Next up in our series of interviews with 2008 presidential candidates: Senator John McCain. The recording is below and is also available at TalkCrunch.
McCain’s campaign made no stipulations on the questions I could ask (and they didn’t even hold this against us). He spoke frankly and clearly outlined his position on a number of key technology issues: China, H-1B Visas, Net Neutrality, Internet Taxes, Identity Theft and other topics. The conversation lasted for just over 22 minutes. The full transcript of the podcast is below.
McCain’s position on a number of issues was surprising. For example, he lambasted Yahoo over their recent Congressional testimony (their actions resulted in imprisonment of a Chinese journalist), saying:
Well, obviously, it was an unacceptable act. And then apparently they tried to cover it up some time ago. Yahoo is a great, great corporation. They have contributed so much. And it’s embarrassing, and it’s frustrating…I think they should know better.
McCain also criticizes Google for “making a [search] deal with China.”
I’ve highlighted other key areas of the transcript below. In general, he’s in favor of a wait and see approach to net neutrality, and says that while he is in favor of H-1B visas, the issue is lumped together with border security issues in the American population and has become collateral damage.
On a lighter note, you’ll hear an interesting discussion of the fate of the people who once stole McCain’s identity, and hear what’s currently on his iPod. And just for the record, McCain denies ever having downloaded any music illegally.
At the end of the interview I mention a video that was forwarded to me that talks about McCain’s experience as a POW in Vietnam. You can see the video here. Also, at one point I mention that I’d heard that there are 30,000 Internet police in China. See this article for more on that.
Hopefully we’ll have Senator Edwards written Q&A published later this week. You can hear our podcast with Mitt Romney here.
Thank you to Senator McCain and his staff for taking the time to talk with me. And thanks again to BitGravity, a content delivery network that specializes in rich media, for hosting the file for us once again. Thanks to them, the file should stream quickly and smoothly.
Standard Podcast [20:28m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Transcript
Note: some text is bolded to highlight key statements.
Michael Arrington: Hello this is Mike Arrington from TechCrunch. Today I have a few minutes to talk with presidential candidate John McCain about his position on a number of technology-related issues. Senator McCain, thank you for your time, and welcome to TechCrunch.
Senator John McCain: I’m ready my friend, and thank you for having me on.
MA: Let’s start off with a broad question on technology leadership. The US technology industry, of course, has been a world leader, if not the world leader over the decades, and we’ve grown quite a bit through international markets. As president, what would you do to advance these efforts?
JM: One thing I would do is make sure we have free trade agreements, so that every market in the world is open to our products and our innovation, in which we lead the world. Obviously, education reform has to be a part of any agenda so we have a trained and capable workforce. I continue to fight against internet taxes, and I’m glad that we just expanded that ban for seven years.
MA: Do you think the ban should have been permanent?
JM: I have always supported, and, in fact, have taken the lead on making the ban permanent. I’ll tell you why they don’t want to do it – it’s because they want to keep coming back to you for contributions, and tell you that we need to make it permanent. It’s the same way with the R&D tax credits – one of the great shakedowns in American history. But, at least getting seven years was better than the last time when we only got four years. Look, globalization is the answer. It’s not something to be feared, it’s something to be exploited. Ninety-five percent of the world’s customers are outside of the United States of America. So getting access to those markets through free trade agreements, and expanded trade, and adequate measures for full protection of intellectual property – I understand that China violates people’s intellectual property rights all the time, and I’ll take them to the WTO. I’ll put pressure on them to stop it. But, I’ll tell you – a developed Chinese economy, where they want their intellectual property rights respected, is probably one of the best ways to encourage them to respect intellectual property rights. You’ll never find anyone who comes on this blog that is more of a free-trader than I am, and I think the lessons of history are that if we resort to protectionism, as we did prior to World War II, and other times in America’s history, we pay a very hefty price for it. And I’m worried, frankly, about the rise of protectionism in America.
MA: You mentioned China a few times there, and the next question actually is specifically about China. Silicon Valley, in particular – the main topic of conversation this week is what happened with Yahoo-founder Jerry Yang, and also their General Counsel Mike Callahan, testifying before Congress, I think a subcommittee, earlier this week. I’m sure you’re completely up-to-speed on this issue. In 2004, they handed over information about a journalist to the Chinese internet police, which, by the way, I’ve heard they’re like 30,000 internet police in China. I don’t have a citation for that, but it sounds crazy. The journalist was sentenced to a 10-year prison sentence. A couple of representatives compared Yahoo – I think Representative Chris Smith compared Yahoo to Nazi collaborators in World War II. Tom Lantos, who I think is our representative here in Silicon Valley, said morally they are pygmies. What’s your opinion on this issue? Specifically with what Yahoo did, but, more generally, just with the idea of American corporations working with China in ways that perpetuate human rights violations.
JM: Well, obviously, it was an unacceptable act. And then apparently they tried to cover it up some time ago. Yahoo is a great, great corporation. They have contributed so much. And it’s embarrassing, and it’s frustrating. But could I also say that part of the problem lies with China, in that they have the kind of a government that remains oppressive, repressive. They select their leaders at a seaside resort in secret. And it argues for us pressing, not only that Yahoo never do such a thing again, but that we have more human rights, more democracy, more progress in China itself. By the way, as you know, Google made a deal with China, where if you google “tiananmen square” in China, you’ll see a very peaceful scene, but if you google it outside of China, you see the young Chinese man standing in front of a tank. So, Yahoo isn’t the only one that’s guilty here. My message to people in Silicon Valley, in high-tech, and people who do business in China, is you’d better not accede to assisting that government in maintaining an oppressive and repressive society. It doesn’t pay dividends in the long run. It harms the image of American corporations. And, very frankly, it confirms the suspicions of some Americans that, for the sake of profit, major corporations in America will do most anything. So, look, I regret it. I don’t think it was Nazi Germany and a lot of the overheated rhetoric that we have a tendency to hear at Congressional hearings. But, I do think it should be a shot across our bow, in recognizing that we’ve got to stand for what America is all about. And, many years ago, when we passed a law that said we couldn’t bribe foreign countries in return for doing business, everybody said “Oh, this will make it an uneven playing field. We’ve got to bribe as others do.” But, the fact is, we didn’t have to because we provide the best and most advanced technology in the world.
MA: So, I’m not 100% sure on your position. You mentioned that Google has also done some things, and so has Microsoft. Skype, which is owned by eBay, reportedly helps the Chinese government monitor and send through text messages. Again, these are all allegations that have been made. I don’t have any evidence. Cisco supposedly sells hardware to the Chinese government that helps them monitor the population. Do you think that US corporations should be banned from doing business with China in a way that perpetuates human rights abuses, or do you think that they should just know better on their own?
JM: Well, one, I think they should know better. Two, the exposure that they will get sooner or later if they are doing things that are in violation of the fundamentals we believe in, then action can be taken one way or another. But, as you well know, it’s not as simple as some would describe. For example, so-called dual-use technology. There are many products that come out of Silicon Valley that can be used for the greatest good, and can be used for the worst way – invasion of privacy, checking up on people, surveillance, and all that. I’d love for it to be black and white, but some of it is gray. But, at the same time, we have to do everything in our power to maintain the integrity of America and our commitment that all of us are created equal and endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights. That’s all of us, including people who happen to be citizens of China. I’m not prepared to quote punish these corporations yet, but I think they ought to know exactly what public reaction will be if they engage in those activities that cause abuses of human rights.
MA: I think you carry so much moral authority on this issue, in particular, that it’s good to see that you have a measured response.
JM: Thank you.
MA: And also, Yahoo’s stock price dropped about seven percent the day after those Congressional hearings, suggesting that society isn’t going to put up with that, and it will punish companies who do business with China in this way.
JM: And the other thing that happens whenever Congress passes a law – well, there’s intended consequences and unintended consequences. A good example is Sarbanes-Oxley.
MA: Oh, yeah. That’s one that we particularly don’t like in Silicon Valley.
JM: [laughs] I don’t blame them.
MA: Let’s talk about net neutrality. It’s probably the most important issue in Silicon Valley, and yet it rarely makes its way to Washington-level consciousness. Barack Obama recently came out saying that he would promise to make it a priority if he became president. What is your position on the net neutrality issue?
JM: In general, I think we need to move to a different model for thinking about the FCC. I think it should focus on policing clearly anti-competitive behavior and consumer predators. But, frankly, until some foul has been committed, I don’t think it should be interfering in the market, and probably shouldn’t be trying to micromanage American business and innovation. This is a very tough issue, because if you look at the extremes of it, then, obviously it has significant consequences – you can’t restrain the market, you can’t say that people can’t make a living or a profit off of the Internet. That obviously is not the intent of why the Internet was invented, and the reason why it has flourished. So what I would like to do is keep an eye on what goes on with the Internet, whether people are taking unfair advantage of it, whether people are being ripped off, and how this thing progresses. The great thing about the Internet is that it has enjoyed, to a large degree, immunity from federal interference and federal regulation. So, I have a tendency to say, look, let’s see how this thing all turns out, rather than anticipate something that, a problem that so far has not arisen in any significant way. I know that sounds a little bit equivocal, but it has a lot to do with my reluctance to use, my inclination to use government intervention only when it’s absolutely necessary.
MA: I think that the pro-market approach is something that I personally agree with, but in the case of Internet broadband access, most consumers and businesses have very few choices, sometimes one, sometimes two. With the cartel or monopoly approach, even if abuse isn’t occurring now, you can see it down the road as almost inevitable. That doesn’t change your position at all, sort of taking a proactive approach to forcing companies…?
JM: Well, what we really need to do is see what’s going on now, what the leading experts in America think, some, at least from academia and others, and have hearings about what exactly the dimensions of the problem are, and what the challenges are. Because, very frankly, it’s one of the few issues where I can see arguments on both sides depending on which direction it actually goes. If there’s clearly anti-competitive behavior, and consumer predators who are lurking around, then, you know, I think that’s pretty obvious. But, I think, with all due respect to those who are concerned, we have not seen very much of that yet.
MA: Well, here’s an area where we have seen some real problems - identity theft, and, in particular, with regard to the Internet as a place where people gather the information, and the government has to some extent taken a hands-off approach. There are plenty of criminal laws around this, but, for some reason, the problem just keeps growing. I think it’s $60 billion a year just in losses for those affected (again, just an estimate, no citation for that), $6,400 per victim. Can the government do anything else to protect our privacy online, or is privacy just a figment of our imagination at this point?
JM: I think identity theft is a real problem, invasion of privacy, there are so many aspects of it. With increasing technology, I think one of our problems is staying up with advances in technology which make this more and more possible, and I’ve had personal experience. Cindy and I had our identities stolen. The legislation –
MA: How long did it take you to clear it up?
JM: Not too long. It was kind of a rudimentary deal. The perpetrators of it are now guests of the state of Arizona. Anyway, I’ve taken the lead on legislation that would ensure that companies have in place general data security policies. Every company that has to have security policies to deal with the ID threat, and would provide notice to consumers when data breaches happen. I think the best solution is continued consumer education and business innovation to try come up with further safeguards. By the way, when that happened to me, as far as my wife’s and my identity theft is concerned, I was reminded of this story of a guy whose credit card was stolen but decided not to report it because the person who stole it was spending less money than his wife was. I had a similar motivation at the time.
MA: [laughs] That’s pretty funny.
JM: Good! Thanks.
MA: H-1B visas. We like them here in Silicon Valley. It brings the best and brightest here. And, the government for some reason brought back the quota to 65,000 a year the last two years, and I think there’s demand for at least 150,000 or 200,000 a year. What are your feelings on H-1Bs?
JM: I’ve always supported H-1B visas, and it’s been a source of much needed talent because of our lack in America of students in math, science, and engineering, but, I got to tell you, I’ve got to give you some straight talk, my friend. We failed on overall immigration reform. We failed. We failed, and expansion of H-1Bs was part of it. All of it failed because Americans have no trust in their government. Look, here’s the message I got from our failure: Americans want the borders secured. They want the borders secured first. I got the lesson. So, we’ve got to restore the trust in the government, and we’ve got to secure the borders. I will continue to support H-1B visas, but, I’m telling you, the American people’s priority is, either rightly or wrongly, and we live in a democracy, is that we secure the borders first.
MA: But isn’t the H-1B program almost collateral damage in the drive to secure the borders? We’re talking about people with college or higher-level degree, educated, very entrepreneurial, often. They come here and work for I think seven years. That’s a different issue than illegal aliens streaming across the border. It’s just a completely separate issue.
JM: Well, except that don’t you think that the agricultural sector in America is an innocent bystander, too? We’re going see lettuce rot in Yuma. We’re seeing melons not being harvested in California. The agricultural sector is hurting as well. So, yes, I think they’re collateral damage, and I’m sorry about it, and I worked for three years to try to get a comprehensive approach to immigration which included, of course H-1B visas, and a number of other aspects of trying to get highly skilled workers into America. But, I’m telling you, it was rejected, and it was rejected by the majority of the American people. We can still go onto it, but they have to be confident that our borders are secure.
MA: So you’re saying the H-1B program can’t be taken on its own, it has to be looked at as part of the larger picture, mostly because the US population demands that?
JM: Well, we live in a democracy. The will of the people prevails. Sometimes in our history the will of people hasn’t been good for America. Democracy is the worst form of government, only a better one hasn’t been invented, as Mr. Churchill said. I want H-1B visas. I want highly skilled workers. I want all those things. But, the American people are saying, in the messages, secure our borders, because they have no trust or confidence in government. Because in 1986 we said we would secure the borders, and we gave amnesty to a couple million people. And, guess what, we gave the amnesty, we didn’t secure the borders, and we’ve got 12 million people here illegally. And you and I know that 40% of the people who are here illegally, are illegal because their visas have expired, and not because they crossed the border. But, I’m telling you, I’ve gone the width and breadth of this country, and I’ve been involved in the most bitter debate and discussion I’ve been involved in on any issue in twenty-four years in the United States Congress, and I’m telling you, people want the borders secured.
MA: We’re running out of time, so – you’ve given some great answers, you’ve really been very forthcoming, and I appreciate it. I guess the most important questions are still to come, though. Are you a Mac or a PC guy?
JM: [laughs] I am illiterate.
MA: Oh no.
JM: Yes.
MA: You do have an iPod, though?
JM: Oh yes, I have an iPod with Beach Boys, Roy Orbison – I have a varied taste in music between very good music and not so good music, but most of my advancement in music appreciation stopped the day I was shot down in October of 1967.
MA: When you download music, do you do it legally through iTunes, or do you get it off of the illegal sites, like BitTorrent and those types of sites?
JM: No, we do it legally. If I did something illegal, I would get famous. [laughs]
MA: When you were shot down, why did that stop your love of music?
JM: It didn’t stop my love of music – it stopped my advancement in appreciation of music. I didn’t hear any music for five and a half years. Oh, I did hear some music. I heard a number of anti war songs, that I enjoyed hearing.
MA: I saw a video of you last night, it was forwarded to me, where you were telling an audience about a guard when you were in prison that loosened your ropes overnight while he was on duty. And he drew a cross in the sand on Christmas day for you, and how much that affected you. It was actually a very touching story, and we don’t have time to go into that, but I just wanted to tell you that, as an American, I appreciate your service to this country, and I’m a big fan of yours –
JM: Thank you. And I appreciate it. Could I make one more comment?
MA: Of course.
JM: I am a free trader. I will do everything in my power as president of the United States to protect intellectual property, but, far more important, to open every market in the world through free trade. For the products of the most innovative, most productive, greatest exporter, greatest source of America’s economy on earth, and responsible for the greatest revolution that we’ve experienced since the industrial revolution. And my job also is, and we need people in the high-tech community to think about this, we’re leaving a lot of workers behind. I am in Michigan right now. We have got to design education and training programs so that people can take part in this marvelous, new technology revolution that we’re going through, so I enlist the help of the smartest people in America to help in that effort to design education and training programs so that we can take care of these displaced workers, particularly as our economy slows down in the next year or so.
MA: Yeah, we didn’t have time to talk about the digital divide, and it was a question I had about the Erate program, and how effective you think it is. I’m sure you could speak for half an hour on that, but it’s good to hear at least your broad opinions. The last question I have, though, is, in protecting intellectual property rights, and this is a touchy question, does that include putting people in jail for downloading songs?
JM: I’m a cruel, inhumane, and indecent person in many respects, but I can’t see myself doing that, unless of course they listen to some of the abominable music that tops the charts today. If they do that, whether they are listening to it on an iPod, or downloading it illegally, they should go to jail anyway. [laughs]
MA: I never understood a different generation’s opinion on the younger generation’s music, until I listened to some of the music that our interns listen to. I’m thirty-seven now, and these guys are twenty, and I feel the same way. I mean it’s absolutely ridiculous. I think music peaked sometime around the time that I was in high school, and it’s gone downhill ever since. [laughs]
JM: It’s an assault on the senses, my friend. Thanks again.
MA: Senator McCain, thank you very much for your time.
JM: Good to be with you.
MA: Good luck in the race.
JM: Thanks. Bye.
MA: Bye.
See all
Post
Great work Mike - very interesting listening and reading!
I wonder if McCain would support foreign companies ignoring US law in the United States? Yahoo had no choice but to support local law in a country they legally trade in, or is Senator McCain suggesting a complete trade boycott with China?
You know you are influential when you can accomplish this
This blog is only two years old - did you think this would happen two years ago?
Did ANYONE think Techcrunch, Youtube, MySpace would have This much impact
http://digg.com/2008_us_electi.....oo_Privacy
Tremendous article Mike …. a great read i must say.
Duncan - I completely disagree. I think people and companies have an obligation to break the law when faced between acting legally or acting ethically.
I wonder what senator thinks of Pornotube?
excellent interview, thanks for tha same
Mike - I think the problem is that people’s ethics are different. The ethics that we, in the west, follow sometimes isn’t the same as the ethics in a country in the Middle East, or the Far East. I think we should take care to understand what people believe in before jumping to western ethcial conclusions. I don’t include western democractic principles in this. Greg.
http://www.HelpWorldPeace.com
Michael wrote: “I think people and companies have an obligation to break the law when faced between acting legally or acting ethically.”
People have a sense of ethics. Companies have not. Ethics is a human thing. Only companies with real people in charge will have some sense of ethics and moral. But this will be the doing of the people, not the companies themselves.
Expecting companies to behave ethically is like expecting cars to drive safely.
Drive safely
Interesting to see McCain’s reaction to Google and Yahoo in China, and his statement of: “it confirms the suspicions of some Americans that, for the sake of profit, major corporations in American will do most anything”
I wonder if his position remains the same in regards to web accessibility - like the current class action against Target for discrimination against blind and visually impaired people through its website.
John McCain is one of the view people I personally admire, and generally speaking I agree with much of what he says. Sadly though, on immigration he’s talking nonsense, and I think he knows he is but feels he’ll lose too much support if he doesn’t oppose immigration, so has to come up with plausible but hollow reasons why people shouldn’t work in the US if they weren’t born there.
Democracy is not about giving the people what they want, that’s *direct* democracy, and only works in Switzerland. Democracy is about restraining government malice and incompetence by threatening them with being turfed out of power if they screw up too badly. It has nothing to do with what the government is allowed to do once they secure a mandate. Democratically elected governments have not just a right but often a duty to do things that get less than 50% support in opinion polls. Market liberalisation, for example, is almost always done in the face of popular opposition, but when the price of bread and the unemployment figures plummet people suddenly realise “hmm, that wasn’t so bad after all”. That includes liberalisation of the job market in the era of globalisation.
Mike - I would be interested in hearing a Democratic perspective on these issues?
another repub, huh? How about being balanced and having a Democrat on here, Arrington?
You wouldn’t be a chickhenhawk, would you?
Did Senator McCain call his wife a gold digger?
“I was reminded of this story of a guy whose credit card was stolen but decided not to report it because the person who stole it was spending less money than his wife was. I had a similar motivation at the time.”
Haha, nonetheless, I am very thankful for having the opportunity to hear the stances of each candidate. These are very important issues to the tech community and the United States. Thanks TC!
I tell you if people came to my country and broke the law I’d want them thrown out … law of land trumps all. Don’t go to the land if you don’t agree with the law.
Morals should be important, they should be a factor in the decision to go to certain countries, but once there, respect the law.
Imagine the Chinese coming to the US and arresting a blogger who criticized them, to them its moral and so they ignore American law - acceptable? No … but they’re immoral and we’re right etc.
Keep the interviews rolling Mike!
Rex
H1-B Visas are just a way for VCs to keep their costs of talent low; too low for intelligent, motivated and market-knowledgable U.S.-based professionals to join the party and reap the rewards. It’s almost perverse to see how the wealthiest among us are less interested in sharing the rewards with other citizens and would rather bring in uninformed people from other countries and make them rich.
I am a Silicon Valley professional that is staunchly anti-H1-B visas and I hope other professionals that are sick and tired of dealing with immigrants willing to work for half market wages start voicing their opinion. It’s time we turned off the spigot that creates unfair labor competition in the valley.
Web 2.0 going mainstream.
Michael Arrington, your belief that people should break the law when they believe that others are acting unethically has a minor flaw: everyone has a different idea of what is ethical behavior. Under your system, you would have chaos. If everyone was allowed to disobey the laws they disagreed with then there will be no law. It is impossible to discern when people are violating a law because it doesn’t align with their ethics versus when they are doing it primarily for personal gain. You can’t accurately measure intentions.
Your lack of understanding what role law plays is interesting as you are/were a lawyer. Now I understand why our legal system is so screwed up. I have lost respect for your analysis and insights because of this comment.
As an American I’m embarrassed by how Senator McCain sold his soul and has been sucking up to the President despite the disgusting political attack the Bush campaign made against McCain’s family in South Carolina.
This is what’s disgusting - the man is clearly an intelligent, rational person, but he’s had to turn into this foaming-at-the-mouth monster to win the race to the bottom of the barrel for the Republican nomination. I’d have voted for McCain 2000, but there’s no way in hell I’d vote for McCain 2008.
my name is gil ! (:(:
Ah, That’s a huge fumble in China - esp it’s a huge economy and there are 1,300,000,000 (1.3 billion) people looking at what he did there.. that’s a major issue man.
Michael,
Since you disagree with what yahoo did, what are your thoughts on the US continuing to allow trade with China? if the US govt is so strongly against their policies, why not lead a worldwide embargo against them - similar to the one being led against Iran?
it seems clear that the govt is ok pulling up Yahoo because it is a private corporation and can be made answerable. While no one, including Sen McCain (whom i admire as well) is willing to sponsor a bill that would halt all trade until China fixes it’s human right issues.
It’s Veteran’s Day….let’s honor all those by Roland Majeau, “Soldiers Cry”
Totally corrupt on illegal infiltration, McCain isn’t much of an American himself.
McCain is getting desperate!
Sometimes we have to work with governments we dont like!
http://fakesteveballmer.blogspot.com
18: “I am a Silicon Valley professional that is staunchly anti-H1-B visas and I hope other professionals that are sick and tired of dealing with immigrants willing to work for half market wages start voicing their opinion.”
Typical protectionist claptrap reminiscent of the trades union era. “Half market wages”? The market wage is whatever wage the market clears at, i.e. where those willing to work work and those willing to employ employ. They aren’t working for half market wages: *you* are demanding double market wages solely on the basis of your nationality.
This is the era of globalisation. National borders are arbitrary lines drawn on maps in crayon by corrupt statesmen, often in comparatively recent memory (a mere few hundred years ago in the case of the USA, and more recently than that in much of the rest of the post-colonial world). Businesses, consumers and most workers with the exception of the coddled, inefficient, white dinosaurs in the West recognise that. Those who don’t will be left behind just as the guilds were in the Industrial Revolution.
This is a brill, insightful post. It’s such substantive reporting that keeps your readers spotchecking Techcrunch. Wonderful job, Michael.
And on #5, agreed.
No where is there more “hypocrites” then in the bay area.
A) it is wrong that people in China are put in prison for political views and just saying something wrong.
B) it is wrong to facilitate the above (ie what Yahoo did)
C) it is wrong to condemn Yahoo while listening to your iPod that was manufactured in China
D) it is either ok to do business with/in China, or it’s not, sure Yahoo’s actions are more easily damnable than consuming all your “made in China” products, but they are really the same thing at the core … supporting China
By the way Duncan, you will likely touch 100 products today that were made in China, including most likely your computer and phone, you have a moral obligation to throw those in the garbage right now, don’t you think?
Or is you profiting from China (by the way of lower priced goods) just that much better than Yahoo profiting from China.
Grow up boy!
@30
Not enough smart folks to do the work. It is very simple. An H1B is no cheaper then a US worker.
Now back to the klan work shop for you! I will argue that this jihad on the H1B’s& illegals aliens is a major component of our current housing/ Credit problems.
We used to have 165000 new master degree/Phd level engineers move to the USA every year and they bought houses, now we have 65000, that’s it.
American Universities DO NOT graduate 165000 Computer Science engineers, WHOSE GOING TO BUY THE HOUSES???
Now don’t get me started on cutting our cheap work force, why that makes no sense at all.
Ooops @18
hate this
new post please…wtf?
By way of debate, I would like to draw attention to this sentence by Senator McCain :
“By the way, as you know, Google made a deal with China, where if you google “tiananmen square” in China, you’ll see a very peaceful scene, but if you google it outside of China, you see the young Chinese man standing in front of a tank. So, Yahoo isn’t the only one that’s guilty here”
Who exactly is the arbiter of how Tiananmen Square should be represented?
Within China, Tiananmen Square is rightfully a very peaceful scene and is greatly revered by the many millions of Chinese warranting an almost pilgrimage like status as they strive to visit the Square to commemorate their national unity. Outside of China, due to overt politicization, the Chinese man in front of tank is the preferred confrontational image that some parties would like to forever hang around China’s neck as a noose.
In the greater scheme of things the Chinese now have the “peaceful scene” as the more representative image or does America and its senators have the greater say in imposing its own view of how the Chinese should be viewing one of their national icons?
It has to be recognised that there are irreconcilable differences in ideologies between US-style democracy and China’s brand of communism and capitalism – and noting that it was not too long ago that the US itself was conducting witch-hunts against its own citizens who embraced communism and even now, bloggers who criticize the US over the Iraq war are branded as enemies of the state.
So it is certainly open to debate to some degree of who is guilty of what and by whose laws….afterall, isn’t wire-tapping on the menu somewhere too?
I have two problems with JM’s stand on the H-1B. First it is based on a false premise and second it is illogical in and of itself.
The assertion, that we are not producing enough STEM (science, technology, engineering and math), workers is wrong. All of the studies showing otherwise are done by people who have a vested interest in it being true. Employers use it to justify more H-1Bs schools use it to get more government to fix a problem that does not exist. The latest, of many, independent studies showing it is not true is “Into the Eye of the Storm Assessing the Evidence on Science and Engineering Education, Quality, and Workforce Demand” which can be viewed at http://www.urban.org/UploadedP.....cience.pdf The basic flaw is comparing American achievement test results with other nations is that we keep students in school who are not serious about their studies where other nations do not. Thus they are there to take the test and lower the American average whereas foreign countries would have kicked them out of school long ago.
Second, even if the charge of low STEM worker graduates was true the H-1B would not be justified. McCain is saying because there are fewer STEM graduates today to be tomorrow’s experienced STEM workers we are going to allow employers to layoff those Americans, who when they were kids were very good at math and science, and replace them with cheap foreign labor today.
It is interesting to me that here on Tech Crunch, the issue about McCain’s interview that is being discussed the most is the Yahoo story.
I’ve seen a few comments on H1-B Visa’s but the preponderence is on China and whether or not U.S. companies should break other countries’ laws.
When I read comments by some that bemoan U.S. bullying and saying that we have to other other countries laws, I really, truly believe in myheart that there are two types of people here: logical, over-thinking the issue types, and people that know in their hearts the difference between right and wrong.
You can take any issue and debate it to death and make black seem white and up seem down. Attorneys are very well paid for this reason. When we point out that China just jailed a blogger for TEN YEARS, people immediately point out ways the U.S. is bad.
No country is perfect, but China is far from perfect. Chairman Mao slaughtered his own people to get to the top, and Chinese democracy has been stifled ever since. Those protestors that were slaughtered in Tinnamen square were pro-democracy university students, academics, and ordinary citizens that wanted what we here have on TC and in the whole o the U.S. — Freedom. They were gunned down by soldiers recruited from outlying Chinese provinces that were indoctrinated by the government and told to fire on their own people.
When Yahoo gave up the name of that blogger, they saw a chance to do good, and instead did wrong. People can argue all they like about “obeying another country’s laws” all they like– but when those laws have a man thrown in jail for ten years for having an opinion, come on now people. The United States does not jail bloggers ever, even when they spout complete garbage.
Yahoo and Google and every other U.S. corporation exists in a global arena- this is unavoidable. We live in a globalised world. But U.S. companies (and all companies in free countries) need to send the message that they will not do business with China when they continue to perpetrate human rights abuses. It’s really simple, and not hard to fathom. DO NOT SUPPORT HUMAN RIGHT ABUSES. Where is the dilemma? Why all the debate? If all of you are so sure we should obey all of China’s laws, go to China and start a blog on your own. Let me know how that turns out for you….
@ #8:
Don’t you ever get tired of saying thing slike “We in the west should not impose western ethics on the east”? There are democracies in the east, just not in China. There are people being brutalized (see Tibet, Myanmar).
John McCain is the type of politician that makes me believe in the U.S. and all the good it can do in the world. It may sound cheesy to some, but he believes that the U.S. still has its best days ahead of it, and I agree.
When he speaks, I feel inspired. The man is a leader, and I’d follow him. I also plan to vote for him. His personal hero is Theodore Roosevelt, and T.R. is one of mine as well. Of course, I also hold up Sen. McCain as one of my personal heroes.
He does not double talk and see which way the wind blows before stating his opinion (or take a bunch of polls).
He knew from the beginning Iraq would take more troops, and he was right. He promises to veto earmarks and pork barrel projects anf I believe him.
The man is an American hero, and I can think of no one better to lead the U.S. The other candidates have a few qualities I like, but none has all the qualities of John McCain. And I can only assume that with his recent rising in the polls that the rest of America is starting to feel the same way!!
McCain ‘08!!!!
McCain’s rise in the polls:
http://www.johnmccain.com/landing/a21.htm
@ 38:
“Who exactly is the arbiter of how Tiananmen Square should be represented?”
One answer is certain: It is not the government. Not in the United States, not in China, and not anywhere.
What makes this particularly insidious is Google’s status as a media company (or at least an internet facsimile of one). While there might be some justification for a US manufacturing firm going into China and abiding by Chinese labor laws, it is never justifiable for a US media firm to go into a totalitarian state and sanitize that country’s limitations on free speech by manipulating the information they provide to their citizens. It’s just as damning as if NBC Universal produced and distributed a communist sanctioned documentary on Tiananmen Square that never mentioned the protests.
Hey Michael, stop moving this story to the top of TechCrunch — we don’t care about your political bias. Thanks.
Mike - you really need to think through these points a little more, because frankly, you come off pretty amateurish. Yahoo’s only responsbility is to its shareholders. There are ethics committees, government, and other officially recognized organized that deal with political/human rights issues.
Yahoo would be extremely irresponsible if they denied China’s request, resulting in Yahoo being kicked off of China, resulting in lost revenue to its shareholders.
Now - if the shareholders decide to punish the stock because of Yahoo’s actions, then Yahoo’s management may decide in the future it is more desirable just to pull out of countries’ with unsavory policies. However, again, this decision MUST be driven by Yahoo’s considering the needs of its shareholders, NOT by making an arbitrary judgement on what it feels is ethical or not.
@46: Yahoo’s responsibility to its shareholders also involves not annoying regulators and US citizens so much that they bring themselves under further market cap destroying regulation. Tell Microsoft that their only responsibility to shareholders was to drive Netscape out of business.
Hey thanks for the audio - it was a great interview to listen to. I hope you have the opportunity to do more of this sort of thing with others in politics.
Gary
Did it occur to you that people in Silicon Valley might care more about say, the war in Iraq, the health care meltdown, the disastrous state of education, and so on? Did it occur to you that those things might matter a hell of a lot more than how many illegals are swarming at our borders, ready to invade us and kill our children? Did it occur to you that voting to allow torture and stripping away our constitutionally protected freedoms is more important than how many H1B visas are issued? Sigh.
McCain was pretty reasonable overall, and while I’d prefer a candidate who emphatically supported net neutrality rather than dancing around the issue, he did show signs of being willing to regulate the industry if abuses occurred. Problem is, he’s clearly not willing to make a definitive statement on the issue now, so who knows what he’d do if he got elected. I get the sense that he wouldn’t focus too much energy on it.
@JS: You can easily find out about his positions on those issues elsewhere. Watch a debate, check out the campaign’s web site, read another interview in the Washington Post or NY Times. This is a tech blog; the interview is going to be tech-focused.