There is a high proportion of Indians in Silicon Valley.

This article tells you about the knowledge points corresponding to the high proportion of Indians in Silicon Valley. I hope it will be helpful to you. Don't forget to collect this site. Silicon Valley in the United States is "occupied" by Indians? With an illiteracy rate of over 100 million, how can India create senior talents? A strange thing has recently been discovered that the United States has a number of leading technology monopolies in many fields, such as Microsoft, Google and IBM, but most of these American giants are actually controlled by Indians: Microsoft CEO Nadella is of Indian descent; Google CEO Sandal-Pichai is of Indian descent; and now IBM's CEO is also taken over by an Indian Arkwenkrishna. The three may be accidental, but the CEO of Pepsi, Nokia, Motorola and Harman International are all of Indian origin, which is outrageous. There's something even more outrageous. Silicon Valley, as the science and technology center of the world, is now being occupied by Indians step by step! According to statistics, in Silicon Valley in the United States, Indian senior technical personnel account for 1/3 of the total talent in Silicon Valley, and it is still increasing year by year. With a change of sight, India now accounts for 1/3 of the world's illiterate population, reaching nearly 300 million, making it the only country in the world that has more than 100 million illiterates. Then the question is, how did India manage to have so many senior talents while there are so many illiterates? On closer inspection, it does not seem contradictory, because India is not only the most illiterate country, but also the country with the largest gap between the rich and the poor in the world. Coincidentally, India accounts for another 1/3 of the world's 1.2 billion poor people, of whom more than 70 million belong to extreme poverty. That is, the average daily living expenses is less than 9 yuan. With a family of six per capita in India, survival is a problem, and education is even more nonsense. On the other hand, for rich Indians, the illiteracy rate is zero, and from the beginning, they also have a bachelor's degree, while Indian families sandwiched in the middle with a slightly better economy will generally receive higher education. Some friends may want to say that no matter how poor India is, people still have eight years of primary compulsory education, but in fact, compulsory education has not been really popularized in India for more than 50 years until today. the reason is also simple: how long did it take from the promulgation of the compulsory Education Law in 1986 to the real popularization of nine-year compulsory education in India? In 15 years, India became even more tiger, directly writing the grand goal of universal compulsory education into the Constitution. How long will it take for India to complete the plan? Jawaharlal Nehru patted his forehead: I said a number! Ten years! Yes, India plans to spend 10 years eliminating more than 80 per cent of domestic illiteracy, totaling more than 240 million, so in the first five-year plan, India allocated 56 per cent of its education spending to primary education. However, in the specific implementation of primary education, India has continued the fine tradition of "slogan is my only action." The laissez-faire policy has been adopted for a long time in the management of primary and secondary education, completely acting as a shopkeeper, asking each state to independently implement universal compulsory education, the situation varies from state to state, and the implementation situation must follow the feeling. As of 2007, India had only eight states with zero primary education dropout rates, 11 states with dropout rates of more than 50%, and the dropout rates in Assam and Bihar even soared to 70%. According to the special case standard of our country's Pujiu acceptance, which allows a maximum dropout rate of 3% a year, it is estimated that India will have to wait another decade. Maybe Nehru was talking about physical extermination. Down-to-earth has never been an Indian style. Nehru did not believe in the sequential development concept of "primary education, secondary education and higher education" put forward by the West at that time, but thought that this was a plot by the West to slow down the rise of our "Great Indian Empire." therefore, while developing primary education, India also allocated the rest of the education funds to higher education. My life is that I am not greasy, bet on both ends and turn a bicycle into a train directly. The consequence of this two-pronged approach is that the slogan for the development of primary education was shouted for the first two years, and in the later stage, the money went to higher education. Since the second five-year plan, the share of funding for primary education has fallen to 33%, and even dived to 24% from 1966 to 1969, while the proportion of funding for higher education has risen to 49% in the same period. Why did India bet all its money on it? Because although primary education is the direct solution to illiteracy, it can be found to be a thankless bottomless pit in India. Money is poured into it, and after it is cultivated, we have to continue to engage in secondary education. Then why don't I just start higher education? My "Great Indian Empire" was established in 2000 to become the flag of a developed country in 2020. How can I have time to accompany you small beans to thrive? India suddenly grasped the "essence" of the problem and devoted itself vigorously to the reform of higher education. What are the results of this reform? Two words: shredded. With the unremitting efforts of the Indian Education Commission, the Indian university system has become the highest fault of higher education in the world. There are now nearly 20,000 colleges and universities in India, and 18 key colleges, represented by the Indian Institute of Technology, drink spicy food with the absolute bulk of education spending every year, while the vast majority of the rest are basically on the brink of bankruptcy every day. To investigate its source is also closely related to its "sunset father (UK)". Universities in modern India appeared during the British colonial rule in the 19th century, when Britain enslaved India for most of its life and found that in the industrial age, the Indian's IQ and EQ were still so low. The leader picks up food and you turn the table, and the leader plays cards and you touch yourself. I can't do this. What I need in the new era is senior wage earners. I need some education! So in 1813, the British Parliament authorized the East India Company to manage the education of the colonies, and the Earl of Macaulay drafted the famous Macaulay Memorandum, which highlighted: "in view of the fact that the government does not have enough funds to implement mass education in India, the colonial government should establish higher education institutions that can only serve a small number of elites." So the Indian colonial government started elite education without much money. But the bad thing is the elite education. After receiving education, the Indian elite finally realized the fact that they were Indian, began to carry out a "calm" non-violent non-cooperation movement under the leadership of Gandhi, and asked Britain to share some of the power of education. At that time, Britain had just finished the first World War, and although it had won, it was still damaging to its strength, let alone to worry about India. As a result, the colonial government made concessions in the education management system, implementing a "decentralization" system, with the central government retaining some of its rights, while the rest was devolved to various states, which were jointly managed by the central and local governments. Later, this is where India learned from the bosses of primary education. In the first few years, local enthusiasm for running schools was indeed high, but don't forget that this is bulk India, where there is no consensus among the states at all, and the development of education is arbitrary. As of 1931, India's literacy rate was only 8.6%. No, no, no. On August 15, 1947, India became independent, and this newborn bulk country had no money, but no matter how hard it was, the children could not suffer. Nehru's first thought was to popularize primary education and the reform of higher education. Wolong's "achievement" we have just said, chicken chicks have to support ah! So in the 1950s and 1960s, the number of colleges and universities in India expanded rapidly from 606 in 1950 to 2370 in 1965. With the liberalization of private universities in the 1980s, the number of Indian universities skyrocketed to 8410 so far. Not to mention India's colleges adopt the admittance system, commonly known as thigh hugging, and the attached colleges have now exceeded the 30, 000 mark and rushed to 40, 000. However, poverty is like the wind, and it is often with me. No matter how many universities are built, the central government's funding for higher education will still be so small even if it goes up. From the early 1950s to the early 1970s, the proportion of higher education in the total education expenditure in India increased from 1 to 3, not to mention in the early 1970s, when the Indian economy was in recession, the investment in higher education and the development of higher education system in India were at a standstill. Well, with limited funds, India certainly has to spend money on what they think is the cutting edge, that is, engineering, business, and science majors directly linked to GDP, and the country is also divided into two systems according to the education level of these popular majors: the national key college system and the general higher education system. Key colleges enjoy good food and drink, while life and death in ordinary colleges and universities depend on heaven. And in these 18 school groups