Debate - Aron vs Matloff

Date: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 3:08 PM

<<<<< JOB DESTRUCTION NEWSLETTER No. 1779 -- 11/07/2007 >>>>>

A couple of weeks ago a debate was given at UCLA called "Future of U.S. IT
Professionals in a Global Market". It was a rather one-sided affair that
pitted Dr. Norman Matloff against three H-1B proponents. The audience mainly
consisted of CIOs, CEOs, and other assorted business oriented people. Norm
held his own in the debate against the three and occasionally got some rounds
of support from some of the older patrons -- especially when he talked about
how H-1B fuels age discrimination.

A Computerworld blog has a partial transcript of the debate between Ravi Aron
and Norm Matolff. My jaw dropped open when I read Aron's statements, and I'm
at a loss to describe them. The transcript is below. This is probably the most
outrageous thing I have heard since Carly Fiorina of HP:

If you re willing to pay enough, supply will meet demand.
Let me add: You should not pay that much.

The idea that there exists an exalted class of
[computer] aristocracy that
should be pampered with the salaries of their desired level
is baloney. We did not do this with agricultural or steel
workers or bank tellers. There is absolutely no reason
whatsoever for someone coming into this occupation to feel
entitled to an $85,000 salary and a bonus.

At the end of the debate, each panelist was awarded with a souvenir clock with
their names engraved against a world-and-time-zones background. It was just
the type of gift you would expect from a bunch of blood sucking globalists!

An official description of the debate can be seen at:

http://www.anderson.ucla.edu/x18889.xml

For Ravi Aron's Bio go here:
http://www.anderson.ucla.edu/Documents/areas/ctr/isassoc/Ravi_Aron_bio.html

For Norm Matloffs Bio go here:
http://www.anderson.ucla.edu/Documents/areas/ctr/isassoc/Norman_Mat_bio.html

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://www.computerworld.com/blogs/node/6482

Matloff vs. Aron on the loss of U.S. IT jobs to non-U.S. workers By Don
Tennant on Mon, 11/05/2007 - 11:39am A couple of weeks ago I moderated a panel
discussion at the fall meeting of the UCLA Anderson School of Management IS
Associates. The topic of discussion was the future of U.S. IT professionals in
a global market, and we focused on offshore outsourcing and the H-1B visa
controversy.

Much of the discussion took the form of a debate between Professor Norman
Matloff of the University of California at Davis, a long-time vocal critic of
the H-1B visa program; and Professor Ravi Aron of the University of Southern
California Marshall School of Business, an authority on offshore outsourcing.

The following is an exchange between Matloff and Aron, edited for clarity and
brevity. It began with Matloff s response to my first question:

Is the premise that there is a shortage of IT workers in the U.S. fact or
fiction?

Matloff: You can look at it in terms of salaries - they re not going up.
There was a Business Week study that found that starting salaries for computer
science and electrical engineering graduates, adjusting for inflation, are on
the downswing. There is no study, other than those made by the industry, that
has established a shortage, even during the dot-com boom. The problem is that
people are not willing to hire who s out there, and largely it s a matter of
money. That, in turn, becomes a matter of age - older people cost more. They
cost more in salary, they cost more in benefits. The whole thing about [there
being a shortage because of] baby boomers retiring is kind of ludicrous,
because almost nobody gets to retirement age in this business. After you reach
age 40 or even age 35, you find yourself becoming less employable. I m talking
about my specialty, which is software development, so everything I said holds
to that group. HR doesn t know what to do with that mountain of applications.
They vet people out, and the age issue is central - it s a way to filter out
the older people. Eminently qualified people can t even get an interview. It
amounts to legalized age discrimination.

Aron: If you re willing to pay enough, supply will meet demand. Let me
add: You should not pay that much. The idea that there exists an exalted class
of [computer] aristocracy that should be pampered with the salaries of their
desired level is baloney. We did not do this with agricultural or steel
workers or bank tellers. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever for someone
coming into this occupation to feel entitled to an $85,000 salary and a bonus.
If I can t get it, I find another occupation. The road to China winds through
entitlement. No IT worker, now or in the future, can have an entitlement that
says, "I have the right to bypass the salary level set by the market because
in some way I m critical to the future of the United States." Let the market
decide that number. If you find that number unacceptable, there are plenty of
other things to do.

How important is it to change the perception among young people that an IT job
isn t worth pursuing because offshoring and H-1B visas are making those jobs
too difficult to attain?

Matloff: You have to ask if this profession is important to us as a nation, as
an economy, as a society. There are some real issues there. There s an obvious
one: the military, which is very dependent on technology. We don t want to
offshore that. Regardless of what you think of the war, you obviously don t
offshore that kind of stuff. On the other hand, you can t say, "We re going to
produce just enough [IT talent] for the military." It doesn t work that way.
You have to have a critical mass.
Innovation is supposed to be our forte in the United States. There s a lot of
stuff that we don t do well as a society, but we are creative. And if we
offshore that to a place where, on average, people are less creative, we re
going to have less innovation and we ve lost our comparative advantage. So
it s a negative for us as a country, and it s a negative for the business
community.

Aron: Is the concern that these people might go be a lawyer or an MBA? So go
be a lawyer or an MBA. What s the big deal? If you can find a good MBA program
that will take you, go and be an MBA. You will do useful work; you will add to
the wealth and efficiency of the corporation. The military needs steel. They
need mechanical engineers, metallurgical scientists, all of which can be
offshored. Have we lost our innovation? Today, the gap between the United
States and the rest of the world in terms of value-bearing patents - patents
that actually make money - is increasing, not decreasing. Who are America s
chief competitors? Germany and Japan, not the low-cost manufacturing economies
of China and India. Design and innovate in America; develop and deliver in the
CPI countries [China, the Philippines and India]. That is the formula for
making money and staying innovative. Not protected by America, for Americans.
If people want to leave [the IT profession] and go become lawyers, let them
become lawyers.
Nothing will stop them from being innovative, creative, and adding to the
wealth of this country.

Why not recognize a good thing when you see it? Why do people have to go
through these [H-1B] procedures? Why have procedures that [cause people to
look for] painful ways of skirting them? Why don t they simply say, "If you ve
got a Masters degree and Goldman Sachs wants to employ you, come on over?" If
they re good enough for Goldman Sachs, they re good enough for the Unites
States.

Matloff: The implicit theme of your argument is that these engineers and
programmers are smart people, and we need more smart people. Well first of
all, they re not necessarily all that smart - anybody here who s been an IT
manager knows that. They ve been burned many times. No. 2, and much more
importantly, is the issue that that influx is causing an internal brain drain.
Innovative people are leaving the field, and I know many, many cases of that.
I don t think anyone, including

Ravi , is going to say it s a good thing when you have bright people not going
into something where they really have talent. They re going into something
that they don t like and where maybe they don t have talent.
Let them become a lawyer? Well, maybe they re not going to be as good a lawyer
as they would have been a software engineer.

Aron: I m not at all saying that you should bring these people in because
they re smart. I couldn t care less whether they re smart or not. If they are
pumpkin farmers, and it turns out there s an economic viability and they can
find a market for it and they can make money, I say bring them in. I am
completely agnostic about their intellectual prowess. And if people become
lawyers and they find they re not very good at it, fine - find something else
to do. As I discovered when I was 18 years old that it was not likely I was
going to make it in a career as a rock guitarist, you will discover that there
are other things to do.

Will it mean that some people will not go into IT as a career? Absolutely.
So what? Will it mean that some talented, bright folks will move from IT into
financial services as they re now doing? Yeah, of course. So what?
That is the strength of the U.S.: Constantly reallocate people and talent
where it is most rewarded. We do not want to be North Korea.

Can we do without the H1-B program? If you re willing to pay enough,
certainly. I don t think that s a good idea. Can America s driving needs be
met without Japanese cars? Of course. Can our photographic needs be met
without Japanese cameras? Without doubt. But the consequences would be
catastrophic. For sure, we can do without H1-B. For sure, we can do without
Japanese cars.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Newsletter Homepage:
http://www.JobDestruction.com/shameh1b/JobDestructionNews.htm

Support this Newsletter and www.JobDestruction.com by donating:
www.zazona.com/Donations.htm

To Be removed from this mailing list, reply to this email with UNSUbSCRIBE in
the subject window

Back to archives