Anthony Quiting Digital Point at midnight tonight!

Hey Anthony, ever notice our heated (but friendly) debates draw the largest crowds?

It's like a Mike Tyson vs Chris Rock boxing match. And you are Chris Rock

 

Man you missed the boat in the last 5 years GTech where programmers lost their jobs during the dot com bust and had to take half of their former pay IF THEY Could even find work in this country.

You believe hype man, but the trend is against the US IT worker.

Go search on these keywords then come back

US IT Job Cuts Layoffs


http://vivisimo.com/search?v:sources=Web&query=US+IT+Job+Cuts+Layoffs&x=48&y=17

Read this and weep GTech because these are your customers that are losing their jobs and their spending money to oil companies.



Then come back and tell me how good outsourcing is.

 

Actually, I've provided a very meaningful article that shows clearly that outsourcing certain low paying IT jobs creates additional jobs and raises the GDP substantially.

Has nothing to do with the dot com bust, completely separate issue.

Read the article and you tell me how good outsourcing is? Which part of $124.2 billion dollars and 317,000 net new jobs disappoints you most?

 

Because it is a big lie GTech, how can it benefit you if I send my website development work to India instead of paying GTech to build my sites?

I can send the work there real easy GTech, I don't need to give the work to anyone here in the states, do I

I have a programmer in Russia that will work for $9.00 an hour, how will that help folks here in the states GTech?

 

I do understand from my older sister that Macromedia, where she works, does outsource certain coding jobs. They don't outsource new programs; they outsource established programs where language barriers aren't such a problem, since established programs only need updating.

Is that a bad thing? I don't know, but the justification used is that it allows U.S. programmers to focus on creating new programs rather than doing basic updating work.

 

That is correct, they do not have to hire full time employees with full benefits and they are able to produce more product by letting their best programmers develop new software and let others maintain what has already been created.

 

Anthony, it is not a big lie. Just because you don't want to believe in reality or something that is greater than you are, does not make it a lie. There are real benefits to outsourcing and global trade.

You have a long standing tradition of calling everything a lie or propaganda, and many persistently disagree with you. Maybe the problem isn't everyone else.

You as an individual, can do what you wish and it's not going to affect me. But if major companies choose to outsource lower paying jobs to save money and create jobs for other areas that offer US works higher salaries, then how is it a bad thing?

How is $124.2 billion dollars and 317,000 net new jobs a bad thing? How is 5.6% unemployment rate a bad thing, when it was the greatest thing since sliced bread when Clinton was in office?

And for the fourth time, why did Clinton know the benefits of outsourcing and global trade and why do you give him a pass?

 

I hate to give you the news but this nation had a giant budget surplus when Clinton left office and now we have the largest budget deficit than the entire debt combined in the entire history of the nation, go back and read the article where Warrren Buffet commented GTech and then justify your statements and your support for The Bush Senior Administration

 

as a percentage of GDP, the deficit is not the biggest ever.

There was no surplus when clinton was in office. it was an illusion. If there was a surplus, why did the debt never decrease? Where did the money go? Govt numbers in 2001 showed that the clinton admininstration pumped up the econominc numbers about 20% to show more income than really existed - to hide a recession that was coming near the end of his term.

 

Yep, and we had that because the Clinton Administration gutted our military. Which "may" be one reason they never wanted to strike back all the times we were attacked by terrorists during his tenure. The same reason Sandy Berger is about to face prison time.

Anyone can balance a budget by cutting our defenses. Perhaps you'd prefer we just let terrorists attack whenever they feel like it. Maybe you forgot about the ONE TRILLION dollars the stock market lost after 9/11, or the companies that laid workers off, the airlines that almost folded (and some eventually did), the hotel and restaurant businesses that suffered. The whole country. I lost a successful software company during that time because we relied on some of these very companies for contracts. The economy has come a long way since those days. Gloom, despair and agony on me.

How is $124.2 billion dollars and 317,000 net new jobs a bad thing? How is 5.6% unemployment rate a bad thing, when it was the greatest thing since sliced bread when Clinton was in office?

For the fifth time, why did Clinton know the benefits of outsourcing and global trade and why do you give him a pass?

 

lorien1973
Spreader of Mad Cow Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 450


as a percentage of GDP, the deficit is not the biggest ever.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Who told you that?

http://cbs.marketwatch.com/news/arc...&archive=true&param=archive&garden=&minisite=


Regarding the outsourcing of manufacturing offshore, there is very little more that can be said -- except, perhaps, that this is hardly something new. Our textile industry which for a century was a key component of New England's economy first migrated to the southern American states, then to parts of Latin America, then to China, and now to India. As a result: we can buy sneakers at Wal-Mart for $9.99 instead of $59.99, or cashmere sweaters at Macy's for $99 instead of the $399 we used to pay at Saks.

Our rate of inflation in recent years has been at very low levels, in no small measure due to the low cost of imports. This has allowed interest rates -- especially long term rates, such as those on 30-year mortgages to drop to 40-year lows, allowing the housing sector of our economy to prosper as never before, and adding significantly to economic growth and household wealth. As Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan indicated in his most recent testimony before Congress, globalization has led to a significantly higher standard of living not only in the United States, but around the world.

Not only that, but this process has also not resulted in the mass exportation of jobs, as many would have us believe. Despite the fact that imports are at all-time highs, our unemployment rate is only 5.4 percent. Furthermore, this absence of globalization exerting any major negative effect on employment in the United States is not likely to change in the future. As the Vice Chairman of the Federal Reserve Roger Ferguson recently pointed out, although there are no conclusive data on the subject, a study produced by the research firm Forrester found that fewer than 300,000 jobs per year would be displaced through outsourcing over the next decade.

So much, then, for that red herring.

Another red herring is the myth that a situation where foreign central banks now hold more than $2 trillion of our national debt -- an amount that is growing by the hundreds of billions of dollars a year -- is not only bad for this country, but in the end will lead to some sort of financial apocalypse. In fact, as Chairman Greenspan has repeatedly pointed out, were it not for these huge capital imports, capital investment in the United States would have to be reduced to much lower levels, with the ultimate consequences of our sinking into a period of extended economic stagnation. Why? Because high levels of capital investment must be fueled by equal amounts of savings. Domestic American savings are woefully insufficient to do so. So we Americans must tap into the savings of the Japanese, the Chinese, the Koreans, the Indians to finance the amounts of domestic investment needed to keep our economy growing at 3.5 percent per annum, at levels high enough to provide jobs for 95 percent of those Americans both willing and able to work. And the central banks of all of these Asian countries are all willing to recycle those hundreds of billions of dollar derived from their trade surpluses back to the United States making up for our lack of savings, and financing both out trade and budgetary deficits.

It all resembles a merry-go-round where we Americans are getting a free ride. And the last thing we should hope for is that the music stops before we manage to get our domestic fiscal affairs in order.

But what if this merry-go-round suddenly stops?

In late February of this year we had a small foretaste of what could happen. The Finance Minister of South Korea, which is the fifth largest holder of U.S. dollars as the major component of its currency reserves, seemed to indicate that his nation was considering diversifying those reserves. The implication was that it would began to build up its holdings of euro and yen, while reducing the percentage of total reserves held in U.S. dollars. Every financial market in New York -- foreign exchange, bonds, stocks -- reacted immediately and negatively as market participants collectively asked -- what if China and India and even Japan followed Korea's example? The dollar would crash, that's what, and probably bring down all the other financial markets with it.

The next day the Koreans back off, and the problem was shoved back into the closet. But the question remains: How real is this risk?

David Levey, former director of Moody's Sovereign Ratings Service and Stuart Brown, Professor of Economics at Syracuse University, sought to answer that question in a recent article in Foreign Affairs under the title "The Overstretch Myth." They begin by recognizing the fact that the United States which, until 1989, was always a creditor to the rest of the world, now has the largest net liabilities in the history of the world, with foreign claims on the United States ($10.5 trillion) exceeding foreign claims of the United States ($7.9 trillion) at the end of 2004, reflecting the fact that the net international investment position (NIIP) is now 24 percent of GDP and rapidly rising as we continue to run huge trade deficits. Warren Buffett concludes that this will eventually turn our country into a nation of sharecroppers dependent on foreign landlords

 

So you would rather pay 59.99 for shoes, but complain about the cost of gas prices. And even think the president controls the price of gasoline, which is most amusing.

The article you post seems to contradict many of the things you propose and back up some of what I've been saying.

How is $124.2 billion dollars and 317,000 net new jobs a bad thing? How is 5.6% unemployment rate a bad thing, when it was the greatest thing since sliced bread when Clinton was in office?

For the sixth time, why did Clinton know the benefits of outsourcing and global trade and why do you give him a pass? Why does Alan Greenspan know the benefits of outsourcing?

 

Greenspan said that if it was not for the investments of these nations we are sending all the manufacturing jobs to the American economy would fall into depression, what is so hard for you GTech, you are able to read, right

PS: Did you miss this part of his comments GTech??

In fact, as Chairman Greenspan has repeatedly pointed out, were it not for these huge capital imports, capital investment in the United States would have to be reduced to much lower levels, with the ultimate consequences of our sinking into a period of extended economic stagnation.

 

What are you, nuts? It says outsourcing 1) has been going on a LOT longer than this administration. 2) That outsourcing is good. Free trade is good. We are not sending ALL manufacturing jobs overseas.

So you are saying you are for outsourcing and against it? You want Americans to keep low paying jobs so that they cannot achieve the high paying jobs the outsourcing provides? That's a little John Kerryish to me.

You are for free trade and outsourcing when a Democrat is in office, but against it when a Republican is in office? Gee, now I understand. It all makes perfect sense

How is $124.2 billion dollars and 317,000 net new jobs a bad thing? How is 5.6% unemployment rate a bad thing, when it was the greatest thing since sliced bread when Clinton was in office?

For the seventh time, why did Clinton know the benefits of outsourcing and global trade and why do you give him a pass? Why does Alan Greenspan know the benefits of outsourcing?

 

The dollar was at record highs under Clinton, we had a budget surplus under Clinton, we had record stock market prices under Clinton.

We had sane leadership under Clinton, we did not have a war in Iraq under Clinton, we also did not have World Record oil prices under Clinton that will take the world economy into a depression, if you think it is bad now, wait until Cheney and Bush have stolen Trillions more in the next few years from this already dead economy.

 

Remind us why we had a surplus under Clinton? Why did the dot com bust when Clinton was in office? We had spitballs under Clinton.

I don't think it's bad now, at all. In fact, I'm amazed that Bush inherited a declining economy from the far reaching 90s that finally began to correct itself. And then 9/11 that cost just the stock market ONE TRILLION dollars in loss, not to mention the job losses around the country, layoffs, etc. And yet, by investing in those that hire, he's proven that it does add jobs and that our economy is recovering for all he was dealt.

Nope, I don't think it's bad. I don't think 5.4 or 5.6 unemployment is bad. That's where it was when Clinton was in office and it's much lower than other countries around the world.

I've seen no evidence that Bush or Cheney have stolen trillions. Hog wash, as usual.

And we did have record oil prices under Clinton and I've discussed it before. So much so, that in an effort to lower those prices, Clinton released some of our oil reserves and it didn't help reduce the cost of gas. Don't you remember that? If Clinton couldn't lower gas prices, how in the hell can Bush raise them? Please!

For your area, Florida, just in Orlando and Miami, I see 737 IT related jobs avaiable. But, but, but, where's all the doom and gloom that they are being outsourced? What's that, only 2.3% is being outsourced? Well, that changes that doom and gloom outlook doesn't it?

http://jobsearch.monster.com/jobsea...=554&sort=rv&vw=b&cy=US&re=14&brd=1,1862,1863

If you want a job, you can get one.

 

So Warren Buffett and Alan Greenspan don't know what they are talking about?

How about George Soros, read what he says about the Bush Administration.

This nation is in trouble and in danger of a banking crisis GTech and you can't stop it nor the corruption in the oil business, the only difference with them and is that they will not get busted like Bernie Ebers did for fraud (WorldCom scam) in an 11 Billion dollar theft.

Remember Enron GTech, they are in your part of the world, Ken Lay is a Bush family friend and he will never do any time.

 

No, you don't know what you are talking about. We are not outsourcing all our manufacturing jobs and the article I posted suggests 2.3% of IT jobs. However, you suggest all software companies outsource their coding jobs. Incorrect.

George Soros is coward, nut job that made his fortunes off the backs of others. I have no interest in anything Soros says, other than entertainment purposes. He's living proof an election can't be bought. If anyone could have, it would have been him. He's a flake, communist loving, free world reject.

Enron has nothing to do with Bush. Who cares of someone was a friend? You want to talk about friends, let's talk Clinton's pardons. Marc Rich ring a bell? There's another oil thief you'll give a pass to.

 

Oh, I almost forgot you've worked so hard to avoid:

How is $124.2 billion dollars and 317,000 net new jobs a bad thing? How is 5.6% unemployment rate a bad thing, when it was the greatest thing since sliced bread when Clinton was in office?

For the eighth time, why did Clinton know the benefits of outsourcing and global trade and why do you give him a pass? Why does Alan Greenspan know the benefits of outsourcing?

 

It is getting close to my time to leave GTech, good talking to you tonight, I knew you would enjoy bringing George Soros in to the discussion.

Michael Moore is another guy you don't like either because he stands up for the truth also

You have a good night GTech, it is always fun, let the others finish off this thread because as you know, I must depart