 Sure glad to be back where they worship the almighty dollar
Mxsmanic wrote:
>>What is your definition of "IT technician?"
>
> Programming, design, support, engineering, operations, or analysis,
> generally speaking.
Why do you snip so much context from the posts to which you
reply?
I also wrote this:
> Mxsmanic wrote:
>
>> These days, I wonder if it's possible to make a living as an IT
>> technician at all.
>
> What is your definition of "IT technician?"
>
> If it matches mine, then it is very possible. I work in a region in
> which thousands of people work in IT for companies ranging from just a
> few employees to companies with thousands of workers.
Thus, based on your definition of "IT technician," the answer is that
it's quite possible to make a living as an IT technician. I do.
Thousands of people in my region do. That being the case, why do you
wonder?
Why do you cut so much context from the posts to which you reply?
Additionally, you didn't respond at all to this:
>> The problem used to be that companies would hire
>> people with only the skill set they required at the lowest possible
>> wage, and then lay them off at the end of the project. Today, they
>> just outsource.
>
> Since you claim that companies just outsource, then it requires just
> one counterexample to prove the claim false. I work for a company that
> doesn't "just outsource." I applied to work for this company when I
> was 48 years old. I was hired and have been at this company since then.
> This company is not the only one in my area which hires locally.
This is a counterclaim to your claim that "they just outsource." In
addition, this company interviewed and hired me even though I am well
over 30. Why did you not address this? Do you simply ignore points
that prove your claims to be wrong? If so, why?
--
dgs
| 
