Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Really? So your claims about what the government does were all just worthless hot air? Wow!
If they cannot aggregate data, they truly are as putrid a group of employees as most think they are.
I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt that, while lazy, they are not too stupid to handle a task any good marketing corp could handle (they put data analysis together all the time..in the private, productive sector).
If they cannot aggregate data, they truly are as putrid a group of employees as most think they are. I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt that, while lazy, they are not too stupid to handle a task any good marketing corp could handle (they put data analysis together all the time..in the private, productive sector).
LOL!!! Think you could keep up with the folks over at CBO?
The successful candidate will contribute to the full range of the division's responsibilities. Those include constructing and improving cutting-edge models that underlie CBO’s policy analyses as well as preparing longer-term CBO studies, shorter-term memoranda, and testimonies. Analysts are also encouraged to turn CBO projects and independent research into CBO working papers and outside publications. Economists who have a broad range of policy interests are encouraged to apply. Special consideration will be given to candidates who have experience in building general equilibrium models and analyzing the effects of fiscal policy. Familiarity with micro data is a plus. Excellent interpersonal, writing, and quantitative skills, and the ability to communicate technical material in a clear manner are essential. Successful candidates will be able to work independently and complete work in a timely manner. Applicants should also have a Ph.D. in economics or a closely related discipline.
This ad is NOT for a high-level position, by the way. Pretty much the full professional worker-bee level.
LOL!!! Think you could keep up with the folks over at CBO?
The successful candidate will contribute to the full range of the division's responsibilities. Those include constructing and improving cutting-edge models that underlie CBO’s policy analyses as well as preparing longer-term CBO studies, shorter-term memoranda, and testimonies. Analysts are also encouraged to turn CBO projects and independent research into CBO working papers and outside publications. Economists who have a broad range of policy interests are encouraged to apply. Special consideration will be given to candidates who have experience in building general equilibrium models and analyzing the effects of fiscal policy. Familiarity with micro data is a plus. Excellent interpersonal, writing, and quantitative skills, and the ability to communicate technical material in a clear manner are essential. Successful candidates will be able to work independently and complete work in a timely manner. Applicants should also have a Ph.D. in economics or a closely related discipline.
This ad is NOT for a high-level position, by the way. Pretty much the full professional worker-bee level.
considering how inaccurate their projections often are, yes, like much of America, I could.
Now if they were accurate I might feel differently, but their projections lack of accuracy has often been startling.
considering how inaccurate their projections often are, yes, like much of America, I could.
No, you most definitely could not. Like practically all of America, you lack the high-level intellectual capacity and background necessary to keep pace with the folks at CBO or any other such agency. You couldn't have gotten an interview for the position advertised above. You do not have the pre-req's to have gotten in the door. Even for a mid-level worker-bee position.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobtn
Nowif they were accurate I might feel differently, but their projections lack of accuracy has often been startling.
Wow! You don't understand what projections are either. Let me tell you that what you are looking for here is a fortune-teller, not an economist. You should have learned the difference at some point. Sounds like a major failure of Personal Responsibility® has left you in the dark though.
Wow! You don't understand what projections are either. Let me tell you that what you are looking for here is a fortune-teller, not an economist. You should have learned the difference at some point. Sounds like a major failure of Personal Responsibility® has left you in the dark though.
Corps project income statements every year, with stunning accuracy. The CBO has the inverse record, even on short term projections.
No, you most definitely could not. Like practically all of America, you lack the high-level intellectual capacity and background necessary to keep pace with the folks at CBO or any other such agency. You couldn't have gotten an interview for the position advertised above. You do not have the pre-req's to have gotten in the door. Even for a mid-level worker-bee position.
Oaktonite aka fairlaker, not everyone posses the intellectual capacity that we elites do. We got our Master's degrees in economics, we go to DC cocktail parties, we own restaurants, we give economics lectures to our nonprofits, and we have worked at a governmental statistical agency before. Therefore we know everything, and the plebs should feel fortunate that we are even posting our wisdom on this forum. By the way, why did you create another account? Isn't that against the rules of this forum?
Well said. America has evolved. One issue manufactures still face is the growing level of competence in China. They have been, and will continue to get better. Some of their advances were basically handed to them by foolish U.S. corporations who were tripping over themselves to send their work to China. In their haste, they signed over decades of intellectual property, designs, process secretes, technology and trade secrets.
At first, corporations just wanted to send the production work. After that, the Chinese companies decided to get a little pushy... Many times, companies in China offered production services with the agreement that molds and dies would also be made in China. Pretty soon, they were handling many levels of the manufacturing process, learning and improving along the way.
China and it's companies/corps were wise. There is no money in the production of the part. There is money in building the complex, multi chamber molds and sophisticated dies. The American corps couldn't pass up such a steal. The Chinese were essentially working their "apprenticeship". They'll work cheap so long as you teach. Genius. It didn't take them long to basically cripple many of our manufactures who specialized in this kind of work. Some companies are rushing work back to the states only to find out.... There are no where near enough U.S. companies or skilled/knowledgeable workers to facilitate a resurgence. It takes a fair bit of brains to put together some of that stuff. Brains tend to avoid modest paying, high stress occupations. Hence, U.S. shortage of critical workers.
In terms of cutting edge tech in China... There are robots and modern heavy stamping rigs operating in China today. There are mid range machining centers and CMMs running, allowing them to improve their standards of quality. When they start playing that kind of game though, the stakes are a little higher. Labor is already cheap, but often it's much less an issue or advantage. At that point, the size of your investment warrants high caliber talent who often cannot be found in mainland China. Believe it or not, some Americans have accepted very generous offers to show them how we make widgets in America with all the fancy space age technology. I don't know what you call that... The free market at work, treason, or a little of both???
Also, it should be noted that American companies were chomping at the bit to get into the Chinese markets. Even if 30% of their population was "middle class" or "rich," that would be more than the population of the USA.
Also, it should be noted that American companies were chomping at the bit to get into the Chinese markets. Even if 30% of their population was "middle class" or "rich," that would be more than the population of the USA.
It's more than just the Chinese Market.
BRIC engages in "nation-building" while the US never did, and still doesn't. Access to Chinese Markets gives you access to BRIC's partner-States.
BRIC has partner-States; the US has client-States.
Learn and understand the difference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobtn
Corps project income statements every year, with stunning accuracy. The CBO has the inverse record, even on short term projections.
I would not disagree, but it's important to understand that the CBO is not allowed to do its own research. The CBO must use the numbers and data it is given.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fairlaker
Like practically all of America, you lack the high-level intellectual capacity and background necessary to keep pace with the folks at CBO or any other such agency.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fairlaker
LOL!!! Think you could keep up with the folks over at CBO?
I can more than keep up with them, since I routinely prove the CBO wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by oberon_1
(Bob, it is 2014 already). Although you are are correct, even in the more recent past, large tech companies (IBM) hired talented engineers out of school and trained them.
That was a different era.
Quote:
Originally Posted by andywire
Quite interesting... No response regarding the millions of skilled labor positions that are undoubtedly going to need new blood in the coming years.
Why would you get response?
Whatever happens, the government needs to stop interfering in the education system at all levels.
I haven't read every post on this thread, but we have over 300 million people nowadays compared to 180 million in 1960. So the proportion ratio is nowhere as close as it was 50 years ago, then add in globalization and trade agreements how it affects the US manufacturing industry. Not to say there haven't been efforts to expand manufacturing in the US as we have seen foreign companies like Toyota and Nokia open up major plants in the last decade, but it's not enough. We have truly become a service industry, and while it's not a bad thing, but it limits us a nation to have various job opportunities for people who don't have a college education.
A college education is great, but it's not for everyone, and the opportunities for non college grads has been limit to the retail and service industry. By service industry I mean fast food, restaurants, delivery drivers, etc. Those wages are pretty stagnant, and it isn't a means to make a good living like the manufacturing industry provided for years.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
