Posted on 10/14/2012 11:13:02 AM PDT by null and void
In our most recent 5 Engineers post — part of this blog and our Fun Friday newsletter, where we toss out a question and invite our audience to respond with their wittiest answers — we asked: What question would you liked posed here in 5 Engineers to the community of engineers and management that visit EDN.com?
You’ll see some of the great questions that were presented in coming 5 Engineers posts. Visit this page to share your own question to be asked. -
This Friday, though, we find ourselves fresh off of the vice presidential debates here in the United States. That followed the presidential debates by a week and there are still more head-to-head debates coming.
At this point, we're just weeks away from voting and the election could go either way. As is the case, we’ve heard snippets here and there regarding technology and engineering from the candidates. We’d like your take on their positions.
So for this week’s question we’re asking: Who is better for engineering and tech: Obama or Romney? Strictly in terms of STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) and not regarding the hot button issues that seem to make up most political debates, whose election would do more to better the world? And we do mean the world. This may be a US position but America’s actions influence the globe.
Post your short, constructive answer below. Be sure to stay tuned to this blog for more 5 Engineers questions in the weeks to come.
Next question?
Obama is a disaster for anyone in the STEM disciplines who relies on a dynamic , merit based system that fosters innovation, in scientific and technological research and development and strong economic and tech base to support those activities.
“I got a bracelet too”
Obama could create a bigger pile of BS, that’s about it.
Romney wants more free trade which means more outsourced jobs including engineering.
Obama doesn’t seem to have a plan, except to spend taxpayer dollars to rescue companies once they have failed due to stupid trade policy.
Engineering forecast looks cloudy. But I see a strong demand 4 years from now for new politicians.
A lot of Democrat talking points in there.
Screaming a lie louder rather then learning even a single fact about how the US Economy works does not change your emotion base ranting to fact.
The Truth About U.S. Manufacturing
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703652104576122353274221570.html
http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/truth-about-trade-history
It’s called Protectionism. It has failed every time it has been tried. Clinging to an emotion based opinion rather then learning a single fact about how the US Economy works is childish. US Manufacturing is dependent on imports of raw material and goods. Your protectionist ideas would destroy the base of our economy.
My feeling is Romney is quite strong on trade.
Strongest in the GOP.
Just wait.
This is an easy question to answer. In 0bama-land, there’s welfare and midnight basketball, that’s all there is.
Considering the fact that the Democrat Party is controlled by Big Labor, and Big Labor are luddites, Obama can’t be good for engineers.
I remember as a youth in the 1980’s and a member of UFCW the rants in the union newsletter against scanners on the checkout line.
Labor unions hope to keep everything the same, the same people with the same job description.
That is nothing new, either. The 1877 railroad strike was largely about brakemen’s jobs being lost due to the Westinghouse air brake. The 1892 Homestead Works strike was about Henry Clay Frick seeking freedom to make innovations in the manufacture of steel in that industry’s early days.
A lot of Democrat talking points in there.
Especially about the alleged support of STEM in education. Alleged since the real intent the Democrats have for education is to dumb it down even further to create more clients for the Welfare State, while throwing more money at the teachers unions without expecting any meaningful results. Did not one teachers’ union leader say that they will start caring about the students when the students pay union dues?
R’s are pro-H1B because they want cheap skilled labor (engineers).
D’s are pro-H1B because they want more immigrants.
Either way, I no longer encourage my children to pursue engineering. And that is quite sad.
IIRC, that was an outgoing legal counsel (attorney) for the teacher’s union. But I’m sure he just said what they all think.
If Romney is elected and frees up the oil drilling industry, I see lots of demand for engineers in petroleum, manufacturing, etc.
MS Google and Amazon all support more H1B for the stated reason that they bring expertise that expands their buisnesses, hence increasing sales and profits.
What they don’t state is that they prefer to acquire young talent, cheaply, and grow that talent within their own corporate cultures.
H1Bs are used as slave labor in my area of engineering.
I’m competing not only with them locally, but with the Chinese slave labor.
I predict that there’s less than 10 years left for American jobs in my particular field. My company is already ramping up a 500 employee design center in China. All job openings within the company are in China, not here. We’ve been told specifically that any position eliminated here by firing or layoff goes to China.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.