I've also read this book, and thought it a very worthwhile read. I would say buy the book, or borrow it from the library. Hamlet's right, it shouldn't be news, but to a lot of people it still is, especially the details, and concerning those outside the technology sector. We all know how insulated CEO's can be from facts on the ground. If you're rich enough, you don't care about being outsourced. And if your CFO tells you it will cut costs, you just do it. (Our President equally doesn't seem to be affected by facts when they inconvenience him. He should be slapped with a fish, too, but that's a different matter.) Friedman's anecdotes serve to reinforce his point. There's a big difference between reading about outsourcing and insourcing in newspapers, and reading details from a full-length book.
Friedman's facts can't be argued with – only a fool would try. Globalization is happening. It affects your life. It is increasing, and only a world war can reverse it. (World War IV, anyone?) His premise – globalization is, on balance, more good than bad for most people - can be argued with. The reason he doesn't find anyone who disagrees with him is probably because he didn't want to! He doesn’t want to present both sides, he just wants illustrations that prove him right. He didn't interview anyone from the AFL-CIO, for example, who probably have plenty to argue with him about. He interviewed only his fellow flat-worlders, who disagree only about the speed and scope of the flattening.
His disinterest in presenting both sides is typical of the style of reporting of the NY Times, his home base. The people who are against globalization are holding massive demonstrations throughout the world wherever the WTO meets. The PBS series Commanding Heights: The Battle for the World Economy does a better job of presenting the anti-globalization points of view. It also presents the point that 9/11 is the dark side of globalization. I can understand why Friedman made the choice he did – the point of view of the anti-globalization people is probably futile - but objective journalism should try to present it anyway.
I think the real reasons BillG is petitioning Congress is because the Indian labor is cheaper, in addition to the fact that they are willing to work in sweatshop-like conditions. They are also much more skilled in math and science than we are. Well, of course they are - their educational path probably ignores the liberal arts for the most part! (In particular, fluency in spoken and written English– which I would guess is the main reason your company fired its Indian developers.) But of course Bill’s not going to say that!
Have you applied to Microsoft? What was their response? Scoble says they’re hiring at a "crazy clip" – what isn’t he telling us? Maybe what they really want isn't Master's degrees - they want Microsoft certifications. Any Microsoftites out there? Tell us.
Comments