http://traumwerk.sta...eid=204962&.jpg
Competition to the US' tech leadership
#1
Posted 09 September 2007 - 09:09 AM
#2
Posted 09 September 2007 - 09:35 AM
#3
Posted 09 September 2007 - 09:52 AM
#4
Posted 09 September 2007 - 10:46 AM
Essentially it's "credential inflation" over there and they've dumbed down the meaning to make it look like their better educated than they are.
Mark
From the Washington Post:
In fact, about half of what China calls "engineers" would be called "technicians" at best in the United States, with the equivalent of a vocational certificate or an associate degree. In addition, the McKinsey study of nine occupations, including engineering, concluded that "fewer than 10 percent of Chinese job candidates, on average, would be suitable for work [in a multinational company] in the nine occupations we studied."
After an exhaustive study, researchers at Duke University also pummeled the numbers. In a December 2005 analysis, "Framing the Engineering Outsourcing Debate," they reported that the United States annually produces 137,437 engineers with at least a bachelor's degree while India produces 112,000 and China 351,537. That's more U.S. degrees per million residents than in either other nation.
Among major media outlets, thus far only the Christian Science Monitor has joined the Wall Street Journal in examining the competing statistics. (A few others have referenced the Duke study). In a December 2005 article, the Monitor quoted Rochester Institute of Technology professor Ron Hira as saying: "Business groups have been very smart about trying to change the subject from outsourcing and offshoring to the supposed shortfall of U.S. engineers. There's really no serious shortage of engineers." Yet, while the National Academies replaced the erroneous numbers with the numbers from Duke, Stine stood by her original conclusion, telling the Monitor that "the U.S. is well behind other countries."
Statistics that end up as conventional wisdom even when they're wrong usually become popular by being presented as fact in a highly visible and respected source -- such as a cover story in Fortune or a National Academies report.
Google rocks.
Mark S Young
Wall Street Sentiment
Get a free trial here:
http://wallstreetsen...t.com/trial.htm
You can now follow me on twitter
#5
Posted 09 September 2007 - 11:15 AM
#6
Posted 09 September 2007 - 11:32 AM
Compared to the size of their populations, they have a long way to go, but it must be clear that the US does not have any time to waste with "the intelligent design"...
THAT, I grant you whole heartedly.
The scientific ignorance in this country, relative to the per capita spending on education is criminal. And I mean criminal. It's intellectual fraud and fiscal misappropriation.
In the city of Cincinnati, they spend something like $8500/per head and pack those class rooms, despite shrinking enrollment. That's $190000/classroom for just 9 months. In this town, I think that the average teachers salary is just shy of $50k/9 months plus some, which is fine money for out here. Where's that money going? Not into educating anyone, I can tell you, if the results are any measure.
Mark
Mark S Young
Wall Street Sentiment
Get a free trial here:
http://wallstreetsen...t.com/trial.htm
You can now follow me on twitter
#7
Posted 09 September 2007 - 06:01 PM
#8
Posted 09 September 2007 - 08:21 PM
#9
Posted 09 September 2007 - 10:41 PM
Thats what happens when your kids grow up rich and not hungry. I'm not saying its a bad thing. Our American kids are out having fun. Good for them, life is short. Play while you can. That school stuff is not fun and waaaaay overated. If we need an engineer or some smart guy for something we can pay for them. Us Americans are loaded. It's the poor people who have to go to school and get educated so that the rich folks can make use of them. Otherwise they stay poor. Unless that poor guy has muscle then they can be used for hard labor. Makes sense to me anyway.
The middle class in US is lagging in earnings compared to the rich class. Some of it
is because of exactly as you put it "they are out having a good time". That IMO does
not bode well for the majority of our youngsters. Most of these youth do not have
rich enough parents to go hire a good engineer or any such smart guy. I have two
teenagers and I see how the school kids spend their time. And our school is one of
the better public schools in Washington state.
#10
Posted 10 September 2007 - 03:42 PM