Saturday, October 15, 2005

More News For The Investor Class

The following item appeared in yesterday's issue of The Philadelphia Inquirer (courtesy of Bloomberg News):

Tech graduates still lag other majors

A government report bolsters businesses' demands for better efforts to boost math, science graduates.

By Paul Basken


The United States is spending $2.8 billion a year on hundreds of programs to boost the numbers of college graduates with mathematics and science degrees, yet the increases still lag behind other fields, federal auditors said yesterday.

The number of U.S. graduates with science, technology, engineering or mathematics degrees increased by 8 percent from 1994-95 to 2002-03, while graduates in other fields increased 30 percent, the Government Accountability Office said in a report to Congress.

"Little is known about the extent to which most STEM programs are achieving their desired results," the GAO said, using the acronym for programs to boost the numbers of science, technology, engineering and mathematics graduates.

The quality of grade-school teachers, insufficient mentoring of young women and minority students, and stricter visa rules since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks may help explain why the United States is not producing more such graduates, the GAO said.

U.S. business groups have been pressing for greater efforts to increase the numbers of technology graduates, calling the matter critical to U.S. economic competitiveness.

More than a third of U.S. manufacturers reported open positions this year because of a lack of qualified people, according to the National Association of Manufacturers. By 2010, the number of unfilled jobs is expected to exceed the overall unemployment rate, said Stephen Jordan, executive director of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Center for Corporate Citizenship.

Thirteen federal agencies spent about $2.8 billion in fiscal 2004 on 207 programs designed to produce more technology graduates, the GAO said.

The costs ranged from $4,000 for a national scholars program sponsored by the Department of Agriculture to a $547 million National Institutes of Health program to expand training in biomedical, behavioral and clinical research, the federal auditors said.

U.S. companies spend almost $3 billion a year to help improve grade schools nationwide, according to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

The chamber was host to representatives from dozens of major U.S. companies - including Microsoft Corp., General Electric Co., Intel Corp., and International Business Machines Corp. - earlier this month to explore ways to spend that money more wisely.

The Business Roundtable and other leading U.S. business organizations issued a report in July saying the country needs to double its science, technology, engineering and mathematics graduates by 2015.

"The critical situation in American innovation threatens to undermine our standard of living at home and our leadership in the world," John Castellani, president of Business Roundtable, a Washington-based lobby organization that represents chief executives of 160 U.S. companies.
Our standard of living has ALREADY been seriously undermined, Mr. Castellani, and we are continuing to lose ground every day. It says something that "the crowd on 'Carpet Row'" is apparently just becoming aware of that reality now.

You know, it is a source of continual fascination to me that these mighty captains of industry will complain in a heartbeat about the way our students are being educated (or not being educated in many cases) in science and mathematics, not learning enough and graduating in the numbers they would like (and yes, I definitely admit that we have work to do about that), but these same business leaders are, at best, silent when our politicians pass legislation that encourages the exporting of jobs in this country overseas (or, in some cases, they are actually cheerleading over it). Or do these business leaders care that overseas students are just going to take the skills they learn in this country back home anyway?

I think this link provides some important information regarding this trend, which isn't likely to let up in the forseeable future, unfortunately. I had also heard that the Bush Department of Labor has published guidelines to encourage companies to "offshore" jobs, selling the tax benefits of this repugnant practice, but I couldn't find a link at the U.S. Department of Labor site to verify that. Also, Paul Craig Roberts at Counter Punch (link in the right column) has written extensively on this topic, and I highly recommend his columns (Roberts worked in the Commerce Department in the Reagan Administration - I was never a fan of Ronnie Baby, but unlike Dubya, he at least had people in important government positions who were actually competent).

Also, here is a link to a bit of good news from Lou Dobbs, who has been beating the drum on the issue of outsourcing/offshoring for some time now (is it a surprise that the Repugs buried this study in an omnibus spending bill, not wanting word to get out that might upset their primary campaign contributors?).

When I hear people like John Castellani advocating legislation to ensure reasonable-paying jobs with decent benefits to go along with the wishes of his Fortune 500 clientele, then I'll consider the whining of these beyond-rich individuals a bit more seriously (and don't get me started on CEO compensation - that's a whole other rant).

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Outsourcing is one of the most important issues facing America today. I'm a computer science undergraudate in my senior year, so I'll be seriously seeing this stuff very soon in the future.

One of my friends already took a job for Lucent Technologies in Bangalore. He thinks it's a great deal (he gets to live in a foreign country, and gets paid well for the standard of living there, but gets paid 1/5 the amount he'd make in a similar job here). He told me "Outsourcing rules!" I asked him, "Do you know you'll be training your replacements?"

People just don't understand this stuff. It's not about a global workforce. It's about corporations exploiting cheaper labor forces. They benefit off temporary economic differentials, and everyone loses (rather than the Repug mantra, that it's win-win--yea, tell that to the workers of Juarez, Mexico, and to the Americans who are now unemployed thanks to that abuse).

Lou Dobbs is the only one beating this drum, but my problem with Dobbs is that he sometimes takes a protectionist stance. This has nothing to do with protectionism. It has to do with democracy versus fascism. Letting corporations decide the economic fate of the world's countries is nothing more than fascism ("with a friendly face", to use the popular saying).

Doomsayer, please take a look at this book: http://gangsofamerica.com/

Thanks for bringing up the discourse. Too bad you're not in NY--I'm organizing a screening of Greg Spotts' film (American Jobs) at my school (NYU) next week, on Tuesday. Hopefully we'll have a spirited discussion afterwards.

-Andrew

doomsy said...

Andrew,

I second, third, fourth and fifth your sentiments. I work with Indian contractors who are based in Mumbai and Pune. Some of them are great, and some of them are horrible, but you're right...this isn't about nationalities. It's about money. It's about the line that we have been fed primarily by the Repugs for the last 20 years or so..."yes, YOU TOO can be rich like us." Sure, that happens probably less than one out of ten times to someone who devotes his or her entire life to their job and they happen to hit it big, but the other 10-20 people give it their all and "crash and burn" anyway through no fault of their own (of course, the Wall Street Journal Op-Ed page will NEVER tell you that).

I'll go to the link and poke around a bit. Thanks for that and checking in with your feedback.

Ed