A couple of pro-H1B articles by Americans
-
MartyK2007 wrote:
I beleive that in a particular US companies catchment/commuting area there may occasionally be no US programmers trained or experianced enough to fulfil a roll.
And so it's better to import someone who speaks English badly from across and ocean, than to import someone from the next-but-one commuting area. I understand now.
MartyK2007 wrote:
I think this particular simile is in poor taste and dont agree with your logic that this constututes a simile based on what we had previously spoken about.
I am oh-so-sorry I offended you. And you don't get to agree or disagree about whether or not something is a simile, perhaps you meant to say that in addition to being inappropriate (according to you), it was also inaccurate (according to you). Perhaps then, we can agree that you can't handle the truth and let it go at that?
Jon Information doesn't want to be free. It wants to be sixty-nine cents @ pound.
Good morning,
Oakman wrote:
And so it's better to import someone who speaks English badly from across and ocean, than to import someone from the next-but-one commuting area.
No its not, assuming you can import someone from the next-but-one commuting area. This is what H1'bs are about - What to do when you cant find any US citizen willing to be imported. Now this visa may have been used improperly for "cheap labour" - I dont know. What I am saying is however if it is the problem then why not keep the H1bs but change the law so no one can hire them as cheap labour (parity of wages would remove this complaint) and then you get back the , for want of a better word , "Purity" and spirit of the H1b legislation.
Oakman wrote:
I am oh-so-sorry I offended you
You didnt offend me - It may have offended some of the survivors of WW2 , I dont know - it was just in bad taste in my opinion.
Oakman wrote:
And you don't get to agree or disagree about whether or not something is a simile
Actually you can, a simile is an example of 2 statements that are different from each other except in one logical way. I dont think your simile met that test because I disagree with your "one logical way".
Oakman wrote:
(according to you),
lets be honest everyone here is expressing an opinion according to themselves , unless of course they quote other people , so yes when I says things its according to me, just like when you write things.
Oakman wrote:
Perhaps then, we can agree that you can't handle the truth and let it go at t
I dont see that - what truth cant I handle and what makes you think I cant handle it?? thanks Martin
life is a bowl of cherries go on take a byte
-
Good morning,
Oakman wrote:
And so it's better to import someone who speaks English badly from across and ocean, than to import someone from the next-but-one commuting area.
No its not, assuming you can import someone from the next-but-one commuting area. This is what H1'bs are about - What to do when you cant find any US citizen willing to be imported. Now this visa may have been used improperly for "cheap labour" - I dont know. What I am saying is however if it is the problem then why not keep the H1bs but change the law so no one can hire them as cheap labour (parity of wages would remove this complaint) and then you get back the , for want of a better word , "Purity" and spirit of the H1b legislation.
Oakman wrote:
I am oh-so-sorry I offended you
You didnt offend me - It may have offended some of the survivors of WW2 , I dont know - it was just in bad taste in my opinion.
Oakman wrote:
And you don't get to agree or disagree about whether or not something is a simile
Actually you can, a simile is an example of 2 statements that are different from each other except in one logical way. I dont think your simile met that test because I disagree with your "one logical way".
Oakman wrote:
(according to you),
lets be honest everyone here is expressing an opinion according to themselves , unless of course they quote other people , so yes when I says things its according to me, just like when you write things.
Oakman wrote:
Perhaps then, we can agree that you can't handle the truth and let it go at t
I dont see that - what truth cant I handle and what makes you think I cant handle it?? thanks Martin
life is a bowl of cherries go on take a byte
MartyK2007 wrote:
No its not, assuming you can import someone from the next-but-one commuting area. This is what H1'bs are about - What to do when you cant find any US citizen willing to be imported. Now this visa may have been used improperly for "cheap labour" - I dont know.
The vast majority of H1Bs are at the bottom of the payscale for their job and state. And therein lies their only attractiveness to employers.
MartyK2007 wrote:
What I am saying is however if it is the problem then why not keep the H1bs but change the law so no one can hire them as cheap labour (parity of wages would remove this complaint) and then you get back the , for want of a better word , "Purity" and spirit of the H1b legislation.
If laws were passed and enforced that required Employers to look for Americans first before talking to H1Bs (there aren't); that forced employers to pay the same wage to H1Bs that they have been paying Americans (they don't); and that considered the use of a body shop contractee to replace an American against the law (there aren't) the H1B program would be of no interest to Employers. Unfortunately even the weak safegards presently on the books are routinely ignored by employers in this country.
Jon Information doesn't want to be free. It wants to be sixty-nine cents @ pound.
-
In the first post, I provided my viewpoint as their manager and the one who was subject to pressures to pay more money than my budget could afford. In the second post, I explained how one gets more than one H1-B visa... sometimes intentional, sometimes not so. If you think your current company is shaky, or the job was misrepresented to you, or you don't want to work 60-hour weeks despite getting overtime pay, etc., you apply for another job and have a second H1 visa. I know people for whom companies get H1 visas in India but do not send them to the US because the contract didn't come through. Those guys also might come on a different company's H1 and thus have two H1 visas stamped on their passport. Most companies are legit when it comes to visa status for their employees. The company I worked for was raided by INS and we got a clean bill of health. The business is too valuable to risk it on a couple of shady visa deals.
-
MartyK2007 wrote:
No its not, assuming you can import someone from the next-but-one commuting area. This is what H1'bs are about - What to do when you cant find any US citizen willing to be imported. Now this visa may have been used improperly for "cheap labour" - I dont know.
The vast majority of H1Bs are at the bottom of the payscale for their job and state. And therein lies their only attractiveness to employers.
MartyK2007 wrote:
What I am saying is however if it is the problem then why not keep the H1bs but change the law so no one can hire them as cheap labour (parity of wages would remove this complaint) and then you get back the , for want of a better word , "Purity" and spirit of the H1b legislation.
If laws were passed and enforced that required Employers to look for Americans first before talking to H1Bs (there aren't); that forced employers to pay the same wage to H1Bs that they have been paying Americans (they don't); and that considered the use of a body shop contractee to replace an American against the law (there aren't) the H1B program would be of no interest to Employers. Unfortunately even the weak safegards presently on the books are routinely ignored by employers in this country.
Jon Information doesn't want to be free. It wants to be sixty-nine cents @ pound.
Oakman wrote:
The vast majority of H1Bs are at the bottom of the payscale for their job and state
can you cite any research proving that??
Oakman wrote:
the H1B program would be of no interest to Employers
I agree if what you say about h1bs is true (its primary use is for cheap labour) then it would drastically reduce the "love" of the employers for it but I dont think there would be of no interest. There will always be a niche specialism that is hard to find resource for , no matter what the country. does noone lobby for these more stringent rules?? perhaps a new task for you in your spare time:) Martin
life is a bowl of cherries go on take a byte
-
Oakman wrote:
You really have no idea what is going on, do you? Well, you just keep telling yourself that, right up until you're asked to train your replacement.
I've always been one of those people that never had a problem getting a job or keeping one. I'll leave the fear mongering and paranoia to those that are much more deservedly accustomed to it. ;)
"I don't want more choice. I just want better things!" - Edina Monsoon
John Cardinal wrote:
I've always been one of those people that never had a problem getting a job or keeping one. I'll leave the fear mongering and paranoia to those that are much more deservedly accustomed to it.
You know what, John, I hope that keeps working out for you. Innocence like yours deserves to exist.
Jon Information doesn't want to be free. It wants to be sixty-nine cents @ pound.
-
Oh well, I could be wrong, it's all academic to me anyway, if people want to blame ufo's or killer bees who am I to get in the way of that?
"I don't want more choice. I just want better things!" - Edina Monsoon
John Cardinal wrote:
Oh well, I could be wrong, it's all academic to me anyway
ROFL what a cheap cop-out. It's so irritating when someone shows up your ignorance, isn't it?
Jon Information doesn't want to be free. It wants to be sixty-nine cents @ pound.
-
Oakman wrote:
The vast majority of H1Bs are at the bottom of the payscale for their job and state
can you cite any research proving that??
Oakman wrote:
the H1B program would be of no interest to Employers
I agree if what you say about h1bs is true (its primary use is for cheap labour) then it would drastically reduce the "love" of the employers for it but I dont think there would be of no interest. There will always be a niche specialism that is hard to find resource for , no matter what the country. does noone lobby for these more stringent rules?? perhaps a new task for you in your spare time:) Martin
life is a bowl of cherries go on take a byte
MartyK2007 wrote:
can you cite any research proving that??
http://www.codeproject.com/script/comments/forums.asp?forumid=1159&tid=0&exp=1&mpp=50&select=2123645#xx2123645xx[^]
MartyK2007 wrote:
There will always be a niche specialism that is hard to find resource for , no matter what the country.
You're right, of course. The same research that find the vast majority of H1Bs getting paid slave wages, shows that 4% of H1Bs make in excess of 100K.
MartyK2007 wrote:
does noone lobby for these more stringent rules?? perhaps a new task for you in your spare time
What do you think I'm doing here - besides p!ss!ng a bunch of people off? :laugh:
Jon Information doesn't want to be free. It wants to be sixty-nine cents @ pound.
-
citation: http://www.cis.org/articles/2005/back1305.html[^] If you read this, it should make it clear than many (not necessarily all) employers pay bargain basement wages to H1Bs, and end your "debate," all in one fell swoop. As to your proposition that dollars going to folks overseas is better for the U.S. economy than dollars being spent in this country - what are you smoking and can I have some? :laugh:
Jon Information doesn't want to be free. It wants to be sixty-nine cents @ pound.
Quite a surprise, that an anti-immigration think tank would have concluded that H1-B holders were paid less than natives. If I had the time, I'd be curious to take a look at the DoL data and see if it actually indicates what CIS claims it does. As for dollars going overseas, the US economy benefits from dollars anywhere, and whether it's central bank holdings or campesino holdings, dollars overseas help maintain the practical and currency value of the dollar. I'll happily admit that funds being sent to families overseas don't match the importance of central bank holdings, but at a macro-economic level, it's just as important as local consumer spending.
-
Phil Martin... wrote:
less-suitable US applicants. . . .the lesser skilled US workers
Actually, my experience is that far fewer of the bargain-basement H1Bs hired for 50K were worth their paychecks than the 75K - 100K citizens. But you can believe whatever you want about the U.S. programmer.
Jon Information doesn't want to be free. It wants to be sixty-nine cents @ pound.
Oakman wrote:
Actually, my experience is that far fewer of the bargain-basement H1Bs hired for 50K were worth their paychecks than the 75K - 100K citizens. But you can believe whatever you want about the U.S. programmer.
Well there you go, my experience is that they're about equally average, so why wouldn't a rational manager go for average at less cost?
-
Quite a surprise, that an anti-immigration think tank would have concluded that H1-B holders were paid less than natives. If I had the time, I'd be curious to take a look at the DoL data and see if it actually indicates what CIS claims it does. As for dollars going overseas, the US economy benefits from dollars anywhere, and whether it's central bank holdings or campesino holdings, dollars overseas help maintain the practical and currency value of the dollar. I'll happily admit that funds being sent to families overseas don't match the importance of central bank holdings, but at a macro-economic level, it's just as important as local consumer spending.
Well it's no suprise that you would find some reason to doubt its figures - even though they cite every source.
haggismold wrote:
If I had the time, I'd be curious to take a look at the DoL data and see if it actually indicates what CIS claims it does.
You have the time, you just don't have the guts. There's nothing sadder than someone afraid to find out the truth.
haggismold wrote:
I'll happily admit that funds being sent to families overseas don't match the importance of central bank holdings, but at a macro-economic level, it's just as important as local consumer spending.
Dream on, MacDuck. Macro-economics are just another word for fantasy-land.
Jon Information doesn't want to be free. It wants to be sixty-nine cents @ pound.
-
John Cardinal wrote:
Oh well, I could be wrong, it's all academic to me anyway
ROFL what a cheap cop-out. It's so irritating when someone shows up your ignorance, isn't it?
Jon Information doesn't want to be free. It wants to be sixty-nine cents @ pound.
No I find it refreshing and a sign of wisdom in others. In fact when people admit they may not know for sure what theyre talking about I take them much more seriously. Anyone who insists they *know* anything about anything is usually full of shit and wrong.
"I don't want more choice. I just want better things!" - Edina Monsoon
-
Oakman wrote:
Actually, my experience is that far fewer of the bargain-basement H1Bs hired for 50K were worth their paychecks than the 75K - 100K citizens. But you can believe whatever you want about the U.S. programmer.
Well there you go, my experience is that they're about equally average, so why wouldn't a rational manager go for average at less cost?
Fascinating, elsewhere you doubt my figures, even though I cited sources, here you happily accept them because you think you can twist them to support your argument. However, it only works if one believes that bodyshop imports are the equal of the Americans they replace, which is, except in isolated cases untrue. Since they are untrue, your money-grubbing 'rational' manager is harming the product to produce a temporarily better bottom line.
Jon Information doesn't want to be free. It wants to be sixty-nine cents @ pound.
-
Well it's no suprise that you would find some reason to doubt its figures - even though they cite every source.
haggismold wrote:
If I had the time, I'd be curious to take a look at the DoL data and see if it actually indicates what CIS claims it does.
You have the time, you just don't have the guts. There's nothing sadder than someone afraid to find out the truth.
haggismold wrote:
I'll happily admit that funds being sent to families overseas don't match the importance of central bank holdings, but at a macro-economic level, it's just as important as local consumer spending.
Dream on, MacDuck. Macro-economics are just another word for fantasy-land.
Jon Information doesn't want to be free. It wants to be sixty-nine cents @ pound.
Oakman wrote:
Well it's no suprise that you would find some reason to doubt its figures - even though they cite every source.
And no-one ever lies with statistics. Ever.
Oakman wrote:
You have the time, you just don't have the guts. There's nothing sadder than someone afraid to find out the truth.
Actually, I'm trying to make sure that my job doesn't get taken by an H1-B holder. But if you are in fact interested in the truth, you can check here and here for a quick overview on the array of anti-immigration organizations that the CIS founder has also started, and a sense of where his funding comes. Bluntly, he's a bigot, and a bigot with statistics is still a bigot.
Oakman wrote:
Dream on, MacDuck. Macro-economics are just another word for fantasy-land.
Well, feel free to ignore state to state debt, currency flows, and suchlike, because if they are fantasy then they surely won't affect your daily life.
-
No I find it refreshing and a sign of wisdom in others. In fact when people admit they may not know for sure what theyre talking about I take them much more seriously. Anyone who insists they *know* anything about anything is usually full of shit and wrong.
"I don't want more choice. I just want better things!" - Edina Monsoon
John Cardinal wrote:
No I find it refreshing and a sign of wisdom in others. In fact when people admit they may not know for sure what theyre talking about I take them much more seriously. Anyone who insists they *know* anything about anything is usually full of sh*t and wrong.
Your noble words would ring more true, if you hadn't gone on to compare people who knew more than you did about the subject to folks blaming "killer bees and UFOs."
Jon Information doesn't want to be free. It wants to be sixty-nine cents @ pound.
-
Fascinating, elsewhere you doubt my figures, even though I cited sources, here you happily accept them because you think you can twist them to support your argument. However, it only works if one believes that bodyshop imports are the equal of the Americans they replace, which is, except in isolated cases untrue. Since they are untrue, your money-grubbing 'rational' manager is harming the product to produce a temporarily better bottom line.
Jon Information doesn't want to be free. It wants to be sixty-nine cents @ pound.
Oakman wrote:
Fascinating, elsewhere you doubt my figures, even though I cited sources, here you happily accept them because you think you can twist them to support your argument. However, it only works if one believes that bodyshop imports are the equal of the Americans they replace, which is, except in isolated cases untrue. Since they are untrue, your money-grubbing 'rational' manager is harming the product to produce a temporarily better bottom line.
You cited a study from an organization with at best questionable claims to neutrality in the debate. You then said "in my experience..." which is anecdotal evidence. You haven't provided any data to indicate that foreign programmers are worse. I responded with an anecdotal experience, from working with programmers from a body shop, and made a comment about the bottom line. You responded:
Oakman wrote:
Since they are untrue, your money-grubbing 'rational' manager is harming the product to produce a temporarily better bottom line.
Welcome to the wonderful world of American management. Is this a surprise to you?
-
It's really very simple...how much money are you going to make for the company that is hiring you? If you provide enough value, they will pay. But the problem is that just the fact that you can program well doesn't create that value. No. The software must do something new AND very valuable...much more valuable than what you can get out of a box. Basically, all the huge innovative strides have been accomplished. It's the difference between the guys who invented and developed the (insert favorite world-changing invention here) and the guys that work on the assembly line producing it. Which one are you? From what I can tell, most programmers are the assembly-line variety, albeit it's an intellectual assembly-line. You may be highly skilled, but what differentiates you from the highly-skilled welder working in the Ford plant? When you get right down to it, not much. You even share the same mindset :) The reality is simple. it doesn't require an intellectual pissing contest to get to the bottom of it. All it requires is for some people to face the facts. This is the real world, and 'the system' is not broken. It's the same as it has always been. For the record, I'm an American, and I'm tired of the whining.
Of course the same situation would apply to other positions, including but not limited to: Accountants Transaction Lawyers Doctors Nurses Dentists Teachers Civil Engineers ... Simply put all these 'white collar' positions are 90%+ rote with only occasional need to invent / apply something new. Most new methods will come from researchers and establishments that specialise in research for their particular field. The time it takes to master the primary functions of each position vary and contribute to the payscale differences as does the cost of educational attainment, level of protection for each job and general intelligence requirements. The old blue/white collar distinction seems to apply only to the physicality of the product and/or the degree of mass-manufacture. I think its fair to say that unless you are a novelist, musical composer, researcher etc you are either a physical or mental assembly line worker. Even then there are assembly line novels and music!
I'm largely language agnostic
After a while they all bug me :doh:
-
Good morning,
Oakman wrote:
And so it's better to import someone who speaks English badly from across and ocean, than to import someone from the next-but-one commuting area.
No its not, assuming you can import someone from the next-but-one commuting area. This is what H1'bs are about - What to do when you cant find any US citizen willing to be imported. Now this visa may have been used improperly for "cheap labour" - I dont know. What I am saying is however if it is the problem then why not keep the H1bs but change the law so no one can hire them as cheap labour (parity of wages would remove this complaint) and then you get back the , for want of a better word , "Purity" and spirit of the H1b legislation.
Oakman wrote:
I am oh-so-sorry I offended you
You didnt offend me - It may have offended some of the survivors of WW2 , I dont know - it was just in bad taste in my opinion.
Oakman wrote:
And you don't get to agree or disagree about whether or not something is a simile
Actually you can, a simile is an example of 2 statements that are different from each other except in one logical way. I dont think your simile met that test because I disagree with your "one logical way".
Oakman wrote:
(according to you),
lets be honest everyone here is expressing an opinion according to themselves , unless of course they quote other people , so yes when I says things its according to me, just like when you write things.
Oakman wrote:
Perhaps then, we can agree that you can't handle the truth and let it go at t
I dont see that - what truth cant I handle and what makes you think I cant handle it?? thanks Martin
life is a bowl of cherries go on take a byte
MartyK2007 wrote:
No its not, assuming you can import someone from the next-but-one commuting area. This is what H1'bs are about - What to do when you cant find any US citizen willing to be imported. Now this visa may have been used improperly for "cheap labour" - I dont know. What I am saying is however if it is the problem then why not keep the H1bs but change the law so no one can hire them as cheap labour (parity of wages would remove this complaint) and then you get back the , for want of a better word , "Purity" and spirit of the H1b legislation.
Requiring that they be paid two to three times the going rate would certainly remove any incentive for low balling. It would also incent the company to actively look for other solutions such as training someone. Yet if a real need exists then they could still fulfill it.
-
Oakman wrote:
Well it's no suprise that you would find some reason to doubt its figures - even though they cite every source.
And no-one ever lies with statistics. Ever.
Oakman wrote:
You have the time, you just don't have the guts. There's nothing sadder than someone afraid to find out the truth.
Actually, I'm trying to make sure that my job doesn't get taken by an H1-B holder. But if you are in fact interested in the truth, you can check here and here for a quick overview on the array of anti-immigration organizations that the CIS founder has also started, and a sense of where his funding comes. Bluntly, he's a bigot, and a bigot with statistics is still a bigot.
Oakman wrote:
Dream on, MacDuck. Macro-economics are just another word for fantasy-land.
Well, feel free to ignore state to state debt, currency flows, and suchlike, because if they are fantasy then they surely won't affect your daily life.
haggismold wrote:
And no-one ever lies with statistics. Ever.
Never said that - Macro-Economics is full of statistcs. However, as you know, I said "sources' and that the raw data is there for you to read - but "you don't have the time." Even though you had the time to google one of the sources to find out that it was founded by someone who also opposes granting amnesty illegal aliens. Your use of the phrase "immigation" to refer to illegals pretty much tells me all I need to know about your ability to bury unpleasant truths. Tell me, do you also think the U.S. deserved 9/11? I find that most folks of your political stripe seem to think we brought in on ourselves.
haggismold wrote:
Well, feel free to ignore state to state debt, currency flows, and suchlike, because if they are fantasy then they surely won't affect your daily life.
Interesting how you keep inferring from what I said to things I never said. I do not ignore those facts of life; I merely find the field of macro-economics filled with witch-doctore pretending to be scientists, and those who place their faith in the field to be fools.
Jon Information doesn't want to be free. It wants to be sixty-nine cents @ pound.
-
Oakman wrote:
Fascinating, elsewhere you doubt my figures, even though I cited sources, here you happily accept them because you think you can twist them to support your argument. However, it only works if one believes that bodyshop imports are the equal of the Americans they replace, which is, except in isolated cases untrue. Since they are untrue, your money-grubbing 'rational' manager is harming the product to produce a temporarily better bottom line.
You cited a study from an organization with at best questionable claims to neutrality in the debate. You then said "in my experience..." which is anecdotal evidence. You haven't provided any data to indicate that foreign programmers are worse. I responded with an anecdotal experience, from working with programmers from a body shop, and made a comment about the bottom line. You responded:
Oakman wrote:
Since they are untrue, your money-grubbing 'rational' manager is harming the product to produce a temporarily better bottom line.
Welcome to the wonderful world of American management. Is this a surprise to you?
haggismold wrote:
You cited a study from an organization with at best questionable claims to neutrality in the debate.
First you complain that I didn't site my sources; now you apparently disbelieve that their sources (which they site). Maybe this is all a matter of faith to you? Are you one of those guys who thought Clinton should have gotten off scot free, but Libbey deserved to be locked up for 2 1/2 years? Maybe you think the U.S. should cut its energy use by 90% while China and India cut theirs by 10%. Enlighten me - how does one obtain neutrality in a debate as to whether the Feds should enforce the border laws and arrest illegal aliens? Shoyuld they renounce their citizenship or is actively aiding and abetting wetbacks enough?
haggismold wrote:
Welcome to the wonderful world of American management. Is this a surprise to you?
At last we agree about something. :laugh:
Jon Information doesn't want to be free. It wants to be sixty-nine cents @ pound.
-
haggismold wrote:
And no-one ever lies with statistics. Ever.
Never said that - Macro-Economics is full of statistcs. However, as you know, I said "sources' and that the raw data is there for you to read - but "you don't have the time." Even though you had the time to google one of the sources to find out that it was founded by someone who also opposes granting amnesty illegal aliens. Your use of the phrase "immigation" to refer to illegals pretty much tells me all I need to know about your ability to bury unpleasant truths. Tell me, do you also think the U.S. deserved 9/11? I find that most folks of your political stripe seem to think we brought in on ourselves.
haggismold wrote:
Well, feel free to ignore state to state debt, currency flows, and suchlike, because if they are fantasy then they surely won't affect your daily life.
Interesting how you keep inferring from what I said to things I never said. I do not ignore those facts of life; I merely find the field of macro-economics filled with witch-doctore pretending to be scientists, and those who place their faith in the field to be fools.
Jon Information doesn't want to be free. It wants to be sixty-nine cents @ pound.
Oakman wrote:
ven though you had the time to google one of the sources
Net time to use google to look up CIS: ~ 5 seconds, plus a couple of minutes to scan results. Net time to review DoL labor stats: > 5 seconds, plus a couple of minutes to scan results. No mystery in my time allocation in that area.
Oakman wrote:
Your use of the phrase "immigation" to refer to illegals pretty much tells me all I need to know about your ability to bury unpleasant truths.
CIS and FAIR cover the waterfront of all immigration, not just illegal immigration. In any case, the word "illegal" is a modifier of "immigration," and you have no way of knowing what I think on the subject of illegal or other immigration outside the question of H1-B visa holders and their employment patterns. I'll give you a hint though, I think that if you want to control the supply of illegal immigrants, you should try reducing demand.
Oakman wrote:
Tell me, do you also think the U.S. deserved 9/11?
Have you stopped beating your wife yet? That's an interesting rhetorical device, sir, but hardly germane to H1-B visas. And just in case you try and read my mind again, the answer to your rhetorical tactic masquerading as a question is "no."
Oakman wrote:
I merely find the field of macro-economics filled with witch-doctore pretending to be scientists, and those who place their faith in the field to be fools
Hmm. I'd suggest that they are amateur mathematicians who make questionable assumptions, but that's just me. Still, there are plenty of people who are making money listening to the fools, and some of them make hiring decisions about programmers. (Just to circle back to the original thread for a moment...)