Not worth it working in UK?

Indeed. Do please let us know when you find the congratulatory article about how well the Indians in Queens County New York are doing, with their average household income of $60,612, compared to the average household income in the county of $65,474. (Stats are taken from US Census Bureau for 2006, the same survey used for the article you cited re: Santa Clara County in California. The sample size was nearly 20% larger in Queens, by the way.) So the implied argument that the Indian migrants in Silicon Valley are representative of the Indian diaspora, can be left where we found it: in the circular file.

Well It may not be in New York. It is a place which is the world finance center and those living here have thier income coming from where not. The good fraction of people living in NY are buisness men ( CEO and MDs of various investment banks and finance institutions ) who have thier income in atronoimical figures, and so no doubt that have its own bearing on the average.

Move to silicon valley where it is the IT and only IT and there the indians are dominating, right?


________
Extreme vaporizer

Ok, so it's the business-people who are skewing the average in New York.
How about, say, London?

One report that compares performance of migrants into the UK: 'Britain's immigrants: an economic profile' (Sriskandarajah et al., Institute for Public Policy Research, Sept 2007). Not sure about London-specific research on this topic, though.

http://www.ippr.org/publicationsandrepo ... asp?id=563 (link to pdf at bottom of page)

In earlier posts, a broad generalisation had been advanced (by prem12) the Indian IT workers were representative of the Indian diaspora, and that they categorically performed better than native populations and other migrant groups. Has the sweeping generalisation now been modified instead to suggest that migrant Indian IT workers do better than all others, barring those who do better than the migrant Indian IT workers themselves ?

Prem12 your quote that there is no other sector that has pay as high as IT is neither correct or factual (just do a google search). For your information, the IT boom burst 7 years ago and IT pay is no different from any other average sector. Infact, it is now harder for IT professionals to justify a high pay in their supporting roles which are increasingly being outsourced at a third of the costs.

global gypsy wrote:Ok, so it's the business-people who are skewing the average in New York.
How about, say, London?

Do you have a silicon valley in Britain? Had there been one, it would not have been any different from what the situation is in in US.

If they are dominating in US silicon valley, why would they not do elsewhere ? Any reason that you can think of?

Places like Silicon Valley no doubt , show the correct profile of IT as compared to finance centers or cosmoplitan places like New York.
________
JAILBROKEN

gordon wrote:One report that compares performance of migrants into the UK: 'Britain's immigrants: an economic profile' (Sriskandarajah et al., Institute for Public Policy Research, Sept 2007). Not sure about London-specific research on this topic, though.

http://www.ippr.org/publicationsandrepo ... asp?id=563 (link to pdf at bottom of page)

In earlier posts, a broad generalisation had been advanced (by prem12) the Indian IT workers were representative of the Indian diaspora, and that they categorically performed better than native populations and other migrant groups. Has the sweeping generalisation now been modified instead to suggest that migrant Indian IT workers do better than all others, barring those who do better than the migrant Indian IT workers themselves ?

According to the report cited by yourself, the Indians have better hourly salary, number of hour worked in a week better than the native UK. Further in matter of owning home, Indians are the ranked as number of one in UK. Please go through your own report. I could see Indians always better than native UK.
________
Stream

prem12 wrote:Among those who get due educational opportunity and exposure , Indians fare much better in the global arena, which is obvious from the numbers of huge diaspora of Indian IT professionals which represent the average, not the best.

But your premise earlier (cf your words quoted above, for a mere sample of your gross generalisations) was that Indians outperformed everyone, not just native populations. Such a generalisation requires that they top the tables (for instance, in the ippr report) relative to natives and other migrant groups, which they don't. You can't argue that one group does better than everyone else, and then only compare that group to the native population.

Only the most careless reading of that report would have missed the glaring facts that, compared to all other groups, Indians do not have the highest employment rates; they do not have the highest self-employment rates; they are not the best educated; they do not have the highest rate of hourly pay; they do not work the greatest number of hours; and they do not have the highest gross annual income. So they have the highest home-ownership rate; that's great, but are we meant to ignore the findings of the rest of the report and conclude that Indians are summarily superior to everyone else on the solitary basis of home-ownership rates ? Surely that cannot be the whole of your argument for Indian ascendancy abroad.

So yes, I have read the ippr report, and in its entirety, no less. And I can't imagine how you can have overlooked the fact that I'm the one who cited it in this thread, and much earlier on, I might add.

I have not overlloked those facts at all. I did not put that in the first post itself . I knew you would come back with this point.

Yes they are not the highest earning.
But if you look at the number of migrants the those coming from India is much more than those from any other country by 3 or more times.

And of course as I had said not all the migrants from India are skilled migrants. Where as those migrating from developed nations like US, Canada and France, Australia, European countries, which generally top most of the list, would be skilled. Thats is the simple reason for this.

I understand you must be finding it difficult admitting that Indians are the richest in Silicon valley which is a typical place which shows the unfudged picture of the clutch of Indians in IT. The data that you trying, even according to which Indians are way better, cover all the migrants skilled as well as unskilled. Even in the previous posts I have been focusing on the IT sector only but dont know why every time you slip back to some data which is not pertinent.

I would really wonder why Indian would be the richest in Silicon valley and not at other places. You need to get the pertinent data and not just any data.
________
Girlfriend Pic

But you said that Indian IT workers were representative of the average in the Indian diaspora; ergo the average Indian migrant's performance should be reflective of what you've claimed for Indian IT workers, regardless of the number of migrants and regardless where one draws data. But that's patently not the case, is it.

prem12 wrote:I have not overlloked those facts at all. I did not put that in the first post itself . I knew you would come back with this point.

Yes they are not the highest earning.
But if you look at the number of migrants the those coming from India is much more than those from any other country by 3 or more times.

And of course as I had said not all the migrants from India are skilled migrants. Where as those migrating from developed nations like US, Canada and France, Australia, European countries, which generally top most of the list, would be skilled. Thats is the simple reason for this.

I understand you must be finding it difficult admitting that Indians are the richest in Silicon valley which is a typical place which shows the unfudged picture of the clutch of Indians in IT. The data that you trying, even according to which Indians are way better, cover all the migrants skilled as well as unskilled. Even in the previous posts I have been focusing on the IT sector only but dont know why every time you slip back to some data which is not pertinent.

I would really wonder why Indian would be the richest in Silicon valley and not at other places. You need to get the pertinent data and not just any data.

You seem to have interpreted my statement to suit to your convininece.

What it means is that such a huge Indian diaspora who work in IT sector are not the best of Indians. It cannot be, simply becuase the of the huge number, it can only be average, in terms of those who get college level of education and migrate.

What I meant was that it is not that the Indian IT diaspora comes from the elite colleges in India. Most of them comes from ordinary college ( educated in in IT related desicpline of course ) are able to make thier way to Silicon Valley and earn handsomely.

There are still others who did not recieve education IT related field end up not being able to command market in terms of salary as they do not have a very good experience back in India. They work on lower wages in IT sector and it is this section of people at which Kaff & alikes look at and live in illusions that all the Indians are like that.
________
LAMBO TECH

Where as those migrating from developed nations like US, Canada and France, Australia, European countries, which generally top most of the list, would be skilled.

Not correct. To cite an example, there are significant numbers of British carpenters, plumbers etc who migrate to countries like Australia. In fact, one could argue the reverse, i.e. more number of highly skilled people migrate from countries like India to developed nations.

Well, they were your words, not mine. I daresay you may claim, ex post, to have meant them however you wish. But clearly, the terms 'Indian' and 'Indian migrants' and 'Indian IT workers' should not have been used interchangeably.

But I've not disputed that Indian migrants do well in Silicon Valley; I did not have to read an article from some random foreign newspaper to work that out. However, unless you can prove that the native population (let alone the migrants) share the same profile as those migrant Indian IT workers disproportionately represented in Silicon Valley, then citing that article does nothing to advance even the more narrowly defined argument you claim to have intended to make, that migrant IT workers outperform their counterparts in that sector --- because not everyone (native or migrant) in Santa Clara County works in Silicon Valley, and not everyone who works in Silicon Valley lives in Santa Clara County.

And once again, I am not disputing your claim; it may well be true. I am merely pointing out that the evidence you provided do not support it - so my sort of skepticism is not unhealthy, although one might call it inconvenient.

prem12 wrote:You seem to have interpreted my statement to suit to your convininece.

Hi all posters in this thread ,

It has been a very interesting and entertaining read - a good break from the normal HSMP hassles.

But just a couple of points - someone here posted that most indians go abroad for "money" and then "beg" for jobs - whatever - please dont make such statements - even if you really had access to almost a million individual's stated reasons for going abroad - you still dont know what the real reason for someone to want to migrate is, sometimes its easier to say youre leaving "home" to "make money" as that seems to be the "acceptable" reason nowadays. People think about a lot more than just money when they make life altering decisions.
And some one else posted something about if India and Indians are doing so great - why they choose to go abroad at all to "developed" ( as the poster put it) countries - Indians seek opportunities to go to other countries for reasons which are democratically acceptable - ie rendering service for a market price - no extortion or force there - which is far better than what certain "kingdoms" did forcibly a mere hundered years ago or what certain world powers are doing even today undemocratically -lets none of us living in glass houses sling mud at each other - it would seem that life comes full circle even at the global level - sorry if this sounds acrimonious. i have travelled to Britain several times and found the ppl there every friendly - im sure US is the same as well. I wish all of you all the best with your HSMP application

global gypsy wrote:

Where as those migrating from developed nations like US, Canada and France, Australia, European countries, which generally top most of the list, would be skilled.

Not correct. To cite an example, there are significant numbers of British carpenters, plumbers etc who migrate to countries like Australia. In fact, one could argue the reverse, i.e. more number of highly skilled people migrate from countries like India to developed nations.

Agreed. It is a hundred times harder for a skilled Indian to emigrate to the UK than it is for an unskilled Aussie, ergo most Indian nationals in the UK (other than those who come as family members) are skilled.

Victoria

And this makes the immigration policies of these countries inherently discriminatory.

Vidya, while I agree with most of your sentiments, it's also important to underscore the fact some Indians tend to talk in hyperbole when they refer to the success of the Indian diaspora. This attitude only helps to provide an excuse to those who are waiting to have a dig at Indians (and other immigrants from developing nations). Striking the right balance is important; hope you agree.

global gypsy wrote:Vidya, while I agree with most of your sentiments, it's also important to underscore the fact some Indians tend to talk in hyperbole when they refer to the success of the Indian diaspora. This attitude only helps to provide an excuse to those who are waiting to have a dig at Indians (and other immigrants from developing nations). Striking the right balance is important; hope you agree.

What do have to say about Kaff's comment. ( Are you his brother.)
Anyway I think that all couple of posts that you have made on this thread have hardly been any good and germane to the discussion, least knowing about the past of this thread. That is also the reason why I do not care to post my opinion on your comments.

So unless you have been a part of the thread or know how things have progressed, please refrain for posting irrelevent.
________
CALIFORNIA MEDICAL MARIJUANA

vidya wrote:Hi all posters in this thread ,

It has been a very interesting and entertaining read - a good break from the normal HSMP hassles.

But just a couple of points - someone here posted that most indians go abroad for "money" and then "beg" for jobs - whatever - please dont make such statements - even if you really had access to almost a million individual's stated reasons for going abroad - you still dont know what the real reason for someone to want to migrate is, sometimes its easier to say youre leaving "home" to "make money" as that seems to be the "acceptable" reason nowadays. People think about a lot more than just money when they make life altering decisions.
And some one else posted something about if India and Indians are doing so great - why they choose to go abroad at all to "developed" ( as the poster put it) countries - Indians seek opportunities to go to other countries for reasons which are democratically acceptable - ie rendering service for a market price - no extortion or force there - which is far better than what certain "kingdoms" did forcibly a mere hundered years ago or what certain world powers are doing even today undemocratically -lets none of us living in glass houses sling mud at each other - it would seem that life comes full circle even at the global level - sorry if this sounds acrimonious. i have travelled to Britain several times and found the ppl there every friendly - im sure US is the same as well. I wish all of you all the best with your HSMP application

Would you mind if I ask you stop sounding prude?
________
Flood Insurance Dicussion

But is 25K GBP enuf even in a place like london? how much approx will you be able to save if its an expensive place like london?

ashishashah wrote:Hmm.
In UK if u get 25 K GBP your work-life balance is maintained..In India , if you get paid 20KGBP (around 16 lakhs INR), most IT companies expect you to put 10-12 hours, and there is a lot of pressure (obvious as you are being paid highly)...
So if u r just comparing salary then there might not be a HUGE difference,but for the same amount,you can have peace of mind in UK..(since for same salary, u r over paid in India and are expected to deliver overly as per crazy deadlines, and in UK u r underpaid and are not expected to deliver as per crazy deadlines..)