For an explanation of what outsourcing is, ignore all the number-crunchers and their fuzzy math ( ), and read this statement from ROCKSS. Repeatedly.
Well, that's true . Guess the Honda's have been 'outsourced' to America! Damned global economy...makes everything so complicated.
Back in the 80s, the US government told the outsourced blue collar workers to get retrained and do white collar work, since the manufacturing jobs were never coming back. This generation is now seeing white collar jobs that require higher education and higher skills leave the country. What is the government now telling the displaced workers?
Anecdotal evidence, especially based on two data points, is an incredibly weak way to defend a point. T_J has presented a well reasoned, thought out view on this topic. The rest of you have spewed emotional rants not based on economic reality.
My wife's company is outsourcing to India. An interesting result is that they have cut job quality (working environment, etc.) because, basically, they can now that they have cheaper professionals in India (they are all degreed positions). People in the office call it "India-lite." She has nothing to worry about because she is a genius and is a part of the NY structure. Anyway, I got a kick the other day when I called my bank's customer service line. I talked to two people in two different "offices" and both had very thick Indian accents. It was especially funny because the first lady identified herself as "Shirley Jackson." I guess they give them American names so the more intolerant callers are not as offended or don't complain about how they cant spell "Anju Patel" or something.
Find the 90K IT jobs in the haystack ... Report: High-Tech Job Market Still Bleak Sep 15, 10:52 AM (ET) By ALLISON LINN 4 SEATTLE (AP) - Researchers at the University of Illinois in Chicago have confirmed what many high-tech workers have long suspected: The job market for technology experts remains bleak, years after the U.S. recession officially ended in late 2001. The nation's information technology industry lost 403,300 jobs between March 2001, when the recession began, and April of this year, the researchers found. Perhaps more surprising, just over half of those jobs - 206,300 - were lost after experts declared the recession over in November 2001. In all, the researchers said, the job market for high-tech workers shrank by 18.8 percent, to 1,743,500, between March 2001 and April 2004. Researchers Snigdha Srivastava and Nik Theodore compiled the numbers using the Current Employment Statistics survey and the Current Population Survey. The report, funded by the Ford Foundation, was conducted for the Washington Alliance of Technology Workers, a Seattle organization that wants to unionize workers at Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) and other technology companies. Theodore, a professor and director of the university's Center for Urban Economic Development, said one factor in the staggering high-tech job losses is the familiar lament that businesses have been wary to hire because of uncertainty over how much the economy is improving. But he also attributes some of the job losses to corporations farming high-tech jobs out to overseas companies that promise to do such highly skilled work for lower wages. He said the study shows that high-tech workers "are really bearing the brunt of economic restructuring strategies." It also shows that the end of the recession did not signal the end of high-tech job woes, he said. "Not only has it not turned around, in many cases it has gotten worse," he said. But Sung Won Sohn, chief economist at Wells Fargo Bank, said he has seen some evidence that the high-tech job market began improving in the months after this study was completed. Still, he said, those in the software industry have fared better than those in the computer hardware industry. Overall, Sohn thinks the high-tech industry will rebound, although the new jobs created might require different skills. That still leaves high-tech workers in better shape than other industries, he said. "I view the setbacks in tech as temporary," he said, "whereas if you're talking about old-style manufacturing, those jobs are gone forever." Marcus Courtney, head of the Washington Alliance of Technology Workers, said the tight job market, combined with growing fears that existing jobs will be lost to outsourcing, has increased interest in unionizing from workers at companies including Sun Microsystems, Apple Computer Inc. (AAPL) and Microsoft. "We are really starting to see the beginnings of a high-tech labor movement in this country," he said. According to the study, the losses were especially pronounced in San Francisco, which saw high-tech employment shrink by 49 percent between March 2001 and April 2004. Boston also suffered disproportionately, with the number of high-tech jobs falling by 34.1 percent. The Seattle metropolitan area lost 10.8 percent of its high-tech jobs during the period, faring better than some other regions. The employment picture has become a hot-button issue in the U.S. presidential race. Even though the overall U.S. economy added 144,000 jobs in August, it still has lost 913,000 positions since President Bush took office. When the August jobs numbers were released earlier this month, Bush said the figures offered proof that the economy was getting stronger. But Sen. John Kerry's campaign argued that job growth should be faster.
Not specialized labor? What about all of the programmers and software engineers that Microsoft just outsourced to India? What about all of the helpdesk technicians being outsourced to India and China? The vast majority of the non-manufacturing jobs that are being outsourced are IT jobs, jobs that pay far more than the jobs at Starbucks and Best Buy that they are being replaced with. They should pay more because they should support the American system that protects workers from exploitation like child labor, long working hours, and unsafe working conditions. Protectionist measures, are you high? Kerry wants to give tax breaks to companies that hire people in the US. How in he!! is that protectionist? He is not planning on raising tarriffs or erecting barriers to trade, just rewarding those patriotic companies that hire within the US rather than outside it. You are really slamming a LOT of people who are highly educated and could add value to a company if they could get a job. My father has a master's degree in systems engineering and spent nearly 2 years selling Apples at Microcenter because his company outsourced his job to India. There are more BAs in Computer Science working at Starbucks than you could shake a stick at in a year and you are trying to tell those people to get "an education" instead of supporting a man who will reward companies that fulfil their patriotic duty to hire the people that will end up buying the VAST majority of their products.
Lighten up big fella! There are realities other than the economic, and an economic issue is rarely just an economic issue. The point being - all this economic data (and the conjecture based upon it) is still up in the air. We're not sure what sort of long-term effects outsourcing will produce. In light of this, I think it's necessary to avoid ignoring the one aspect of outsourcing that we do know about for sure - and that is this: Every outsourced job means someone in the U.S. just lost their job. And losing a job sucks, especially if you end up losing a good job at an IT firm and gaining a crap job at Best Buy. I, personally, think the era of capitalism is coming to an end. It's outlived its usefulness, and has now become an obstacle to achieving the ideals it was originally based upon. I'm not endorsing communism (that hasn't worked like it was supposed to either), but I am saying it's time for something new.
TJ, you're probably right but was it necessary to mix in all of the anti-liberal garbage in your initial post? Nobody asked about your political views in this post. I didn't see anyone railing on Bush in this thread. It completely tainted your otherwise well-educated response. I get the feeling that you have some useful and accurate information to add to topics like this but I have to take everything from you with many grains of salt. Back to the topic... I, too, am a casualty of outsourcing. I don't really blame the government for this as I realize that in the long run it will be beneficial. It just sucks that it has affected me! I just hope that the government is able to identify the next 'boom' and start getting people trained. I don't have a degree. I spent my 20's pursuing a career in music. In my 30s I taught myself web design and got on with a design form back in '97. Life was grand. For a while. I was among the last wave of layoffs in late 2001. After being unemployeed for 11 months I finally got a job making about 12K less than I was. Now in my upper 30s, with a 1 year old, I can't afford to sit around and blame the government, I have gone back to school to get a degree in Science and see what doors open for me in the (hopefully) near future. I just hope my current job lasts while I pursue that degree.
I can't believe I'm with Trader_Jorge on an issue. I will agree though that outsourcing does cause pain through the loss of jobs and in many cases the jobs lost are only replaced with lower paying service jobs. That's a reality that can't simply be brushed off. At the same time in a competitive global economy outsourcing is practically inevitable and need not be considered negatively. The benefits from it here are already stated but as Americans we also forget what outsourcing and trade do for developing countries. Many liberals decry the massive discrepancy of wealth between the first world and third world yet are against outsourcing and trade. We have to consider that the only self-sustaining method of transfering wealth from the first world to the third is through trade and outsourcing. Why this system isn't perfect its the only one that has tangible built in incentives for each party to engage in that transfer. The ultimate goal of a fair and open trade and outsourcing system is a levelling of the disparities. While this for measurement purposes means that our standard of living shrinks in relation to the standard of living in India as long as all of us are producing capital and keeping inflation down all of us (India and America) will benefit and the global standard of living will rise.
I am not sure if you are right, but I must admire your openmindedness on the possibile. As a rule, the markets can do ANYTHING, and they will often do what you could have never previously fathomed. If paper currency goes extinct like quite a few are scared that it may, then your prediction could come to fruition. But that is indeed a big if.
There is no need to turn this into a poo flinging contest. The thread starter simply asked someone to explain outsourcing. I don't declare myself an expert on outsourcing, but here is a link from Mark Cuban's blog where he talks a bit about outsourcing. It may be helpful and informative to read.... or not: the interpretation is up to you. If you don't know who Mark Cuban is, he is the owner of the Dallas Mavericks and a very succesful buisnessman. He has a blog where he writes about whatever stuff is on his mind and in the blog I'm showing you, outsourcing is the first topic. (There are also other topics he talks about afterwards such as: social security, drug companies, and stock options etc.) Anyways, here it is: http://www.blogmaverick.com/entry/5844174539663617/ Here's the part on outsourcing: 1. Outsourcing. This has become a flashpoint across all of America. I can understand both sides of the argument. On one side, replacing an American worker with one from overseas means one of our own loses a job. That is terrible for those who are displaced and their families. As an employer, I can also understand how the money saved from diverting that job overseas can be used to do quite a bit. It can be applied to Research and Development, it can be a pay increase to other workers, it can be used to hire workers who add new value to company. If the money is redeployed and invested in the company, I don’t have a problem with it. I can see that although some my feel the pain short term, that the capital redeployment will result in a net gain to the economy and the job count in our country. Where I have an issue, and where I think there needs to be controls put in place, is when corporate insiders in essence put the money saved from outsourcing in their own pockets. If you go through the list of companies that outsource and start looking at stock sales, bonuses and other incentives, you quickly see that a material portion of the money saved is going into the pockets of insiders. That’s wrong. Or the outsourcing is being used to hit a Wall Street expectation for quarterly earnings, maintaining stock prices and enabling insider stock sales. That’s wrong. If we want to make outsourcing the route of last resort and to make sure its only used when it makes absolute business sense, Prevent insiders from selling stock or earning corporate bonuses in any year they outsource jobs.
I don't care what the job is. If it can be done in India or Pakistan for half as much then you need to do something. I'm not doubting your father could add value to a company, but its his job to convince them of that. If he can add more value than someone in India for less of a cost then he will get a job. If not, don't blame world trade and outsourcing which makes products cheaper for everyone in the long run supporting and creating other jobs. And if you want to blame anyone for companies moving certain plants abroad because of "They should pay more because they should support the American system that protects workers from exploitation like child labor, long working hours, and unsafe working conditions." then you should blame your liberal buddies that are enacting limitations on business, the Unions and the trial lawyers such as Edwards and the Democratic party that are using regulations and lawsuits to significantly increase the cost of companies doing business here. If the costs continue to grow based on these groups, more jobs will travel overseas. I though a corporation was a private entity. Why should it have to be patriotic? Do you want to have a patriotic cause? Its ironic that many people that consider themselves liberal, talk about equality in the world and the rights of those around the world, but then want a silver spoon in the form of "patriotic US hiring" because the rest of the world isn't American.
I take it you would rather go back to the "good old days" of the robber barons when 12 hour workdays, child labor, and unsafe working conditions were the norm. These conditions ARE the norm in the countries we outsource to and I believe that these companies are doing America a disservice by supporting those conditions overseas. If a company wants the benefits of doing business in America, particularly if it is an American company, then they SHOULD be patriotic and help Americans. A person is a private entity and I would assert that Americans have a duty to be patriotic, just as American companies should. What the he!! are you blathering about here? I don't want a "silver spoon," I just want American companies who derive the VAST majority of their profits from Americans to step up to the plate and support the very Americans that they want to hawk their products to. I further don't want American companies exploiting workers in the rest of the world because they do not have the same worker protections that we enjoy here. Those protections are a BIG part of the reason that America is the best country in the world and I believe it is wrong for American companies to subvert those rules by taking advantage of workers in the rest of the world. There are things that are more important than profits.
Oh come on. Don't resort to images of children whipped into making shoes. We're talking about IT here. I've been to call centers and sofware programing centers in Pakistan and the people were college educated, making a huge premium to most in the society and their income relative to cost of living in the society was higher than most in the US, though they were being paid less. Why should they not be afforded the opportunity?? And please don't disguise your sympathy for the fact that you indeed do want a silver spoon in your mouth. If your father cannot prove he is a valuable commodity (which obviously he hasn't) then why should he be hired? (Country Accent " Because he's Amerrican! Whoo hoo) And with the globalization of corporations, many derive much more of their income from foreign operations and sales than they do in the US. Should Coca Cola and Ford Motor Company not be a part of your Patriotic Hiring clause to hire American's first and then others? I believe each must prove their worth. Its very simple, do a task and be compensated for it. If someone is offering less, take it or learn something else.
Obviously, the question of outsourcing is one that each company has to address individually. However, giving tax breaks to those companies that increase hiring in the US is an excellent way to spur job growth, especially when this country is facing its worst economic downturn in years.
And by the way. Thank your democratic party biggest supporters like the Unions and Trial Lawyers for their continued lawsuits and abuse that has forced American companies to set up shop abroad. Thanks Kerry! Thanks Edwards! An example. Rampant lawsuit abuse against the financial industry has caused many firms to limit their account sizes to accounts over $100,000. Thanks for helping the little guy trial lawyers!
