Comments on: Answering Bush's competition challenge

The State of the Union speech throws down the gauntlet, and Cisco CEO John Chambers says America must respond with alacrity.

[dmrpdx]

How can the president even utter the words that education is a priority

How can the president even utter the words that education is a priority after making unprecedented cuts to financial aid for higher education? By making higher education unavailable to more people you are effectively reducing the pool to pull the "best and the brightest" from. I guess when you hear the best and the brightest it really means the best and the brightest with money.

Cisco is a Big Part of the Problem

Because Cisco continues to import cheap slave labor
under the H1-B program, US college students are
avoiding careers in technology.

The idea that we can improve American competitiveness
by spending more money on education is ludicrous
as long as the corporations are allowed to engage
in systematic discrimination against US citizens.

John Chambers and George Bush are both engaged in
?let?s pretend? rhetoric. Instead of actually making
things better, they are talking about the situation
rather than taking action to improve it.
Some people call this "analysis paralysis".
Other people call it things which are unprintable.

[maxperfectforce]

Is there an alternative.

The H1-B abuse by high tech companies and offshoring are harming the engineering base in the US. Hiring more H1-Bs and increased offhshoring has begun a spiral that is accelerating the rise of China and India and diminishing the US technological advantage. I understand that US firms must lower their costs to compete with the likes of Huawei, but H1-B and offshoring will eventually eat us, not save us. The only solution I can see to keeping the US engineering base strong is tax credits for engineers who are US citizens. Blaming the US education system for the lack of engineers is a lie and a disservice to the hard working teachers of this great country. Shame on those who are taking apart the engineering base of this country.

[lazura]

Not Competitive? What does that mean?

I'm tired of politicians and CEO's talking about the US not being 'competitive' without revealing the real reasons why. Education? Our K-12 schools certainly have problems, but the US still educates 99% of it's population, where as countries like India and China still only educate about 20-25%% (both countries have a 75% poverty rate). Also, our college education system is still the best in the world by far (the best come here; nobody goes to China or India for college). But, where the US could really impact education is by making college affordable for most Americans; the cost of college today in this country is insane and growing rapidly. Now what these 'leaders' really mean by not being 'competitive' is that our cost-of-living is too high. Our cost of living is 10-20 times more than in countries like China or India. Well, whose fault is that! If that means that we all need to start making WalMart-type wages to be 'competitive', then I want to see the CEO's lower their wages significantly also from a non-competitive $10 million a year to a competitive $100,000 a year. Swallow that pill John Chambers..

[R. U. Sirius]

Hypocrite

Sure John, you care so much for our country, but you aren't hesitating one bit to offshore US jobs to India and China. I believe nothing that you have to say, you've already proven yourself.

[TomMariner]

Thank you John

I am both enthusiastic and pessimistic about the Mr. Chamber's well thought out and timely words.

I am enthused that at least there is some spoken recognition that our standard of living (at the least) is in danger because our innovation is waning.

I am less enthralled by the word "priority". The concept of priority means that money and effort will have to be diverted from a less important task to one that restores our twentieth century inventiveness. Some folks flew airplanes into buildings in New York City and we as a nation could not even squelch our greedy habits enough to effectively concentrate spending on areas that were most likely for a return visit by our enemies. Our lives are at stake and we treated the enormous funds like the Highway Bill to be doled out according to seniority and geographical area! Are we really going to be able make the hard choices to divert attention from rewarding those who trade services within our borders to those who invent things that the rest of the world will buy?

One of the other reasons I am pessimistic is the tone of other talkbacks to John's important words. We seem so busy passionately and irrationally supporting one political view or another that we ignore the fact that if we don't change, our children are going to be cutting grass for folks from "over there" to whom we have sent our capital for the things they have invented.

I think John Chambers has earned the right to his opinion and that we would be foolish to ignore him.

[pentium4forever]

President Bush is an idiot, nucccleearr!

It's funny to hear President Bush say we aren't innovative enough. Well, when you cut jobs like he has and then run away from talking about it during press conferences, speeches, etc, what can you expect? He doesn't know what he's talking about and doesn't really have a plain laid out in his agenda. That's why America is in the hole it is in. I didn't vote for him in '04. When 2008 comes around, he'll finally be done as President, thank goodness. America needs a Democrat that doesn't screw up the budget like he has. Hillary 2008!

[Sarbanes]

What a joke!!!

Give me a break. Our government is so out of touch it makes me sick to my stomach. I agree with everyone's replies to this story. Some more valid than others.

But one major item has not been discussed-- Stock Option Accounting. Whether you agree or disagree with the new accounting rules, companies like Microsoft, Intel and Cisco were founded on the principals of innovation, risk and reward. Our wonderful politicians folded like a cheap lawn chair when this issue became mainstream which was tainted by all of the corporate governance issues. So we want to be leaders in technology, but took away a tool that has been used to get people to work around the clock for high risk high/high return. Are we really willing to bet the future of this country that the rules will makes us less competitive? Out of touch, or government employees that don't have stock options and work a 9 to 4 job (highly productive) making decisions that will impact this country for many years to come.

Does our wonderful leader (Pres. Bush) even understand the issue? If our government wants to compete with cheaper labor overseas with our US work force that is generally under educated and lazy (why should I do more, what is the incentive to work around the clock etc...), how are they expecting this will happen? By telling us we are not competitive? Oh that will do it-- George says we are lazy so let's work harder. What a joke--

Oh, and if that was not enough, our wonderful government passed the sarbanes oxley bill. Now every company in America can waste all of their resources focusing on internal controls etc.. (most of which were not issues)and spending a whole bunch of money with accounting and law firms instead of increasing R&D funding. Great trade off-- I am sure that Sarbanes Oxley dollars wasted will give the US a big competitive advantage in the near future. What a joke!!!!

If you work for the government and you don't like my comments, too bad. I pay your salary and you are making my job and every american's job harder. So get over it, smell the coffee and get a real job.

[djacobsonw]

Education begins in the HOME not the schools

Math and science proficiency still must come from reading and understanding language. Children from birth should be read to outloud or through audiotapes to hear syntax and vocabulary. Early Childhood Education in the home and schools is a necessity; yet, funding is directed at higher school levels. Literacy starts in the HOME, not in the schools. High school students are graduating with below 4th grade reading literacy--how are they to become excellent in math and science?

[Egils1]

Innovation Requires Bi-Partisan Action

The President's American Competitiveness Initiative is a strategically significant response to the challenges the US faces in the hyper competitive, networked global economy. The President?s proposals are a smart investment in basic research, science and math education, long term incentives for private sector innovation and the world?s brightest people to study and work in the US. The US cannot maintain an economic leadership role by shutting down borders to the worlds goods, services, capital and talent. The nation must focus on bolstering innovation as the primary driver of future competitiveness and prosperity. Bi-partisan action on authorizing legislation and appropriations is the next essential step and hopefully will be accomplished this year.

[sid_dr]

reply to the president's ides

i am an indian and proud to be that.although i also admire the american prowess in defense and economy.i sincerely request te people ruling this country to change their attitude towards the world.you are te nation who cn one handedly raise countries like somalia,etc o new heights.
america can remain the leader if it wants.the first thing required is concentrate entirely on your agenda.by involving yourself in iraq and afghnistan you have lost weapons,money and more importanly your soldiers.
think over that.

[carbonunit]

energy independence and "Kyoto"

Another area where the US has "fallen behind" is in the fight against the impending ecological disaster of global warming. Cisco is uniquely positioned to provide technology (e.g. video conferencing) that will greatly reduce the need for business travel and commuting, both major producers of green house gases worldwide.

Revolutionary, or at least innovative, solutions for reducing carbon emissions and becoming energy independent should be a major priority of the US government and US corporations if we ever hope to maintain (or perhaps regain) our economic and political leadership.