I Cogitate

"It's time to ask whether the rise of tech powerhouses in Asia and the movement of tech jobs there will do to Silicon Valley what the rise of the Japanese car industry did to places like Flint, Mich.

Not because it's likely to happen--at least not anytime soon. But because it may be the only way to have a frank conversation about the profound changes these trends will mean for the economy of the valley and the country as a whole.

That conversation has been elusive. Whenever it does take place, it's polarized and not terribly constructive...

...But when leaders in business, government or academia seek to downplay the impact of outsourcing, they're doing everyone a disservice. Over the past year, arguments seeking to do just that have proliferated:

• The current wave of job migration is the latest in a succession of similar waves that have benefited the valley. As chip manufacturing jobs were replaced by computer jobs, then by software jobs, Internet jobs and so on, the valley has only prospered.

True. But that ignores the unprecedented influx of about 300 million skilled workers into the global workforce in the past decade or so. Their hunger for employment will translate into the biggest challenge that this country's workforce has seen in generations.

• Only lower-level jobs are going to India and China.

That's simply untrue. The kinds of jobs being exported are rapidly moving up the skill ladder. Tech titans such as Oracle, Intel, Microsoft and IBM aren't building campuses overseas to fill them with grunts.

• Few tech jobs have been lost to outsourcing, far fewer than those lost to a deflating tech bubble.

That may be true, at least so far. But it ignores the fact that virtually every start-up that is funded in Silicon Valley today is hiring some of its workers overseas. It is start-ups--not large, established firms--that historically have generated job growth in the valley. So the issue is not so much about the jobs lost, but about those that will never be created here.

• We'll be fine, because countries like China and India don't have a culture of innovation and risk-taking.

Really? How, then, can we explain that foreigners, including many from China and India, were behind a third of the start-ups launched here during the tech boom? When those innovators and entrepreneurs can start the next generation of firms without having to emigrate, they will. VCs will gladly bankroll them. And experienced American executives will head overseas to fill whatever gaps those countries may have in management and marketing know-how..."

Finally, finally, someone is talking reality about 'outsourcing.' Helft has written previous editorials on this same subject and viewed the issue from many different points along the political spectrum.

Too often, one side simply bleats that protectionist legislation is needed, while the other crows that many other jobs are being created right here due to the removal of trade and employment barriers. Nothing substantial occurs beyond the conflicting claims. Actual numbers are difficult to come by, especially regarding the wages of any new jobs created in this country versus the salaries saved by sending work overseas.

Yes, the bursting of the internet bubble dramatically reduced the number of technology jobs here in the United States. Silicon Valley alone lost some 200,000 positions.

And the employment drain is going to continue, the reasons why both proven and projected in Helft's article.

What is truly needed is an 'open' national discussion so that answers can be determined and policies instituted to 'treat' this multi-faceted problem.

Such is highly unlikely to take place with our current presidential administration. But it probably wouldn't be that much different though if there was a Democrat in the White House. Then, the only substantial shift would be from the current willful ignoring of the problem to one of platitudes that resolve very little but attempting to make people feel better.

Yes, there are no easy answers. That's usually the way it is when facing real life problems.

But just as President Bush is currently exhorting that.Social Security, in its present form, is outdated and no longer applicable to many in the present and future workforce, well, so are federal and state unemployment and training programs, policies and benefits.

This issue needs a fresh look from a national perspective, with state input. It could be tweaking the current form of social Darwinism but, more than likely, something comprehensive involving tax credits, reduced tuition, lengthier periods of unemployment insurance, salary 'makeups,'a greater financial and educational emphasis on mathematics and the sciences, is needed.

We need a strong dose of actual reality, which unfortunately is not and has not been the direction the 'science' of politics has been heading for some time.

But do credit Miguel Helft for his attempts to raise the bar. May others join him.

 RSS feed