Yes, I agree with that, Ed, despite the fact that so many of us are getting
the short end of the stick. Widespread protectionism was part of the reason
we had such a long depression in the 1930's. and that eventually let to WWII.
To echo some of the earlier messages, I guess we need to figure out what's
in demand and go that way, because even if trade barriers were a good idea,
nobody would listen to us anyway! :-) My former emphasis was manufacturing
and process-control software, which has taken a double hit lately. I'm
thinking I should learn Java (not much of a stretch coming from the C++
world) and maybe also become proficient at some database-related skill like
SQL. (Oracle still seems to be in pretty good demand, any comments?) I'm
also thinking that Linux will continue to grow, though it's possible it's
being held back a bit by SCO's antics (I'd call them the Enron of the
computer world, all BS and no substance.) When SCO finally bites the dust
Linux should take off with a vengeance.
Vaughn
On Wednesday 10 December 2003 12:19, you wrote:
> One more comment (and continuing the OT shift that is happening).
> From the perspective of preventing future wars, lowering trade
> barriers creates an inter-dependence and neither party can afford to go to
> war with the other. As much as I dislike the "off-shore shift" and how it
> affects me and my family personally, I'm convinced it has to happen. I'm
> not advocating a complete and uncontrolled opening of the flood gates to
> trade and immigration, but I do think we need "controlled leaks" so that,
> ultimately, things can be equalized.
(text/plain)