patrick.net

Well DUH!!!

It's not just the EPI, but professors from MIT and Berkeley as well who study the issue.

Only the Industry sponsored think tanks and research says there is a labor shortage. Both indirect evidence (flat wages) and graduation rates (I believe ~300,000 new STEM bachelor's degrees issued in 2000-20009 alone) contradicts the "Labor Shortage" notion as well.

thunderlips11 says

It's not just the EPI, but professors from MIT and Berkeley as well who study the issue.

Only the Industry sponsored think tanks and research says there is a labor shortage. Both indirect evidence (flat wages) and graduation rates (I believe ~300,000 new STEM bachelor's degrees issued in 2000-20009 alone) contradicts the "Labor Shortage" notion as well.

What's amazing is the fact this myth has been around for over 30 years yet is still widely believed.

The bigger myth is that Indian programmers are automatically brilliant because they are from India. No disrespect to any capable Indian programmers out there, they can be badass brilliant developers. But certainly no better or worse than anyone else.

For the most part, every Indian that I've ever worked with that HR hired on the spot because they looked like Apu, were clueless. I had one guy Ajoy, ask me how does he see the code, in the Visual Studio IDE, he was hired to take over a project as I was moving on to another.

Folks, the existence of the lifelong postdoc is in itself, proof of the oversupply of scientists/engineers.

One cannot have a legion (sorry, make that armies) of highly skilled laborers earning $36K-$42K with a 2-5% chance of finding full time work as a principal investigator in academia, industry, or govt.

Thus, there's no shortage of S&Es, only a shortage of idiots who're willing to work in industry, for postdoc salaries. That's it.

Rin says

Folks, the existence of the lifelong postdoc is in itself, proof of the oversupply of scientists/engineers.

One cannot have a legion (sorry, make that armies) of highly skilled laborers earning $36K-$42K with a 2-5% chance of finding full time work as a principal investigator in academia, industry, or govt.

Thus, there's no shortage of S&Es, only a shortage of idiots who're willing to work in industry, for postdoc salaries. That's it.

Yep! That's a HUGE part of the problem. Why the fuck this problem hasn't self corrected by now is a mystery to me.

APOCALYPSEFUCK is Shostakovich says

Dunno how many guys I know who've received code on a project from an Indian contract firm and found it was mostly reused crap that was patched together to kinda sorta map to the programming spec - and had to work it into acceptable shape.

THIS. When I had a coding shop, people would bring us sloppy code with absolutely no references or comments in anything, and pay us thousands to fix it.

But then they would turn around and buy more code from the same Indian Place, even though it was cheaper for us to do it than to pay them to write it, then us to fix it! I had one guy who sold websites to all the other tribesmembers*, he kept hiring Indians, and kept hiring us to fix it, it made no sense.

Why? Because "Everybody knows India is better and cheaper" --- even when it ain't.

The guy simply didn't believe me when I told him we would write the same thing from scratch for the same the Indians wanted, and certainly less than them doing it and us fixing it. "Same price or cheaper than Bombay in NY/NJ??? Does not compute/Does not conform to Business Week Statements". He thought I was pulling his leg and trying to set him up for extra billing or something later on down the road.

*Meaning hymies like me

Slowly but surely, as soon as businessmen get their heads out of their faddish asses and look at the bottom line, we'll see coding return more and more to the USA.

Rin says

Folks, the existence of the lifelong postdoc is in itself, proof of the oversupply of scientists/engineers.

One cannot have a legion (sorry, make that armies) of highly skilled laborers earning $36K-$42K with a 2-5% chance of finding full time work as a principal investigator in academia, industry, or govt.

Thus, there's no shortage of S&Es, only a shortage of idiots who're willing to work in industry, for postdoc salaries. That's it.

It is called post-doctoral treadmill. Once you are on it, you won't get out.

Read this professor from UC Davis on STEM and h1b:

http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/h1b.html

raindoctor says

It is called post-doctoral treadmill. Once you are on it, you won't get out.

Problem is that this treadmill had started, while I was still in high school. I'd graduated from college some 14 years ago. Thus, I can't understand how a shortage myth could have sustained itself for a generation.

APOCALYPSEFUCK is Shostakovich says

If they want the jobs, American tech professional will have to prove they will work cheaper than Chinese, Indians or anyone who regards living in a cardboard box as their greatest aspiration.

Don't forget the "living in a cardboard box" that cost 30 years of your income. At the end of the day, you have to rebuild the cardboard box and then sell it to the next fool in the chain.

finehoe says

“Even in engineering,” the authors said, “U.S. colleges have historically produced about 50 percent more graduates than are hired into engineering jobs each year.”

True, nobody is courageous enough to take on the higher education industrial complex (aka: Ivory Tower).

finehoe says

Chief executives regularly come through Washington complaining that they can’t find qualified American workers for openings at their firms that require a science background.

Pass a law requiring that every H-1B Visa worker must be paid at least $200,000 in year 2000 dollars adjusted for M3. Do this and no fucking CEO will complain about a shortage of American workers. The entire H-1B racket has always existed only to take away bargaining power from the one class of worker who still has it, high-tech skilled workers. That is the sole purpose of H-1B Visas.

And allowing this and outsourcing is causing the largest brain drain in the history of the human race. My fellow STEM engineers, would you really let your son or daughter major in what you did? I wouldn't. There will be no jobs for them. And that illustrates how bad these outsourcing and H-1B policies are. Any politician who votes for them should be removed from office and shipped over to India to work in a sweatshop for the rest of his or her life.

The fact is that third world nations with cheap labor forces are incapable of producing any engineer that isn't shitty. Good engineers can only come from places where good engineers make a descent living.

Engineering, unlike any other profession, is about pushing the envelope of what can be done. It can't be dumb down. Any engineering task that can be dumb down is automated out of existence. And any engineering that that is automated out of existence can't make your company money because you are adding no value to industry. For example, try making money by coming up with a better spreadsheet or word processor. So how many people give a shit about your product.

Dan8267 says

My fellow STEM engineers, would you really let your son or daughter major in what you did? I wouldn't. There will be no jobs for them.

Our secretary, a humanities BA holder, is doing a science masters part-time, to later sit for the Patent Agent exam. Her idea is that since prop trading isn't in her cards, then the next best thing is to be in a licensed field, since ALL aspiring Patent Agents need to be US nationals to even sit for the exam.

Dan8267 says

My fellow STEM engineers, would you really let your son or daughter major in what you did? I wouldn't.

Nor I. As bad as you think engineering is science is worse!

Still what area can a kid go into and be successful without resorting to nepotism?

New Renter says

Nor I. As bad as you think engineering is science is worse!

Still what area can a kid go into and be successful without resorting to nepotism?

Heathcare .... basically, if one can get the A's (in the biosciences), then the trajectory is medical school. If he or she is in the B+ towards A- category, pharmacist or physician's assistant. After that, it's nursing and whatever else they can muster like physical therapy.

The problem with engineering is that academics has nearly zero correlation to real world success. For the most part, the most successful engineering persons are those who'd made it, as sales executives. The 'A' students may get hired by some elite R&D dept, only the find themselves laid off in a round or two.

New Renter says

Still what area can a kid go into and be successful without resorting to nepotism?

Basically, there are two paths that work. You can enter a parasitic field (lawyer, financial industry, politician, etc.) or you can enter a field that requires physical presence and/or is restricted by law/licensing to a certain number of entries per year like doctor, pharmacist, lawyer, nuclear technician, etc..

Rin says

Heathcare .... basically, if one can get the A's (in the biosciences), then the trajectory is medical school. If he or she is in the B+ towards A- category, pharmacist or physician's assistant. After that, it's nursing and whatever else they can muster like physical therapy.

I don't think so. If any field is ripe for a transition to full automation its pharmacy just as bank tellers were to ATMs.

Much of non-emergency healthcare is susceptible to medical tourism which would reduce the demand for American nurses and PA's.

Dan8267 says

you can enter a field that requires physical presence and/or is restricted by law/licensing to a certain number of entries per year like doctor, pharmacist, lawyer, nuclear technician, etc..

Again many of those fields are ripe for automation.

Robot surgeon:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/health/med-tech/4332259

Pharmacist:
http://singularityhub.com/2012/06/03/meet-robot-rx-the-robot-pharmacist-doling-out-350-million-doses-per-year/

Lawyer:
http://www.digital-lawyer.com/resource/software.html

Nuclear Technician:
http://www.toshiba.co.jp/nuclearenergy/english/business/4s/introduction.htm
http://bnrc.berkeley.edu/documents-2010/Presentations-SS/Competition/Bergmann.Fischer.Ho.Presentation.PDF

But not all is bleak. The future IS looking bright for legal parasites!

http://yourlegalhelp.com/medical-device-complications-side-effects/da-vinci-robotic-surgery-lawsuit-surgical-robot-lawsuits

The system even auto-corrects for any shaking as the doctor manipulates the tools from the console. But could the assistant one day operate without a doctor's guidance? "Unless they develop artificial intelligence that can recognize variations in human anatomy, physicians will always be needed," Hu says.

It's unlikely that in our lifetimes, there won't be a doctor controlling the robot. First, liability. Second, the American Medical Association would successfully lobby to make it a law that fully automated AI doctors would be outlawed for "safety" reasons.

Same goes for nuclear technician.

I doubt that lawyers will be replaced by expert systems. In principle, they could, but the real purpose of lawyers is not to serve rational laws in an open and fair legal system, but rather to lie and connive to twist the truth so to favor their clients. A centralize, universal legal AI would not be able to serve this purpose, especially if it were to be open source.

Rin says

For the most part, the most successful engineering persons are those who'd made it, as sales executives.

Bingo.. you got that right.

Rin says

Problem is that this treadmill had started, while I was still in high school. I'd graduated from college some 14 years ago. Thus, I can't understand how a shortage myth could have sustained itself for a generation.

Yes, one could say, 14 years ago (1999) there was a shortage based on the high number of tech employers, but certain not today given the population of companies is half as much. an certainly less than say 1994. There are many underemployed and unemployed engineers.

You can blame Google for that...

thomaswong.1986 says

Yes, one could say, 14 years ago (1999) there was a shortage based on the high number of tech employers

In '98-'99, there were many ppl with BA/BS, working in IT vis-a-vis Dot Com companies. On the other hand, there were many postdocs in the sciences, who were not considered candidates for entry level jobs in IT, for the fact that they were academics and not experienced outside of the academy. This pool of ever expanding postdocs started in let's say '94, when big science projects like the supercollider were cancelled, and when they'd discovered that the human genome analysis didn't require so many structural biochemists out there. Since those days, more & more PhDs ended up on the postdoc treadmill, waiting for the day which never came.

Dan8267 says

Basically, there are two paths that work. You can enter a parasitic field (lawyer, financial industry, politician, etc.) or you can enter a field that requires physical presence and/or is restricted by law/licensing to a certain number of entries per year like doctor, pharmacist, lawyer, nuclear technician, etc..

Nuclear Technicians are not hard to find. The Licensed Operators however take years of training in a license class before they are ready to take a NRC Exam. They then have even more training afterwards for their normal day to day job. It took me just under 4 years to obtain a license after I was hired.

These Operator Licenses are site specific meaning that they can't be used at another plant and they are not easy to obtain. I tend to think that this keeps wages low because I can't use to operate another plant for more pay. That plant would still have to pay me for two to three years while I am getting another license and it is not cheap.

I agree with the idea of the mythical shortage of STEM degree holders. I earned a BS in Nuclear Engineering and there is very little out there in this field. When I was in school, I thought that nukes would make a big come back. How wrong I was!

thenuttyneutron says

I agree with the idea of the mythical shortage of STEM degree holders. I earned a BS in Nuclear Engineering and there is very little out there in this field. When I was in school, I thought that nukes would make a big come back. How wrong I was!

Pardon the pun, but nuclear engineering was the 1st STEM field to get nuked during the 80s. From what my dad's friends had said, the blast radius was nearly 100% of nuke grads, who didn't do the navy program (& thus, served on a carrier/sub). For other STEMs, the tides came & went with each tech/business fad.

I agree the medical field as a source of steady employment is a chimera. The idea we can have an economy based on half the population providing medical care for the other half is almost as foolish as thinking we can have an economy based on buying and selling houses from/to each other.

finehoe says

The idea we can have an economy based on half the population providing medical care for the other half

Well, yes and no. Corporate America, at this time, is Corporate Global. There are workers (some STEM) worldwide. The essence is that the productive economy is now distributed globally and thus, you'll find more and more American workers geared towards management, finance, or health care but less of the developing world is headed in that direction, as they're ramping up production, to fill orders from the 1st world.

Ask yourself this question, why is it that many of the cities on i-90: Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, Albany, Springfield, & Worcester are rust belt towns and have been in the doldrums for the past 20-40 years whereas Boston's been the so-called rising star on the end of the highway? Eastern Mass gets a lion's share of defense money (MITRE, Raytheon, etc), health care spending, and financial services (Pension/Mutual Funds). None of these industries are traditionally productive; they're basically lumped in with other non-tradable goods/services but since Boston isn't the only city in the world, it somehow works out, as the Bay State lives off a rentier type of income stream from the rest of the country and the world.

thenuttyneutron says

These Operator Licenses are site specific meaning that they can't be used at another plant and they are not easy to obtain. I tend to think that this keeps wages low because I can't use to operate another plant for more pay.

Excellent point. Of course things like this only serve to strongly discourage college students from pursuing such fields.

Rin says

Pardon the pun, but nuclear engineering was the 1st STEM field to get nuked during the 80s. From what my dad's friends had said, the blast radius was nearly 100% of nuke grads, who didn't do the navy program (& thus, served on a carrier/sub). For other STEMs, the tides came & went with each tech/business fad.

Yes. I graduated from school in 2004. According to an ABET paper there were only 202 graduates that year across the USA. Most of the people in the utilities are growing older each day and will be replaced.

The reason I studied Nuclear Engineering is because I thought at the time that it was poised to make a big comeback. I was wrong. It is ok because I simply became an operator and make more money than an engineer. The drawback is that I work shift work. I am now just a blue collar worker with a federally issued license.

I still have hopes of Nuclear Power making a big comeback with the next generation reactors. If we had not cancelled the IFR design, we would have a better designed reactor that would have plenty of fuel available to use (spent fuel from the current generation).

Nukes still make about 20% of the electricity in the country and are not going away just yet. The great thing about nukes is that the fuel costs are very low and they can be even lower with the newer designs. The natural gas craze is going to crush some utilities that decided to build lots of these gas units. Most nukes operate on 18 or 24 month fuel cycles. The plant that I work at has been online at nearly 100% output for about the last year and won't shut down until next spring.

Rin says

The essence is that the productive economy is now distributed globally and thus, you'll find more and more American workers geared towards management, finance, or health care but less of the developing world is headed in that direction, as they're ramping up production, to fill orders from the 1st world.

Yes, the old comparative advantage argument. That's been the main rationale for "free trade" over the last thirty years and it hasn't worked out so well for the American middle-class. I view medicine as job generator the same way as casinos. Works great for generating income when there are just a few here and there, but when every jurisdiction jumps on the bandwagon, then most advantages are lost.

finehoe says

Rin says

you'll find more and more American workers geared towards management, finance, or health care but less of the developing world is headed in that direction

Yes, the old comparative advantage argument. That's been the main rationale for "free trade" over the last thirty years and it hasn't worked out so well for the American middle-class. I view medicine as job generator the same way as casinos. Works great for generating income when there are just a few here and there, but when every jurisdiction jumps on the bandwagon, then most advantages are lost.

Well, I'm not defending the practice. I concur, it's bad for the middle class and the end result, as we're already seeing is a bifurcated society, with 90% of the cities on i-90 being rust belt dumpsters while a few neighborhoods in downtown Boston and the top area suburbs, remain posh and exclusive for those Celtic players, surgeons, and money managers.

thenuttyneutron says

The reason I studied Nuclear Engineering is because I thought at the time that it was poised to make a big comeback. I was wrong. It is ok because I simply became an operator and make more money than an engineer. The drawback is that I work shift work. I am now just a blue collar worker with a federally issued license.

Well when the nuclear industry is desperate enough to hire THIS guy as a safety officer you have to believe in the STEM myth:

Rin says

Thus, I can't understand how a shortage myth could have sustained itself for a generation.

Because it's perpetuated by "research' from "think tanks" supported by industry.

The easiest way to discover it's BS is to simply look at wages.

finehoe says

Yes, the old comparative advantage argument.

Right. And Finehoe, Ricardo looked at Agriculture; the fact that wine is made both better and more cheaply in Portugal than the UK is a physical reality of climate, there's not much the UK can do about growing grapes for wine in good quality. Even though Portugal can have sheep, so can the UK so it's best for Portugal to grow grapes and make wine, and Britain to raise sheep and create textiles, and swap them to each other.

However, Ricardo would have never imagined, in his day of sailing ships, that Manchester and Liverpool mills could be taken down and shipped to Southeast Asia. It was inconceivable to them that a country would trade away it's manufacturing processes and secrets halfway around the world, even if they could do so.

One other quick point about the "old capitalist masters" - Smith said enlightened self-interest. Those who quote him today often leave off that important qualifier, and propose unmitigated, raw self-interest which Adam Smith explicitly did not agree with.

thenuttyneutron says

Nukes still make about 20% of the electricity in the country and are not going away just yet. The great thing about nukes is that the fuel costs are very low and they can be even lower with the newer designs. The natural gas craze is going to crush some utilities that decided to build lots of these gas units. Most nukes operate on 18 or 24 month fuel cycles. The plant that I work at has been online at nearly 100% output for about the last year and won't shut down until next spring

I don't know about that. The nice thing about NG plants is they are relatively cheap to build at least compared to nuke plants. They also can be turned on and off relatively quickly so they can be good for local emergency power.

thenuttyneutron says

I agree with the idea of the mythical shortage of STEM degree holders. I earned a BS in Nuclear Engineering and there is very little out there in this field. When I was in school, I thought that nukes would make a big come back. How wrong I was!

My dad was a nuclear engineer as well. In the early 60's he also saw nuclear as the next big thing. Turns out not so much....

thunderlips11 says

there's not much the UK can do about growing grapes for wine in good quality.

Funny you should mention that: "Climate change means southern England is looking more like France’s Champagne region."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/english-sparkling-wines-challenging-rivals/2013/04/28/422681b2-acdc-11e2-9493-2ff3bf26c4b4_story.html?hpid=z3

Dan8267 says

It's unlikely that in our lifetimes, there won't be a doctor controlling the robot. First, liability. Second, the American Medical Association would successfully lobby to make it a law that fully automated AI doctors would be outlawed for "safety" reasons.

The day of the robot doctor may not be short term but it is coming. Until then the threat to American surgeons is going to be medical tourism and the internet.

First, a person should have the right to do business with whoever he/she chooses, and has the right to get burned if that choice is incorrect.

Second, not all Chinese or Indians or Russians are great programmers, just the same way not all tall black guys are great basketball players. But we make this discriminatory choice all the time in our lives, based on our mindset. I don't think government should or can dictate who we hire.

Third, higher education is also a good hint like others, but is not necessarily true. I recall a guy with Stanford PhD in CS no less. He was a lousy engineer, and he was Indian as well.

Overall, here is where the "liberal" and the "left" diverge. People like "finehoe" will whine about the cheap foreign labor or cheap robotic automation, and will be the first one find the cheapest deal for a particular product or a service.

gsr says

First, a person should have the right to do business with whoever he/she chooses, and has the right to get burned if that choice is incorrect.

You're missing the point. The point here is the myth of a STEM worker shortage is alive and well despite decades of evidence to the contrary. This evidence includes stagnant and declining wages, eternal post docs, and STEM workers forced to leave the field. Industry and academia have a clear interest in propagating the myth to ensure a ready supply of cheap highly skilled indentured servants.

New Renter says

Pharmacist:

http://singularityhub.com/2012/06/03/meet-robot-rx-the-robot-pharmacist-doling-out-350-million-doses-per-year/

Can the robot pharmacist read the doctor's handwriting?

New Renter says

Well when the nuclear industry is desperate enough to hire THIS guy as a safety officer you have to believe in the STEM myth:

I used to work at a TVA nuclear plant. You would sometimes find photoshopped pictures of Homer Simpson wearing a TVA hard hat around the place. For some reason, management didn't approve of this.