a very good article.we are participating in debate in support of capitalism .pls send us the details

I live in Tampa and know a few people who used to make good money as administrator or programmers who are now working for that AOL Tech support group. The simple fact is many were making more money than they have a right to expect in the long term because of market forces. I know most people’s salaries have dropped in the last four years even where they have kept similar jobs.

There are several factors besides technical skill, education and intelligence that poeple look for in hiring and now that they have choice again they are using it. Some of the people at AOL are there because their technical skills really weren’t that great and there are many more people with better skills than they have. Some have the skills but are are not hired for jobs because of other factors (interpersonal skills is a big example). Some people never learned how to sell their own skills because six or seven years ago they didn’t have to. Recruiters came looking for them.

Let’s face it. 90% of sytsems administration is not hard. It doesn’t require large amounts of creativity or intelligence. You don’t see typical administrators using extensive stastical analysis on a set of data to determine why something isn’t working as well as it could. They are buying a faster computer to run it on. It’s cheaper to buy a $5,000 machine to upgrade your server than it is to pay someone $10,000 to get that last few % of performance out of the system. I could wish it wasn’t so, but that’s the way systems are these days. The hardest part of administration these days seems to be knowing how to get exactly the right information out of Google to find the last person who had the same problem you have right now. Most administration doesn’t require high level degrees in math and computer science. For that matter most software development doesn’t either. I’ve lost track of how many “software engineers” don’t know who Knuth or Dijkstra is and don’t have the ability to get past the first sentence of any of their works. Application development is a matter of being able to connect the interface to the database and get the right data to the right place. This is even true of DBAs. How many DBAs need to be able to calculate the expected run time of a query in order to know if the query written another way would be faster?

So you increase the supply of technical people by creating large demand (.com boom and Y2k), you lower the skill set necessary through more powerful computers, which increases the supply more (more people are capable of fulfilling the job description). You create a temporary situation that creates a culture of people who did relatively little to become highly paid and you pull the rug out from under them. What do you expect to happen?

People need to learn how to compete for jobs again. They need to learn to evolve their skill sets. They need to find ways to gain situational advantages over the competition.

I’ve seen several positions in the Tampa area for systems administrators. Some of the larger Sun shops outside of the .com industry are in this area including Verizon and Neilsons (the Ratings people). Several agencies in this area are looking for people from time to time including Sapphire. The opportunity is out there, your friend has to take it.

A system administrator position is open now at my employer, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. See http://cjo.lbl.gov/, position number 017013 for details.

Jeff,
I am not entirely certain that America cannot enjoy the benefits that Norway has reaped from its ‘welfare democracy’, let’s just say that I am, um, fairly certain.

As long as the bulk of america sits in economic comfort and bathes in the constant deluge of selfish consumer propaganda I do not see any major change from the status quo of savaging the central government and dismanteling the social welfare safety net through tax cutting programs.

Both Norway and FDR had the ‘benefit’ of extremely hard times in recent memory to coalesce the public into supporting programs that benefitted the common good. Without the first-person experience of living on the edge of existence, I do not believe that the public can show the moral courage to take a few dollars out of their paycheck for the sake of the country at large.

What were once fringe groups that advocated seperating themselve from the union have become poster children for the neo-conservative movement. Until this tide turns back towards a nationalistic need to support each other for the sake of the nation, I do not see any chance of real change.

“Would I give up most of my income to live in a well-run society where my kids’ kid’s kids’ would have a guaranteed ’swell upbringing’, education and relative happiness? Hell yeah! Is there any chance that I could get a majority of the voting representatives to support this ‘great society’ knowing that they would be immediately voted out of office? Hell no!”

How can we be so sure of this? It seems to me that FDR managed to get re-elected 3 times on a somewhat less ambitious platform. While he was committing these un-American acts, he was being called a traitor and a dictator by the GOP and much of the influential media. It’s just so damned hard to argue when your opposition provides employment and food.

Do we want to be just like Scandanavia? Probably not, but I find it interesting that the climate for start-ups is so positive. And yes, without north sea oil, much of this would be more difficult. But the point here is that America has lots of valuable natural resources too. The difference is that greed is seen as a virtue rather than a pathology. This is not a view that is generally supported by historical evidence.

And what flavor did you want your capitalism?
According to wikipedia:
“The Norwegian economy is a prosperous bastion of welfare capitalism, featuring a combination of free market activity and government intervention. ”

So, there’s that capitalism thingy again, maybe not so ‘unfettered’ as in say, malaysia, but still the idea that selling something for more than you paid for it is a “good thing”.

Of course, Norway would be nicer if it was say, in the tropics, with a light evening breeze and maybe a brief rain shower every afternoon, and …

And you know that Norway receives a great amount of government funding from the state-run petroluem industry… It is unlikely that higher taxes alone could support the workers paradise that exists there.

And then there is that whole creepy ‘northern european society’ with your neighbors knowing what you earn for a living and minding whether you jay walk or not… pretty creepy

Would I give up most of my income to live in a well-run society where my kids’ kid’s kids’ would have a guaranteed ’swell upbringing’, education and relative happiness? Hell yeah! Is there any chance that I could get a majority of the voting representatives to support this ‘great society’ knowing that they would be immediately voted out of office? Hell no!

So, we work with what we’ve got, try and get ready for the ‘next great thing’, then get our un-fair share of cash and head off to an island paradise to get jiggy with the islanders and fade off into the sunset.

Hmmm. “Capatalism is the worst economic system, except for all the others?”

What color is the sky in your world? While a socialized welfare state may not produce many millionares, it often reduces abject poverty and violent crime to close to 0%. For an example of this, check out this article: http://www.rakemag.com/features/detail.asp?catID=61&itemID=15314

Before I hear from the knee-jerk self-abusers who feel we all have to suffer to achieve innovation, look at the recent U.N reports on the progress of the human condition. The countries that successfully implement social democracies are now also beginning to show a higher rate of innovation than the good ole’ US of A.

The reason? When you don’t have to worry about loss of medical care, housing, and starvation, joining or creating a start-up business is a lot less risky, and more people are tempted to try it. That’s right, the welfare state can be more entrepenurial than our rough and tumble capitalism, if run properly.

Now granted, some will be turned off by tax rates of over 50%. But when the whole society benefits, it’s mostly the sociopaths who really have a problem with sharing the wealth. Would I give away 2/3 of my income in exchange for free education for my kids, full health coverage, 35 hour weeks, and a livable retirement benefit? You bet! That’s a bargain. Think of what you pay in the U.S. for less than this.

Democracy? Since when did the U.S have a real democracy at the national level? Just what is it you are defending? God forbid if we had directly elected leaders in a true multi-party system!

Don’t forget to check Wikipedia for basic overviews. It is important not to get into fights over semantics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mob_rule
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism

“True Democracy is nothing more than MOB RULE.”

I’m not sure what “true” democracy is, but I can see how a system where everybody voted directly on laws could in some ways be the same as mob rule. But we don’t have that; we have a representational democracy, for better and for worse.

“Capitalism seeks slave wages to maximize profits. CAPITALISM owes NOTHING to the community. CAPITALISZM encourages slavery.”

Capitalism does get out of hand sometimes, which is what government is for. I wouldn’t want to see capitalism completely off the leash.

I guess I agree with Churchill about democracy. To paraphrase, “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.” And I think that can be applied to capitalism as well. It’s the worst economic system, except for all the others.

Russ,
I have to disagree with you, I just don’t know where to begin.

I have thought about it, and I really believe that anarchy would be closer to mob rule than democracy. At least with our democracy we have regular polling periods (some even limit the sale of liquor to keep the mob sober), an electoral college (to save us from ourselves) and convenient requirements for greater than a simple majority for important things like constitutional ammendments and veto overrides.

Sure democracy isn’t perfect, but what would you prefer? Technocracy, Oligarchy, Monarchy, straight up Dictatorship?

As far as capitalsim goes… In its purest form you get people worked to death and their bones rendered for glue which is sold to their children ans food… But that’s not what we have here. We have the combination of capitalism tempered by democracy (and a good deal of socialism). Capitalism has been a great ‘engine’ to drive our society. Every now and then it gets a little overheated requires some good old intervention from the elected representatives…

Sure it’s messy, inelegant, and just plain noisy sometimes.

What _are_ your alternatives?