Outsourcing is bad for America....

[FrodoB]

Many democrats preach about equality and jobs for all. But does that only apply to Americans? Isn't it a good thing that more people around the world now have access to better jobs and higher standards of living?

 

[SuperTool]

Originally posted by: FrodoB
Many democrats preach about equality and jobs for all. But does that only apply to Americans? Isn't it a good thing that more people around the world now have access to better jobs and higher standards of living?

Are you an internationalist or an American?

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: SuperTool

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: SuperTool
I guess we all gotta give up our health benefits and agree to work for $3/hr to keep our jobs

unless we can do like the unions did in the early part of this century and coerce the foreign gov'ts into siding with us then we'll have to wait around for their own people to do so.

I don't remember such a thing happening in the last 4 years. Refresh my memory please.
I remember Spain's govt siding with Bush without having their people do so, but I don't remember the union angle.

early part of the 1900s

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: SuperTool

Originally posted by: FrodoB
Many democrats preach about equality and jobs for all. But does that only apply to Americans? Isn't it a good thing that more people around the world now have access to better jobs and higher standards of living?

Are you an internationalist or an American?

well all know you can't be both!

 

[chess9]

Charity starts at home. Besides, this is about business, not charity. We could go a long way towards solving some of our social problems if people at the bottom of the ladder had JOBS. And when our steelworkers lose their jobs and Congress won't extend their unemployment benefits and provide re-training should we sit idly by? No thank you. Those guys have busted their humps for 20-40 years so you guys could wreck the guys made of their steel.

We OWE them more. Just like we owe our veterans and soldiers and police and teachers and firemen.

-Robert

 

[tallest1]

Originally posted by: dirtboy

Originally posted by: tallest1
we not only need to globalize jobs but also globalize worker protections, rights, and benefits.

And how are you going to do that??? Hmmmmmmmmm......? I'm still waiting. Are you going to invade all these countries and force their governments to do what we want?

No, thats what you would probably do. We would push for worker rights the same way we 'fight' for human rights in China and woman's rights in the middle east. Through diplomacy and regulation (I'll further on this in 30 secs), we mold the world into a better place. In case you forget we do this in places like China and Cuba - Bush refuses to end the embargo with Cuba until they have "free and fair National Assembly elections...[release] political prisoners and [allow] a free opposition"
[ Link ]. We've intentionally strained trade relations with China time to time until human rights issues are resolved. This isn't protectionism, this isn't global lawmaking. This is to insure that money isn't earned by means of the sweat and blood of the unfortunate. To insist that these people in India should continue to be regarded as modern slaves should be a crime.

Originally posted by: dirtboy
Oh wait, you're not going to change them. People will enact change when they want it. We wanted all these changes and we got them.

BS! If you believed that, you would've been against the war on Iraq. But I digress, you're not going to see 10 year old kids in Africa standing up against a multibillion corporation now are we? These people could enact change but the problem is that those same American businesses would leave them just as quickly as they left us.

Originally posted by: dirtboy
It's called survival of the fittest. If someone is willing to work without health benefits, then they are more likely to get a job because it will cost an employer less. Deny that will you? Try running a business for a day.

Wow, talk about coldhearted. Lets just pay everyone in this country $5/hour and corner the world market while we're at it. Hell, lets start an ebay for jobs with a person who offers to work for the least gets the job. That way the small business owners win, the big businesses win, sounds like Utopia doesn't it? :disgust:

Originally posted by: dirtboy
Other people are willing to take our tech jobs because they have no other choice. Over time, they will begin to demand more rights. Just because it doesn't happen today or when you want it to happen, doesn't mean it won't. There's a huge difference in intelligence between someone who assembles shoes and someone who write code. The smart ones will seek change down the road.

I partially agree with this but what can you say when every company comes to you and says "Heres a job we should pay you $60,000/yr for but instead we'll pay you $25,000/yr without benefits. Take it or leave it?". For as long as there are people elsewhere to exploit, conditions won't get any better. If American (or even better, the global community) doesn't respond to this, every demand for rights will be ignored.

In the meantime, you just gotta face that this is the way things are.

I would agree with you if the issue at hand didn't involve us.

Originally posted by: dirtboy
You get all excited about high paying tech jobs, but ask yourself how many Mom & Pop stores, the ones you claim to love and want to protect so badly, have gone out of business due to Internet retailers who undercut their prices. I don't see you complaining because you are too busy cashing your big paycheck.

Believe me, I shed a tear when I see Mom & Pop stores close down. I make it a priority to eat at a Mom & Pop's restaurant at least once a month and I avoid Walmart like the plague. To a degree you're right. Progress & innovation is causing people to lose jobs and lower their profit margin. Its a horrible thing to see but unless you equate outsourcing with progress & innovation, you're a bit off. Progress & innovation is like the DVD overtaking the VCR, video killing the radio star , and CD players replacing record players - thats the kind of scenario where people HAVE to adapt but do you really think replacing the modern american worker with an underpaid worker in another country is Progress? Innovation? There are certainly casualties in both cases - of course, that guy who used to program in Basic for a living will have to adapt - but I refuse to see Americans adapt because companies can exploit people elsewhere.

If you read all of this, :beer: for you

 

[rahvin]

Protectionism is far far worse for an economy than any outsourcing.

 

[dirtboy]

Originally posted by: tallest1

No, thats what you would probably do.

Yea.

I could care how other people live their lives. You should know that by now.

We would push for worker rights the same way we 'fight' for human rights in China and woman's rights in the middle east. Through diplomacy and regulation (I'll further on this in 30 secs), we mold the world into a better place.

So you're going to force your ideals on other nations. Isn't that very similar to nation building? I thought you folk were against that.

This isn't protectionism, this isn't global lawmaking. This is to insure that money isn't earned by means of the sweat and blood of the unfortunate.

It is global lawmaking. You're saying that everyone else should adhere to what you want and they shouldn't be allowed to do it. And if they do, there will be repercussions.

BS! If you believed that, you would've been against the war on Iraq. But I digress, you're not going to see 10 year old kids in Africa standing up against a multibillion corporation now are we? These people could enact change but the problem is that those same American businesses would leave them just as quickly as they left us.

Not so. People can live the way they want. I could care less. When they start killing me, then that pisses me off. When they threaten to kill me, that pisses me off, unless their name is Red Dawn. As far as I'm concerned, if Saddam would have done what he was supposed to, he could still be in power and still killing his citizens today.

Wow, talk about coldhearted. Lets just pay everyone in this country $5/hour and corner the world market while we're at it. Hell, lets start an ebay for jobs with a person who offers to work for the least gets the job. That way the small business owners win, the big businesses win, sounds like Utopia doesn't it? :disgust:

So you think it's cold hearted when you don't get a job because someone else is more qualified.

It's all about survival of the fittest. Look around you. The weak perish and the strong prosper.

I partially agree with this but what can you say when every company comes to you and says "Heres a job we should pay you $60,000/yr for but instead we'll pay you $25,000/yr without benefits. Take it or leave it?". For as long as there are people elsewhere to exploit, conditions won't get any better. If American (or even better, the global community) doesn't respond to this, every demand for rights will be ignored.

Then I guess you will either take the job or change jobs. It's not my fault you choose to let someone dictate your employment future. Nobody is stopping you from running your own business, but yourself. If you're working for the man, you take what he gives you or go somewhere else.

Believe me, I shed a tear when I see Mom & Pop stores close down. I make it a priority to eat at a Mom & Pop's restaurant at least once a month and I avoid Walmart like the plague.

Every time you order something online, someone is going out of business and another minimum wage box stuffer job is created. *thumbs down*

To a degree you're right. Progress & innovation is causing people to lose jobs and lower their profit margin.

Very true; been happening for years.

Its a horrible thing to see but unless you equate outsourcing with progress & innovation, you're a bit off.

I see outsourcing as smart business. Why pay more for something you can get for less somewhere else? That'd be like saying never buy anything on sale and even better, pay extra for it!

do you really think replacing the modern american worker with an underpaid worker in another country is Progress? Innovation?

There have been plenty of threads about people complaining about how crappy low end tech jobs are. Okay fine. Someone else will do them. People on this forum complain about all the low paying jobs. Okay, if you think we're too good for them, let someone else who is more appreciative have the job.

It is progress, because money is flowing to people that don't have it now. When those people get money, they will start demanding goods that aren't made in their country. They in turn will import, which will create jobs here and in other nations. Those jobs will create an increase in spending and the cycle continues.

There are certainly casualties in both cases - of course, that guy who used to program in Basic for a living will have to adapt - but I refuse to see Americans adapt because companies can exploit people elsewhere.

It's not exploiting if someone willingly does it. People in other nations gladly take our manufacturing jobs, because often they are the only jobs available in their own countries!!

 

[chess9]

If keeping as many jobs in America as possible is protectionism, then I'm in favor of protectionism. But, I suspect that protectionism is simply one of the limpdick battle cries of the brain dead supporters of ManCow and his ilk.

-Robert

 

[rahvin]

Originally posted by: chess9
If keeping as many jobs in America as possible is protectionism, then I'm in favor of protectionism. But, I suspect that protectionism is simply one of the limpdick battle cries of the brain dead supporters of ManCow and his ilk.

-Robert

Smoot-Holley thought that protecting america's jobs was paramount as well.

 

[chess9]

That was Smoot-Hawley, and it was a tariff. Tariffs are not to be confused with jobs, though tariffs do have an impact on the number of jobs, granted. My beef is with companies moving American jobs off-shore.

I've heard the old saw about tariffs prolonging the Great Depression, a notion propogated by some economists who should have been sweeping floors insteading of guessing how the economy should be run. I'd trust Donald Trump before I'd trust an economist and I consider Trump a complete low-life.

I am 100% with Lou Dobbs on this issue. (After he supported the war in Iraq I left, but I've snuck back. )

-Robert

 

[MadRat]

Whoa, arguing that the world needs to NOT have the same workers' rights? I guess we should forget the pillars our society was built upon. Let them work as slaves - if we can have it cheaper... NOT. And you are probably one of those guys that runs around proud to be an "American". If you don't remember the ideals of America its easy to see why you would think its okay for the low wage countries to treat their people badly. I mean, isn't the American way of life what is really at stake here?

 

[burnedout]

**Breaking News**

According to Bloomberg, the U.S. received more outsourced jobs than it is losing.

While reliable figures aren't available for the last two years, the Commerce Department estimated on March 18 that the number of Americans employed by U.S. affiliates of majority non-U.S. companies grew by 4.7 million from 1997 through 2001. In the same period, the number of non-Americans working at affiliates of majority-U.S. companies abroad rose by 2.8 million.

**Film at Eleven**

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: burnedout
**Breaking News**

According to Bloomberg, the U.S. received more outsourced jobs than it is losing.

While reliable figures aren't available for the last two years, the Commerce Department estimated on March 18 that the number of Americans employed by U.S. affiliates of majority non-U.S. companies grew by 4.7 million from 1997 through 2001. In the same period, the number of non-Americans working at affiliates of majority-U.S. companies abroad rose by 2.8 million.

**Film at Eleven**

Hmm....seems to put more weight behind this no?
CkG

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: burnedout
**Breaking News**

According to Bloomberg, the U.S. received more outsourced jobs than it is losing.

While reliable figures aren't available for the last two years, the Commerce Department estimated on March 18 that the number of Americans employed by U.S. affiliates of majority non-U.S. companies grew by 4.7 million from 1997 through 2001. In the same period, the number of non-Americans working at affiliates of majority-U.S. companies abroad rose by 2.8 million.

**Film at Eleven**

Thanks for posting this. Another confirmation that U.S. Companies must drop the "U.S." in front of them and be designated the "Foriegn" Companies that they are.

A fair and level playing field is all anyone is asking for.

 

[burnedout]

Further thoughts:

A good piece on the subject in the Financial Times

The first mistake of many politicians, argues Matthew Slaughter, a professor at the Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth College, New Hampshire, is to assume that a job created overseas is one not created in the US. "An overseas worker is sometimes a substitute for a US worker but very often they are a complement for a US worker," he says. "Expanding an overseas network frequently means you have to hire more workers in the US too."

This is one of the arguments as well:

"Economists also argue that while the job losses caused by offshoring are conspicuous, the benefits are larger. Although the gains are hard to quantify, some analysts are now attempting to do so.

Assuming that companies shift staff overseas partly to save money, economists argue that the effect of offshoring is to lower prices in the US. This raises the purchasing power of US consumers and, on the margin, helps keep interest rates lower. This in turn should lead to higher consumer spending and stronger economic activity, which creates more jobs.

"That concept tends to be beyond the sophisticated, deep-thinkers in Democratic politics, though. Ironically, it's one of the few Clinton-era positions that they haven't retained, and one of the few that they should have. Even Al Gore seems to have forgotten much on this score, and is almost unrecognizable from the man who made the case for NAFTA on similar grounds."

 

[dirtboy]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Thanks for posting this. Another confirmation that U.S. Companies must drop the "U.S." in front of them and be designated the "Foriegn" Companies that they are.

A fair and level playing field is all anyone is asking for.

And even if that happened, that would change things in what way? Oh right, it wouldn't change things at all. That's what I thought.

 

[SherEPunjab]

Spending 4+ billion a day on a war that isn't getting us anywhere is bad for America...

Yes, flame me for posting in the wrong thread, or thread crapping i dont' care. in extra b*thy mood today about our foreign policy. just saw the video of the falleujah massacre.

our FP ain't working, and we're spending too much damn money. people hate us like never before. its okay if they hate israelies, thats their problem, but I don't want this country to become another israel. we need to back off a bit. we haven't even caught obl. ::rant off::

 

[chess9]

SherPunjab:

I fully concur with those views and the war's effect on the economy is huge, not only because of our spending on the war itself, but in the value of lost goodwill overseas. If the dollar weren't in the tank we'd be seeing a lot more American goods sitting on the shelves in Europe. I wonder how much, if any, of the ruling against Microsoft is due in part to anti-American sentiment?

So, Burnedout, have you seen the historical numbers of jobs in versus jobs out? I've heard this saw from the right wing until I'm blue in the face, yet everyone admits outsourcing is a growing phenomenon. I don't think the numbers you cite are relevant unless you can show that imported jobs are growing IN RELATION to exported jobs.


-Robert

 

[tallest1]

Originally posted by: dirtboy

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Thanks for posting this. Another confirmation that U.S. Companies must drop the "U.S." in front of them and be designated the "Foriegn" Companies that they are.

A fair and level playing field is all anyone is asking for.

And even if that happened, that would change things in what way? Oh right, it wouldn't change things at all. That's what I thought.

Its good to see that your "me me me" mentality has finally shown through. We're not arguing for a level playing ground so that companies are forced to come back to the US. We're arguing so that these highly talented and/or key producers of goods and services are treated as such. However, you're too busy hoping for blood stained soil and cheaper t-shirt prices to care.

 

[dirtboy]

Originally posted by: tallest1

Originally posted by: dirtboy

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Thanks for posting this. Another confirmation that U.S. Companies must drop the "U.S." in front of them and be designated the "Foriegn" Companies that they are.

A fair and level playing field is all anyone is asking for.

And even if that happened, that would change things in what way? Oh right, it wouldn't change things at all. That's what I thought.

Its good to see that your "me me me" mentality has finally shown through. We're not arguing for a level playing ground so that companies are forced to come back to the US. We're arguing so that these highly talented and/or key producers of goods and services are treated as such. However, you're too busy hoping for blood stained soil and cheaper t-shirt prices to care.

Why don't you try posting again when you can make sense or did you offshore your posting? :Q

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: dirtboy

Originally posted by: tallest1

Originally posted by: dirtboy

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Thanks for posting this. Another confirmation that U.S. Companies must drop the "U.S." in front of them and be designated the "Foriegn" Companies that they are.

A fair and level playing field is all anyone is asking for.

And even if that happened, that would change things in what way? Oh right, it wouldn't change things at all. That's what I thought.

Its good to see that your "me me me" mentality has finally shown through. We're not arguing for a level playing ground so that companies are forced to come back to the US. We're arguing so that these highly talented and/or key producers of goods and services are treated as such. However, you're too busy hoping for blood stained soil and cheaper t-shirt prices to care.

Why don't you try posting again when you can make sense or did you offshore your posting? :Q

Tallest makes perfect sense, you on the other hand....

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: chess9
That was Smoot-Hawley, and it was a tariff. Tariffs are not to be confused with jobs, though tariffs do have an impact on the number of jobs, granted. My beef is with companies moving American jobs off-shore.

I've heard the old saw about tariffs prolonging the Great Depression, a notion propogated by some economists who should have been sweeping floors insteading of guessing how the economy should be run. I'd trust Donald Trump before I'd trust an economist and I consider Trump a complete low-life.

I am 100% with Lou Dobbs on this issue. (After he supported the war in Iraq I left, but I've snuck back. )

-Robert

you see what steel tariffs are doing to steel dependent industries in this country and yet you still hold that opinion?

 

[MadRat]

Tie human rights to free trade and you avoid the pitfalls. China really ought not to be an exception. If India or Southeast Asia want to modernize them on their dime then let them. They'll run out of affordable resources very fast, even on a world trade supply. No matter what kind of carrots people think China offers, it all comes down to human rights. If they don't respect human rights then they do not respect property rights, the basis for all trade.

 

[przero]

A good start for worker in the the U.S. - Buy products that are "Made in the U.S.A."

And ban products from any countries that do not have as stringent environmental laws as we do. Good for the environment and good for the U.S.