China poised to blow by US in science, engineering and more....

Page 9 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

HamburgerBoy

Lifer
Apr 12, 2004
27,112
318
126
Why would anyone in the US study science or math at this point? You generally get ridiculed or when you do get a job, no one respects you. "Business majors" look down on you and treat you like a slave or cost center despite the fact that just about any idiot with 3 brain cells can major in business but you have to be pretty intelligent to make it through a science/engineering degree program. As someone with an engineering degree who has had to report to some of these idiots, it is demoralizing.

Kids are indoctrinated by the media to be a lawyer or a Wall Street broker. Yeah, I know, salaries for new lawyers are still in the tank and there is a huge oversupply but to my knowledge, they keep cranking them out. And, those who don't major in one of those listen to the other messages being pushed by our society and that message is you must have any sort of 4 year degree to be someone, hence the huge number of liberal arts majors who can't find decent jobs.

lolwut? Outside of the occasional dumbass jock in high school, who is going to say "You're going to major in physics? What a loser!" to a prospective college student? I agree that there are cultural issues and certain social consequences for being too much of a nerd, and that other countries (like those scary Asian ones looking to take our jerbs) don't have that problem, but come on. If anything, it's indoctrination in Asian countries that encourage high numbers of them into science and engineering (with high teen suicide rates to show for those that can't live up to societal pressures). American kids are some of the freest in the entire world, and our schools not nearly as rigid as the German system and etc. The problem is that many don't know what they want to do, or have overly high expectations of themselves, and think "Eh, lawyer/businessman, sounds easy and like good money to me".
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
Its still sad that common view is that globalization has made the US less wealthy.

A basic rule of life, is that society does not get wealthy when it pays more for things than it has to.
 

norseamd

Lifer
Dec 13, 2013
13,990
180
106
Nope. Only people of European descent can truly create. It's in our blood; we are the master race, the inventors, the basket of knowledge and prosperity from which others steal. They can only beg to slave under us so that they may catch a glimmer of our brilliance and wealth, 4000+ years of recorded civilization be damned.

Tongue in cheek here?
 

IndyColtsFan

Lifer
Sep 22, 2007
33,656
687
126
lolwut? Outside of the occasional dumbass jock in high school, who is going to say "You're going to major in physics? What a loser!" to a prospective college student?

Reread what I wrote. I am more referring to the work world.

I agree that there are cultural issues and certain social consequences for being too much of a nerd, and that other countries (like those scary Asian ones looking to take our jerbs) don't have that problem, but come on.
The social stigma is what I was referring to in my earlier post. Also, not many scientists/engineers get to lead most companies. I think most companies would be in better shape if they were run by scientists and engineers.

The problem is that many don't know what they want to do, or have overly high expectations of themselves, and think "Eh, lawyer/businessman, sounds easy and like good money to me".
That's exactly it -- they're viewed as easy and big money. Why bust your ass in a STEM major when you can take a fluff undergrad to pad your GPA and then spend 3 years in law school and come out making lots of money? Yeah, I know that isn't necessarily true now, but it was just a few short years ago.
 

HamburgerBoy

Lifer
Apr 12, 2004
27,112
318
126
Pretty sure many/most managers in engineering and science are also educated in those fields. Doesn't mean they're as competent as the people they're bossing, but it doesn't usually go like "Oh hai, I'm gonna get a BA in business or an MBA and then run a company that develops transistors, everyone will love me!" afaik. The average business major is probably a manager at Walmart.

EDIT: And maybe it's a little different for CEOs in ultra-mega corps, but really, I think you want a prestigious economics or business guy there.

EDIT #2: Just went through Wikipedia's top 15 tech companies, and at least about half of this have CEOs and/or chairmen with engineering and science degrees (and that's excluding ones with young founders). There's probably a much more thorough list on CEOs and their degrees somewhere, but...
 
Last edited:

IndyColtsFan

Lifer
Sep 22, 2007
33,656
687
126
Pretty sure many/most managers in engineering and science are also educated in those fields. Doesn't mean they're as competent as the people they're bossing, but it doesn't usually go like "Oh hai, I'm gonna get a BA in business or an MBA and then run a company that develops transistors, everyone will love me!" afaik.

I worked for a large company that was basically an engineering company (chemicals and industrial gases, surface coatings, semiconductor industry support, aviation). Some of its business units were run by scientists and engineers, while other units were run by guys who went the exact route you specified -- business major and then MBA. I don't recall the exact split to be honest but I think it was probably around 50/50. The division I worked for was always headed by an engineer or scientist, however, and as an engineer, it was great to see.

But I think we're veering from the original train of thought. Lawyers and business people (like in those Wall St. movies) are glorified in the media and society and engineers/scientists don't have that level of glorification.
 
Last edited:

HamburgerBoy

Lifer
Apr 12, 2004
27,112
318
126
Any kid stupid enough to be influenced by such movies isn't cut out for science or engineering anyways. Last I checked, Wall Street was kind of vilified anyways, even if it's a kind of sexy white-collar vilification where the bad guy is surrounded by attractive secretaries as he scams the middle-class. I agree completely that further encouragement should be given for people considering a STEM program, however. It's just that ultimately, the real issue is in poor/flimsy parenting ("Be whatever you want!") and low-quality primary education. Larger society plays a role, but the average person of average means should be expected to be able to get their shit at least somewhat straight.
 
Last edited:

bradley

Diamond Member
Jan 9, 2000
3,671
2
81
It's not even about the loss of manufacturing job, but the greater picture reflects a decrease in US sovereignty and increased colonization.

I keep hearing 'but Bush II,' when the horse was already long out of the barn after Bush I and especially Clinton. I guess 'but Clinton' doesn't have as nice a ring to it. To me, they're all equally criminal.



Nice site with some decent articles, at least more perceptive than the mainstream press.
http://economyincrisis.org/wto

The WTO Now Controls Our Economy, Fate and Future



The World Trade Organization is a self serving and undemocratic organization that operates outside of our control. The U.S. Constitution states that all treaties made under the authority of the United States become supreme law of the land (Article VI). When our government stymied under pressure from foreign-represented lobbyists and signed the WTO treaty our government effectively weakened our sovereignty.

Our laws, regulations and administrative procedures are now open to challenge.

Since entering the WTO in 2001, trade with China has resulted in the loss of 2.8 million jobs through 2010, according to the most recent study by the Economic Policy Institute. Those fortunate enough to retain their jobs witnessed their annual earnings decrease by roughly $1,400. American workers are put in direct competition with one another as more and more employers look to offshore production to nations with lower wage rates.

Jobs losses have affected every sector of the economy in both white and blue-collar occupations. Over that time we have lost:

909,400 jobs in computer and electronic products
178,700 jobs in apparel and accessories
204,300 jobs in administrative support services
173,100 jobs in professional, scientific and technical services

These job losses can be directly attributed to China’s rapidly growing trade surplus with us maintained by the systematic manipulation of the Chinese yuan.

By purposely undervaluing their currency, China subsidizes their exports – some estimates put this subsidy at nearly 30 percent. This practice has allowed America’s trade deficit with China to balloon since China entered into the WTO. In 2001, when China joined the WTO, they held a small trade surplus of $84 billion with us. By 2010, that number had grown exponentially to $278 billion, growing over $21 billion per year on average.

With the U.S-China trade deficit exploding, more job losses are forecast in the future. The Progressive Policy Institute claims that unless the trade deficit is brought under control, 12 million information-based jobs in the U.S. are highly susceptible in the future. This can be seen today in what some are calling the jobless “recovery.” Without jobs, there can be no recovery.

Beyond the quantifiable numbers of economic hardship here in America, the WTO is inherently wrong for other reasons. The organization remains indifferent to issues of workers rights, child labor and environmental protection standards. The organization has little to no transparency as all of its hearings are closed to the public. It is no wonder then that we lose nine out of every 10 trade disputes brought before the body.

The WTO has come to represent the most efficient form of colonization the world has ever seen – reaping all the benefits with no downsides of occupation. The corporate agenda of the organization has destroyed the developing economies of the world, exploiting cheap resources and giving them little in return.

We must renegotiate terms or completely withdraw from the WTO – immediately!



Amen! (added by me) And again, one has to wonder, why the US gave up so much power and sovereignty for $o little in return? Isn't anyone even the least bit curious?
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,234
701
126
Amen! (added by me) And again, one has to wonder, why the US gave up so much power and sovereignty for $o little in return? Isn't anyone even the least bit curious?

Just look at short term gains for those at the top and you'll get your answer. Short term meaning the last few decades, with the middle / lower classes propped up by falling taxes (including tax credits to the tune of negative tax returns) as well as debt (loaned by guess who?).

The gravy train is running out of steam though....
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
Just look at short term gains for those at the top and you'll get your answer. Short term meaning the last few decades, with the middle / lower classes propped up by falling taxes (including tax credits to the tune of negative tax returns) as well as debt (loaned by guess who?).

The gravy train is running out of steam though....

Since the "loss" of jobs can be quantified, can you also quantify the benefits of the lower cost of goods?

The "average" person now has more things. So while their income is not growing, the things that once were luxury are not owned by almost everyone.

Had we not shipped out US jobs to countries that could produce goods at a lower cost, the "shrinking" middle class would not be able to afford all the things they have now.

The main reason China was able to "steal" us jobs, is because people were willing to do it for a cheaper price. There are a lot of very very poor people in china vs the US. Once those poor come out of poverty, they will do what everyone who has ever come out of poverty has done...

Show me any country that has gone from 3rd world, to 1st world, and kept all the low paying jobs it once used to get out of poverty.
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,234
701
126
Show me any country that has gone from 3rd world, to 1st world, and kept all the low paying jobs it once used to get out of poverty.

Can't answer that but we kept the lower paying job and shipped out the good paying, solid middle class job and made up the difference with DEBT, as I stated above (and government tax credits to the tune of negative tax returns - aka EIC). Not hard to figure out. Workers share of the national income has been shrinking for decades made up for with debt and lower taxes / tax credits.



Your idea that we're somehow better off with lower real wage jobs with lower benefits is beyond me. The very same people that shipped the good paying jobs out found out that they could double dip if they made up for the difference by loaning their former employees money to continue to buy their stuff.
 
Last edited:

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
True enough, I have a Ph. D. in chemistry and I managed to get out of research because the job market is so bad. Much of it in my field is being outsourced or abandoned altogether. I'm a little worried because many companies cut their R&D in the recession and while it's starting to come back, I don't think it's near the levels it was pre-recession. Companies see R&D as a cost center, and when it comes to cutting R&D versus cutting manufacturing, R&D will almost always be the first to go. It's a short term solution that seriously handicaps the future performance and outlook for any company.
True. Today American corporations assume that R&D isn't needed since the Chinese are designing their products, but soon enough the company doing the design and the manufacturing no longer needs the company providing the name on the box.

I don't know the last US (or NZ) movie or television show watched by me. Although that statement and projection would be ironic coming from any non-US citizen perhaps enamored by US culture.

I'd rather read Nixon's memoirs and learn for our past mistakes. Especially in the Shanghai Communique, both Nixon and Mao wrote, “China will never be a superpower and it opposes hegemony and power politics of any kind.” How's that for lol clairvoyance.

China is most certainly developing regional hegemony and showing discontentment as a US *silent* partner, we'll see where that leads. Perhaps they will make a Hollywood movie about it some day.

I give Nixon (and Kissenger) credit for trying with China. However I take away major points for the backdraft they created by underestimating China, and the complexities of Taiwan (viewed as expendable lol?,) which eventually fostered a relationship on China's terms from a position of great US strength. Ultimately what began weakly with Nixon ended badly with Clinton.

I see that fateful 2001 decision to allow Chinese "quick entry" into the WTO as a true turning point, which created the current state of the US economy. All of the Clinton Adminstration's projections and assumptions about China becoming more 'Westernized' were way wrong. Yet, for more than a decade, this important issue instead has been obfuscated mostly by the war on terror and other such distraction$.
I agree completely, though in fairness to Clinton, the Pubbie elite believed the same thing. (Or perhaps the elites of both parties merely find it advantageous to pretend to believe it.)

Tibet, Inner Mongolia, Xinjiang, part of India. Attacked Vietnam in 1979 and was humiliated by women and old men from the local militia force.

Right now it is claiming almost the whole South of china Sea (took Paracel and part of Spratly from Vietnam and Scarborough Shoal from Philippines) and intimidation Japan in East of china Sea. Don't forget about Taiwan.

Bully china is acting like Nazi Germany in the 30's.
Yup. Germany jumped the gun and attacked before it was ready. If Red China does the same thing, that means a world war that may well go nuclear. At the very least, it means losing our consumer goods stream and our satellite capability. If Red China does not move before it is ready, then it faces a cakewalk as America is continually reducing our quantity of armaments, even where we no longer have such a qualitative edge. Twenty years from now - which is probably what it will take for China to be prepared to take on the USA and UK with some reasonable expectation of winning - will America even be able to project power? Personally I doubt it, but there's absolutely zero chance that twenty years from now, we'll have a significant industrial base able to be moved to a wartime footing. Even if our weapons systems remain superior, which frankly I doubt, at some point quantity has a quality of its own. It would be beyond ironic if the nation that demonstrated that principle to Nazi Germany gets its own demonstration.
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
Can't answer that but we kept the lower paying job and shipped out the good paying, solid middle class job and made up the difference with DEBT, as I stated above (and government tax credits to the tune of negative tax returns - aka EIC). Not hard to figure out. Workers share of the national income has been shrinking for decades made up for with debt and lower taxes / tax credits.



Your idea that we're somehow better off with lower real wage jobs with lower benefits is beyond me. The very same people that shipped the good paying jobs out found out that they could double dip if they made up for the difference by loaning their former employees money to continue to buy their stuff.

Oh come now, the idea is not that hard to understand. Would you rather have a wage that is 10% lower, if it meant that inflation would be 20% less?

If globalization "steals" jobs away, then you have to measure all effects. Can you say that the loss of jobs has been outweighed by the reduction of prices? If you cant, then how can you denounce globalization?

I dont care if my wage was 1$/hr if it meant my standard of living improved. I'm not going to pretend that I can quantify that, but the reasoning behind globalization appears sound. The argument against it is very disorganized and not supported by the majority of people who research and study it.

At this point, can you honestly say your opinion is based off of anything other than saying that jobs that once paid x are now being done in countries that now pay y?
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,234
701
126
Oh come now, the idea is not that hard to understand. Would you rather have a wage that is 10% lower, if it meant that inflation would be 20% less?

If globalization "steals" jobs away, then you have to measure all effects. Can you say that the loss of jobs has been outweighed by the reduction of prices? If you cant, then how can you denounce globalization?

I dont care if my wage was 1$/hr if it meant my standard of living improved. I'm not going to pretend that I can quantify that, but the reasoning behind globalization appears sound. The argument against it is very disorganized and not supported by the majority of people who research and study it.

At this point, can you honestly say your opinion is based off of anything other than saying that jobs that once paid x are now being done in countries that now pay y?

Where are my prices 20% lower? Consumer electronics? Clothing? Show me something that states that my stuff is cheaper with importation vs making it here?



You still don't mention how the standard of living is temporarily being propped up by debt and relaxed tax credits.

You don't mention the loss of benefits and the fact that people are losing pensions, healthcare, etc. in your 'cheap imported' standard of living.

You think we can import our way to prosperity. In reality, you have yours and don't give a shit as long as you can somehow think you're getting lower prices and someone else's wages are the ones going down.

Again, if you think lower wages McService jobs are better than the ones that we shipped out, you're full of shit.
 
Last edited:

bradley

Diamond Member
Jan 9, 2000
3,671
2
81
To me it's a simple trade-off. We gave up our *vast* rights as a sovereign nation (the most prosperous in world history) in order to buy cheap consumer goods for a comparatively short period. In other words, we have been made colonies by corporations and the WTO.

Hate to tell Americans, you were on the butt end of that contract/pact with the Devil. The devil is in the details that you ignored while being distracted by and preoccupied with Mcmeaningless minutiae.
 

HamburgerBoy

Lifer
Apr 12, 2004
27,112
318
126
Ah yes, the days when every other formerly-great nation was either under communism, in debt to us because of WW2, or still picking up rubble. How I loved me them 40s and 50s. Didn't have to interact with outsiders as much either.
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,234
701
126
Ah yes, the days when every other formerly-great nation was either under communism, in debt to us because of WW2, or still picking up rubble. How I loved me them 40s and 50s. Didn't have to interact with outsiders as much either.

Smug to the fucking core.
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,234
701
126
You think people should be entitled to low-skill high-pay manufacturing jobs solely on the basis of birthright. Who is smug?

LOL....not smart enough to figure out that those jobs falling out from the middle class will eventually drag you down too. Your generation is going to be fucked and you're not smart enough to see it (or too damn smug to think that it can happen to you).

Good luck....I'm done with you. I would rather have 100 people working manufacturing jobs in this country than one of you.

If China want them, go build their own. No, our top 1% though it would be better (for them) to stick it to the middle class and you're next....just not smart enough to see it.
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
Where are my prices 20% lower? Consumer electronics? Clothing? Show me something that states that my stuff is cheaper with importation vs making it here?



You still don't mention how the standard of living is temporarily being propped up by debt and relaxed tax credits.

You don't mention the loss of benefits and the fact that people are losing pensions, healthcare, etc. in your 'cheap imported' standard of living.

You think we can import our way to prosperity. In reality, you have yours and don't give a shit as long as you can somehow think you're getting lower prices and someone else's wages are the ones going down.

Again, if you think lower wages McService jobs are better than the ones that we shipped out, you're full of shit.

I did not respond to the debt people are taking on, because it does not directly relate to globalization.

I also have never said that simply importing things makes the US better off, and you know this.

What I did say, was that if the cost of products is sufficiently reduced it can offset the loss of the wages people were making. So, even if the wages were reduced 50%, if the corresponding goods/services in the economy are reduced by 50.1% then how is anyone worse off? Nominally things look bad, but that would be simple ignorance.

As for the service jobs that we now have, its not a question of 1 job vs another.

I have pointed this out to you multiple times, and I dont remember ever getting an answer. Ill ask it again anyway, do you think the manufacturing jobs that were sent to china would or could pay the same as they used to if they were brought back?

The whole reason they left, is because china could do the job for a lot less.

I will break down your argument for you.

Person A used to make 40k a year. That job is now in China and pays 3 people a total of 1k to be split across the 3. The products are now sold for a 10% reduction in cost. The people are now spending less in nominal dollars, but more in real terms because they are taking out debt to sustain their lifestyle.

In the long run, if this truly is the case, the credit bubble will pop, and we will stop buying cheap Chinese goods. We will have the products they produced and china will have an industry nobody can afford. The benefit is that we get to keep the goods.
 

HamburgerBoy

Lifer
Apr 12, 2004
27,112
318
126
LOL....not smart enough to figure out that those jobs falling out from the middle class will eventually drag you down too. Your generation is going to be fucked and you're not smart enough to see it (or too damn smug to think that it can happen to you).

Good luck....I'm done with you. I would rather have 100 people working manufacturing jobs in this country than one of you.

If China want them, go build their own. No, our top 1% though it would be better (for them) to stick it to the middle class and you're next....just not smart enough to see it.

lol, you never responded to any of my earlier posts addressing your absurd op to begin with. Don't project your own failures on others.
 

bradley

Diamond Member
Jan 9, 2000
3,671
2
81
Ah yes, the days when every other formerly-great nation was either under communism, in debt to us because of WW2, or still picking up rubble. How I loved me them 40s and 50s. Didn't have to interact with outsiders as much either.

Don't know if you're attempting to be the next Will Rogers or Will Smith. So in other words, if you were the US President in 1995 or 2001, you would have signed off on the WTO for the US and the Chinese? Either you're sidestepping or missing the point entirely.

And I don't take Engineer as smug, more like frustrated to the core. Someone made Americans feel guilty for having self-interests several decades ago and they were fundamentally wrong. In fact, life and human nature itself has self-preservation at its core, even amongst all these woman-man-made artifices.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |