Be Creative, Not Protectionist

The Wall Street Journal ^ | Friday, February 13, 2004 | CARLY FIORINA

[presidio9]

Nineteen years ago, a group of leaders from American business, labor, government and academia issued a report that raised alarm bells in Washington. The report argued that America's ability to compete in world markets was eroding in the face of emerging industries and low-wage workers in Japan and other Pacific Rim nations.

[Iscool]

work to keep our country in the lead, by making it the most competitive and creative of all nations.

What a moronic statement for the sheeple to feed on...The only way we can compete enough to keep jobs here is to work for the wages and benefits they work for in China and Somalia...

[presidio9]

People were saying the same things about Japan 15 and 25 years ago.

[Iscool]

Japn has nothing in the way of natural resources...They have to import most everything they need...We don...Not apples and oranges...

[DustyMoment]

"That's why the eight member-companies of the IT industry's think tank, the Computer Systems Policy Project, have invested $80 billion in R&D, capital expenditures, education and employee training here the past three years alone. We're betting on -- and investing in -- America."

Carly is going to burn in a very HOT place for this outrageous lie. As an out-of-work technical trainer in the IT industry, I can assure you that NO money is being spent on additional technical training in the emerging technical fields she is talking about. All she is doing is trying to justify the huge number of jobs that HP has outsourced overseas.

[Snuffington]

It takes a little more than just innovation. I think we have plenty of know-how for competing with low-wage offshore developers. But those strategies are still in the "early adopter" phase.

I'm becoming increasingly worried we have reached a point where over-regulation and out of control tort-law have raised the barrier for entry for startup companies too high. Much higher than it was in the 80's or even the 90's. And I don't see either side in the offshoring debate putting either of those issues very high on their agenda.

[Deliberator]

I don't see either side in the offshoring debate putting either of those issues very high on their agenda.

When the offshoring opponents are clearly aiming for new government restrictions, the pro-freedom side will of course be reactive. Maybe instead of bawling about those evil Indians, offshoring opponents should direct their fire at the politicians (who the offshoring opponents probably helped elect) who have hobbled domestic business with taxes and regulation.

[americanSoul]

I'm becoming increasingly worried we have reached a point where over-regulation and out of control tort-law have raised the barrier for entry for startup companies too high. Much higher than it was in the 80's or even the 90's.

Very true. Once a Govmnt reg is enacted, it is rarely ever rescinded.

[Orbiting_Rosie's_Head]

Ping

[CMAC51]

What a moronic statement for the sheeple to feed on...The only way we can compete enough to keep jobs here is to work for the wages and benefits they work for in China and Somalia...

That is the very attitude that corporate management feeds on. They don't even bother challenging their employees to find creative gains in productivity, they compare the current situation in their US workforce and what the offshore offers and decide based on that.

Contrary to what your attitude expresses, most US workers are willing to respond to the challenge when presented.

[hchutch]

Well, the ones who are outsourcing are doing so because they cannot get the over-regulation and the lawsuit culture fixed. Extrenched special interests have protected it for far too long, I'm afraid.

On the other side of the issue, solutions to the problems that lead businesses to outsource/offshore will not be welcomed. Why? It will put the complainers like Lou Dobbs and Paul Craig Roberts out of business.

[thedugal]

Glad I got in on this thread before it hit 100s of posts. I very much want to be on the side of free trade, but I have a logical problem for which I have yet to receive an answer.

The most common argument from the free trade side is the cliched "buggy whip maker". However, I find the analogy false. When buggy whip makers lost their jobs it was because the automobile had been invented and there were new jobs in the automotive industry. Now that IT and other professional and service sector jobs are being offshored, what is the new technology that replaces the IT "buggy whip".

I do not know of any such technology. But it's worse than that. I cannot foresee of technology that cannot be done by educated persons in foreign countries. Anything that can be digitized can be sent from any country to any other country in a matter of seconds. Can we possibly have a nation of 100 million inventors and small businessmen each selling one another products manufactured in foreign countries? I don't think it is possible.

I listened to Greenspan's latest House Committee hearing and he kept repeating the same theme as nearly every member pounded him on the jobs issue. The jobs must return because there is no data to show that there has ever been a cycle when jobs didn't return. Only one problem with that theory. There never was an internet.

p.s. I am an American who has just started a software company in Japan (from where I now type these words) and I will be outsourcing most of my work to India. I see the writing on the wall. I simply refuse to equate precedent with law. That is, I understand that the precedent is that the jobs will return, but I don't believe that they MUST, just because, well, they Must. They may not, and someone damn well needs to start considering the consequences.

[LibertarianInExile]

But...you're BUILDING AMERICA! You're BUILDING CREATIVITY!

Aren't you supposed to act like you feel happy about it? I mean, c'mon, the Wall Street Journal says it's okay to offshore because it helps build 'creativity' in America! It must be what America needs! All these people whining about jobs lost overseas are just avoiding the necessary hard work and retraining they'll need to compete in the global marketplace!

[sarcasm off]

[LibertarianInExile]

Well, their readers were getting tired of that 'GET A JOB, YOU WHINING SLACKERS!' article...they needed to add something to the rotation!

[upcountryhorseman]

Yes, we do have the resources but the enviro's won't let
us develop them.

[Thisiswhoweare]

Super post and I heartily agree with you!

The problem lies at the decades long war we have fought with socialism in the heart of our government. Jobs are being outsourced, insourced (H1Bs,L1s, etc.), and workers imported wholesale under non-enforced immigation laws for one reason: to circumvent the regulatory and financial burden of paying an American citizen under American corporate laws.


"They may not, and someone damn well needs to start considering the consequences."

What disgust me the most is that rather than fixing while we have *alledgedly* conservative Republican conrol, this administration and it intractable supporters would rather ignore it or tell us the problem doesn't exist. They are getting as good at spin as the Clintons. This is positively Orwellian.

Now we have President Bush trying to push through this new immigration reform that will expand this nonsense and give it legitimacy.

Instead of circumventing the regulatory and financial burden of paying an American citizen under American regulatory law - they need to take a meat cleaver to the excesses of government.

The elephant hiding in the corner here is the massive overhead incurred by jacking up the cost of everything through unfunded mandates, and indirect as well as direct taxation. I doubt if even the best taxpayer action group could adequately calculate the real level of taxation since it is inherently recursive in nature. It keeps propagating itself at every level from raw materials and labor to administration, corporate taxes, legal defense, accounting requirements, cost of transportation, sales and use taxes and more.

I believe they have considered the consequences. Unfortunately, many of the so called conservative Republicans would rather continue and extend these circumventions to the benefit of a few rather than to thwart the den of thieves to the benefit of all. They have found willing accomplices in the demorats. They know precisely what they are doing, and it is destroying what little remains of America.

[Iscool]

The solution is called "fair" trade...However, that's not the agenda of corporations or the President and his minions who work for them...

[Iscool]

Well, the ones who are outsourcing are doing so because they cannot get the over-regulation and the lawsuit culture fixed. Extrenched special interests have protected it for far too long, I'm afraid.

Who goes out of business due to over regulation??? No one I know of...Is OSHA good??? Not if you work at home...But if you work in a factory, it is well appreciated that the company is required to make sure the brakes work on lift trucks...It's nice to know the company has to provide gloves when you are working with toxic chemicals...It's also not a bad idea that companies can not dump acid into the ground...Sure we have regulations and maybe a few too many, but we have (had) the highest standard of living of any other country in the world...

Corporations aren't moving out and outsourcing due to regulation...Everyone knows that...It's the greed...And everyone knows that...And if someone agrees with this operation, it's because they see a potential buck in it by screwing the rest of the Americans and America...

[hchutch]

So, in other words, you are saying you are ENTITLED to a job, and if I were to outsource or offshore because it is a better bargain for MY business, then I am being greedy?

I see little difference between Jesse Jackson and Lou Dobbs on this matter. Both are trying to tell me who I should hire and that I should hire who THEY say I should hire REGARDLESS of whether it is good or not for my business.

I would tell Jesse Jackson to go to hell if he tried that shakedown on me. I'll tell Lou Dobbs and Paul Craig Roberts the same thing.

[chimera]

...offshoring opponents should direct their fire at the politicians (who the offshoring opponents probably helped elect) who have hobbled domestic business with taxes and regulation.

Good idea. So good, in fact, that I've been there, done that, got the tee shirt. Results so far: zero. We'll keep trying, but there are a lot more people and special-interest groups out there trying to make businesses pay more than there are who want them to pay less.

The business climate is so bad in my state (Ohio) that I won't even consider trying to set up another company here now, from scratch. Too many taxes, too much bureaucracy, workmen's comp is a killer. I understand the need for some level of those things, but it has reached the point where it's counterproductive. Small businesses simply can't manage them, so they either close up permanently, relocate, or never get started. Then the RINO governor complains about the lack of economic growth, and comes up with the bright idea of a state-issued bond program to help businesses get started (with the usual strings attached, preferences and incentives for minority-owned, woman-owned, foreign-born citizen-owned), funded by, guess who, taxpayers (business and individuals), Sheeesh! Why bother with that crap if its simpler just to make it a more business-friendly place?