5 ms·

Tech jobs are drying up and graduates are no longer guaranteed a role

17 points by SMAAART 2y ago

SMAAART 2y ago
https://archive.is/h4Cwg https://archive.is/h4Cwg
r9295 2y ago
Classic BusinessInsider article with no actual insight or sources, just a few shallow quotes and sensational extracts.
poulsbohemian 2y ago
This article could have been written anytime between 2000-2004, because apart from AI, we were saying the same things, IE: tech is imploding, jobs are going overseas, etc. Instead things went along for a while and then tech salaries and demand for tech workers exploded. There will always be pressure on tech and those young people coming out of places like Berkeley will have it better than those coming out of NoNameU. The past decade or so tech has been the main thing propping up the labor market and the stock market, so not unrealistic that there would eventually be a rebalancing.
nuancebydefault 2y ago
I like the idea of taxing machines (and use that for UBI) Today the race between human and machines is not so much 'unfair' because of the machines' speed and efficiency, but moreso because of unfair taxes: people and businesses get to pay taxes for each hour of human labour, but receive tax deductions for using all non-human resources like energy, machines and offices. It's time to rethink the tax and economic models such that a lot of people will benefit from machines' efficiency, not only the happy few who happen to be in control.
- free_bip 2y ago
  How do you propose "taxing machines"? Everything I can think of has obvious and large downsides, e.g. - filing taxes for each machine (companies may have millions of machines) - determining how much income all machines make (for machines used by humans, e.g. sewing machines, how do you determine what percentage of the income is made by the human vs the machine) - taxing cloud usage (How to determine netflix's % income made by cloud vs by advertising, by original content, etc)
  - avmich 2y ago
    > - filing taxes for each machine (companies may have millions of machines) Yes. It may be harder to figure out the definition of a machine - e.g. a computer can have multiple programs running, is it one machine? - but this is one direction. > - determining how much income all machines make Yes, it's tricky, but we can try. For example, some temporary measurements which can be updated every few years? > - taxing cloud usage Yes, we can measure power, bandwidth, network sessions for that.
    - antifa 2y ago
      Wouldn't it be easier to increase taxes for high profit income and give tax incentives for increasing human labor on payroll?
      - nuancebydefault 2y ago
        High profit income is already taxed in a cumulative way (at least where i live). Profit equals revenue minus costs. It is financially relatively interesting today to have a high cost (typically going to machines, buildings, energy, advertising, financial services and business trips), because it makes the (tax on) profits lower.
  - rogerkirkness 2y ago
    Just tax revenue or profit per employee, which has risen ~5x in the last 25 years among the S&P 500.
    - free_bip 2y ago
      Sorry, I don't see how taxing income per employee translates to taxing machines
      - rogerkirkness 2y ago
        How do you think the S&P500 was able to increase profit per employee by 5x?
b3ing 2y ago
Probably best to move to Asia or India and apply for a role, you're more likely to get hired as 30% of the jobs are being replaced overseas. While this kind of behavior isn't new, I think its happening more often now. Will software development be considered national security later down the road (like how making chips are) when most of it is done overseas? As I imagine it will be, along with AI. Of course the bootcamps flooded the market as well, but H1B visa workers are another way to saturate the market, to keep costs low. I know they say they need workers with experience or training we can't get here, but you know most of the workers hired are just doing CRUD software, they aren't building an AGI-atomic-surgeon.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
dopylitty 2y ago
Whether it's true or not I don't know but it would be good if fewer people went into tech. We don't need more people working for ad companies endlessly rewriting chat apps in the flavor of the month JavaScript framework. We need people doing useful jobs like building houses (or making house building easier), basic research, medicine, social work, plumbing, or HVAC.
foobarkey 2y ago
Noticed strong candidates are somewhat easier to find than one year ago (talking about sr roles here), but other than that see no drying up, maybe different in US or maybe this article just being dramatic to get clicks
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

17 points by SMAAART 2y ago

SMAAART 2y ago

https://archive.is/h4Cwg https://archive.is/h4Cwg

r9295 2y ago

Classic BusinessInsider article with no actual insight or sources, just a few shallow quotes and sensational extracts.

poulsbohemian 2y ago

This article could have been written anytime between 2000-2004, because apart from AI, we were saying the same things, IE: tech is imploding, jobs are going overseas, etc. Instead things went along for a while and then tech salaries and demand for tech workers exploded. There will always be pressure on tech and those young people coming out of places like Berkeley will have it better than those coming out of NoNameU. The past decade or so tech has been the main thing propping up the labor market and the stock market, so not unrealistic that there would eventually be a rebalancing.

nuancebydefault 2y ago

I like the idea of taxing machines (and use that for UBI) Today the race between human and machines is not so much 'unfair' because of the machines' speed and efficiency, but moreso because of unfair taxes: people and businesses get to pay taxes for each hour of human labour, but receive tax deductions for using all non-human resources like energy, machines and offices. It's time to rethink the tax and economic models such that a lot of people will benefit from machines' efficiency, not only the happy few who happen to be in control.

free_bip 2y ago
How do you propose "taxing machines"? Everything I can think of has obvious and large downsides, e.g. - filing taxes for each machine (companies may have millions of machines) - determining how much income all machines make (for machines used by humans, e.g. sewing machines, how do you determine what percentage of the income is made by the human vs the machine) - taxing cloud usage (How to determine netflix's % income made by cloud vs by advertising, by original content, etc)
- avmich 2y ago
  > - filing taxes for each machine (companies may have millions of machines) Yes. It may be harder to figure out the definition of a machine - e.g. a computer can have multiple programs running, is it one machine? - but this is one direction. > - determining how much income all machines make Yes, it's tricky, but we can try. For example, some temporary measurements which can be updated every few years? > - taxing cloud usage Yes, we can measure power, bandwidth, network sessions for that.
  - antifa 2y ago
    Wouldn't it be easier to increase taxes for high profit income and give tax incentives for increasing human labor on payroll?
    - nuancebydefault 2y ago
      High profit income is already taxed in a cumulative way (at least where i live). Profit equals revenue minus costs. It is financially relatively interesting today to have a high cost (typically going to machines, buildings, energy, advertising, financial services and business trips), because it makes the (tax on) profits lower.
- rogerkirkness 2y ago
  Just tax revenue or profit per employee, which has risen ~5x in the last 25 years among the S&P 500.
  - free_bip 2y ago
    Sorry, I don't see how taxing income per employee translates to taxing machines
    - rogerkirkness 2y ago
      How do you think the S&P500 was able to increase profit per employee by 5x?

b3ing 2y ago

Probably best to move to Asia or India and apply for a role, you're more likely to get hired as 30% of the jobs are being replaced overseas. While this kind of behavior isn't new, I think its happening more often now. Will software development be considered national security later down the road (like how making chips are) when most of it is done overseas? As I imagine it will be, along with AI. Of course the bootcamps flooded the market as well, but H1B visa workers are another way to saturate the market, to keep costs low. I know they say they need workers with experience or training we can't get here, but you know most of the workers hired are just doing CRUD software, they aren't building an AGI-atomic-surgeon.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

dopylitty 2y ago

Whether it's true or not I don't know but it would be good if fewer people went into tech. We don't need more people working for ad companies endlessly rewriting chat apps in the flavor of the month JavaScript framework. We need people doing useful jobs like building houses (or making house building easier), basic research, medicine, social work, plumbing, or HVAC.

foobarkey 2y ago

Noticed strong candidates are somewhat easier to find than one year ago (talking about sr roles here), but other than that see no drying up, maybe different in US or maybe this article just being dramatic to get clicks

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]