Outsourcing Jobs

[Grimaldi]

Originally Posted by fencerchica

Being specialized to the point of being inextricably dependent on the global economy for anything requiring a healthy manufacturing base doesn't seem to be a good position to be occupying if the bottom drops out of the US dollar.

Is there an alternative? Most nations in the world today are interdependent on one another, whether for energy, food or goods. It's easy to say the US should somehow become mostly self-sufficient, but realistically that would cause other major problems...namely high unemployment rates, inflation and taxes. I think you'd have problems economically, too, as many nations would want to reduce their trade with the US. If they found themselves in the situation we are in (they importing many US goods, US not accepting their goods), they may adopt a similar course of action. Trade is beneficial between nations, and should be encouraged.

Originally Posted by fencerchica

Not all of our citizens necessarily have the potential to do well for themselves outside of a manufacturing economy, as dcmdale has already discussed. An economy split between high and low-end service (with menial service jobs at the low end and jobs in finance at the high end) and a few high-tech specialties is a breeding grounds for a highly binary class system, as we can already see from the accelerating divide between rich and poor in our country.

Now who's throwing out red herrings? Who cares how big the divide is between rich and poor? The important thing is whether or not people can reasonably find employment in the nation to meet their needs. The current answer is yes. Now, granted, if you make poor decisions (drugs, multiple illegitimate children to support, etc) you may have issues, but otherwise it can be done. I think US historical records for standard of living, income and wealth all show we're not doing too badly, and even the poor are pretty well off.

Originally Posted by fencerchica

Do you seriously think that granting China MFN status while they adjust the yuan to encourage the trading gap to widen had nothing to do with this? And then there's NAFTA. Even with our friends up north, we have a wide and growing trade gap.

Are you suggesting ending MFN status with China? NAFTA? Sure, after a very painful period of high inflation, we may create some jobs here to compensate, but those goods will be much more expensive than those we imported, so prices remain high...and the poor you talk about will, of course, be the ones hit hardest by this.

Originally Posted by fencerchica

You seem to think the government's role has been as an inactive bystander whom I'm now demanding intervene. I don't see it that way. I am coming to think that the current form of the US economy is a product of the government's policies in tax and trade, tarriffs and subsidies. I see the government as having been in up to its neck in regulating and guiding the economy for a long time and that it's incumbent upon it to set about correcting the consequences of its poorly formed policies.

I kind of agree here. Many of our problems are from government meddling with things like taxes, tarrifs and subsidies. So why would I think more government meddling would fix the problem? You know loopholes will be included for major businesses in certain districts get exemptions (See Pelosi and StarKist Tuna). How about deregulating and focusing on the US economy's strengths? Trying to make our nation a competitive manufacturing center for certain goods is silly....we can't be as competitive, and doing so is just another subsidy. We're good at agriculture, advanced industrial stuff (planes, weapons), medicine...nothing wrong there.

Originally Posted by fencerchica

But we are not all above average, and part of a healthy economy is having adequate-paying and worthwhile productive labor available for the less intellectually gifted, instead of seeing them as an army of expendables.

So, what kind of jobs are you proposing we bring back to the US? Again, earlier examples were things like telephone help assistants and factory labor. Is it really "worthwhile" labor if the same thing can be accomplished by someone else, for the same quality, cheaper? That sounds like busy work to me.

Instead, I'd propose continuing trade with nations and increasing our technological edge. As nations like China and India become more developed and wealthy (from our money now), they'll start demanding more advanced goods, and that's where the US shines (and the real money (aside from oil) is). As those industries ramp up to meet the increased demand for their goods, they'll create the meaningful job for lower-class workers your hoping for.

[erik_blank]

Originally Posted by Grimaldi

Wow...smug much? So, do you change your opinion with every argument that you read, or are you one of those lucky few that knows how the world actually works? Just because you can't convince someone with your arguments doesn't mean they are closed-minded bigots.

Me? Smug? Always and forever! Actually, I admit that when I am presented with differing opinions I react like most people, with disbelief and distrust of the others that present these 'flawed' statements. I TRY to look at these things from an open perspective, I TRY to look for the research that both refutes and supports what the other person is saying, but I (like many of my fellow Americans) am simply lazy. Lazy in my thinking and in my wish to actually look further than my established beliefs. But overall, I do look for information that will support my beliefs first, then look for dissenting ideas later. Once again, I am running out of time to more appropriately respond to these posts.

Originally Posted by Grimaldi

And what kind of people have led us into a "world economy"? Why is it bad to spread wealth and opportunity across the globe? If you recall, the industrialization of most nations was a long and painful process...it's painful for the countries going through it now, with the help of the global economy, but in the end they will be much more prosperous than before.

[fencerchica]

Originally Posted by Grimaldi

It's easy to say the US should somehow become mostly self-sufficient, but realistically that would cause other major problems...namely high unemployment rates, inflation and taxes. I think you'd have problems economically, too, as many nations would want to reduce their trade with the US. If they found themselves in the situation we are in (they importing many US goods, US not accepting their goods), they may adopt a similar course of action. Trade is beneficial between nations, and should be encouraged.

This is where the "free trade" versus "fair trade" issues comes in. I agree that we are living in a global economy, and total protectionism and isolationism are neither desirable nor feasible. That being the case, what I'd like to see would be reciprocal trade arrangements (including requirements re: worker treatment and product safety) working toward the goal of a net zero balance of trade. I'd like this to replace our current situation of unfettered "free trade" arrangements and tax/tariff incentives to US corporations which outsource manufacturing and other labor. That coupled with some mild protectionist measures for sectors valuable to national security (such as the steel industry) would encourage a two-way flow of trade in manufactured goods, such that we could benefit from global trade in areas our manufacturing base was weak in or had little interest in, while exporting manufactured products from other sectors. To that end, yes I'd like to re-evaluate China's MFN status and re-negotiate NAFTA, as just two prominent examples.

Originally Posted by Grimaldi

Now who's throwing out red herrings? Who cares how big the divide is between rich and poor?

You've got to be kidding. No society with a massive gap between the rich and poor is going to remain politically or economically stable, let alone prosperous, in the long run.

Originally Posted by Grimaldi

The important thing is whether or not people can reasonably find employment in the nation to meet their needs. The current answer is yes. Now, granted, if you make poor decisions (drugs, multiple illegitimate children to support, etc) you may have issues, but otherwise it can be done.

Making Ends Meet.

Originally Posted by Grimaldi

Many of our problems are from government meddling with things like taxes, tarrifs and subsidies. So why would I think more government meddling would fix the problem?

This is like saying "I agree that the US tax code is hopelessly jacked. So why should more government meddling (i.e. fixing the tax code) be a good thing?"

Originally Posted by Grimaldi

You know loopholes will be included for major businesses in certain districts get exemptions (See Pelosi and StarKist Tuna).

You won't find me defending those shennanigans. More transparency and oversight is the only solution I can think of -- letting the status quo slide as you appear to advocate is not an option. But funny you should mention the government favoring corporations. I'm no Pelosi fan (boy has she dropped the ball in compromising on FISA) but the StarKist Tuna mini-scandal has nothing on Halliburton or the Iraqi oil deal.

Originally Posted by Grimaldi

How about deregulating and focusing on the US economy's strengths? Trying to make our nation a competitive manufacturing center for certain goods is silly....we can't be as competitive, and doing so is just another subsidy. We're good at agriculture, advanced industrial stuff (planes, weapons), medicine...nothing wrong there.

Deregulating. Right. Now there's a good way to establish a reputation for quality products.

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by fencerchica

what I'd like to see would be reciprocal trade arrangements (including requirements re: worker treatment and product safety) working toward the goal of a net zero balance of trade.

Comparative advantage makes this impossible until the triumph or world Communism. ( Which is to say, never. )

I'd like this to replace our current situation of unfettered "free trade" arrangements and tax/tariff incentives to US corporations which outsource manufacturing and other labor.

How much lower a standard of living are you willing to accept in return for this desideratum?

No society with a massive gap between the rich and poor is going to remain politically or economically stable, let alone prosperous, in the long run.

Define "the long run".

How long did Rome go on in just that way, for instance?

[Slim]

Originally Posted by erik_blank

Chica:

While this is a god try, I don't think that it will do any good. Here you are trying to confuse him wih the facts, while his mind is already made up. Slim seems to me to be one of the lucky few who know how the world 'actually' works, and from the sniping that he has done around the edges, he seems to be well invested in his opinions no matter how many times 'well intentioned' people have told him about counterdicting 'facts.'

Unfortunately it is people like this that have lead us into the 'world economy' and the mideast wars.

Not even the sack to address me directly.

Mr. Blank, you are a pompous ass.

I believe that makes us even with the ad-hominems now. Carry on.

[Slim]

Originally Posted by telkanuru

I... agree.

Wow, that was hard to say.

It happens. Ask Jeff or Biggs.

[erik_blank]

Originally Posted by Slim

Not even the sack to address me directly.

Mr. Blank, you are a pompous ass.

I believe that makes us even with the ad-hominems now. Carry on.

Yup, you got me, pompous to the end. But I felt it appropriate considering the answer that you gave the OP. I remember a similar comment made by R. Reagan in response to the Detroit layoffs and the concerns of the now jobless auto workers: "Move."

While it is in SOME WAYS the appropriate response, it is also one of the biggest blow offs that I have ever heard from a politician. When I head him say this all I could think is Wow, what an ass. Here we have people that are now pretty much destitute after 12 months of layoffs who had waited on good paying jobs to come back, and now that they are pretty much unable to do anything, this guy blithely tells them to pickup and go somewhere else.

Now you essentially say the same thing to the OP without even knowing where he is coming from, what his background is, if he is in debt from school loans, what industry he was in, etc. No, instead you say tough S**t you must be a looser, go get some skills since it is obvious you don't know c**p.

Gotta go, I have to sharpen some rocks so that I will be able to be ready for work on Monday.

[Grimaldi]

Originally Posted by erik_blank

Me? Smug? Always and forever!

I was hoping for a response like this, and not some horrible flame war. Most people are resistant to changing their opinion...no one wants to be wrong...I just thought you were being a little unfair in holding one person to a higher (impossible?) standard of "open-mindedness" than normal.

Originally Posted by erik_blank

While it is in SOME WAYS the appropriate response, it is also one of the biggest blow offs that I have ever heard from a politician. When I head him say this all I could think is Wow, what an ass. Here we have people that are now pretty much destitute after 12 months of layoffs who had waited on good paying jobs to come back, and now that they are pretty much unable to do anything, this guy blithely tells them to pickup and go somewhere else.

No surprise here, but I'm a big fan of Reagan, and this is exactly what should happen. Sure it sucks, but government trying to "fix" the problem only ends up with longer term, more expensive problems. Think of all the problems from stupid things like sugar tariffs to protect US sugarcane farmers/manufacturers. Industries rise and fall in the US (in any healthy economy!), and to try and stop it only causes more second and third order issues that typically last a long time.

Originally Posted by erik_blank

Now you essentially say the same thing to the OP without even knowing where he is coming from, what his background is, if he is in debt from school loans, what industry he was in, etc. No, instead you say tough S**t you must be a looser, go get some skills since it is obvious you don't know c**p.

While it's true that you can't expect such advice to automatically be applicable, for many people it is the sad and painful truth. Many of the higher paying, higher demand jobs are ones that require specific education/certification. Engineers and IT people usually can find employment pretty readily. I ran into the same problem. Majored in psych, commissioned into the Army, served 5-6 years on active duty, then separated to join the civilian workforce. No one wanted to hire me for what I was making in the military, or even close to what I was making. So, I had a choice...scrounge for a few years getting education to get a good paying job, or go back to what I knew. With a wife and 3 kids, option A didn't sound very good, so I ended up joining the National Guard full time.

[Lemonaide]

India: the history between the western world and India is deep. I don't think we could write a synopsis of it on the water cooler, but in general, dating back in history, England In-Sourced trade agreements with India and the Gujarat became a center for industry and the merchant class. Having a friend from that area, who told me about their history. So, maybe in America, and especially the first 13 states, which still carry a heavy English flare, our connections to 'trade' outsourcing, insourcing and so forth are heavly entrenched to the extent that it seems natural to outsource industries elsewhere.

What we need to do before we send work out to the 'hired hands of the world', is figure out a way to fill in the gaps we leave behind.

[MyrddinsPrecint]

Originally Posted by telkanuru

My job can't be outsourced!

Grocery store clerks are the new power!

Originally Posted by piste off

Ah, the world of low-telk!

BTW - we (http://www.peapod.com/) just moved all our systems overseas...

Still need drivers until the robots come in, so you may want to start training on that.

R-

And don't forget Germany's new Future Store--- http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7477124.stm.

On the up side, you.... won't be outsourced.

[erik_blank]

Originally Posted by Grimaldi

I was hoping for a response like this, and not some horrible flame war. Most people are resistant to changing their opinion...no one wants to be wrong...I just thought you were being a little unfair in holding one person to a higher (impossible?) standard of "open-mindedness" than normal.

OK, just to be annoying, why SHOULDN'T we hold people to higher standard? Aside from being hypocritical, I actually believe that our standards should be those that should be strived for, not settled on.

Originally Posted by Grimaldi

No surprise here, but I'm a big fan of Reagan, and this is exactly what should happen. Sure it sucks, but government trying to "fix" the problem only ends up with longer term, more expensive problems. Think of all the problems from stupid things like sugar tariffs to protect US sugarcane farmers/manufacturers. Industries rise and fall in the US (in any healthy economy!), and to try and stop it only causes more second and third order issues that typically last a long time.

While it's true that you can't expect such advice to automatically be applicable, for many people it is the sad and painful truth. Many of the higher paying, higher demand jobs are ones that require specific education/certification. Engineers and IT people usually can find employment pretty readily. I ran into the same problem. Majored in psych, commissioned into the Army, served 5-6 years on active duty, then separated to join the civilian workforce. No one wanted to hire me for what I was making in the military, or even close to what I was making. So, I had a choice...scrounge for a few years getting education to get a good paying job, or go back to what I knew. With a wife and 3 kids, option A didn't sound very good, so I ended up joining the National Guard full time.

First: Thank you for your service. I spent 4 years in the Navy in the 80's, but I was too full of myself to stay. I could have retired by now if I had stuck to it, but I was just too damn cocksure of my own intellectual superiority (and also conflicted by being raise partly as a Quaker) that I had to leave.

I am Glad that you can continue to serve and maintain your position with the NG.

As for Reagan, I'm glad that you liked him. I am still amazed that we didn't end up glowing slag heaps during his Admin due to his belligerence towards the Soviets, but either he was actually surrounded by geniuses, or he got incredibly lucky. Of course the same group of geniuses that surrounded him also surrounded Nixon and the current Bush admin.... Can't say that I have seen great things from any of them myself.

But back to your statement that telling people to simply "Move" when confronted by people who had lost what had been told by Unions and Management to essentially be life time jobs... In an abstract sense, I agree. These people needed to move, or have another equally large industry come in to take the place of the Auto industry... I do not agree with the in-politic manner that they were told to do so, nor do I agree that they should have been cut loose like they were when the upper management were given golden parachutes.

I do want to make a comment about your statement

Originally Posted by Grimaldi

No one wanted to hire me for what I was making in the military, or even close to what I was making. So, I had a choice...scrounge for a few years getting education to get a good paying job, or go back to what I knew. With a wife and 3 kids, option A didn't sound very good, so I ended up joining the National Guard full time.

It seems to me that you were faced with a better decision than most people that are let go from a decent paid salaried position. You had the opportunity to return the the same firm in the same capacity as when you left. You yourself said that you really had only one option. The same could be said for those that lost their jobs in the auto industry in the early '80s, not to mention the other MFG industries over the last few decades. Here were people that had a specific skill set with family and mortgages. The loss of their jobs and the loss of the factory itself placed them in an untenable situation. They were now no longer able to keep their families fed, nor keep them housed. They could not sell their houses to move to another location since the market had dropped out of the area. After all who is going to buy in a market where there are no jobs for the people moving in? so RR's statement of "Move" was blind and unnecessarily callous in the light of the situation.

I agree to a limited extent about the sugar tariffs. After all, when it becomes cheaper to hire people for pennies on the dollar than would be paid here and then still make a profit from the transport of the raw product back to the 'home' country, the owners of the company would be pure fools to not do so. Of course this is the same thought that created the great European colonial empires. I seem to recall that they are not doing quite so well according to many of the conservative talking heads.

Of course even with the best of free education available to all, there are just not that many jobs in the high skilled IT/Engineering fields. I recall quite clearly what happened when the Internet bubble burst and for 3 years the IT field was completely glutted and there wasn't a decent job to be had for half the going rate of before, and those that were available expected 3+ years of experience in VERY specific aspects of the field. As for engineers, again, if everyone becomes an engineer, the need to pay them high salaries goes away, and the 8+ years of Grad work are worth no more than a GED. There just isn't the need for 5 million new engineers every year. Nor for everyone to become doctors, even if they COULD get through the course work.

The answer is never simple, and I am rambling again, unable to put the whole thought together in anything resembling a rational thought because once again I have had to compose a message over the course of to days with multiple breaks to take care of dinner, wifely interruptions and multiple breaks to take care of the kids.

G: Thanks again for your service. While I often rant and rave against the current and past administrations use (and mis-use) of the military service, I respect and honor those that serve for they are the ones that keep us safe.

[Lemonaide]

It's like reading a novelette. But outsourcing has been identified as a campaign issue and both candidates are taking it up as an issue. Here's another way to look at how things have shaped up.

Today's CNN's newscaster announces that Retirement plans are now 'up to us!'

Can anyone remember when IRA's, Money Markets, and other plans like the 401K were introduced to the employee? We never had those options until the mid-1980's? I worked for what seemed liked a million years and suddenly they were everywhere. BUT the catch was to keep with the same employer so you could benefit from these plans - which leads us to "at will" and 'your gone'. Anyway, round and round we go with this - I don't like the sound of "it's up to you" government. It's like going into the hospital and having the nurse hand you a kit to take care of your own splints.

Hey we might as well just live out in the woods and get rid of government offices all together. I don't know anyone who'se gone into retirement with both a pension and their social security - except my parents. I have only benefitied from an Annuity fund, when I quit one of my jobs and thank goodness it was there.

I hate to go on and on, but my eyes were opened to all of this when I found two old people basically living under an underpass in Jefferson Parish Louisiana. The home of Rep. Jefferson who now stands accused of bilking his constituents of hundreds of thousands of dollars. It took me a few days to take care of them and get them out of there, but it was an unbelieveable sight, and not to mention the liver transplant old man who fell out of bed that I had to save at 4:30 in the morning.

[Inquartata]

Out of curiosity, does anyone have a documented source for the "Move" quote, or is it just apocryphal?

[erik_blank]

Seems that CANDIDATE reagan had lunch with Flint MI workers in a Pizza parlor and was filmed making slightly less calous that simply "Move."
Quote from the Transcript of Roger and Me:

He told them he had a great idea.
If they tried it, they'd all be working again.
He suggested that maybe some of us...
could find better jobs elsewhere...
like in Texas, or in the southern states.

http://www.script-o-rama.com/movie_s...ranscript.html
OK, now I know that this is from M.M. and many people think that he is a lying SOB, but it is hard to refute video tape. RR IS quoted out of context, as he is intoduced inthe film as the president, but was actually still only a candidate when he held the meeting with the Unemployed workers.