|
|
|
|
|
|
by AJ007
5314 days ago
|
|
|
I never said the Philippines was a "regular other country", thus why is this in quotes? In my own personal business, I estimate without native English proficiency my employees would be worth 1/5th or less of what they are to me now. I would have to hire an bilingual manager to run projects, and that person would have to be paid a lot. My turnover would be higher and the accuracy of instructions would be diminished, thus resulting in slower project execution times. Irregardless of the non-ideal situations of the past, current citizens with English proficiency benefit enormously -- in the form of money. Being proficient in English is a really big deal. As an American child I was told over and over again that it was important to learn a foreign language to increase my ability to get a job. As an adult, I found the opposite, that English above all other languages was critical in running a successful international business. |
|
|
You used the Philippines as a counter-example to Russians not having very good skills in English. I think the example was badly chosen: Like if you choose to compare them to Canada or United Kingdom. Of course there are countries where people have better skills in English than in Russia. But I think comparison with one of these extreme examples misses the point -- you should compare Russia to other countries that are competing for being "the world leader in software development".
I do think however that we are discussing about a bit different things though, as I didn't understand how your reply had anything to do with my message -- except for the double quote part.