Sigh...
Lizzie, if you want to have a real discussion, then let's have a real discussion. Offering three ludicrous choices as if these are the only possible alternatives and then declaring a ludicrous outcome is... well, ludicrous.
This is the Cisco thread. Last time I checked, they made gear that powers the Internet. And the Internet is that thing which circles the globe, leveling the playing field, eliminating the effects of distance and transporting the entire wealth of a corporate knowledge base to one's fingertips. Instantly.
One would think we, on this thread, would be amongst the first to clue into the idea that a technology which helps our global corporations penetrate world markets will also help the world labor markets penetrate our global corporations!
So we have enabled road warriors to be ultra-productive with an office in the palm of their hand. What difference does a few light-milliseconds really matter?
We in the valley have a problem. Which is this: (1) WE ARE VERY EXPENSIVE, and (2) WE AREN'T, ON AVERAGE, THAT MUCH MORE INTELLIGENT THAN THOSE WHO INHABIT THE REST OF THE PLANET
However hard it may be to wedge that thought in amongst some of the egos around here, it is a fact.
Now we can choose to stick our heads up our butts and complain about how dark and smelly it is in here, if we like. But that's just going to make it so we don't see the problem when it hits us. If we don't die of suffocation first.
The problem is we are pricing ourselves out of the market. The global job market. We can pretend it should be a local market, but as geography ceases to be a factor, and corporate knowledge distribution technology increases in effectiveness, the pretending gets harder and harder to do. Aren't you one of the experts in making this happen? Can't you see the natural consequences?
Stock options are a red herring. Or, perhaps more correctly stated, those proposing the expensing of options are convenient whipping boys.
Chambers is one smart guy. And the smarter politicians (yes, that's what CEOs are) are quick to recognize that their actions in out-sourcing jobs to cheaper labor markets aren't going to go down well with the local constituency. So let's blame it on something else that's also not going to go down well with the local constituency.
Go ahead and lash at me if it makes you feel better. It won't make the problem any less, and it won't hurt me at all. But it's not all that indicative of an appreciation for what is really going on.
The out-sourcing to India started well before I ever typed the words "stock option" on this thread. And it will continue well after the debate settles. Cisco is out-sourcing to India. But they don't expense stock options.
The whole thing sounds just like my son. Tonight I asked him to do the dishes. And the reason his homework isn't done is 'cause he had to do the dishes. And the dog wasn't fed 'cause he had to do the dishes. And he's late going to bed 'cause he had to do the dishes. 'Course he doesn't do his homework or feed the dog or go to bed on time any other night either... but tonight... it was all 'cause of the dishes.
All the energy focused in the wrong place won't fix the problem. It's just a childish attempt to duck responsibility.
We are un-competitive in our compensation structure with respect to the global job market.
Whose fault is this?
Who bears the consequences?
Who owns the responsibility for change? |
