Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Strategic Defense' started by kroko, Jun 1, 2012.
I hope the US become increasingly hostile to them so that they have to come back to China to work.
There was a news article a few weeks back that Canada fired its non-Canadian Chinese scientists from Canada's version of the CDC for fear they would steal and weaponized deadly diseases stored there.
I wonder, how many of these fired individuals would blame China?
Sure, the truly talented doing cutting-edge R&D will easily find good positions in China and they could truly contribute there. But your rank and file SDE is not going to be able to compete with the intense job market there and are not needed. So what are we going to do there, plant crops?
Everybody has to figure out his/her own story. Some ask the question, "what do minnows like me do to survive?" while others ask, "how do I become a shark?" Success isn't spoon-fed and it's not the obvious default answer given to you. Upside is, you have your whole life to figure it out, and along the way, find who you are.
This is a completely bass-ackwards situation. China should not suffer a surplus of STEM talent; if there is such a glut then more capital should flow into new companies until talent becomes the bottleneck. China's got a lot of catching up to do, especially in software. There is no Chinese operating system, no Chinese EDA software, no industrial process simulation, etc. You name it, China doesn't have it. There are many more problems than there are people to solve them.
Yes, I read about that too. Sadly, it seems Canada is following American footsteps.
Your thinking is very similar to Trump, imo. Because fierce competition makes a certain group of people lose jobs, hence we shouldn't make competition more fierce, instead the government should introduce less competition and make room for lower end talents.
This is not how society progresses. It's true that if Chinese talents in the US come back to China, many would lose jobs, many other would face greater competition in terms of promotion, pay, etc. But overall there is only benefit to society and no downside.
Put the best people to the job, that's how you grow, and when the economy and society grows, more opportunities elsewhere will be created for those who might have lost jobs in the earlier process. For example, at the end of the 1990s, Chinese SOEs laid off tens of millions of incompetent workers and made themselves competitive again. When China joined the WTO in 2001 its economy grew significantly and many factories opened for these once incompetent workers and many people went on to build a well-off middle class income.
If growth and competition creates problems, the solution is not to say NO to such progress, for progress is bound to have side-effects. The solution is to strive for greater growth, greater development, greater success, so that there is a 'spill over' effect for everyone to benefit from the process.
The prime reason why many in Western countries could enjoy a higher living standard than those in developing countries is precisely because of this: developed countries have the best minds, talents, and technologies, and enjoy many monopolies which create wealth far faster and greater than those companies in developing countries. It is not because an average working class American work ten times harder than say the Vietnamese or the Filipinos, it's because of the 'spill over' effect from top notch companies that the West has. They make billions of dollars by creating IP, by copyrights, and then putting that money back into creating more of them.
I don't think that's what he's saying. He's saying he'd personally want to go to China to work for his own country but he doubts that his current repertoire is enough to truly make a contribution or even to carve out a decent life for himself. According to him, that's what's holding him back.