Here's some more crazy talk!

When Ron Paul was asked directly by Lawrence Kudlow, 'What would you do?' Ron Paul's answer was an indecipherable statement. Paul said he would let
private companies or banks issue currency and have the private currencies
compete against the government currency. Ron Paul had jumped the shark
into the looney bin of libertarian economics.

This is a trillion dollar economy.

Much of Ron Paul's and the libertarian's criticism of the Federal Reserve
and the need for a gold standard is true, but stating that the solution to
the Federal Reserve's problems is letting Wal-Mart print Wal-Mart Bucks is
absurd. Gold standard, yes. Wal-Mart bucks, no.

Lawrence Kudlow and the other panelists are devoted free traders, so no
mention of China or the balance of trade deficit emerged in the
discussion. Apparently, owing billions to the Chinese, or is it trillions,
does not affect the value of the dollar.

Now, free trade, balance of payments deficits are abstractions that are
incomprehensible to the average person. But the price of gas is not. As
the dollar depreciates, and foreign governments move out of the dollar,
the price of gas will simply continue to rise. When gas hits $5, $8 per
gallon, the US public will know something is wrong. Ron Paul is right, the
currency will collapse, but the cause is not inflation and the Federal
Reserve, it is free trade and the outsourcing of U.S. Jobs. One would
think that Ron Paul would see that, but libertarianism is an ideology of
free trade and free markets, that describes how things should be, not how
things actually are, and how economies actually work.

Lou Dobbs and Pat Buchanan have a better grasp on what is killing the
American economy: Free Trade.

"Free trade is the serial killer of American manufacturing and the Trojan
Horse of World Government. It is the primrose path to the loss of economic
independence and national sovereignty. Free trade is a bright shining
lie. -- Where the Right Went Wrong, Patrick Buchanan

Alex Montalvo AS/400 Consultant 1(917)442-5450 Cell


From: "Ketzes, Larry" <Larry.Ketzes@xxxxxxx>
To: "Ketzes, Larry" <Larry.Ketzes@xxxxxxx>, "'Michael Ryan'"
<michaelrtr@xxxxxxxxx>, "'Alex Montalvo'" <alexmrpg@xxxxxxx>
CC: "'midrange-jobs@xxxxxxxxxxxx'" <midrange-jobs@xxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"'cpf0000@xxxxxxxxxxxx'" <cpf0000@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [MIDRANGE-JOBS] Fw: H-1B/offshoring debate at UCLA
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2007 09:40:57 -0500

After reading this, I'm not surprised at all of your employment
challenges. If your prejudices were removed, you might find a happy
company to settle in at. Also, in my humble opinion, instead of just
blaming people when outsourcing happens, try to use that as an
opportunity to improve your situation if possible. If you are just
blaming, that won't happen. I know I sound all rosy and everything, but
prejudices are not going to help your situation.


Larry Ketzes | Senior iSeries System Administrator | AIG / ALICO -
American Life Insurance Company
One ALICO Plaza, 600 N. King Street, AMIS | Wilmington, DE 19801 | *:
302.594.2146 | 7: 302.830.4524| *: larry.ketzes@xxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----
[] On
Behalf Of Michael Ryan

Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 11:11 AM
To: Alex Montalvo
Cc: midrange-jobs@xxxxxxxxxxxx; cpf0000@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [MIDRANGE-JOBS] Fw: H-1B/offshoring debate at UCLA

*** Please pay close attention when replying to a message on this list!
*** If you want the reply to go to the list, use REPLY-TO-ALL
*** Recruiters may advertise only permanent employment positions in this

Wow...quite the venomous diatribe. You made your point succinctly. I'm
sure that anyone who reads this can understand you, your employment
issue and your belief system.

On Nov 8, 2007 11:03 AM, Alex Montalvo <alexmrpg@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> *** Please pay close attention when replying to a message on this
> *** If you want the reply to go to the list, use REPLY-TO-ALL
> *** Recruiters may advertise only permanent employment positions in
this list.
> I am a such a forty something coder who has been given my walking
> again from a Jewish owned textile company after 2 months three H1b
> consultants from India have been here for 7 + months are staying!
> consulting company from India hired me for this all just so the
> permanently employed staff can take thier vacations and now that
they are
> done so was I. Had to wait 30 days for my first pay check from
India to
> get here and wait another five day's for it to clear all that and
> get left out. This is the fourth time I have been subject to this. I am
> so sick of this senario. who the hell do I have to sue to get this
____ to
> stop?
> There is a underlying agenda it has been the case since the Reagan
era and
> the undermining of labor unions, The corporate and political powers
> be are turning a free market society into a kingdom without a king!
> there is one, consisting of many crowns(companies) and many
> politicians and lawmakers & authorities) and many
> Hmmmm! where have I heard that before? No I am not a religious
fanatic but
> the simularites were just too obvieous to ignore.
> Alex Montalvo
> AS/400 Consultant
> 1(917)442-5450 Cell
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> From: "SJL" <sjl_abc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <cpf0000@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, <midrange-jobs@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [MIDRANGE-JOBS] Fw: H-1B/offshoring debate at UCLA
> Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2007 08:08:32 -0600
> >*** Please pay close attention when replying to a message on
this list!
> >*** If you want the reply to go to the list, use REPLY-TO-ALL
> >*** Recruiters may advertise only permanent employment positions
> this list.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >All -
> >
> >Dr. Norman Matloff is a professor of computer science at
> >and is one of the leaders in the fight to keep technical jobs in
> >country - and employ _Americans_ in those jobs...
> >
> >His opinion (based on much analysis of salary trends in our
> >business over the last 7 years) is that companies use H-1B
> >primarily for cheap labor.
> >
> >In this debate, Ravi Aron confirms this fact. During the debate,
> >globalist Ravi says (see full text in story below):
> >
> ><snip>
> >
> >Aron: If you're willing to pay enough, supply will meet demand.
> >
> >Let me add:
> >You should not pay that much.
> >
> >The idea that there exists an exalted class of
> >[computer] aristocracy that should be pampered with the salaries
> >of their desired level is baloney. We did not do this with
> >agricultural or steel workers or bank tellers.
> >
> ></snip>
> >
> >
> >- Steve
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Norm Matloff" <matloff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >To: "Norm Matloff" <matloff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 12:42 AM
> >Subject: H-1B/offshoring debate at UCLA
> >
> >
> >To: H-1B/L-1/offshoring e-newsletter
> >
> >On October 23, IS Associates, an industry affiliates program in
> >UCLA Anderson School of Management, held a panel discussion on
> >future of U.S. IT professionals, given the rise of H-1B and
> >
> >This is one of the few panel discussions I've ever participated
in that
> >gave everyone a chance to speak in full. Instead of the usual
> hour,
> >we actually had three hours (including a break and a Q&A period)
> >which to thoroughly debate the issues. That sounds like
hardship for
> >both speakers and audience alike, but but the debate was quite
> >and the audience seemed quite engaged.
> >
> >Enclosed below is a blog report on the event by Don Tennant, who
> >editor of Computerworld and served as the moderator of the
event. He
> >posed some excellent questions, and included a couple of small
> >of the ensuing discussion in his blog.
> >
> >Though Don is correct in stating that much of the debate
consisted of
> >exchanges between Prof. Ravi Aron and me, it's important to
point out
> >that there were two other panelists, Jesus Arriaga, Interim CIO
> >Bosley Medical, Inc. and Mitch Stern, Director Human Capital,
> >Consulting. Mr. Stern, an HR expert, did have quite a bit to
say, and
> >Mr. Arriaga made some interesting comments as well.
> >
> >As you will see in his remarks below, Prof. Aron takes the
> >point of view. He admits that the H-1B program is used for
cheap labor
> >rather than for remedying a labor shortage, and over lunch
before the
> >event he also admitted that the H-1Bs are mainly brought in so
> >employers can avoid hiring older, i.e. 40+, Americans; indeed,
> >brought this up before I did. (He also mentioned that to prep
for the
> >debate, he talked to his former colleague at Wharton, Peter
> >whose writings on the non-shortage of labor I've often quoted.)
He put
> >forth the usual argument, spoken with religious fervor and
> >certainty, that purely laissez faire economic policies make the
> >better.
> >
> >For my part, I stated that I respect the libertarians because at
> >they are honest about issues like this. However, I also stated
that I
> >believe most people (including those in the audience) aren't
> >libertarians. My willingness to participate in forums such as
this is
> >motivated mainly by a desire to get the facts out in the open;
> each
> >listener can apply his own political/economic philosophy to
forming his
> >stance on the issues.
> >
> >The nature of the audience, consisting of CIOs, IT managers, IT
> >entrepreneurs and the like, made for quite a different type of
> >discussion than one usually finds in these forums. They KNOW
> >issues. This is the first such forum I've seen in which NO ONE
(if I
> >remember correctly) challenged my point that H-1B is about cheap
> >and replacement of older workers. Even Stern and Arriaga, both
of whom
> >strongly asserted a tech labor shortage, did not dispute these
> >and as mentioned, Aron did not dispute them either.
> >
> >One thing that got a big laugh and repeated references in the
> subsequent
> >discussion was that I said, "Paraphrasing Shakepeare, I say
> thing
> >we do is kill all the HR people.'" :-) After the event, several
> >told me some of their own favorite horror HR stories. HR people
> to
> >be zealous gatekeepers, a major obstacle to good hiring. Stern,
a very
> >personable guy, took it good naturedly.
> >
> >Aron was personable too. Though the discussion got a bit heated
> >times (even with plenty of time to get my points across, I am
> >when offered false choices such as "Who would you rather believe
> >H-1B, Paul Krugman or Charless Grassley?"), I look forward to
> >pleasant chat with him when we bump into each other again.
> >
> >Yet it's clear that Ravi and I are poles apart in, literally,
our views
> >of the world. It's not just ideology, but also a sense of
> >nationality--or lack of one, as the case may be. I get the
> >that Ravi is a member of a growing class of immigrants to the
U.S. who
> >consider themselves transnationals, not tied to any particular
> >Just as many big firms view themselves as multinational (and,
> >to Harvard economist Richard Freeman, even his university thinks
> >itself as multinational), there are now many individuals who
have a
> >multinational mentality too. The trend has been noticeable
enough for
> >UC Berkeley anthropologist Aihwa Ong to write a book on it,
> >Flexible Citizenship.
> >
> >Before coming to the U.S. for study and later work, Ravi was a
> >consultant in Malaysia, and for a while ran a software firm in
> >native India. It wouldn't surprise me if Ravi's next job were
to be in
> >the UK or China, say. This has to color his views of offshoring
> >H-1B.
> >
> >His stance on those issues is also presumably impacted by his
> >consulting work on offshoring, which I'm told has been quite
> >for him. (Speaking of which, one of the people writing comments
on Don
> >Tennant's blog asserted that I have a "vested interest" against
> >but it ought to be clear that the status of the H-1B program has
> >substantial impact on me one way or the other.)
> >
> >By the way, I posited three points that I thought everyone could
> >on as to the desirability/necessity of keeping a major fraction
of this
> >profession American. Two are in Don's excerpt below--military
work and
> >the need for innovation. The third one was the point that
whether we
> >think the importation of foreign programmers and engineers is
good or
> >not, they're not going to keep coming here in the future. Tech
> >in the U.S. are becoming less attractive, due to stagnant wages
and a
> >roller coaster job market, while jobs in India and China are on
> >upswing. Even Mitch Stern, the HR expert, seemed very concerned
when I
> >mentioned this. Yet Ravi dismissed it, saying that we (he may
> said
> >"you") can grow this labor force internally if things come to
> >Mitch replied, no, this is not a feasible solution, as it an
> >takes many years to make such adjustments.
> >
> >In a somewhat comic twist (whether deliberate or unwitting), all
of us
> >speakers were presented with special clocks, with a map of the
> and
> >24 time zones, perfect for the globalist future. :-) I did
> >though, that in order to see the U.S. one needs to hold the
> upside
> >down. :-)
> >
> >Norm
> >
> >
> >
> >Matloff vs. Aron on the loss of U.S. IT jobs to non-U.S. workers
> >
> >By Don Tennant on Mon, 11/05/2007 - 11:39am
> >
> >A couple of weeks ago I moderated a panel discussion at the fall
> meeting of
> >the UCLA Anderson School of Management IS Associates. The topic
> >discussion was the future of U.S. IT professionals in a global
> and
> >we focused on offshore outsourcing and the H-1B visa
> >
> >Much of the discussion took the form of a debate between
> Norman
> >Matloff of the University of California at Davis, a long-time
> critic
> >of the H-1B visa program; and Professor Ravi Aron of the
University of
> >Southern California Marshall School of Business, an authority on
> offshore
> >outsourcing.
> >
> >The following is an exchange between Matloff and Aron, edited
> clarity
> >and brevity. It began with Matloff's response to my first
> >
> >Is the premise that there is a shortage of IT workers in the
U.S. fact
> or
> >fiction?
> >
> >Matloff: You can look at it in terms of salaries a** they're not
> up.
> >There was a Business Week study that found that starting
salaries for
> >computer science and electrical engineering graduates, adjusting
> >inflation, are on the downswing. There is no study, other than
> made by
> >the industry, that has established a shortage, even during the
> boom.
> >The problem is that people are not willing to hire who's out
there, and
> >largely it's a matter of money. That, in turn, becomes a matter
of age
> a**
> >older people cost more. They cost more in salary, they cost more
> >benefits. The whole thing about [there being a shortage because
> baby
> >boomers retiring is kind of ludicrous, because almost nobody
gets to
> >retirement age in this business. After you reach age 40 or even
age 35,
> you
> >find yourself becoming less employable. I'm talking about my
> >which is software development, so everything I said holds to
> group. HR
> >doesn't know what to do with that mountain of applications. They
> people
> >out, and the age issue is central a** it's a way to filter out
> older
> >people. Eminently qualified people can't even get an interview.
> amounts
> >to legalized age discrimination.
> >
> >Aron: If you're willing to pay enough, supply will meet demand.
Let me
> add:
> >You should not pay that much. The idea that there exists an
> class of
> >[computer] aristocracy that should be pampered with the salaries
> their
> >desired level is baloney. We did not do this with agricultural
or steel
> >workers or bank tellers. There is absolutely no reason
whatsoever for
> >someone coming into this occupation to feel entitled to an
> salary
> >and a bonus. If I can't get it, I find another occupation. The
road to
> China
> >winds through entitlement. No IT worker, now or in the future,
can have
> an
> >entitlement that says, "I have the right to bypass the salary
level set
> by
> >the market because in some way I'm critical to the future of the
> >States." Let the market decide that number. If you find that
> >unacceptable, there are plenty of other things to do.
> >
> >How important is it to change the perception among young people
that an
> IT
> >job isn't worth pursuing because offshoring and H-1B visas are
> those
> >jobs too difficult to attain?
> >
> >Matloff: You have to ask if this profession is important to us
as a
> nation,
> >as an economy, as a society. There are some real issues there.
> an
> >obvious one: the military, which is very dependent on
technology. We
> don't
> >want to offshore that. Regardless of what you think of the war,
> >obviously don't offshore that kind of stuff. On the other hand,
> can't
> >say, "We're going to produce just enough [IT talent] for the
> It
> >doesn't work that way. You have to have a critical mass.
Innovation is
> >supposed to be our forte in the United States. There's a lot of
> that
> >we don't do well as a society, but we are creative. And if we
> that
> >to a place where, on average, people are less creative, we're
going to
> have
> >less innovation and we've lost our comparative advantage. So
it's a
> negative
> >for us as a country, and it's a negative for the business
> >
> >Aron: Is the concern that these people might go be a lawyer or
an MBA?
> So go
> >be a lawyer or an MBA. What's the big deal? If you can find a
good MBA
> >program that will take you, go and be an MBA. You will do useful
> you
> >will add to the wealth and efficiency of the corporation. The
> needs
> >steel. They need mechanical engineers, metallurgical scientists,
all of
> >which can be offshored. Have we lost our innovation? Today, the
> between
> >the United States and the rest of the world in terms of
> >patents a** patents that actually make money a** is increasing,
> decreasing.
> >Who are America's chief competitors? Germany and Japan, not the
> low-cost
> >manufacturing economies of China and India. Design and innovate
> America;
> >develop and deliver in the CPI countries [China, the Philippines
> India].
> >That is the formula for making money and staying innovative. Not
> protected
> >by America, for Americans. If people want to leave [the IT
> and
> >go become lawyers, let them become lawyers. Nothing will stop
them from
> >being innovative, creative, and adding to the wealth of this
> >
> >Why not recognize a good thing when you see it? Why do people
have to
> go
> >through these [H-1B] procedures? Why have procedures that [cause
> to
> >look for] painful ways of skirting them? Why don't they simply
say, "If
> >you've got a Masters degree and Goldman Sachs wants to employ
you, come
> on
> >over?" If they're good enough for Goldman Sachs, they're good
> for the
> >Unites States.
> >
> >Matloff: The implicit theme of your argument is that these
> and
> >programmers are smart people, and we need more smart people.
Well first
> >of all, they're not necessarily all that smart a** anybody here
> been
> >an IT manager knows that. They've been burned many times. No. 2,
> >much more importantly, is the issue that that influx is causing
> >internal brain drain. Innovative people are leaving the field,
and I
> >know many, many cases of that. I don't think anyone, including
Ravi ,
> is
> >going to say it's a good thing when you have bright people not
> >into something where they really have talent. They're going into
> >something that they don't like and where maybe they don't have
> >Let them become a lawyer? Well, maybe they're not going to be as
good a
> >lawyer as they would have been a software engineer.
> >
> >Aron: I'm not at all saying that you should bring these people
> because
> >they're smart. I couldn't care less whether they're smart or
not. If
> they
> >are pumpkin farmers, and it turns out there's an economic
viability and
> they
> >can find a market for it and they can make money, I say bring
them in.
> I am
> >completely agnostic about their intellectual prowess. And if
> become
> >lawyers and they find they're not very good at it, fine a** find
> something
> >else to do. As I discovered when I was 18 years old that it was
> likely I
> >was going to make it in a career as a rock guitarist, you will
> that
> >there are other things to do.
> >
> >Will it mean that some people will not go into IT as a career?
> Absolutely.
> >So what? Will it mean that some talented, bright folks will move
> IT
> >into financial services as they're now doing? Yeah, of course.
So what?
> That
> >is the strength of the U.S.: Constantly reallocate people and
> where
> >it is most rewarded. We do not want to be North Korea.
> >
> >Can we do without the H1-B program? If you're willing to pay
> >certainly. I don't think that's a good idea. Can America's
> needs be
> >met without Japanese cars? Of course. Can our photographic needs
be met
> >without Japanese cameras? Without doubt. But the consequences
would be
> >catastrophic. For sure, we can do without H1-B. For sure, we can
> without
> >Japanese cars.
> >
> >
> >--
> >This is the Midrange Jobs: Postings & Discussion (MIDRANGE-JOBS)
> mailing list
> >To post a message email: MIDRANGE-JOBS@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> >To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> >visit:
> >or email: MIDRANGE-JOBS-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> >Don't forget to check the jobs board at
> --
> This is the Midrange Jobs: Postings & Discussion (MIDRANGE-JOBS)
mailing list
> To post a message email: MIDRANGE-JOBS@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> visit:
> or email: MIDRANGE-JOBS-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Don't forget to check the jobs board at
This is the Midrange Jobs: Postings & Discussion (MIDRANGE-JOBS) mailing
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-JOBS@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
or email: MIDRANGE-JOBS-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Don't forget to check the jobs board at

This thread ...


Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2020 by and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].