Comments on: No story critical of banks is too dopey to run http://www.dinocrat.com/archives/2009/02/02/no-story-critical-of-banks-is-too-dopey-to-run-2/ Thu, 09 Feb 2012 11:49:05 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3 By: TominDE http://www.dinocrat.com/archives/2009/02/02/no-story-critical-of-banks-is-too-dopey-to-run-2/#comment-317607 TominDE Tue, 10 Feb 2009 23:12:39 +0000 http://www.dinocrat.com/?p=8097#comment-317607 Mark, you have it wrong! Banks seek workers with high skills, and there are not enough Americans with these skills, plain and simple. I wish there were. I am at a University and we would love to train more US citizens in quantitative skills. They don't apply. Banks don't pay an average salary of $90,721 for low skill or unskilled jobs. These jobs require a MS or higher degree. These are high skill jobs. The AP story is baiting for a fight that has no substance. Mark, you have it wrong! Banks seek workers with high skills, and there are not enough Americans with these skills, plain and simple. I wish there were. I am at a University and we would love to train more US citizens in quantitative skills. They don’t apply. Banks don’t pay an average salary of $90,721 for low skill or unskilled jobs. These jobs require a MS or higher degree. These are high skill jobs. The AP story is baiting for a fight that has no substance.

]]> By: boqueronman http://www.dinocrat.com/archives/2009/02/02/no-story-critical-of-banks-is-too-dopey-to-run-2/#comment-317244 boqueronman Tue, 03 Feb 2009 21:38:31 +0000 http://www.dinocrat.com/?p=8097#comment-317244 I think you're right on this this one Mark. The threat of penalties should be incorporated in any "transfer contracts" or whatever instrument the gov't-recipient sign before the hand-over of taxpayer money. But this is just a drop in the bucket. What I find most troubling is the potential for abuse of the infrastructure construction stimulus. Too much money may go to experienced, white workers! OK, just kidding. Seriously, given the structural transformation of the construction industry, there is a high probability that taxpayer funding will be used to hire illegal aliens. That shouldn't be part of the deal. However, Dinocrat is correct that AP couldn't write a well argued, informative, unbiased news report if their lives depended on it. I think you’re right on this this one Mark. The threat of penalties should be incorporated in any “transfer contracts” or whatever instrument the gov’t-recipient sign before the hand-over of taxpayer money. But this is just a drop in the bucket. What I find most troubling is the potential for abuse of the infrastructure construction stimulus. Too much money may go to experienced, white workers! OK, just kidding. Seriously, given the structural transformation of the construction industry, there is a high probability that taxpayer funding will be used to hire illegal aliens. That shouldn’t be part of the deal. However, Dinocrat is correct that AP couldn’t write a well argued, informative, unbiased news report if their lives depended on it.

]]> By: MarkD http://www.dinocrat.com/archives/2009/02/02/no-story-critical-of-banks-is-too-dopey-to-run-2/#comment-317166 MarkD Mon, 02 Feb 2009 13:50:03 +0000 http://www.dinocrat.com/?p=8097#comment-317166 As one who has seen friends and co-workers laid off and forced to leave the IT field while companies bring in foreign replacements, I'd say the AP got it right. In the 70s and 80s, companies actually spent money training their IT workers as new technologies came along. Along the way, they decided that it was cheaper to replace workers than to retrain them. Workers aren't owed jobs, and the owners of the company can do whatever is legal to contain costs. I can't rationally object to that. I've managed to stay employed, partly because I retrained myself for new opportunities, and partly through luck. But is it fair to tax Americans to hire foreign workers? We are the shareholders of this country, and I think we ought to have a say in what this bailout money buys. I certainly don't want to be taxed to save Citi while it buys a French jet, nor do I want be taxed to to pay an Indian outsourcing firm. I'd rather see the opportunities remain for people like my son, who managed to graduate into the burst of the dot com bubble with his CS degree. The dirty little secret is that many of these jobs "require" technical degrees to be hired, but not to actually do the job. Due to EEO lawsuits, employers are leery of testing job applicants, so requiring a BS degree is the easy way out. Thus endeth my rant. As one who has seen friends and co-workers laid off and forced to leave the IT field while companies bring in foreign replacements, I’d say the AP got it right. In the 70s and 80s, companies actually spent money training their IT workers as new technologies came along. Along the way, they decided that it was cheaper to replace workers than to retrain them.

Workers aren’t owed jobs, and the owners of the company can do whatever is legal to contain costs. I can’t rationally object to that. I’ve managed to stay employed, partly because I retrained myself for new opportunities, and partly through luck.

But is it fair to tax Americans to hire foreign workers? We are the shareholders of this country, and I think we ought to have a say in what this bailout money buys. I certainly don’t want to be taxed to save Citi while it buys a French jet, nor do I want be taxed to to pay an Indian outsourcing firm. I’d rather see the opportunities remain for people like my son, who managed to graduate into the burst of the dot com bubble with his CS degree.

The dirty little secret is that many of these jobs “require” technical degrees to be hired, but not to actually do the job. Due to EEO lawsuits, employers are leery of testing job applicants, so requiring a BS degree is the easy way out.

Thus endeth my rant.

]]>