Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (64902)	10/5/2003 7:59:36 PM
From: Stock Farmer	Respond to of 77400

LOL... I'm a "financial type"? Too funny. I suppose your mistake is forgiveable, 'cause I do follow the numbers when it comes to INVESTING. But when it comes to technology, invention and the building of enterprise, that is where my real passions rest. And what this whole issue is about. You keep looking for a "recovery", as in businesses buying more things. Where you think the necessary "more spending" is going to come from is beyond me. Oh, there's plenty of demand for goodies and gadgets, that never went away. It's just that there's no more money to pay for the demand. Unlike gadgets and goodies, gringos are not getting less expensive. So no kidding offshore enterprise is kicking butt. It's because it is COST EFFECTIVE. You wrote "The problem this economy has is offshoring at least in the tech area, why can't you just admit it." The problem? LOL... Chambers wouldn't even entertain offshoring if it wasn't worth it, now would he? Or do you think these captains of industry are complete morons? You are mistaking cause for effect. There is competition out there for jobs. And not just between white caucasian silicon valley neighbors. It's global. That's the point. And folks outside the valley have become competitive on a skills basis. They don't need to be on par until their salaries are on par. Meanwhile, we can afford to get what we pay for. Besides, the software industry has matured to the point where it can be effectively implemented on a distributed basis, globally. And industry is demanding an increase in productivity. Which is all about doing more with less. You are participating. Managing a distributed organization of 4x more people doing more things. And spending less doing it, I imagine, than you could be doing otherwise if you only had access to the local labor pool. Give it a try some time. Assemble a competitive team to do a better job of what you are doing for less expenditure out of only local hires. You hypothesize that it can be done. But you probably can't do it. And if you can't, and you still think offshoring is the problem, then "naive" is the kindest adjective that would apply in your case. If you think you can but haven't tried, then you are merely a hypocrite: demanding of others what you yourself won't do. And if you think you can but failed when you tried, then you might want to look within for the source of a problem.

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (64902)	10/5/2003 8:21:13 PM
From: RetiredNow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 77400

Hehe. Yes, I'm a financial type, but only identifiable from my degrees. Truth is I was building hobby computers when the average college student was drinking beer and smoking pot. Then I was learning how to program just so I could make my own games, since it seemed that there weren't many commercial types that realized that we dorks loved computer games. Yes, I started out getting a business degree, because I didn't think computers would develop into anything more than a hobby. But I changed my mind after a few years in corporate finance and went back to doing what I love...programming. Then later, after I turned 40, I got into IT consulting, which is what I do now. I guess I feel a little sorry for the half-assed programmers who aren't good enough to compete, because now you have to be really good to keep your job rather than have your job offshored. But I don't feel too sorry for them, because this is economic darwinism. It's good for our economy and for the nation's wealth in the long term. So I guess you have me half right. I happen to be half techie, half financial type. Oops. I guess that makes me knowledgeable about all of the relevant topics here. :)