Skilled worker shortage hurts U.S.

Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 11:02 am

http://money.cnn.com/2007/01/04/news/economy/jobs_outlook/index.htm?cnn=yes

Quote:

Businesses "feel there's real (unmet) demand out there," he said, adding that "economic growth would be faster" if there wasn't this tight supply of workers.

Economists are forecasting that overall the unemployment rate in December stayed at 4.5 percent. But the rate for college-educated workers was just 1.8 percent in November, near the rate for that group in 1998 and 1999, when the economy was white-hot. The lowest rate for college grads on record was 1.5 percent in three months during 2000.

Mark Vitner, chief economist for Wachovia, said another sign of the tight labor market is the growing number of job openings being reported by the Labor Department in a separate report, even as hiring posts modest gains.

The most recent report shows 4.2 million job openings in October, up 8.8 percent from a year earlier, while hirings rose just 1.5 percent. Meanwhile, the number of workers quitting, retiring, getting fired or laid-off grew only 0.6 percent.
How big will your raise be in 2007?

"With this level of unemployment, the only way they can find the workers they need is to hire them away from someone else, hire them from someplace else, or hire someone without the necessary skills," said Vitner. "All these things cut into productivity growth."

Posted: Sat Jan 06, 2007 2:28 pm

this sounds like good news for the working man. finding a job will be easier and folks will have more benefits and higher pay.

Posted: Sat Jan 06, 2007 8:26 pm

hillbillyatheist wrote:

this sounds like good news for the working man. finding a job will be easier and folks will have more benefits and higher pay.

Maybe in the short term, but in the long term it will either cause your companies to move to countries with higher supply of skilled workers, or these countries will get ahead of you in the fields that are experiencing this demand.

Thinker Joined: Nov 12, 2006 Posts: 423

I had seen this story a while back as well. I think that it is not as it seems, like manipulating the numbers, and just an excuse to justify more outsourcing, or even insourcing cheaper labor. An example of this sort of thing is Intel threatens politicians and Clinton to increase H-1B quota.

Wasn't it not too long ago that they were also saying that there were plenty of skilled workers it was just that they didn't want to do the job?

Speaking of numbers being manipulated. I just noticed, the number of my posts listed under my Avatar seems to have dropped dramatically.

Posted: Sun Jan 07, 2007 12:18 am

sjc wrote:

I had seen this story a while back as well. I think that it is not as it seems, like manipulating the numbers, and just an excuse to justify more outsourcing, or even insourcing cheaper labor.

Since when do you need to justify such actions to anyone?

Quote:

Speaking of numbers being manipulated. I just noticed, the number of my posts listed under my Avatar seems to have dropped dramatically.

It may have something to do with the fact that you're using a completely different account the old one .

Thinker Joined: Nov 12, 2006 Posts: 423

Ivan_Ivanov wrote:

Since when do you need to justify such actions to anyone?

Since they're unfair business practices. An insourced tech worker is willing to work for around $13,000 less per year, on average, than an American worker.

Salary concerns renew H-1B visa opposition

Quote:

It may have something to do with the fact that you're using a completely different account the old one .

I'm speaking of the account I've used since coming on here.

Posted: Sun Jan 07, 2007 2:03 am

Ivan_Ivanov wrote:

hillbillyatheist wrote:

this sounds like good news for the working man. finding a job will be easier and folks will have more benefits and higher pay.

Maybe in the short term, but in the long term it will either cause your companies to move to countries with higher supply of skilled workers, or these countries will get ahead of you in the fields that are experiencing this demand.

we're talking about small businesses here. unless I am mistaken, I don't think they have the resourced to outsource.

Thinker Joined: Nov 12, 2006 Posts: 423

hillbillyatheist wrote:

we're talking about small businesses here. unless I am mistaken, I don't think they have the resourced to outsource.

How about insourcing with the H-1B program?

Posted: Sun Jan 07, 2007 2:16 am

sjc wrote:

hillbillyatheist wrote:

we're talking about small businesses here. unless I am mistaken, I don't think they have the resourced to outsource.

How about insourcing with the H-1B program?

yes they could do this, and I have mixed feelings on that. I tend to lean towards limiting immigration so that our economy isn't flooded with workers driving wages and benefits down too far. I realize that long term, our economy would adjust and perhaps even benefit from tons of cheap labor, but in the short term, there would be alot of needless suffering. thus I think a balance is needed so that we can have that influx of needed workers, while not driving down wages too far.

Posted: Sun Jan 07, 2007 2:52 am

hillbillyatheist wrote:

we're talking about small businesses here. unless I am mistaken, I don't think they have the resourced to outsource.

I think that outsourcing most tech stuff is pretty cheap, but even if I'm mistaken, such a situation will cause long term losses to the US.

If the supply of skilled workers remains low relative to other countries, those other countries will simply progress further then the US in the given field.

Posted: Sun Jan 07, 2007 4:28 am

Ivan_Ivanov wrote:

Since when do you need to justify such actions to anyone?

sjc wrote:

Since they're unfair business practices.

What makes them unfair?

sjc wrote:

An insourced tech worker is willing to work for around $13,000 less per year, on average, than an American worker.

So what? If one of my friends is willing to paint my garage for $100, and another for $80, is it unfair of me to pay the second guy $80 and not $100? Of course not.

But you just keep on believing that it is. Keep right on buying into the notion that valuation is objective, just like the rest of the Marxists do.

Now I fully expect you to evade that point. I fully expect you to go off on some strange rant.

Thinker Joined: Nov 12, 2006 Posts: 423

hillbillyatheist wrote:

yes they could do this, and I have mixed feelings on that. I tend to lean towards limiting immigration so that our economy isn't flooded with workers driving wages and benefits down too far. I realize that long term, our economy would adjust and perhaps even benefit from tons of cheap labor, but in the short term, there would be alot of needless suffering. thus I think a balance is needed so that we can have that influx of needed workers, while not driving down wages too far.

That is the way it use to be, now business seem to be playing by a different set of rules at the expense of their workforce. The long term doesn't seem to be as important to them anymore. To make their fortune and then get out as fast as possible. We see they a lot with their excessive bonuses and so-called "golden parachutes".

Thinker Joined: Nov 12, 2006 Posts: 423

Knight_of_BAAWA wrote:

What makes them unfair?

So what? If one of my friends is willing to paint my garage for $100, and another for $80, is it unfair of me to pay the second guy $80 and not $100? Of course not.

Applies and oranges, KnoB. In a case like this you get what you pay for. You may get your garage painted, but you also will land up having to paint every year afterward because of the lower quality of work and materials used. Ever heard of a show called Holmes On Homes? Its a show about a renovator who goes in to fix the mess some people get themselves into when they hire a cheap contractor who ends up cheating them.

Quote:

But you just keep on believing that it is. Keep right on buying into the notion that valuation is objective, just like the rest of the Marxists do.

Whatever, KnoB.

Quote:

Now I fully expect you to evade that point. I fully expect you to go off on some strange rant.

Playing to the crowd again, KnoB?

Posted: Sun Jan 07, 2007 6:28 am

Knight_of_BAAWA wrote:

What makes them unfair?

So what? If one of my friends is willing to paint my garage for $100, and another for $80, is it unfair of me to pay the second guy $80 and not $100? Of course not.

sjc wrote:

Applies and oranges, KnoB.

Nope. They are exactly the same.

So what makes it unfair?

sjc wrote:

In a case like this you get what you pay for.

Nope.

So what makes it unfair?

I have to keep asking, since you have evaded the entire point and still believe that valuation is objective.

Thinker Joined: Nov 12, 2006 Posts: 423

Knight_of_BAAWA wrote:

Nope. They are exactly the same.

So what makes it unfair?

Nope.

So what makes it unfair?

I have to keep asking, since you have evaded the entire point and still believe that valuation is objective.

Man, you sure are a KnoB. If anything what I had said makes it subjective. "You get what you pay for..." $20 may not be much of a different to affect quality, but when its in the thousands, or more, than you are into a significant issue.

Playing up to the audience is a pitiful game you seem to like to play.


Create an account	Home · Articles · Downloads · Video Library · Forums · Chat Room · aStore