View Full Version : Dean's Speech at Nationals
byrne159
18-04-2004, 20:24
As much as I love FIRST, I found that Dean Kamen's speech during the closing ceremonies at nationals was less than good. My complaints are not so surface-level as length or monotony, but rather the content of his words. I found it extremely insensitive because it seemed to me that he displayed a lack of respect for all people who are not engineers in his message about humanitarianism and technology. He trivialized the loss of approximately 1.9 million jobs due to "outsourcing" (since I don't want anyone to think I'm making this up, http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2004-03-21-outsourcing-usat_x.htm) and he took a nationalistic stance on technology in the United States, which didn't strike me as very gracious or professional towards our international teams. So, I was wondering what anyone else got out of the speech, assuming that you didn't sleep through it.
phrontist
18-04-2004, 20:48
As much as I love FIRST, I found that Dean Kamen's speech during the closing ceremonies at nationals was less than good. My complaints are not so surface-level as length or monotony, but rather the content of his words. I found it extremely insensitive because it seemed to me that he displayed a lack of respect for all people who are not engineers in his message about humanitarianism and technology. He trivialized the loss of approximately 1.9 million jobs due to "outsourcing" (since I don't want anyone to think I'm making this up, http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2004-03-21-outsourcing-usat_x.htm) and he took a nationalistic stance on technology in the United States, which didn't strike me as very gracious or professional towards our international teams. So, I was wondering what anyone else got out of the speech, assuming that you didn't sleep through it.
I disagree, I think he was spot on about outsourcing. He backed it up with historical facts, so I really don't see what there is to complain about. Do you have a rebuttal?
Nationlism has a negative connotation. Nationalism is not a vice per se, Nationalism without justification is. The fact stands that America has lead the world technologically for the majority of its history. This may change soon.
While it may not be politically correct to say so, the American people do not have a magical right to anything. This goes for oil, jobs, etc. When people forget this, we get in long/wasteful wars.
If I lose my job because someone is willing to do it for less, how can I possibly blame this on the person who now has my job? I didn't produce at a price that was economically feasible. These are simply the harsh facts of free-market economies. I personally think the invisible hand does the job quite well, but if you think we should regulate it, by all means mail your congress-person.
I'd be happy to hear why Mr.Kamen was wrong, if you're willing to explain it to me.
Oh, and no hard feelings mate, it's only politics! Not something important like Operating Sytems or Text editors!
Bruce C.
18-04-2004, 21:44
Oh, and no hard feelings mate, it's only politics! Not something important like Operating Sytems or Text editors!
Now there's a man with his priorities straight!!! :)
Thank you.
byrne159
18-04-2004, 22:31
I disagree, I think he was spot on about outsourcing. He backed it up with historical facts, so I really don't see what there is to complain about. Do you have a rebuttal?
Nationlism has a negative connotation. Nationalism is not a vice per se, Nationalism without justification is. The fact stands that America has lead the world technologically for the majority of its history. This may change soon.
While it may not be politically correct to say so, the American people do not have a magical right to anything. This goes for oil, jobs, etc. When people forget this, we get in long/wasteful wars.
If I lose my job because someone is willing to do it for less, how can I possibly blame this on the person who now has my job? I didn't produce at a price that was economically feasible. These are simply the harsh facts of free-market economies. I personally think the invisible hand does the job quite well, but if you think we should regulate it, by all means mail your congress-person.
I'd be happy to hear why Mr.Kamen was wrong, if you're willing to explain it to me.
Oh, and no hard feelings mate, it's only politics! Not something important like Operating Sytems or Text editors!
I'm all about some healthy debate, definitely no hard feelings.
My reasoning is this: his ideas on outsourcing make sense coming from a corporate standpoint. However, when you're considering American families who were affected by the mass amount of outsourcing in recent years (much more so than ever before, despite how long it has existed) and the way it affects their lives, it's a completely different story. And I don't mean to say that American families more important than anything else, but I do think that financial security of said families should be a priority for this country. And yes, you're right about the international economy, however it's very different when looking at the US economy. As more people lose more jobs, less money is going to the government (and government entities like public schools) and more money is used by the government to support these unemployed citizens with unemployment checks. Part of my basis for this view is simply the town that I live in, where the three major employers are Colorado State University, HP, and Agilent Technologies (my father's former employer). In a city of 120,000, about 4000 engineers have been laid off in the past four years because of the outsourcing done at HP and Agilent. Although I have sympathy for the Malaysians who have these jobs now, because I believe they deserve to enter these fields just as much as any American, I care a lot more about the fact that my family is trying to send my brother to college and both my parents to grad school on my mother's salary, and my mom is a public school teacher. To me, it's offensive for Dean Kamen to send a message to me, and the other members of my team in similar situations, that our parents need to simply raise the bar (no pun intended) and find new technologies to get back on track. They don't care as much about having the jobs they love back as they do about finding a way to get health insurance for their families. Since he clearly isn't experiencing the same threat of financial security as many of the rest of us, he fails to see it from this personal level. It's not that I believe we need to try to stop outsourcing from happening; it's inevitable, but I wish he would show some sensitivity to those of us who have been affected it and try to understand that it's not as easy as he thinks to just get back in the game. As cliche as it may be to say, these aren't just numbers, they're lives.
I feel the same way about his comments on America leading the way in the technological world. True as his comments may have been, they were insensitive, which is the issue for me. His comments also ignored the feats of other countries that have been made. What about the military technology that came out of Europe during World War Two? What about medical technology that's come out of Canada? We've done great things, but we aren't the only ones. We're dependent on other countries for technology and they're dependent on us, and I felt like Dean's speech only displayed the latter.
I think that basically, his speech really showed how economically different he is from most of the FIRST kids, and I felt like he trivialized something that affects a lot of us and a lot of our mentors.
I'd have to agree with Phrontist.
Anyone that disagrees with Deans Speach either doesn't fully understand Economics, thinks they are entitled to something, or just totally misunderstood him. There is no reason what so ever that a job should stay in the US if it can be produced at better quality, or similar quality at a lower cost. I'm not saying that production in the US "IS" Better or "ISN'T" Better. I'm saying "IF" , than why not.
It's true "Gracious Professionalism" to give opportunities to other countries that are qualified to do the work. It's not g.p. to say that we need to hord jobs and force companies to raise prices or go out of business. It becomes a win-win situation. The Company can "Survive" in business (no matter the company size that is a constant battle) by keeping costs down. The Public can have access to products at reasonable prices. The other country can have their economy stimulated by Jobs and corporate expansions.
Please look at this from a global economy view and not the view of someone that feels they are entitled to somthing for nothing.
Dean was saying that if the trained professionals are in other locations than why not make the world a better place by tapping into that knowledge base. There have been decades when those trained professionals came here to the US (sometimes leaving their families) just for work. In a global economy with many multi-national corporations out there- people no longer have to totally uproot to find work. If the knowlede base is concentrated in certain areas, then the jobs will follow.
The Filp side to the speech is the chalange- The Chalange to create the advancement of knowledge in the fields that allows for you or your company to draw customers/employees to you. To be the leader of the pack. If you own or possess the intelectual property then you will get the jobs. If what you do can be done by anyone comming out of college (maybe after a few months of training and experience) then dont expect to have a guarenteed job, especially if you want to get raises every year.
Dean was saying that it's still worth pursuing these fields, even though there is lots of outsourcing going on. Its worth it as long as you plan on being productive. If you want to just take up a seat or computer workstation someplace and collect a paycheck, then expect to be replaced.
One succussful Entrepeniur once stated about his billion dollar company- "No one guarentees his company business, in five years we could go from several billion a year to nothing" If our governments cand protect the companies from going under or guarentee business, then how can we expect our govenrments to guarentee Jobs from these same companies.
Hope this makes sence! (though I'm sure someone will dissagree)
(please note this responce was being written before the previous post was submitted) I am not trying to be insensitve to your struggles or anyone elses. Dean wasnt rich when he we 18 or what ever he was when he invented the Auto-Suringe. Comments that say that companies or all rich people cant relate is not fare to them. If you ever talk one on one with them about these situations you'd learn that they often look beyond their own personal needs (since those are well taken care of) and look at a bigger picture. I am self-employed and my wife is home with 2yr-old twins, health insurance is off the wall and other expences keep mounting. I'm by no means finacially independent at this point in my life. But I can still look at a greater good for the world. If the leading techonolgy companies went totally out of business (instead of outsourcing) that would be no good to anyone in the world. Every country would loose the work and we'd loose many of the facilites/resouces to develop new products. Dont forget Dean was trying to inspire students to bring the Jobs to you by having the knowledge instead of jobs moving away. Ant thats true to anyone in any country. Dean just taks about the US because thats his point of reference in his life. Its not Nationalistic, so give him a break. Best of luck to you and your family!
I was sort of torn on the speech also I was agitating over Chairman's, so I didn't quite get anything. About outsourcing (THIS IS JUST MY OPINION!), Dean Kamen can talk all he wants about how we need to come up with new technology and that once we do this simple little thing like coming up with a machine that can make food out of air particles or something, we'll be fine. I hate to break it to Mr. Kamen, but not everyone is as brilliant as he is and not everyone is going to come up with these new technologies. Just because we're in FIRST doesn't mean that there aren't other intelligent people out there. Mr. Kamen said that America has always led in technology and that this can continue. Once again, I hate to break it to Dean, but the fact of the matter is that China and India are catching up very fast and I expect them to catch and overtake America soon if there aren't wholesale changes (we can have our MIT's, but check out the competition to get into a university like IIT in India).
Plus, you tell the average American who doesn't have a job to "go invent new technology." There are just so many things wrong with that that it's sick. "Sure, Mr. Kamen, let me just go invent new technology with umm, what resources? I don't have a job you know."
I'd also like to reply to phrontist's comments because he had some interesting ones. When I lose my job to someone in India because he works for less than I do and I'm living on the street, I don't think I'm going to be saying, "At least it's feasible that I lost my job."
Comments on nationalism. You say it's bad, but since 9/11, what do you think the movement with all of the flags and stuff has been. Yeah, it's not militaristic, but it is nationalism. I am NOT saying that nationalism is a bad thing. You can look at history, but I don't think it's going to help a lot. What the US may need is economic nationalism. How would that work? What are the ins and outs? I don't know. I'm just stating my opinions right now. I don't have a solution and AP European is calling.
In conclusion, I am certainly not trying to offend anyone or bash anyone else's statements. My comments do not represent Team 341 at all. It's just my spin on things right now.
Automobile plants moved to Mexico
Call centers moved to India
What ISN'T manufactured in China nowadays?
Will we be upset when our FIRST (Inter)National Championship Awards start getting "outsourced" to other countries like Canada, Japan, South Korea, China, or even Iran when the day comes when they too have FIRST teams?
like these:
http://www.robocup.org/games/03Padova/3174.html
Shouldn't a person or group be rewarded and recognized for their efforts, regardless of the colour of their skin, race, creed, religion, nationality, or which side of what border their house lies? Are these not the founding principles of our "nation"? Should they not be echoed by FIRST? our governments? our corporations?
Why do we talk about our "nation" losing 1000 jobs from outsoucing, yet fail to realize that 1000 more people half way around the world have gained jobs, often with a much larger and far reaching benefit.
Maybe WE can't buy that over-sized, excessive, top of the line, $60000 SUV anymore, because we've lost our IT jobs to someone in India. But this Indian will use his/her $30000 to provide food, shelter and life's amenities for himself and his poor extended family.
Doesn't trading an unnecessary SUV for one person in exchange for food and shelter for many seem reasonable? Does it hurt even more that this Indian probably has a much more extensive education, and will perform the job, not only cheaper, but much more effectively than his/her American counterpart?
Why does it make us feel hurt? Are we working toward making THE world a better place? or just OUR world a better place?
Why is one nation more important than another...?
Why is our nation more important than yours?
Ask yourself these questions... because I'm asking them over here, and millions more in the Middle East are asking too...
-Shawn...
KenWittlief
19-04-2004, 08:16
outsourcing is fine
as long as its someone elses job that is being outsourced, not yours
the problem is, you dont just show up at work for 8 hours a day, then go home - for many hi-tech jobs you put a lot of creativity into it and you personally further the state of the art
but when that gets sent overseas, you have nothing to show for it.
Dean would feel differently if the chinese or japanese government decided his Segway is nothing but a classic inverted pendulum PID control system, voided his international patents, and started flooding $300 Segway clones into the US - when YOUR source of income has been outsourced, its a different story.
BTW - 9 out of 10 patents dont stand up in court when contested.
also, nationalism is nothing but putting your preference to a certain part of the world, or a certain form of government - if you are willing to follow your job to china or india, and live there for the rest of your life, thats cool
but north america is different in one aspect - our ancestors did not live here as far back as we can trace - at some point in our family tree, our ancestors decided to leave their homeland and move here, and many of us dont want to go live in another part of the world.
Is that nationalism? absolutely?
is it a bad thing? I dont think so.
Pat Roche
19-04-2004, 08:48
The way I read into it was that Dean was trying to start a "revolution." We in the latter part of the computer age. I think what he was suggesting is that its time for the US to move on to a new technology. Theres an entire universe out there to be discovered that we havent focused (obviously there has been some focus just not enough) completely on because of a lack of technology. In my mind I believe he was suggesting we change our focus. Let the world catch up with computers....well go to mars instead ;)
Just the way I read it,
-Pat
suneel112
19-04-2004, 08:55
Economically Americans are having a bad time right now. Not only are jobs being outsourced, causing many American families to lose their income, but the prices of goods and services are also on the rise, specifically college tuition,health care, and food prices (at least going by the competition site ;) ) are outrageous. I think outsourcing is screwing America over. I agree that India, Korea, and China have the right to participate, but it is not the responsibility of American companies to do so. I visit India regularly, and though there are lots of American companies there, India has its own multinationals, which hire Indians and provide services to worldwide companies. Reliance, Indian Oil, and Wipro to name a few.
To save Americans economically, there either has to be a great reduction in Outsourcing OR a great reduction in living and education costs.
For a more professional view, go to a news website, an economist website (for a right view), or a liberal website (for a left view)
I believe Mr. Kamen's speech was intended to counteract the current "Don't go into engineering because there are no jobs" message that is being heard frequently today. He was trying to say that the generation coming up can still make a global impact by inventing new technologies.
However, as an adult who has lost her 25-year-long career at a major corporation, I didn't care for the message about outsourcing. I know too many people who are still looking for work, two years after having their jobs eliminated with me.
And what about the MOTHERS and GRANDMOTHERS who have paved the way before us, Mr. Kamen? You only mentioned the FATHERS and GRANDFATHERS. Shame on you! (I will assume it was an unintentional slip in the speech...)
And what about the MOTHERS and GRANDMOTHERS who have paved the way before us, Mr. Kamen? You only mentioned the FATHERS and GRANDFATHERS. Shame on you! (I will assume it was an unintentional slip in the speech...)
We are starting to nitpick a little bit too much now.
Once again, I hate to break it to Dean, but the fact of the matter is that China and India are catching up very fast and I expect them to catch and overtake America soon if there aren't wholesale changes (we can have our MIT's, but check out the competition to get into a university like IIT in India).
I wonder how many of the people in China and India actually get a decent education as opposed how great some of the education is. I seriously doubt that it is everyone. You are not advanced if only a few people actually get access to the technology. Also, just because you are really really really smart does not mean you will do better. The Japense space program really has not been doing to well. I recently heard on the news that American car manfactures actually improved the quality of their cars but was still under Japan.
http://www.space.com/news/spaceagencies/japan_space_000627.html
I am inclined to agree that outsourcing is nothing new, and certainly none of us are entitled to lifelong jobs, or even to being able to stay in one career field throughout our working years. Speaking from personal experience, I have "retrained" at least three times in my career, though it has all been various flavors of engineering, and I have been fortunate enough to do it on the job (as opposed to doing it while on unemployment).
BTW, I also agree that Dean was insensitive to those displaced, and to non-Americans. And it would have been nice if he had chosen a more up-beat message, given the occasion!
That said, here's my overly-simplistic opinion of where the real problem lies:
One serious issue which I feel is overlooked in most discussions of outsourcing is that of new-technology startups, and the relative lack of them recently. In the past when a major industry became unable to compete, new technology offered new opportunties for the industry or the displaced employees. Either new technology (itself creating new jobs) "saved" the industry - such as the re-invention of the auto industry during the 70's & 80's, or it created an entirely new industry, such as IT in the 80's & 90's.
One key ingredient in the creation of new technology has been a source of money to start businesses with. Long ago (like in the Stone Age when I started working), major corporations would fund internal "skunk works" projects or companies doing leading-edge development. This was high-risk, and (the companies hoped) high-reward. Maybe one in ten actually became profitable. In the 80's a lot of those corporations decided that the risks weren't worth the rewards and went to mergers & acquisitions to bring in new ideas. This was seen as "outsourcing" by the corporate R&D people who lost their jobs in the process. However, investment bankers took up the slack by providing funding for new startup companies, most likely in the hope that some would be acquired by corporations at a premium price.
This scenario worked pretty well throught the 80's and 90's, and a whole lot of new businesses were started to create a lot of neat techology, and all the while new jobs were being created at quite a clip.
Then the Internet Bubble came along and the investment community suddenly saw 20x and higher returns on their investments, at least until the bubble burst. Now most realize those were unrealistic growth projections, but it seems that the venture capital people are now reluctant to fund high-risk investment without expectation of unrealistically high returns. Between tight money and the economic downturn of 2001, few new technology businesses have been starting up lately. Which means there is a shortage of new jobs for those who are are caught between the outsourcing of "last decade's" technology and the lack of new job fields to go into.
I would be the last to caution against going into technology fields, and it should be noted that to a large extent, science jobs (chemistry, biology, biotechnology for example) have not been pinched as much as other technical jobs. For those making choices about their future fields of study and careers, my philosophy is go for what you find interesting - not where the best starting salaries are this year. Remember that business, like most things, is cyclical. What is hot this year will be old stuff in five years, but will be replaced by a new kind of hot. I just hope that some of FIRST's best brains who are not interested in technology go into investment banking, and straighten out this mess!
Then the Internet Bubble came along and the investment community suddenly saw 20x and higher returns on their investments, at least until the bubble burst. Now most realize those were unrealistic growth projections, but it seems that the venture capital people are now reluctant to fund high-risk investment without expectation of unrealistically high returns. Between tight money and the economic downturn of 2001, few new technology businesses have been starting up lately. Which means there is a shortage of new jobs for those who are are caught between the outsourcing of "last decade's" technology and the lack of new job fields to go into.
I would actually have to disagree with that. Right here on Long Island there is a new company that is developing a really really really neat and new technology. They say that they can turn animal byproducts and plastics into oil. Now that is really really high-risk investment. G.W. Bush wants about 1.2 billion spent on researching fuel cells. Everyone knows about IRobot and the Rhoomba vaccum. Google still wants it's employees to work on their own projects to improve their company.
I would actually have to disagree with that. Right here on Long Island there is a new company that is developing a really really really neat and new technology. They say that they can turn animal byproducts and plastics into oil. Now that is really really high-risk investment. G.W. Bush wants about 1.2 billion spent on researching fuel cells. Everyone knows about IRobot and the Rhoomba vaccum. Google still wants it's employees to work on their own projects to improve their company.
SAYS they can turn animal byproducts and plastics into oil, I'll believe that when the government approves it and it hits the market. Won't even barely mention Bush in the conversation. He has done his best to get rid of all Democrats on national scientific boards (most decent scientists I know are Democratic) and he has replaced them with his own ultra-conservative cronies.
Maybe I'm being overly nationalistic here, and actually, I may be a culprit of outsourcing as I'm thinking about going to McGill for college, but I am thinking about leaving the US for other reasons. My "nationalism" is basically I want to see every US citizen who is willing to work hard to get a job. Other countries have great technology and stuff, but as long as I'm a US citizen, I want to see the US do well. If I move somewhere else, I want to see that country do well. Right now, outsourcing is not doing the whole country a lot of good.
Quick comment about the Space Program. While the Mission to Mars is absolutely incredible, let's not bash Japan's space program when the US has not put anyone in space since the Columbia incident.
SAYS they can turn animal byproducts and plastics into oil, I'll believe that when the government approves it and it hits the market.
Actually it is all ready.:) There was a working presentation plant in Philidelphia and now there is a plant in a Butterball Turkey plant.Quick comment about the Space Program. While the Mission to Mars is absolutely incredible, let's not bash Japan's space program when the US has not put anyone in space since the Columbia incident.
Actually I know that. Im just saying that the caliper of education that people receive does not lead to success.
Klondike Mike
19-04-2004, 20:56
I have been waiting for Dean Kamen to say something about the economy and I was dissapointed in the substance of his message.
I think that science and technology are extremely important and we as a country need to do something to retain a base of technical expertise that is busy doing something other than creating the latest WMD.
I like to think of Dean as kind of a rebel, counterculture kind of guy but he seems to be a very much a corporate Republican.
Anyone who doesn't think being outsourced is no problem hasn't been outsourced.
shtylman
19-04-2004, 21:22
It may just be me...having come from a different country and lived here for a while now. But I think the main problem and debate here is that American's feel that they are all mighty and important. They seem to forget that they are just one country in a vast world. Yes, even though the U.S. is a world power and I am very glad to live here, without the other countries...where would we be? It is very hard to loose a job, but what about a home? a life? or a family? others have it much harder than your lack of not having the latest widescreen or 3.9 Ghrz machine. Just take a moment to look at the bigger picture and think about others...and enjoy life (oh and btw its just a speech)
~Roman (just my opinion)
Clell Chatman
19-04-2004, 22:19
While Dean is a bit full of himself and his beliefs, the truth is that global markets have cost us 2 million jobs to outsourcing in the last 10 years and have created mulitiple times that many american jobs. You cannot choose not to compete or you have already lost. But, while they are creating millions of engineers most of them are working for american companies that export their ideas back to the US for americas use.
SilenceNoMore
19-04-2004, 22:21
Wow, it looks like Dean Kamen knows the score. Good for him, he is annoying and arrogant, but I have to say, if he said the things that you say he said, then I should buy him a drink!
Dean's right for endorsing economic nationalism. America MUST win the technology race, it is the only way to survive. What do you think is going to happen if the Chinese get ahead of us in terms of technology? They are going to march towards Moscow and the Berring Straits and they aren't going to look back! Think I am crazy? 1.2 billion people, the world's largest army, and world history says I am not. When the Chinese are charging the Golden Gate Bridge with satellite and space weaponry, stealth aircraft, advanced body armor, and low-yield nuclear weapons don't say Dean Kamen didn't warn you! The Chinese don't believe in this One-World-Love-Everybody-Lets-Get-Together-And-Hug-Each-Other nonsense. They are smart and they always know the score!
And if you don't like outsourcing, then don't live in state where the government drives out business with insane regulation and extreme taxation (i.e Massachusetts, California, Oregon, and Washington).
Clell Chatman
19-04-2004, 22:25
Well lets not get insane the chineese are falling to capitalism and democracy from the inside out. Have you seen the recent news about the unrest in Hong Kong waiting for democracy.
SilenceNoMore
19-04-2004, 22:34
Well lets not get insane the chineese are falling to capitalism and democracy from the inside out. Have you seen the recent news about the unrest in Hong Kong waiting for democracy.
I hate to break it to you, but whether its authoritarian rule by a monarch, Republicanism with warloads, Communism, Capitialism, and Democracy, the Chinese will always have a historical desire to conquer and use their vast population to expand the size of their country.
The Chinese have shattered the theory that Capitialism breeds democracy. In fact, they are cracking down harder on dissidents then since the Cultural Revolution.
phrontist
19-04-2004, 22:34
Wow, it looks like Dean Kamen knows the score. Good for him, he is annoying and arrogant, but I have to say, if he said the things that you say he said, then I should buy him a drink!
Dean's right for endorsing economic nationalism. America MUST win the technology race, it is the only way to survive. What do you think is going to happen if the Chinese get ahead of us in terms of technology? They are going to march towards Moscow and the Berring Straits and they aren't going to look back! Think I am crazy? 1.2 billion people, the world's largest army, and world history says I am not. When the Chinese are charging the Golden Gate Bridge with satellite and space weaponry, stealth aircraft, advanced body armor, and low-yield nuclear weapons don't say Dean Kamen didn't warn you! The Chinese don't believe in this One-World-Love-Everybody-Lets-Get-Together-And-Hug-Each-Other nonsense. They are smart and they always know the score!
And if you don't like outsourcing, then don't live in state where the government drives out business with insane regulation and extreme taxation (i.e Massachusetts, California, Oregon, and Washington).
I agree on a theoretical level, bu China would have to really work hard against democracy to pull this off. Since the chinese want democracy, I don't see this as likely. Maybe some sort of North Korean + Rebel Chinese movement...
After reading all the posts, I'm glad to hear the other side(s) of the story. As I understand it, the global market is a trade-off. Yes, jobs are lost within the US, and placed elsewhere in the world, but the loss also creates opportunity for the growth of developing sectors within the US. With death comes life, as Joseph Campbell would say. It's painful to lose a job you care about and financial security, both my parents have experienced that in my lifetime, but that's the way things work. The most powerful statement of Dean's speech, I think, was (paraphrase): "There will always be room for people who work together." Isn't that what FIRST is all about? We're building an innovative AND conscientious society able to survive the birthing and growth of new technologies to the world.
btw, does anyone know where I might find a transcript of the speech?
SilenceNoMore
19-04-2004, 22:53
"There will always be room for people who work together."
Man I wish that was true.
byrne159
19-04-2004, 23:11
Wow, it looks like Dean Kamen knows the score. Good for him, he is annoying and arrogant, but I have to say, if he said the things that you say he said, then I should buy him a drink!
Dean's right for endorsing economic nationalism. America MUST win the technology race, it is the only way to survive. What do you think is going to happen if the Chinese get ahead of us in terms of technology? They are going to march towards Moscow and the Berring Straits and they aren't going to look back! Think I am crazy? 1.2 billion people, the world's largest army, and world history says I am not. When the Chinese are charging the Golden Gate Bridge with satellite and space weaponry, stealth aircraft, advanced body armor, and low-yield nuclear weapons don't say Dean Kamen didn't warn you! The Chinese don't believe in this One-World-Love-Everybody-Lets-Get-Together-And-Hug-Each-Other nonsense. They are smart and they always know the score!
And if you don't like outsourcing, then don't live in state where the government drives out business with insane regulation and extreme taxation (i.e Massachusetts, California, Oregon, and Washington).
First of all, we need to stop mixing up the terms nationalism and patriotism, because they are two distinctly different ideas. Nationalism is the concept of putting your country's culture, political system, and oftentims, though not in this case, race above those of all other countries. Patriotism, however, is a sense of devotion and/or love for your own country. It has nothing to do with how you view other nations.
The issue with outsourcing, which it seems many people fail realize, is that it affects more than just the unemployed engineers and their families. The way our education system is set up, if a community is losing jobs, they're paying less money in taxes, which means less money to their school district. That means that suddenly you may be losing teachers at your school, or textbooks in your classrooms, not just engineering jobs. This is not a superficial "gee, rich engineer can't buy an SUV anymore" issue, it's a matter of our nation's economy, and all the government entities connected to it, including schools that most of us attend, roads that all of us drive on, and public servants. Our country needs jobs to survive, and if people don't have them, we have no chances of remaining competitive in international technology. There is a domino effect that comes from outsourcing, that we shouldn't overlook.
Also, is it really fair to tell people that "if they don't like outsourcing, then don't live in a state where government drives out businesses??" Honestly, when someone gets laid off, first of all, they probably don't have the money to just get up and move, seeing as how they have NO INCOME, second, many of them have families who have commitments wherever they are, third, it's happening everywhere, and it's becoming harder and harder to avoid it these days.
Sidenote: India has a larger military in terms of manpower and the US spends over 4 times as much money on our military as China and India combined, so I'm not sure it's accurate to say China has the "world's largest army."
SilenceNoMore
20-04-2004, 01:04
First of all, we need to stop mixing up the terms nationalism and patriotism, because they are two distinctly different ideas. Nationalism is the concept of putting your country's culture, political system, and oftentims, though not in this case, race above those of all other countries. Patriotism, however, is a sense of devotion and/or love for your own country. It has nothing to do with how you view other nations.
I believe Dean was preaching Nationalism, putting our country's economic and technological future above others. Nothing wrong with Nationalism. It is very healthy.
Also, is it really fair to tell people that "if they don't like outsourcing, then don't live in a state where government drives out businesses??" Honestly, when someone gets laid off, first of all, they probably don't have the money to just get up and move, seeing as how they have NO INCOME, second, many of them have families who have commitments wherever they are, third, it's happening everywhere, and it's becoming harder and harder to avoid it these days.
The fact of the matter is that people are leaving states like California, Oregon, and Washington in droves and moving to more business friendly states in our beloved Union. California's population growth is driven by immigration.
Sidenote: India has a larger military in terms of manpower and the US spends over 4 times as much money on our military as China and India combined, so I'm not sure it's accurate to say China has the "world's largest army."
Not true. In terms of manpower, India has around 1.2 million on active duty and China has slightly over 2 million. China is currently spending around 100 billion on defense (they will usually only admit to around 20 billion, interesting how it works) and is acquiring and developing more advanced weaponry from Russia and our allies in Israel. The threat is there people.
www.globalsecurity.org
Please note that this is a long rant written late at night, however I have a some reputation points to spare and I think that it is important to say:
The more I read about Dean the more I realize that our idol-worship of him is misplaced.
I didn't hear his speech at nationals, but I have heard him speak on many different occasions. He may be a fine engineer but he is arrogant, hypocritical and usually just plain wrong.
I've heard him countless times talk with pride about how many states he's convinced to allow the Segway (using his huge team of lobbyists). In the same speeches he frequently makes fun of lawyers, lobbyists, and government.
The Segway was supposed to change the world, it is a disaster. Read the book on Ginger, its a fascinating look at how a great toy was hyped as a world-saving device it never had the potential to become. Dean was so caught up in his grandiose vision that he couldn't see the forest for the trees, he couldn't understand that his product could never deliver what he had promised even when real visionaries like Steve Jobs and Jeff Bezos actually told him so. As a result, Dean has lost a great deal of credibility (something he himself admits readily). This is a frequent problem with Dean, he latches onto big picture ideas he doesn't really understand and proposes solutions that, while clever, don't work. Take the Segway, or the iBOT wheelchair that didn't win approval until this year, or even in a sense FIRST itself. The fact is that FIRST isn't about what Dean thinks its about. We aren't transforming the culture and we shouldn't be (and how wrong is it for a guy who famously abstains from popular culture to criticize that same popular culture he has no knowledge of!) Dean sees FIRST as a big-picture thing, about transforming the culture of the United States, but it isn't. Take the number of students who participate in FIRST, subtract the number who are inspired by FIRST, subtract the number who were already interested in Science/Technology, subtract the number who like FIRST but come out of it choosing a career path other than engineering. The number of people fulfilling Dean's vision ends up being so small as to be insignificant on the national level. However, FIRST isn't really about that, its really about inspiring individuals and communities, and here FIRST makes a HUGE difference. Most of the people at FIRST get this, Dean doesn't.
Dean is certainly genuine - I will give him that - but he isn't all that he is cracked up to be. Dean is no more worthy of our cult-worship (which we seem all too ready to hand out) someone like Donald Trump. Its the image we're worshipping, not the man.
How about instead of talking about Dean constantly we start talking about the mentors who actually make FIRST worthwhile. They are the inspiring ones, and they are the ones who are worthy of our attention.
Has Dean ever actually mentored a team? I know that Dave Lavery and other FIRST leaders do... why doesn't Dean?
KenWittlief
20-04-2004, 08:26
While Dean is a bit full of himself and his beliefs, the truth is that global markets have cost us 2 million jobs to outsourcing in the last 10 years and have created mulitiple times that many american jobs. You cannot choose not to compete or you have already lost. But, while they are creating millions of engineers most of them are working for american companies that export their ideas back to the US for americas use.
I understand what you are trying to say, but this is not correct. When your job is outsourced it means the work you use to do here in this country is now being done in another country, and there is nothing else for you to do - YOUR job is lost and you are unemployed
its not tasks or functions that are being outsourced, its JOBs.
I have worked for companys that had started entire new industries, and completely lost their market to foriegn competition and are now closed. I have worked for companies that took all the core of their design and manufacturing and outsourced it to foriegn suppliers. The people who use to do that work here in the US are not doing it anymore. The company is in essence buying a product designed and manufactured on the other side of the world, placing their name (lable) on it, and selling it as if it were their own. If I told you which companies are doing this I think you would be shocked.
And let's not forget the ripple effect of someone losing their job to outsourcing. A group of engineers is laid off because their jobs are outsourced. Now there is no longer any need for any support staff to work for them (adminstrative/secretarial support, library support, photocopying people, mailroom people, etc.) and those positions are eliminated. The woman who worked in the library was her family's health care insurance provider so now the family is no longer able to afford to visit the doctor or purchase prescription drugs. The local pharmacist, who is trying to keep his independent business alive, has less customers. He, in turn, cannot afford to do the bathroom remodeling project he had planned for the year. So now the plumber (who was married to the library worker) is also scrambling to make ends meet. It's a vicious cycle.
KenWittlief
20-04-2004, 09:02
thats true, and thats the part the CEO cant see on his little spreadsheet thats telling him he can increase profit by 3% if he outsources 20 peoples jobs to the other side of the world.
Outsourceing isnt even the right word for this - there are many businesses here that have consolidated functions and tasks that businesses need and use, like office cleaning, certain design and manufacturing services - its often better for a business to hire a cleaning contractor than to directly hire people as cleaners
but those jobs stay in the community - the people just work for a different local employer
but when a job is sent to the other side of the world the effects run much deeper and wider than the person making the decision can possibly see.
I think the real problem here is this: if you own a business, what exactly is it that you own? The name? the profit and expense statements?
if your business is based on engineering and manufacturing skills, and you outsource those to a foreign country, then what do you have left?
where is the innovation going to come from when your engineers are all gone? where is the next generation of products going to come from? If you dont have your own people on the manufacturing floor, then who is going to improve the manufacturing process on a day by day basis? improving quality? reducing costs?
who are your customers going to talk to when they call for technical support? someone in Malasia? Will they be able to get an engineer on the phone if they have a difficult problem that needs to be resolved immediately? one that speaks english?
and who are your customers going to talk to when their needs and requirements change? when they need something different.
and heres the real thing - if you ship the core of your business out of the country, your research and developement is now based on what? If all you have left are sales and marketing people, once your foreign design and manufacturing companies have learned how to build your product, what do they need you for? they can market your product and sell it without you.
and when THEY come up with the next generation of products, and THEY hold the next familiy of design patents, why should they deal with you? why should they offer their new stuff to you for a deal any better than anyone else would get?
Then YOU will be in the wrong column on the profit and loss spreadsheet of THEIR company.
do you really think you can send away the goose that lays the golden eggs, and still expect to have a steady flow of golden eggs in your in-basket every morning?
jpsaul7usa
20-04-2004, 10:23
Nation(a)lism has a negative connotation. Nationalism is not a vice per se, Nationalism without justification is. The fact stands that America has lead the world technologically for the majority of its history. This may change soon.
I don't mean to be picky, but the US has not been a leader in technology for very long. Anyone who's taken American history classes knows that the US depended on inventions from the real leaders, mainly Great Britain and Germany, for a very long time. The Industrial Revolution, for example, started on the other side of the Atlantic. The steam engine, the entire textile industry, and the beginning of the iron/steel industries were all pioneered by scientists and engineers in Europe. edit: The Industrial Revolution DID NOT begin in the United States. It began in Great Britain. The US did improve these fields, particularly in production, and gradually became a major player in the world of technology, but it really wasn't recognized as a world leader in technology until post-WWI when much of Europe was in pieces. edit: The US has been in a position of leadership in technology for about a century now, however, this is only abour 100 years of a 230 year existance, and much of our recent success has come from the fact that the world wars were fought oversees and not near our major cities and industrial areas. The US has led the world in manufacturing and manufacturing techniques since the beginning of the 1800s. Forgive me if I'm not getting all the details down 100%, as it's been 2 years since I took AP US.
My point is that the US hasn't always been the dominant country in politics, economics, and technology, and there really isn't any particular reason why it should be compared to other countries. Many people seem to think that Americans now have a right to be #1, but that kind of hidebound thinking is misled and potentially dangerous.
This is going to sound corny, but here goes: The US used to be a relatively small "rookie" country, if you will, and now as a big country it seems our team members resent other rookies trying to emulate our success. In FIRST, we honor and give out awards to teams who support others, especially rookies, but when we think about politics we take on a totally different attitude? Does that make any sense to anyone else?
KenWittlief
20-04-2004, 10:41
I don't mean to be picky, but the US has not been a leader in technology for very long.
I dont understand this? the industrial revolution didnt start till the late 1800s - yes the steam engine was key to the beginning of it - but once the basic concept for it took hold, american companies ran with it big time
but the real technology revolution came from men with names like: Wright, Ford, Edison, Tesla, Westinghouse, Farnsworth (<extra credit if you know him)
and companies like Bell Labs, IBM, Intel, GE, GM
and the businessmen who took these new ideas and inventions and spread them across the nation and the world
its not arrogant to say the US lead the industrial and technology revolution - its a historical fact. Stuff that is being manufactured all around the world, was invented here - electric power, telecommunications, tubes and transistors, semiconductors, computers...
its not arrogant to say the US lead the industrial and technology revolution - its a historical fact. Stuff that is being manufactured all around the world, was invented here - electric power, telecommunications, tubes and transistors, semiconductors, computers...
No, but it is arrogant to assume the US is the only country in the world capable/deserving to invent and manufacture these goods. I've followed the whole outsourcing "phenomenom" for a while, and while I am young and employed, let me ask this:
Is there a difference in outsourcing internally, within the country, than outsourcing internationally? Say an engineering firm in New York decides it can cut costs by hiring engineers in Nevada to work, assuming a lower cost of living. Is that as bad as outsourcing to India or China? I've never heard so much contraversy about companies relocating within the country as I've heard about companies hiring overseas.
The bulk of Deans speech was to say let those millions of new engineers in India and China work with current technology if they can produce it cheaper. That is the purpose of competition after all. Good for them, they can make a living. What we need to do here is develop new technology, rather than rely on what's already here and common.
but the real technology revolution came from men with names like: Wright, Ford, Edison, Tesla, Westinghouse, Farnsworth (<extra credit if you know him)
and companies like Bell Labs, IBM, Intel, GE, GM
Exactly! What Dean is saying is we need to become the next generation of great inventors, and start the next generation of great companies. We can't hope to make a living off our grandfathers and great grandfathers work, especially when the technology is already developed all over the world. It's up to us to keep the spirit of invention alive and keep pushing the boounds and "raising the bar" of technological innovation.
Paul Copioli
20-04-2004, 11:30
Here are my thoughts about Dean's speech and about what we (as mentors)are trying to do about outsourcing.
Let's just say it: Dean is not a good public speaker. If you talk to him individually you get a different view of him. I think I understood what he was trying (very poorly) to say about outsourcing. He has had many people come to him asking about outsourcing and how it will affect engineering jobs. His speech was in response to that. Other engineers at my work complain about it all the time. Things like, "did you know GM (or Ford/DCX/etc) is sending X amount of engineering jobs to China?" or "in 20 years we will not have any engineering jobs left in this Country." You know what I say to them?
"What are you doing about it?! I am mentoring a FIRST team and showing kids that engineering is cool. I (and MANY other engineers involved in FIRST) am taking unfocused kids and getting them interested in science and technology and some of them are becoming engineers." They look at me like I just insulted their mother. They just don't know what to say.
Dean did have some points regarding the numbers of engineers coming from other countries compared to our own and this is the fundamental problem we will have: not enough engineers to keep the technology edge.
Here is one quote from a Detroit News article from Thursday, March 6th 2003 (this article is posted outside my office): "U.S. technology, seen from an Indian point of view, seems overwhelmingly cool and speaks to our status as a nation." It goes on to say, "Many of our own kids find science and engineering difficult and aren't aware it's the source of our power." The article was about U.S. automakers getting engineers from India.
The above article pretty much sums up some of the reasons I am involved. Our students need to get excited about engineering and science in order to want to be an engineer (or scientist, etc.). Dean's speaking skills don't even get me excited about engineering and am already excited about it.
byrne159
20-04-2004, 18:19
In FIRST, we honor and give out awards to teams who support others, especially rookies, but when we think about politics we take on a totally different attitude? Does that make any sense to anyone else?
The thing about that is, FIRST isn't politics. And, as much as many of us enjoy FIRST more, politics affect us a lot more. It's great to see other people succeed, but in FIRST, we still get to go home to a warm house, a nice school, and parents who feel like they're worth something, even when we lost to the rookie team. In the political world, it's a whole different story, so it does make sense that we would approach it with a different mentality.
Interesting piece in Newsweek this week about outsourcing, including a brief interview with the CEO of Autodesk
It is very hard to loose a job, but what about a home? a life? or a family? others have it much harder than your lack of not having the latest widescreen or 3.9 Ghrz machine. Just take a moment to look at the bigger picture and think about others...and enjoy life (oh and btw its just a speech)
I agree. Does anyone find it interesting that the three countries that are competiting with the United States technology wise also have problems with suicide? I was reading articles about how Japanese workers that loose their jobs just kill themselves.
Interesting piece in Newsweek this week about outsourcing, including a brief interview with the CEO of Autodesk
I saw an interview too with the CEO of Autodesk. She said the company could produce products not viable to create because of outsourcing.
Btw... Does anyone think that the reason most people are not interested in sciences is because they don't leave very good lives? Galileo died while in permament house arrest. The Wright Brothers did not make much money off the airplane. Tesla died forgotten and not even receive the credit for the radio or for developing our power system. Curie died of radiation posioning which is not fun. Einstein died forgoten and not even achieving his greatest goal. Archimedes was killed by a Roman soilder while doing a math problem.
Jason Kixmiller
20-04-2004, 20:05
Let me be the first to admit that I may not be the most educated on this subject. However, as someone aspiring to enter the field of engineering, I interpreted Mr. Kamen's message in a different way. Yes, some of the things he said did seem insensitive to foreign countries, and yes, he may not be the most eloquent of speakers, but both of these topics have already been covered. I understand the importance of keeping historical perspectives in mind as history often tends to repeat itself. However, history must also be realized and accepted for what it is: history. I feel that the outsourcing debate is just the tip of the iceberg. Outsourcing can be a potential problem, but a more threatening problem is complacency. America must not become complacent with the status that its forefathers worked for. It is only through the work of organizations such as FIRST and incredible mentors that America can hope to stir the leaders of tomorrow from complacency. If America wishes to stay competitive, its sons and daughters must continuously strive to better themselves and their country through math, science, medicine, technology, etc.
I feel that Dean has the inalienable right and privelage to make any point he cares to make for the organization he founded. If you didn't like the speech, i guess that isnt a terrible thing, but i took it as a rare oppurtunity to experience a lecture from one of the geniuses of our time, and a very great man.
Just a quick comment. America hasn't really taken over technology until perhaps the Soviet Union disbanded (remember, they were in space first), but now that we are on the top, we should try to stay on the top as long as possible. I think that is the main point that Dean was trying to make. But he went off on a lot of controversial tangents that I didn't agree with and didn't get the point across very well.
Bharat Nain
25-04-2004, 15:49
Isn't it clear that Dean said that just because of people were talking against science and technology(in the sense that there is no future to it)? He must have thought that it would drive people away from FIRST and thought it was necessary to say that.
I disagree with what Dean had to say about outsourcing. It gets down to this. You are Mr. X. You have worked in the XYZ industry for 20 years now. One fine day you get an text message on your cell saying "You're fired". You now go around looking for a new job for 2 years and can't find one. You wife has fallen sick and you have no money to get her treated. You can't afford any insurance. You have sold you car, your house, and all your precious jewelry.
Where is Mr. X headed?
This is just a small story which 1000's of people live.
Let's say you have a job. It's rare that anybody would find a dream job these days. You sit in that small box and go thru hell everyday. I am not even kidding, I have been in such offices and I see no scope of improving. Not to be against a job or anything, but thats just real life. In only about 20% of the offices you would find a OK work enviornment.
Getting back to outsourcing. I love to be in a country like America, and I know many others who do. But people have had to leave this country because their job got out-sourced and they have no source of living. They are forced to leave this country, no matter how much they wish not to. Isn't that pathetic?
How can everybody stay at the top of everything? Those who do I know what their life is like... They spend more time with their boss than their wives. They spend all their life doing something useful, but their life is probably ruined. We need those kinda people just because it would be impossible to grow without them, but they just can't enjoy life.
Speaking of experts, anybody heard of the name Robert Kiyosaki? Here is a quote from him "If you have money you life, if you don't you DIE, its already hapenning in other countries, and it is spreading in America" Robert is a well-known expert in financial stuff, care to argue against an expert?
Sorry if I offended anyone, its just my opinion. I love to see technology grow... but I just can't agree that outsourcing is too good.
You are Mr. X. You have worked in the XYZ industry for 20 years now. One fine day you get an text message on your cell saying "You're fired".
but I just can't agree that outsourcing is too good
Sure, that people are getting fired because their job is moving, isn't "good." Dean's message was: What are you going to do about it? Talk about it for ever, or invent the next best thing. In our capitalistic society, businesses are going to outsource ... on the one hand it tends to lower costs to the consumer (something most people like), and, true, on the other hand it has a personal effect, and many people get fired. No one is saying that those people getting fired is A Good Thing -- but you've got to understand the issue is not so simple as that!
What I got out of Dean's message is this. Outsourcing is happening, it always has in one disguise or another, and there's nothing you can do to stop it. You can either be the philosopher who ponders over a glass being half-empty or half-full ... or you can think like an engineer and find a solution to the problem. Invent something. Lacking that, go out and make yourself "marketable." But just because you fell of the horse, don't give up. Just because outsourcing is causing a problem for engineers now, if we keep our children from becoming engineers the problem will just get worse, not better.
care to argue against an expert?
Almost always. (As an aside, depending on an "expert" is an example of what's called a fallacy; "experts" seldom agree and are quite frequently wrong ;))
Almost always. (As an aside, depending on an "expert" is an example of what's called a fallacy; "experts" seldom agree and are quite frequently wrong )
I agree. With economics almost everyone has an opinion and they usually conflict.
Joe Matt
25-04-2004, 17:11
My dad has been out of a job for over a year now, and yes, it's easier to write off outsourcing when you still have money coming in and you can feed your family. Just like people who protest genetically modified crops, it's easier to debate against it when your stomach is full and you can do without it.
As for Dean's speach, I think that mabey he should have re-thought out his words, but I agree with him somewhat on things.
KenWittlief
25-04-2004, 18:28
Just a quick comment. America hasn't really taken over technology until perhaps the Soviet Union disbanded (remember, they were in space first), but now that we are on the top, we should try to stay on the top as long as possible. I think that is the main point that Dean was trying to make. But he went off on a lot of controversial tangents that I didn't agree with and didn't get the point across very well.
if you want to get picky about history, Nazi Germany was the first to put a man made object into space -the V2 rocket that rained death on London was both supersonic and high enough at apogee to be considered a space craft.
i didnt read all the posts before i wrote this...sorry if im repeating, but theres not enough time to read them all. here are my opinions
outsourcing isnt bad-rather it is what keeps american companies in business. Here are some facts to back it up. The number one selling car in china-made by an American company: General motors. So, they move some jobs out of the country to produce goods at a lower cost in order to sell more cars there and in other places at a lower cost. The revenue this provides allows them to do research into things like alternatively fueled vehicles. And where are thos vehicles produced first? America. You can't ignore his "golden egg" remarks. If we kept everything in america prices would NEVER go down, flat-lining our economy. SO we outsource to make money-then put that money right back into America.
If you listened closely enough to mr. kamen, you would realize that his speech was not really nationalistic. His speech was there to get us to peer into the glass of creativity, knowledge, and invention. He didnt want us to sit here on this forum and debate about wether his glass is half full or half empty. He wanted to know if we can use our knowledge and creativity, what we can do with it, and how we can get MORE of it. THe goal of his speech was to get people searching for solutions to the problem of outsourcing, not debating the meaning of his words.
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.