How Synopsys could save $$ without offshoring

[tbx135]

that doesn't help when you can't unload your shack in Si Valley

We all take risks...No one was pissing and moaning when those homes
appriciated in value. I also remember the $200+/hr software
contractors...Anyone save any money?

 

[Tom Joad]

"tbx135" <tbx135@msn.com> wrote in message news:<WwjFb.7911$wn5.7443@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com>...

Offshoring is the market saying that labor is over-priced. Supply/demand is
a natural law and while everyone can talk a good game at "protecting" jobs,
the truth is if you can't compete, your business and it's "protected" jobs
go away. Want to keep your job? Cut wages to compete.

I've heard of people offering to work for less money to prevent their
jobs from being offshored, but this is never considered a serious
option by management. I suppose they figure that when the economy
improves you'll leave or ask for a raise or something.

Certainly I'd be willing to work for less than I used to. Even up to
30% less, I suppose. However, there are limits. I've still got to
pay rent, insurance, electricity bills, etc. Hey, maybe I should tell
my landlord that he needs to compete and lower his rents by 50%?
Maybe I should mention this to the electric company & the grocery
store as well. Yeah, I'm sure that's going to work and they'll be so
glad I suggested it to them. How about that health insurance? Maybe
I should just go without so I can be more competitive on the global
market. And then there's cars; who needs 'em, since we're aiming for
3rd world here, I should get a donkey.

I too was once a member of the Church of the Invisible Hand. I no
longer count myself a member of that congregation since doubts caused
me to disbelieve.

Tom Joad

 

[Tom Joad]

Bassman59a@yahoo.com (Andy Peters) wrote in message news:<9a2c3a75.0312221007.5de16497@posting.google.com>...

tomjoad_is@yahoo.com (Tom Joad) wrote in message news:<a111d6e2.0312201451.4de52f7d@posting.google.com>...
Given that the major EDA companies are very much engineering companies
and are based in the US we might hope that they would have some
loyalty to the US. So how about other ideas for saving money? As was
noted above, Silicon Valley is expensive. Apparently Synopsys has a
rather large empty office building on their Oregon campus. Why not
move most of their engineering up to Oregon? The expense for office
space would seem to be much lower there and over a period of a few
years salaries could be allowed to match the lower salaries of that
area. I even hear you can get a very decent house up there for around
$200K. I'm sure that one of the arguments would be that employees may
not want to move, but given the increase in standard of living for the
dollar I suspect many would be very eager to relocate. And of course,
it beats the alternative of having your job sent over to India.
Believe me, being unemployed in the Valley quickly drains all your
savings.

OK, consider the problem of the poor bastard who bought his house in
Silicon Valley at the height of the boom. Sure, you can buy a house
for $200K in Oregon ($200K buys a real nice place in Tucson, too), but
that doesn't help when you can't unload your shack in Si Valley
because you have a $500K note on a property worth much less, 'cause
nobody's buyin' 'cause the jobs are leaving.

It's a problem, that's for sure, but I wonder how many people are in
that situation. Probably not that many. Of course, considering the
alternative, it could still be a lot better to walk away from a
mortage like that if you've got an opportunity at steady work
elsewhere.

Maybe Synopsis should get into the real-estate biz, and buy up, at a
profit for the employee, the homes of the employees who move?

Some companies will assist in selling the property, but these days
it's probably not likely.

Tom Joad

 

[Tom Joad]

"tbx135" <tbx135@msn.com> wrote in message news:<NiKFb.8180$VB1.5095@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com>...

Here's the deal - I can get an overseas resource for 1/2 what I pay here
plus the management agravation. I can sell cheaper as a result.

But why do we need you? Why not just send your management position
over? Why should you make any more than a Wal*Mart Associate if the
rest of us are supposed to be making that much? Come on now, get with
the program and compete!

You can
protect your job anyway you want, I'll get around that. In the end I get a
cheaper resource, you lose your job. Ask manufacturing, textile, steel
people about all this.

Yeah, they're all Wal*Mart Associates now. So basically, you're
proposing that we not make or design anything in this country. We'll
just sell lattes and cheap Wal*Mart junk to each other. It's bad
enough we we don't manufacture anything here anymore, but it's going
to be even worse when we don't design anything here.

If you want to put your faith in some politician
fixing this, go right ahead.

I'm not sure if any politician can help us. Maybe there could be
incentives to have a certain percentage of your workforce employed
here.

Wages will go up overseas, after a while and talent will become short. But
thats not happening now.

and the wages between the third world and the US won't equalize for
another 20, 30 years or so. What are we supposed to do in the
meantime? During this time living standards will equalize and that
means that living standards in America will fall by quite a bit before
we're 'competitive' with the third world. One could hope that that
would rile up a lot of folks here and get them nice and mad so we can
rethink this global capitalism madness, but it will probably happen
slow enough that most folks won't notice till it's too late.

If you want to protect your job, work competitively
with the rest of the world.

I'm work'n on get'n me a big cardboard box so's I can move under a
freeway overpass and thus cut expenses so I can compete in the global
marketplace, yes sir. Way I sees it, I won't need to pay rent anymore
and of course there won't be any electric bill to pay either. And for
food, well I can go dumpster diving at night after working my $7/hour
engineering job for 12 hours. And if I choose an overpass that's
close to work I won't need a car either. Hey, you think they'd just
let me move the family into my cube? The kids could go out
panhandling during the day so they won't be bother'n nobody.

Yes siree, you got me to think'n about how I'm gonna compete with the
rest of the world. I hope you're think'n about it too.

Tom Joad

 

[tbx135]

Here's a fact of life: Everyone likes to get a good deal. No one wants to
pay too much.

The lack of understanding of competition it is going to kill the US. Too
many think they are entitled to this and that.

Your tech job went away for the same reason you first got it: Economics.

P.S. - If I worked at Wal-Mart, I'd be running the store soon, and it would
be profitable.

 

[Tom Joad]

"tbx135" <tbx135@msn.com> wrote in message news:<I2_Fb.8259$_F3.4204@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com>...

Here's a fact of life: Everyone likes to get a good deal. No one wants to
pay too much.

Sure, but people also like to get paid a decent amount too.

The lack of understanding of competition it is going to kill the US. Too
many think they are entitled to this and that.

As was already pointed out: there's no way you can compete with people
in a totally different economic system where rents, for example, are
equivilent to $50/month. ...where there are no labor or ecological
laws - I'm not advocating that we get rid of those laws, they are part
of what make the US more livable than many other places. ...where
they have government health insurance (have you priced health
insuranced lately?) Or where there aren't so many lawyers. The only
way we can do that is to have massive deflation in the US so that
workers here are competing on a level playing field with worker in,
say, India or China.

Your tech job went away for the same reason you first got it: Economics.

P.S. - If I worked at Wal-Mart, I'd be running the store soon, and it would
be profitable.

Well, those stores are already pretty profitable. So where are you
going to cut to make them more profitable? Likely, you'll decide to
screw the employees even more. Recently saw a skit where a fake
reporter was interviewing a woman who had worked at Wal*Mart for 22
years. The big news was that she would be eligble for health
insurance in another three years. Not too far off the mark.

That's the part of the equation you're missing: the workers. What
good is it having lots of wildly profitable businesses if the workers
are getting screwed or don't have a job at all? Wouldn't it be better
to have businesses that might not be as profitable (but still make a
profit), but treat their employees well? Most of us in this country
work for someone else, so when you screw the workers you screw the
country. Who is going to do all the consuming that is supposed to
keep our economy going if we're all making much less or no money?

What happened to Henry Ford's idea where he figured that the average
worker on his assembly line should be able to afford the cars they
were making? He felt he had an obligation to his workers and by
extension to his country.

Here's a question for you: Most EDA tools are pretty pricey - $50K for
a tool isn't unusual. Do you really think that when the EDA tools are
developed in India that the prices will actually go down to reflect
lower labor costs? Not likely. Where's the extra money going to go?
It'll fatten up the wallets of a few corporate officers, no doubt.
Stock might go up a bit, but what will they do the next year to show
even more profits? That's what Wall Street expects, ever rising
profits. What are they going to cut the next year after they cut
labor costs so low? (send the CEO over to India ;-)

Here's a scenario for you: Now that we're moving all of the
engineering jobs and knowhow (as in, we'll be losing knowhow) over to
places like India, what's to stop them from starting their own EDA (or
other technology) companies? It's going to happen, of course. So
I'll predict right now that the EDA (and other technology) companies
based in the US are sowing the seeds of their own demise amidst their
greed. Why? Well, in five years when Indians have started their own
EDA companies they'll be able to afford to price their software much
lower than their US counterparts. Maybe they'll be able to charge $5K
for tools that American companies are charging $50K for while still
making a healthy profit. And as you say, "No one wants to pay too
much".

Tom Joad

 

[tbx135]

You live in your world, I'll live in mine - Happy Holidays

 

[Kai Harrekilde-Petersen]

Y'know guys, sitting here as I am, on a different continent than
America, reading about 'Valley people crying out about "outsourcing to
aboard", is kind of odd.

Netnews is a global media, and there are quite a few non-US people
contributing to the vlsi related groups. So please, consider that your
audience is not just the Valley, nor just California, and not just US
of A. It's the whole d**n world.

As for outsourcing, everyone is under pressure from the global job
market - but to a different degree, depending on the specialization of
your labor, and what the cost of your labor is.

Globalization is a double-edged sword; we have a larger market to
compete in, but we also have a larger body of competitors. Sorry to
stir the bitter cup for you, but you cannot have the one without the
other.


Regards, and seasons greetings to everyone.


Kai Harrekilde-Petersen

 

[EdwardH]

The US Government is the major advocate of Globalisation. Every government
wants to remove protection and further the cause of free trade. Exportation
of
jobs is another side of this coin. It started with manufacturing and has now
moved
up the food chain.

We had a situation a few years back where there wasn't enough design talent
around and companies looked to other countries for people. With the
collapse of the dot comms and the downturn in the telecomms and computer
industries suddenly there was an excess of people.

Engineers in other countries also need to live. I live in Australia and
worked for a multinational that closed down (and incidently is now
outsourcing
much of its work to India). I have been out of work for a year but will
soon start work for another multinational.

The issue for me is not that jobs go to other countries or that we should
drop our living standards but rather how we innovate and create new
technologies
so that there is work for everyone. Responsible financial management and
accountability at the top level in major corporations is another issue.

Edward

"Tom Joad" <tomjoad_is@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:a111d6e2.0312222044.4c1a04ed@posting.google.com...

Bassman59a@yahoo.com (Andy Peters) wrote in message
news:<9a2c3a75.0312221007.5de16497@posting.google.com>...
tomjoad_is@yahoo.com (Tom Joad) wrote in message
news:<a111d6e2.0312201451.4de52f7d@posting.google.com>...
Given that the major EDA companies are very much engineering companies
and are based in the US we might hope that they would have some
loyalty to the US. So how about other ideas for saving money? As was
noted above, Silicon Valley is expensive. Apparently Synopsys has a
rather large empty office building on their Oregon campus. Why not
move most of their engineering up to Oregon? The expense for office
space would seem to be much lower there and over a period of a few
years salaries could be allowed to match the lower salaries of that
area. I even hear you can get a very decent house up there for around
$200K. I'm sure that one of the arguments would be that employees may
not want to move, but given the increase in standard of living for the
dollar I suspect many would be very eager to relocate. And of course,
it beats the alternative of having your job sent over to India.
Believe me, being unemployed in the Valley quickly drains all your
savings.

OK, consider the problem of the poor bastard who bought his house in
Silicon Valley at the height of the boom. Sure, you can buy a house
for $200K in Oregon ($200K buys a real nice place in Tucson, too), but
that doesn't help when you can't unload your shack in Si Valley
because you have a $500K note on a property worth much less, 'cause
nobody's buyin' 'cause the jobs are leaving.


It's a problem, that's for sure, but I wonder how many people are in
that situation. Probably not that many. Of course, considering the
alternative, it could still be a lot better to walk away from a
mortage like that if you've got an opportunity at steady work
elsewhere.

Maybe Synopsis should get into the real-estate biz, and buy up, at a
profit for the employee, the homes of the employees who move?


Some companies will assist in selling the property, but these days
it's probably not likely.

Tom Joad

 

[Tom Joad]

Kai Harrekilde-Petersen <khp@harrekilde.dk> wrote in message news:<uwu8jsbv6.fsf@harrekilde.dk>...

Y'know guys, sitting here as I am, on a different continent than
America, reading about 'Valley people crying out about "outsourcing to
aboard", is kind of odd.

dk, is that Denmark? You are also in a high-cost labor country (at
least as reckoned by the globa free traders) which means your jobs
could be exported as well.

Netnews is a global media, and there are quite a few non-US people
contributing to the vlsi related groups. So please, consider that your
audience is not just the Valley, nor just California, and not just US
of A. It's the whole d**n world.

It's a global conversation. I'm sure this sort of thing is happening
in Europe as well as the US.


Tom Joad

 

[Kai Harrekilde-Petersen]

tomjoad_is@yahoo.com (Tom Joad) writes:

Kai Harrekilde-Petersen <khp@harrekilde.dk> wrote in message news:<uwu8jsbv6.fsf@harrekilde.dk>...
Y'know guys, sitting here as I am, on a different continent than
America, reading about 'Valley people crying out about "outsourcing to
aboard", is kind of odd.

dk, is that Denmark? You are also in a high-cost labor country (at
least as reckoned by the globa free traders) which means your jobs
could be exported as well.

dk is Denmark, correct. We've definitely seen the export of of
low-tech labour from Denmark for the last 30 years or so, and the
export of high-tech is starting to happen.

Netnews is a global media, and there are quite a few non-US people
contributing to the vlsi related groups. So please, consider that your
audience is not just the Valley, nor just California, and not just US
of A. It's the whole d**n world.

It's a global conversation. I'm sure this sort of thing is happening
in Europe as well as the US.

Indeed - that was part my point. Jobs will go where it is deemed most
economically viable to have them.


Happy new year to everyone,


Kai

 

[tbx135]

Exporting tech jobs to India?
Alan Reynolds

January 4, 2004

Those afflicted with an irrational phobia about international trade used to
confine their raving to manufactured goods, not services. But the United
States is now said to be exporting high-paying service jobs to India,
particularly in information technology.

Worrying about U.S. companies importing services from India is a classic
example of the journalistic inclination to ignore the forest and focus on a
few twigs. The United States is by far the world's biggest exporter of
services, just as the United States is by far the leading exporter of goods.

The United States accounted for 18.1 percent of worldwide service exports in
2001, according to the WTO, up from 17 percent in 1990. India accounts for
only 1.4 percent of world service exports. India is in 21st place among
world exporters of services and in 30th place for goods. India is running a
trade deficit of about $8 billion, and that country's imports rose 20
percent in 2003. China ranks fifth among world exporters of goods (although
China accounts for 11 percent of U.S. imported goods), and it has a small
and dwindling trade surplus. China's imports rose 40 percent in 2003. Hong
Kong is a significant exporter of services, but it has a trade deficit with
the United States.

The United States had a $64.8 billion trade BEG ITAL) surplus in services in
2002, despite economic stagnation in Europe and Japan. Services accounted
for 30 percent of all U.S. exports and 43 percent ($3.1 billion) of U.S.
exports to India.

Worrying about job changes among computer professionals is yet another
example of the journalistic inclination to totally ignore any facts about
the big picture and instead generalize from small and local anecdotes.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics categorizes these allegedly vanishing jobs
among "computer and mathematical science occupations" -- i.e., computer
programmers, software engineers, systems analysts, support specialists,
network administrators, etc. These jobs exploded with the tech boom, rising
11.9 percent in 2000 alone, but such panicky hoarding of computer geeks was
no more sustainable than 5,000 on NASDAQ. Even in 2002, however, employment
in these computer-related occupations was nonetheless higher than in 1999,
and so were salaries.

In 1999, there were 2,620,080 jobs in these computer-related professions at
an average wage of $26.41. In 2002, there were 2,772,620 such jobs at $29.63
an hour ($61,630 a year). Figures on that specific job group are not
available for 2003, but professional business service payrolls were up 2.3
percent by November, when compared with the year 2000, and jobs in
information industries were up 4.9 percent. Jobs in the subgroup of
"computer systems design and related services" are down slightly from last
year but have risen steadily for the past three months.

The notion that service jobs are being lost to India is paradoxical because
similar complaints about China or Japan invariably involved disparaging U.S.
service jobs as "McJobs" -- inferior to working with a sewing machine or
wrench. In the case of India, however, even the most menial computer service
chores -- such as tech support and handling health insurance claims -- are
now being glorified as "high-wage" jobs.

Past stories about "exporting jobs" also assumed those jobs had moved to
countries with trade surpluses, such as Japan and Germany. But India has a
sizable trade deficit, and it even had a deficit in services until 2002.
This is not to suggest, however, that previous stories about trade surpluses
being a sign of economic strength made sense. On the contrary, from 1990 to
2001, employment grew by 1.2 percent a year in the United States, but by
only 0.3 percent in Japan and 0.1 percent in Germany.

Trade phobia has lost any sense of direction. The United States is now said
to lose jobs to countries with trade deficits as well as to countries with
trade surpluses, and to lose jobs in services as well as manufacturing. Some
even suggest the United States will lose most service jobs to India and most
manufacturing jobs to China. But without jobs, how could Americans keep
buying all those imports?

A New York Times report claimed India is attracting a lot of direct
investment from multinational corporations. Yet Morgan Stanley reports:
"Private corporate investment (in India) is estimated to have declined to
4.7 percent of GDP in 2003 from 9.6 percent in 1996. ... In April to
September 2003, FDI investments have declined by 63 percent compared to the
same period last year."

The United States has always imported and exported services as well as
goods. So what? Even if we ignore this country's huge and growing dominance
of world service exports, it would still be delusional to speak of importing
services as equivalent to exporting jobs. The notion that "exports create
jobs" (every commerce secretary's favorite slogan) is neither more nor less
true than the idea that imports create jobs. Work is involved in all
creation and marketing of goods, services and financial assets. Work is also
involved with the extra investment resulting from a net inflow of foreign
capital, otherwise known as a "current account deficit." Growth of
employment is related to growth of the economy, not to imports or exports or
the gap between them.

If the United States was really losing more jobs than it was gaining, then
employment would be falling. But employment is rising. There were 138.6
million civilians with jobs in November, up from 136.5 million a year
earlier. The number of U.S. jobs doubled in fewer than 40 years. If the
rapidly expanding number of jobs were inferior to the ones that preceded
them, then incomes would be falling. But incomes, too, are rising. Real
hourly compensation kept rising even in the recent recession and is now up
more than 26 percent since 1980. Real disposable income (which excludes
stock market gains) rose at a brisk 3.9 percent annual rate cent from April
to November.

The media blitz about imported goods or services resulting in the best jobs
being relocated to some variable list of countries -- first Japan and
Germany, now India and China -- has never been anything more than
unadulterated hogwash.



Š2003 Creators Syndicate

 

[EdwardH]

An interesting article but is it relevant to the current discussion?

ASIC/FPGA Engineers represent a very specific area of the market. If by some
magical
phenomenon we could change trade then the picture might be different e.g.
"x" ASIC design jobs might have been lost overseas but if "x" Project
Management jobs were created and displaced ASIC designers could all
be absorbed in those jobs then all might be good.

An example: In the state of Australia in which I live, a multinational
closed
down at the end of 2002 and a dozen ASIC designers lost their jobs.
(Development responsibility for the products those designers worked on is
being
transferred to India but I mention this as a sideline). There is only one
other
company left here that does ASIC design. They hired 3 ASIC designers in
2003.
According to the recruitment companies there are hundreds of applications
for every electronic hardware design position advertised. Since the ASIC
designers
don't have recent skills relevant to the rest of the industry here, they are
at the
bottom of the heap. Those that have been able to find alternate work have
ended up with very much lower salaries and job status.

Unemployment has dropped to record low levels here as well. The Australian
economy
is booming but this is of no consolation to the ASIC/FPGA designers here
that
have no jobs and no prospects in the next few years of working in this area.

"tbx135" <tbx135@msn.com> wrote in message
news:OhYJb.49508$tp2.4898@newssvr31.news.prodigy.com...

Exporting tech jobs to India?
Alan Reynolds

January 4, 2004

Those afflicted with an irrational phobia about international trade used
to
confine their raving to manufactured goods, not services. But the United
States is now said to be exporting high-paying service jobs to India,
particularly in information technology.

Worrying about U.S. companies importing services from India is a classic
example of the journalistic inclination to ignore the forest and focus on
a
few twigs. The United States is by far the world's biggest exporter of
services, just as the United States is by far the leading exporter of
goods.

The United States accounted for 18.1 percent of worldwide service exports
in
2001, according to the WTO, up from 17 percent in 1990. India accounts for
only 1.4 percent of world service exports. India is in 21st place among
world exporters of services and in 30th place for goods. India is running
a
trade deficit of about $8 billion, and that country's imports rose 20
percent in 2003. China ranks fifth among world exporters of goods
(although
China accounts for 11 percent of U.S. imported goods), and it has a small
and dwindling trade surplus. China's imports rose 40 percent in 2003. Hong
Kong is a significant exporter of services, but it has a trade deficit
with
the United States.

The United States had a $64.8 billion trade BEG ITAL) surplus in services
in
2002, despite economic stagnation in Europe and Japan. Services accounted
for 30 percent of all U.S. exports and 43 percent ($3.1 billion) of U.S.
exports to India.

Worrying about job changes among computer professionals is yet another
example of the journalistic inclination to totally ignore any facts about
the big picture and instead generalize from small and local anecdotes.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics categorizes these allegedly vanishing jobs
among "computer and mathematical science occupations" -- i.e., computer
programmers, software engineers, systems analysts, support specialists,
network administrators, etc. These jobs exploded with the tech boom,
rising
11.9 percent in 2000 alone, but such panicky hoarding of computer geeks
was
no more sustainable than 5,000 on NASDAQ. Even in 2002, however,
employment
in these computer-related occupations was nonetheless higher than in 1999,
and so were salaries.

In 1999, there were 2,620,080 jobs in these computer-related professions
at
an average wage of $26.41. In 2002, there were 2,772,620 such jobs at
$29.63
an hour ($61,630 a year). Figures on that specific job group are not
available for 2003, but professional business service payrolls were up 2.3
percent by November, when compared with the year 2000, and jobs in
information industries were up 4.9 percent. Jobs in the subgroup of
"computer systems design and related services" are down slightly from last
year but have risen steadily for the past three months.

The notion that service jobs are being lost to India is paradoxical
because
similar complaints about China or Japan invariably involved disparaging
U.S.
service jobs as "McJobs" -- inferior to working with a sewing machine or
wrench. In the case of India, however, even the most menial computer
service
chores -- such as tech support and handling health insurance claims -- are
now being glorified as "high-wage" jobs.

Past stories about "exporting jobs" also assumed those jobs had moved to
countries with trade surpluses, such as Japan and Germany. But India has a
sizable trade deficit, and it even had a deficit in services until 2002.
This is not to suggest, however, that previous stories about trade
surpluses
being a sign of economic strength made sense. On the contrary, from 1990
to
2001, employment grew by 1.2 percent a year in the United States, but by
only 0.3 percent in Japan and 0.1 percent in Germany.

Trade phobia has lost any sense of direction. The United States is now
said
to lose jobs to countries with trade deficits as well as to countries with
trade surpluses, and to lose jobs in services as well as manufacturing.
Some
even suggest the United States will lose most service jobs to India and
most
manufacturing jobs to China. But without jobs, how could Americans keep
buying all those imports?

A New York Times report claimed India is attracting a lot of direct
investment from multinational corporations. Yet Morgan Stanley reports:
"Private corporate investment (in India) is estimated to have declined to
4.7 percent of GDP in 2003 from 9.6 percent in 1996. ... In April to
September 2003, FDI investments have declined by 63 percent compared to
the
same period last year."

The United States has always imported and exported services as well as
goods. So what? Even if we ignore this country's huge and growing
dominance
of world service exports, it would still be delusional to speak of
importing
services as equivalent to exporting jobs. The notion that "exports create
jobs" (every commerce secretary's favorite slogan) is neither more nor
less
true than the idea that imports create jobs. Work is involved in all
creation and marketing of goods, services and financial assets. Work is
also
involved with the extra investment resulting from a net inflow of foreign
capital, otherwise known as a "current account deficit." Growth of
employment is related to growth of the economy, not to imports or exports
or
the gap between them.

If the United States was really losing more jobs than it was gaining, then
employment would be falling. But employment is rising. There were 138.6
million civilians with jobs in November, up from 136.5 million a year
earlier. The number of U.S. jobs doubled in fewer than 40 years. If the
rapidly expanding number of jobs were inferior to the ones that preceded
them, then incomes would be falling. But incomes, too, are rising. Real
hourly compensation kept rising even in the recent recession and is now up
more than 26 percent since 1980. Real disposable income (which excludes
stock market gains) rose at a brisk 3.9 percent annual rate cent from
April
to November.

The media blitz about imported goods or services resulting in the best
jobs
being relocated to some variable list of countries -- first Japan and
Germany, now India and China -- has never been anything more than
unadulterated hogwash.



Š2003 Creators Syndicate