@goafit, @Nic_Mokhoff: What a PANT_LOAD! Corporations don't exist to give you something to do with your days, or to make sure you have insurance! They exist to *produce*, and by that task, profit. I refuse to join any of the U.S.'s unions precisely because of attitudes like that. I do the best job I can, regardless of how poorly (or minimumly) someone else does. Thus, if I can /produce/ more, I will. It is a matter of pride with me, not 'share the wealth'!
You have not been paying any more attention than US corporations pay taxes. 65% of all corporations pay no tax. Corporate off-shore tax havens cut the taxes for the remainder. Corporate share of US taxes has declined by 50 % in the last 30 years.
Try not to be a corpowhore.
as was mentioned here we train our cheap replacements because management and 'the process' appears this way profitable. so yes! there will be more outsourcing. also, 'talent' is not in demand anymore especially in a big corporation where 'the process' took over, so yes! there will be more of us deemed overqualified. this is the 'new spirit of capitalism' and if you don't like it you are out of luck. how many people are or will ever be 'purple squirrels'? or can open a small business? yes this is a global world now and competition is tougher but what do we have in store for our children? when kids see how their educated and hard working parents were chewed up what will their aspirations be? do we have an education system that prepares for the 21st century? or are we going to expect them to live on anti-depressants?
That is very reminiscent of the Kurt Vonnegut novel "Player Piano". Ironically, in his vision of the automated future, the society was run by managers & engineers -- the people who designed, developed and maintained the machines that performed all the labor.
Every time there is an economic downturn, U.S. productivity goes up -- because companies find a way to increase output even though they use less human labor.
The problem with unemployment in US is productivity. If you reduce productivity, there will be more jobs. Unfortunately, the future of nations do not look like one that will have many workers, because machines will displace most.
Frank: you hit the nail on the head. Corporate greed is squeezing employees dry, and the same greed is writing the job applications that require each prospective hire to wear at least two hats; mind you not just being able to handle two or multiple tasks in one discipline but to know the intricacies of another parallel field as well as the one you specialize(d) in; hence, design engineers need to be verification engineers, circuit designers need to be system architects, and so on. Is this strategy the best; is it sustainable?
There has long been a philosophy among our politicians that you can accomplish more by imposing penalties than by providing incentives. Our current economic climate reflects the consequences of this approach. If a private company were to adopt the same methodology they would soon loose all but their most incompetent employees. That is what is happening to business in the United States today. Our government is removing all of the incentives for success and in fact penalizes companies that do succeed. If this continues we will become a third world nation.
There is an immigration reform bill being worked on in the US House of Representatives that grants a permanent Green Card to anyone that and start a business in the US, hires a small number of workers (like two), has at least $500,000 in capital and can build up a company in two or three years - hires two workers and shows a profit or meets a certain revenue criteria.
To me this looks like another off shoring operation similar to the one set up in New York and highly touted by Senator Clinton that ended up being just a funnel for jobs exportation.
This should go a long way towards helping 'our' businesses 'cure' their employment shortages with no need to increase spending on educating US engineers.
I 'wonder' who is pushing this agenda (footing the bill) in congress?
I'm trying to decide if you are just being facetious.
The problem with the regulations is "partial deregulation", ie, things like a utility company having their energy cost deregulated while what they can charge remains controlled by government regulation. That's why California had so many brown/black outs a few years ago. Government regulation simply isn't competent to control this stuff.
As for companies acting "in the direction of maximum profit", OF COURSE they do!!! They have a fiduciary responsibility to their stockholders to do exactly that.
With respect to quality..."involves many managers to maintain", yeah, and we "test in" quality, too. Simply put, neither managers nor testing "cause" quality; testing might find defects but all managers can do is ensure process is followed (and that doesn't guarantee quality, either).
And, by the way, that protectionism you're talking about ("tax every product that is made on foreign soil..." is one (but only one) if the reasons the Great Depression was "great" instead of just a run-of-the-mill recession.
What are the engineering and design challenges in creating successful IoT devices? These devices are usually small, resource-constrained electronics designed to sense, collect, send, and/or interpret data. Some of the devices need to be smart enough to act upon data in real time, 24/7. Are the design challenges the same as with embedded systems, but with a little developer- and IT-skills added in? What do engineers need to know? Rick Merritt talks with two experts about the tools and best options for designing IoT devices in 2016. Specifically the guests will discuss sensors, security, and lessons from IoT deployments.