Comment Re:From TFA ... (Score 1) 435
Am I the only one who's annoyed by the twisted logic employed by the author? For example, in the quoted paragraph, he looks at the rising profits at the 7 biggest companies vs. the declining employment in THE WHOLE SANTA CLARA COUNTY. Why not look only the employment at the 7 companies? I'll bet you that it has been rising steadily as profits have been growing.
Also, there was the argument that startups being more careful with their money results in less employment. Give me a break. First of all, I doubt that new startups could more than make a dent in the overall employment stats. And by the way, how can companies being more efficient be bad for the economy? Remember, startups are more careful with their money because there is less money. And any extra capital will probably be used to fund other startups (if there are any new ideas around, of course).
Finally, the whole idea of comparing levels of empoyment against the boom years is just stupid. Of course, the NYT has become so politically correct that they'll avoid stating directly any truth that could potentially offend anyone. In this case the truth is that a big bulk of all those people who came to the valley during the peak years were simply underqualified. Every liberal arts graduate and their dog came to design web pages. Now that only the real engineering jobs have remained, a lot of those people are not qualified enough to fill them in. Many good companies (my employer included) have been hiring constantly during the last several years. The truth is that it's hard to find good people to hire. Of course, that's not a good politically correct story to print in the NYT. It's so much better to blame outsourcing and corporate greed than the simple scarcity of homegrown talent.
Also, there was the argument that startups being more careful with their money results in less employment. Give me a break. First of all, I doubt that new startups could more than make a dent in the overall employment stats. And by the way, how can companies being more efficient be bad for the economy? Remember, startups are more careful with their money because there is less money. And any extra capital will probably be used to fund other startups (if there are any new ideas around, of course).
Finally, the whole idea of comparing levels of empoyment against the boom years is just stupid. Of course, the NYT has become so politically correct that they'll avoid stating directly any truth that could potentially offend anyone. In this case the truth is that a big bulk of all those people who came to the valley during the peak years were simply underqualified. Every liberal arts graduate and their dog came to design web pages. Now that only the real engineering jobs have remained, a lot of those people are not qualified enough to fill them in. Many good companies (my employer included) have been hiring constantly during the last several years. The truth is that it's hard to find good people to hire. Of course, that's not a good politically correct story to print in the NYT. It's so much better to blame outsourcing and corporate greed than the simple scarcity of homegrown talent.
