mjk@tty3b.UUCP (Mike Kelly) (09/25/84)
>From: falcone@erlang.DEC (Joe Falcone, HLO2-3/N03, dtn 225-6059) >Lately, there seems to have been a "yahoo backlash" of articles knocking >the computer industry and high-technology industries in general for >allegedly not delivering on their "promises" of employment. >These articles are pretty ridiculous when you consider that firms such as >Digital and Hewlett-Packard each employ over 70,000 people in jobs which >largely did not exist before WWII. The estimate I've seen is 900,000 new high-tech jobs by 1990. The articles I've read are not "knocking" high tech. They are simply pointing out that, with 200,000 unemployed auto workers *alone*, high-tech is hardly the salvation some people expect; or do you believe that Detroit is about to become the new Palo Alto to employ all those unemployed auto workers? That doesn't even address the steel industry and other heavy manufacturing, where many of the jobs lost over the past decade are permanently gone. Employment is a tough issue. No one wants to "stop" high-tech development. On the other hand, a blase attitude towards 8 million unemployed Americans seems pretty unconscionable to me. It's one reason I'm voting against Reagan. Mike Kelly
kds@intelca.UUCP (Ken Shoemaker) (09/28/84)
70,000 jobs spread out throughout the world sure isn't very many
relative to the number of people living here...
--
I've got one, two, three, four, five senses working overtime,
trying to take this all in!
Ken Shoemaker, Intel, Santa Clara, Ca.
{pur-ee,hplabs,amd,scgvaxd,dual,idi,omsvax}!intelca!kds
---the above views are personal. They may not represent those of Intel.