It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by interupt42
reply to post by Jason88
It has nothing to do with demand or the availability of qualified American workers. It has to do with the bottom line. I can hire an American to develop my application or I can outsource my application to a Foreigner who will do it for half the price. So why would I want to hire an American?
In addition there are numerous of companies in the US that hire temporary workers with 6 month visas to do high paying jobs in the US at half the rate of an American consultant.
Why, because they charge half price or less. Why or how can they charge half the rate, because the cost of living overseas is far less than in America?
American companies have no desire to hire an American worker that demands higher wages ,benefits, and workers rights. They created this false image of not enough qualified American engineers and scientist a while ago in order to increase the number of allowed foreign workers that can be imported. Funny that these MORE qualified workers cost those corporation half the cost of an American worker. I'm sure that is just pure coincidence.
So the question is not if the US needs to compete with India or China , but rather if the US wants to compete with China, India, and the upcoming African workers.
In order to compete with China,India,Africa we need to drop our ideals and ways of living such as slave labor, cost of living, giving up child labor laws, benefits, family life, disposable income, etc...
I appreciate your snarkiness, but the point is lost on the "human causality" factor. A great CEO may follow that paradigm - a billionaire entrepreneur does not. Writing off expensive American's is something reserveed for the greedy, short-sighted, steal the coffers-type manager.
Funny I work in Africa too. Please get them fresh water, reliable governments, and a good education.. then we'll talk. (Discluding South Africa from this).
Simples and I've seen it firsthand at Fortune 100 companies - you'll have to redo that application. Debug it, fix the UI for a Western audience, and generally have "do over" now paying twice the price at you cheap ass outsourced prices. Congratulations on short term savings - nice business plan.
I saw first hand that same corporation I worked for hire a bunch of new college graduates with no experience in a highly specialized engineering software application and put them through a 4 week boot camp. In the end of the camp they called each one of those students a Senior level engineer and shipped them to the clients with Senior level billable hours. After 6 months they pretty much realized what you said about paying twice the price because the clients refused to pay them for their work and therefore they got rid of most of those students. However, the fact is that was not the first time they tried this nor the last time.
Why does this 3 letter corporation take those risks , because it often pays off . In addition they know that most Gov't agencies have no choice but to use them because of liability. As it turns out no CEO or Politician likes to be held accountable with certain high liability risk applications. So what these CEO and Politicians do to minimize getting blamed is that they go directly to the manufacture of the software and hire their consultants. So when an accident occurs the CEO or Politician , says look we hired the company that makes the software so what more could we have done or who else could we have hired to do the work.