retirement. The .com boom was 
>>sort of government seeded. Booms are booms, you really can't separate 
>>the market from the government. They form a system. The space program 
>>was a national goal, it didn't subsidize industry, it created several 
>>industries.
> 
> 
> What do you mean by "the .com boom was govt. driven"? If you dont think
> its a waste of time, you cud explain. Iam interested.

"Government seeded", DARPA net -> NSF net  ....

The roots of the Internet were not driven by capatilistic motives.
> 
> 
>>As far a socialism is concerned, "Does a tiger loose it's 
>>stripes?"
> 
> 
> Nope. And you are right about this. But I will confess that I have hopes
> that I will spot the stripe-less tiger atleast close to the end of my
> life, when am all wise and white bearded. 
> 
> 
>>You have a lot of poverty in India.
> 
> 
> Yup you are right.To quote Jerry "My views on this might surprise you". If
> you want my views about India, let me know.
Yes I would.
> 
> I dont know if you read an OT post that I made sometime back about an
> Arundathi Roy interview in a leading Indian magazine. I have taken a huge
> liking to the bubble bursting that Arundathi Roy did in that interview
> surrounding "the great Indian hype". Simply put she said, India is not a
> super power, it is just super poor. I subscribe to this. I also subcribe
> to her philosophy that booms and highs created through the sufferings of
> another tribe from another place is not sustainable in the long run,
> including the Indian boom. So you take a deep breath and think why yours
> burst.

This is food for thought.
> 
> 
>>Your politicians, like 
>>those everywhere else will always be tempted to cook the goose that lays
> 
> 
>>the golden eggs, particularly since those poor folks vote.
> 
> 
> And people like me dont.We talk a lot but we dont vote.

Well, I don't always vote either.  I read someplace that India has the 
largest numbers of middle class people of any nation in the world. 
Unfortunately that doesn't translate into the highest percentage of 
middle class people.  In "principle", in the US, there are a lot of 
people who will vote like me.
> 
> 
>>I suspect that the attraction of H1-B for industry is the tighter 
>>control over intellectual property.
> 
> 
> Do you mean Americans would file more patents out of their work? If you
> dont mean this, then can you elloborate?
> 

Most companies including the US Government require a blanket assignment 
of intellectual rights to them as a condition of employment.  One might 
also say that things like security clearances are a form of control over 
intellectual property if you have a broad interpretation of what 
intellectual property is. I actually think that these broad assignment 
rights have the effect of reducing innovation.  The counter argument is 
that these rules protect investors and ultimately provide for the 
availability of more capital that innovators can use.

> 
>>Political stability 
>>and rule of law are important to investors in the long run. In the short
> 
> 
>>term its hard to tell.I kind of wonder about people who invest in 
>>China while the Taiwan issue remains unresolved.
> 
> 
> The blunt answer to that is, "fishing in troubled waters is the emperors
> and conquerors hobby". Has been so for centuries.
> 
> The alternate answer: The difference being that for China's economic size,
> might and integeration into the world economy, it is in every body's
> interest that Taiwan remains a minor irritant and no more. This is called
> the political reality. When economics and geopolitiking go hand in hand,
> you have a process of colonization in your hands.
> 
> 
>>The numbers that I'm interested in 
>>is the portion of H1-B that convert to permanent status.
> 
> 
> Hmmm... I wonder. BTW what is the modus operandi? How exactly does this
> conversion to permanent status happen. I dont know want to be caught
> unawares if am bestowed upon the *chance*!
> 
Other than the fact that it can be done, I'm clueless.  I suspect that 
it involves income for lawyers.


> --Bhooshan
> 
> 
> 		
> This message was sent using the Comp.DSP web interface on
> www.DSPRelated.com

Stan--

>The cold war saw many an engineer to retirement. The .com boom was 
>sort of government seeded. Booms are booms, you really can't separate 
>the market from the government. They form a system. The space program 
>was a national goal, it didn't subsidize industry, it created several 
>industries.

What do you mean by "the .com boom was govt. driven"? If you dont think
its a waste of time, you cud explain. Iam interested.

>As far a socialism is concerned, "Does a tiger loose it's 
>stripes?"

Nope. And you are right about this. But I will confess that I have hopes
that I will spot the stripe-less tiger atleast close to the end of my
life, when am all wise and white bearded. 

> You have a lot of poverty in India.

Yup you are right.To quote Jerry "My views on this might surprise you". If
you want my views about India, let me know.

I dont know if you read an OT post that I made sometime back about an
Arundathi Roy interview in a leading Indian magazine. I have taken a huge
liking to the bubble bursting that Arundathi Roy did in that interview
surrounding "the great Indian hype". Simply put she said, India is not a
super power, it is just super poor. I subscribe to this. I also subcribe
to her philosophy that booms and highs created through the sufferings of
another tribe from another place is not sustainable in the long run,
including the Indian boom. So you take a deep breath and think why yours
burst.

> Your politicians, like 
>those everywhere else will always be tempted to cook the goose that lays

>the golden eggs, particularly since those poor folks vote.

And people like me dont.We talk a lot but we dont vote.

>I suspect that the attraction of H1-B for industry is the tighter 
>control over intellectual property.

Do you mean Americans would file more patents out of their work? If you
dont mean this, then can you elloborate?

>Political stability 
>and rule of law are important to investors in the long run. In the short

>term its hard to tell.I kind of wonder about people who invest in 
>China while the Taiwan issue remains unresolved.

The blunt answer to that is, "fishing in troubled waters is the emperors
and conquerors hobby". Has been so for centuries.

The alternate answer: The difference being that for China's economic size,
might and integeration into the world economy, it is in every body's
interest that Taiwan remains a minor irritant and no more. This is called
the political reality. When economics and geopolitiking go hand in hand,
you have a process of colonization in your hands.

> The numbers that I'm interested in 
> is the portion of H1-B that convert to permanent status.

Hmmm... I wonder. BTW what is the modus operandi? How exactly does this
conversion to permanent status happen. I dont know want to be caught
unawares if am bestowed upon the *chance*!

--Bhooshan


		
This message was sent using the Comp.DSP web interface on
www.DSPRelated.com

Stan Pawlukiewicz <spam@spam.mitre.org> writes:

> The original post had some numbers.  The numbers that I'm interested
> in is the portion of H1-B that convert to permanent status.

Based on a sample size of one employer, I'd say it's pretty high.

Ciao,

Peter K.

Stan,

I don't blame people in the countries that US jobs are being outsourced
to for taking the jobs, it is in their best interests. I am
disappointed with the US government that they let the outsourcing
happen to the degree it has.  It is not only in engineering.  How often
(assuming you live in the USA) have you called an information line
(credit, product, ...) and didn't get someone half-way around the world
to answer your questions?  Sometimes communication is difficult.  So
much for customer service.

As far as the H1-B visas go, it used to be that a company had to prove
there was no one locally to fill the the job before they brought
someone in from out of the country to fill it.  The US government has
been bringing in people to fill jobs that are not vacant.  That pisses
me off.

The irony is that the current beneficiaries of outsourcing in India,
Russia, and Eastern Europe, will start looking expensive if the proper
environment develops in China, with the wages that exist there.

To succeed in engineering you have to continue learning about your area
and keep up with related technology changes, new methods, information,
etc.  But you also need a place to apply your skills.

Dirk

Bhooshan Iyer wrote:
> Stan--
> 
> 
>>IMHO, the H1-B is really not the problem.  It dosen't help either.
> 
> 
> Rightly said. H1-B or no H1B, the differential in salaries are high enough
> for the shoe-string manager to seek out the cheaper labour either in the
> home turf or elsewhere.I remember reading a Bill Gates statement to the
> effect of "If you dont let them come here, we will go there"
> 
> Also whats interesting to me to deduce from your post is that the boom you
> talk about in the 70's and the 80's was a Govt. driven boom and not a
> market driven boom. Isnt that always dangereous, to depending on Govt.
> spending to sustain an Industry? We used to call that socialism.

  The cold war saw many an engineer to retirement. The .com boom was 
sort of government seeded. Booms are booms, you really can't separate 
the market from the government. They form a system. The space program 
was a national goal, it didn't subsidize industry, it created several 
industries.  As far a socialism is concerned, "Does a tiger loose it's 
stripes?".  You have a lot of poverty in India.  Your politicians, like 
those everywhere else will always be tempted to cook the goose that lays 
the golden eggs, particularly since those poor folks vote.

I suspect that the attraction of H1-B for industry is the tighter 
control over intellectual property. Its also a stepping stone to 
outsourcing. Salary is only part of the equation. Political stability 
and rule of law are important to investors in the long run. In the short 
term its hard to tell.  I kind of wonder about people who invest in 
China while the Taiwan issue remains unresolved.
> 
> Just for my understanding:How bad is the unemployment of the EE grad in
> US;Do you have some numbers?  

The original post had some numbers.  The numbers that I'm interested in 
is the portion of H1-B that convert to permanent status.


> 
> --Bhooshan
> 
> 
> 		
> This message was sent using the Comp.DSP web interface on
> www.DSPRelated.com

Richard Owlett *while functionally asleep* wrote:

What doesn't even make sense to himself. Since last nights shift was 
even longer, I'll abstain from posting until awake ;}

> Rick Lyons wrote:
> 
>> [ significant(?) snip ]
>>
>> Looking back on it, I was I could have skipped the Western Culture, 
>> English, Mechanics, Thermodynamics, Chemistry, Materials Science, etc. 
>> classes.
>>
>> (I realize that some guys are jump on me about this.)
>>
> 
> Given jumping invitation, I JUMP ;)
> 
> Actually I also jump on:
>  1. IEEE ( and other !@#$ engineering education standard setters )
>  2. Liberal Arts professors/schools that don't educate
>  3. narrow minded engineering students(sic)
> 
> I will harangue in reverse order ;)
> 
> "sic"="Latin word for 'thus' used to indicate an apparent error"
> 
> I'm annoyed enough to leave much as exercise to student.
> 
> Perhaps I will annoy/irritate others so they will "engage brains before 
> putting ????? in gear"
> 

Stan--

>IMHO, the H1-B is really not the problem.  It dosen't help either.

Rightly said. H1-B or no H1B, the differential in salaries are high enough
for the shoe-string manager to seek out the cheaper labour either in the
home turf or elsewhere.I remember reading a Bill Gates statement to the
effect of "If you dont let them come here, we will go there"

Also whats interesting to me to deduce from your post is that the boom you
talk about in the 70's and the 80's was a Govt. driven boom and not a
market driven boom. Isnt that always dangereous, to depending on Govt.
spending to sustain an Industry? We used to call that socialism.

Just for my understanding:How bad is the unemployment of the EE grad in
US;Do you have some numbers?

--Bhooshan


		
This message was sent using the Comp.DSP web interface on
www.DSPRelated.com

V.S. wrote:
> A very interesting discussion. I am curious to know what your (y'alls?)
> thoughts are on the bleak scenario painted by IEEE-USA for US
> engineers. Especially the assertion that salaries have been held low
> vis-a-vis lawyers and doctors, due to influx of foreign workers. I am
> in the odd situation of being a H1-B engineer paying IEEE-USA dues and
> hear them constantly lobby against our ilk...
> 
IMHO,  The goal of the IEEE is to promote technology, not the 
technologists.  It considers itself to be an international institution 
(except when it wants money), so it doesn't and never will advance the 
interests of US (Canadian, European, ...) engineers to the disadvantage 
of others.

IEEE-USA is supposed to be a bit more nationalistic.  I quit IEEE a 
couple of years ago but to my knowledge IEEE-USA has always supported 
permanent visas. If it wanted to keep salaries high, it would oppose all 
immigration. The difficulty has been primarily with temporary 
generically qualified engineers.  The facts are that the law governing 
H1-B visas have been abused. It is supposed to be for highly specialized 
workers.

IMHO, the essential problem with engineers in the US is that policy 
makers view engineers as something that comes out of spigot that money 
can turn on and off at will.  Think about the Appolo space program, the 
Vietnam war, and the Reagan military build up. There was a big ramp up 
of demand and then a huge bust.  These patterns are not conducive to a 
profession that requires many years to master the necessary skills. You 
could work on something for ten years and poof some politician has 
decided what you have, isn't needed. Some manager may decide to shift 
your job across the country or across the world.

   I think that the reason that kids in the US don't want to go in 
engineering is that its a roll of the dice.  Higher education was 
relatively cheap when I was a kid. I could go to college or be like my 
father and work in a factory. Taking a risk on engineering was a no 
brainier.  Its a nobrainer for a kid in India or China right now if you 
have the opportunity. Go to college or ride your fathers water buffalo, 
pick rice or whatever. In the US, a kid is looking at spending between 
$50K-100K on an education. Do they choose engineering or do they look at 
something else.  It simply isn't the same decision it was 25 years ago.



IMHO, the H1-B is really not the problem.  It dosen't help either.

Richard Owlett wrote:

   ...

> "sic"="Latin word for 'thus' used to indicate an apparent error"

It is used to claim "Don't blame me; that's how it was written."

Jerry
-- 
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
�����������������������������������������������������������������������

A very interesting discussion. I am curious to know what your (y'alls?)
thoughts are on the bleak scenario painted by IEEE-USA for US
engineers. Especially the assertion that salaries have been held low
vis-a-vis lawyers and doctors, due to influx of foreign workers. I am
in the odd situation of being a H1-B engineer paying IEEE-USA dues and
hear them constantly lobby against our ilk...