Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

On Fri, 17 Dec 2004, Kamal R. Prasad wrote:

> Date: 17 Dec 2004 00:31:08 -0800
> From: Kamal R. Prasad <kamalp@acm.org>
> Newsgroups: sci.research.careers
> Subject: The Snot Report....its a biggie this time !
>
> Kamal R. Prasad wrote:
>>
>> Sputnik was never a threat to americans -any more than the earth
>> simulator by NEC is.
>
>> The threat wasn't the satellite per se, of course, but the nuclear
>> warhead delivery capability that the launch vehicle implied. And
>> yes, that WAS a threat, and if you don't think so you should read
>> some history of the Cuban missle crisis and how close we came to
>> Armageddon. The NEC simulator isn't a threat. When did I ever
>> imply that it was? As a meteorologist I find it an amusing waste
>> of machine cycles, like many (but not all) such projects, but it
>> isn't a threat.
>
> For every scientific achievement, there is a dual-use application.

I hardly see how penicillin can be used as a bioweapon. I hardly see how
electric light bulbs can hurt anyone unless you put them on incoming
warheads to frighten people before they are hit.

> Lots of countries can hit a missile at India, but the question on my
> mind is what they will get besides nuclear pollution by doing so?

The target will be vaporized. Why does India have nuclear weapons?

The
> cuban missile crisis was a result of the cold war, meaning the
> russians wanted to gain an edge in the on-going war.

And, lets see, India has no cold war with Pakistan? And, Pakistan has no
disputes with India?

>> Americans are obsessed with notions of
>> superiority and that is why they consider it a threat.
>
>> Please don't generalize.
> Alright. But it is US govt. policy to maintain a pre-eminent position
> in science and technology.

It is the US govt policy to maintain a pre-eminent position in military
strength. The position of the NSA and CIA is to look out for "American
Interests" (whether you or I like them is irrelevant). All else is
debatable.

Its as if some other country making
> progress in S&T is akin to posing a threat to the US citizenry.

Already polls in the US are showing a majority opinion that it is bad to
offshore jobs. The threat comes from greedy selfish corporate executives.

>> The way I look
>> at it, a scientific achievement by another country is as much an
>> achievement as one by the US.
>
>> As a scientist, so do I.
> Alright. I meant if I were you, I would appreciate the russians'
> achievement.

There is "old science" where it doesn't matter who discovers something and
the "new science" which is to grab it, keep it a secret, get a patent on
it, and make money off of it and in 3rd world countries the "new science"
is to make it anyway and forget the patent, the royalty, the legalities
and thus we have, in the USA and elsewhere, lots of counterfiet products
and in 3rd world 95% of all the software is stolen without payment.

>>
>> I hope you haven't forgotten Ricardo and his theory of comparative
>> advantage -which is perhaps what offshoring is all about.
>
>> I have not forgotten it, but I try to ignore it and most other
>> blather from economists.
>
> Its not blather. Its plain economics.

Plain economics has been preaching how good everything is in the USA but
in reality debt is up, deficit is up, savings is down, job loss is
continuing at a great rate, and many other bad things are happening, and
we, in the USA, are going to have another depression. The economists are
full of bullshit.

If another country can produce
> cheaper & better goods -it makes sense to let them do that job,

It makes sense only to executives who will steal a job from an employee
that pays him $40k per year, and then give $20k to an Indian (who lives in
a coutry cheaper to live in but has less standard of living) and put the
remaining $20k into the executive bonus or pay.

and do
> something which you are better at(Im not sure what that would be for
> americans right now).

We make the finest military weapons in the world and great special effects
movies. I have not yet heard of a great movie fro India yet.

No country has been able to change that basic
> law as yet.

Russia did in 1917. Indian Ghandi threw out the British. This can happen
again.

>> Much as a patriotic president or businessowner may want, he cannot
>> change the fact that somethings are better/cheaper made outside than
>> inside the US -and that is what the customer will opt for.
>
>> Not if the customer is sufficiently brainwashed.
> Yeah -ford & gm must be having a tough time painting the american flag
> on their cars to help them compete with Toyota and Honda.

Ford and GM are the best examples of the worst greedy and selfish
corporate executives. They all know that they are in the business of
making money and not in the business of making cars.

>> Now you're ignoring economics. The Chinese are artificially
>> manipulating the yuan, just like the Japanese did with the yen for
>> a while. It ultimatley backfired on the Janpanese (I just read
>> that chapter of _Devil Take the Hindmost: A History of Financial
>> Speculation_ last night). It may backfire on the Chinese.
>
> The USD is inflated against just about every other 3rd world country.

This is circular reasoning. By definition, any 3rd world country has a lot
of nothing that is worth nothing or almost nothing. Flesh can be bought
very much cheaper in India.

> India is 1 of those countries, and offshoring is a result of that
> inflated currency.

Its not inflated currency, its cheap labor.

The chinese have pegged their currency to
> *DISSUADE* currency speculators from playing havouc and not to gain an
> unfair advantage.[I don't represent them -but that is my conclusion
> from the facts on hand].

China is still also a poor country but gaining in status (ownership of
cars, refrigerators, TV sets) very rapidly.

Since 1994 to 2004, the US economy has gone
> up and them come down, and so has its currency vis-a-vis other
> non-pegged currencies. If they had wanted an unfair advantage, they
> could have allowed their currency to depreciate when other currencies
> were depreciating wrt the USD.

Other things can be done to manipulate currency.

>> If they don't want to use their inflated
>> currency -then why have it inflated in the first place? Its like
>> saying you want to manufacture counterfeit currency -but not put it
>> into circulation.
>
>> But what does that have to do with my point?
> It has something to do with hoping walmart doesn't stock chinese
> goods. You have an inflated currency precisely to buy more imported
> goods with fewer dollars.

Our currency is NOT inflated. The issue is cheap labor. If we had zero
imports and zero exports, or close to it, we would have a situation
closer to a hundred years ago and the USA was not doing so poorly,

If the currency hadn't been inflated,
> imported goods would automatically be expensive and not stocked at
> price-competitive stores like walmart.

The argument should really be based on cheap labor, not currency.

>> If you had to be a fortune 500/walmart CEO, how would you deal with
>> the situation?
>
>> I would never be in that situation, any more that I'd be elected
>> President. If I were, I'd run the company according to my
> philosophy,
>> which I've expounded in part here over the years. That includes
>> honest, ethical dealings and communications with employers, stock
>> holders, customers, etc., which is why I'd never make it to CEO in
>> 99% of companies. :-)
>
> If you can provide more shareholder value, you have a good chance of
> being the CEO.

Shareholders are a very small part of the population. Jobholders are a
large part of the population.

> There is no way you can replace a 1$ chinese product by
> a $10 american one, and retain either the cost conscious customer base
> or make as good a profit as walmart does currently.

In the past the Europeans have done a pretty good job at keeping OUT cheap
made in Japan products. This is a fact. I don't know what the situation
is today but their neo-cons are also thinking more about how to get rich
than being part of their society and economy.


>> national version of the idea of the self-made man which many neo-cons
>> subscribe to, especially when thinking about themselves, without
>> admitting that they (probably) were born into a reasonably well off
>> family which helped them get their start in life, and were helped all
>> along the way by society. Of course, some of that can be said to
>> exist for all citizens, but as it says in _Animal Farm_, some animals
>> are more equal than others.
>
> I believe americans would be better off expecting their leaders to
> provide more jobs, education etc.. than making a pledge to make it the
> greatest nation on planet earth (which is what GWB does).

Quite a bit of what I hear coming out of India is to make India the world
leader in everything.

In India,
> people ask their leaders for more schools

If you think this is not happening here in the USA, then you don't know
anything about what people are asking their leaders here. Its in our
newspapers all the time. Especially as H1bs take jobs, it is "retrainintg"
that we hear. But, when corporations say they are moving the job overseas,
it always ends on _cheap labor_.

> not invade countries.

Has India never sent troops into another country?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged