I recall a resent short blurb on a tech program where a number of large
companies (they didnt indicate which large companies) who had a sitdown with
a major network vendor. The jest of the program was that the companies where
unhappy with the quality of the products/support and that their pocket books
would do the talking.

As a result, a number of the jobs were coming back where they could be
better managed.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Wonsil" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2004 9:48 AM
Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] OT: NYTimes.com Article: Op-Ed Contributor: Second
Thoughts on Free Trade


> Tom Hula wrote:
> > The real problem is that these people running American businesses
> > truly think that they can hire these cheaper foreign workers and do
> > just as well or even better than with trained experienced American
> > technical workers.
>
> <nit_pick>I think you meant English speaking workers since this list
> contains some really excellent folks from other countries whose English is
> better than many Americans.</nit_pick>
>
> The point of the WSJ editorial is that in order for U.S. workers to keep
> their rates up, they have to raise their value.  Right now some companies
> are paying less and getting less.  This is why you can get a DLink product
> cheaper than many others.  If Cisco/Linksys promised tech support that was
> all U.S. labor, would you buy their product instead?  If so, vote with
your
> pocketbook.  If Linksys offered a premium service that guaranteed you a
U.S.
> worker, would you pay for it?  Some have already pressured companies to
> raise the tech support level or lose business.  That's how it's going to
> work.  Better English speaking workers in India will be able to get more
> than those whose skills lack.  BTW, how are the American workers answering
> questions at HP about the HP 3000?  :-o
>
> IMHO, in the big picture it's better for the U.S. if jobs can move around.
> If we sit back and try to maintain the "have vs. have not" status we have
in
> the world, we put ourselves at greater risk.  It fosters resentment in the
> world.  It reduces the market in which we could be selling.  It makes us
> lazy.  Sure, some might like to cruise to retirement in just one job but I
> suspect that, while it's uncomfortable and even scary, most on this list
> find moving to new things rewarding and exciting once they land somewhere.
> We don't grow without pressure.  Most of us need external pressures to
move
> us off our butt and get us to think and grow.  Hell, that's why I got
> married.  ;-)
>
> Mark W.
>
> * To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
> * etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
>

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *