|
Re: The Downside of Having More Engineers
The principle issue that Dean Kamen points out is that we're training the future engineers that will be in competition with foreign competitors more than with domestic engineers. The U.S.'s society already is has a rift between science and "jobs that do not create wealth (such as sports, pop culture, and finance)**, which is causing us to lose jobs (both technical and nontechnical) on the international stage. He also suggests that there will almost never be a shortfall for demand for engineering because there will always be world problems to solve.
Another way to look at the problem is that right now, today, a future engineer's job is in danger of being outsourced due to increasing engineering availability in other countries. Whether we like it or not, we're already in competition. We're simply gaining more support to keep the jobs from being given to international competitors.
I for one am not worried about training my competitors through FIRST, not one bit.
**It's up for argument whether or not these jobs do or do not create wealth, and to what extent. No matter how much we argue against it, society NEEDS entertainment and a way to finance future endeavors. Such may be seen as creating wealth indirectly. That there is MORE interest in those types of INDIRECT endeavors instead of more interest in jobs that create wealth is the issue that Dean has. He believes (as do I, and many others) that our current direction will lead to deterioration of the U.S. economy since foreign nations are focusing on competing with us in those areas (science, engineering, tech, math, etc) and can simply go to less expensive countries for financing, create their own entertainment, and they can live without major national sports.
__________________
Drive Coach, 1885 (2007-present)
CAD Library Updated 5/1/16 - 2016 Curie/Carver Industrial Design Winner
GitHub
Last edited by JesseK : 06-01-2010 at 14:21.
|