[AntiGuv]

There is a fundamental difference between certain sectors of the job market becoming obsolete due to technological advancement versus certain sectors of the job market being exported to cheap labor foreign markets.

In the first case, jobs which are lost - such as switchboard operators - are replaced by generally equal or higher paying jobs - such as network administrators.

In the second case, higher paid, higher skilled workers are displaced by low-wage foreign substitutes, which generally forces either a competitive reduction in domestic salaries or a downscaling of employment opportunities.

Stated differently, there would be no ultimate distinction between shipping these jobs to lower paid workers overseas or simply removing the worker protections which by and large ensure higher domestic wages.

It is merely an end-run around the various institutions which have developed to protect workers and elevate the broad standard of living and quality of life in this nation. Over time, this process would inevitably diminish the purchasing power of the most vibrant economy in the world, by transferring its wealth capacity overseas.

Congratulations. Don't hurt yourself patting yourself on the back.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

It is merely an end-run around the various institutions which have developed to protect workers and elevate the broad standard of living and quality of life in this nation.

Spoken like a true union thug.

[1rudeboy]

In the second case, higher paid, higher skilled workers are displaced by low-wage foreign substitutes, which generally forces either a competitive reduction in domestic salaries or a downscaling of employment opportunities.

If your second case was true, then real wages would be dropping for these "higher paid, higher skilled" workers. Unless you qualify your typical UAW job as high pay, high skill.

[Sender]

I think there is a difference too, although technology and cheap labor may cause the same effects (loss of jobs here), they should not be lumped together.

We can't very well become luddites and say 'all technology is bad', especially since we are now addicted to technology and we could not be nearly as productive (nor do most jobs at all) without it. However it does result in a lot of jobs no longer being necessary, and those displaced workers must adapt. Productivity soars, and the end product is often better and more consistant than before the technology came along.

On the other hand, outsourcing to cheap labor is different. Instead of replacing many jobs with a single machine, we are replacing many jobs with many jobs...just not for us. While the low-paid workers in China and India deserve to make a decent living just as we do, the fact is that many of them DON'T make a decent living from outsourced jobs. The very fact that makes outsourcing appealing to CEOs is what makes it less than satisfactory for the workers...paying pennies on the dollar for the same work. Also, the quality of the end product is very often inferior when compared with the original...witness the rapid backtracking of Dell, Lehman, GE/Marquette, HP/Compaq and others who either have returned customer support from India to the USA or are considering it due to complaints. Although they get tech support done for pennies, callers say they get meaningless script reading by people who are hard to understand and know little about US business. Not at all a cheaper replacement for US tech support jobs, just cheap crap.

The article is thought-provoking though and raises some good points. It is good to admit that jobs do come and go, regardless of the administration or world politics. Otherwise the left seems to think there are only 2 types of jobs: ones magically created by Bill Clinton, and ones negligently lost by George Bush.

[Naspino]

The transfer of wealth is a problem-- but it could work to our advantage if it creates a huge gap between the wealthy (owners) and poor (workers). Revolution and 3rd world wage increases will benefit us. I don't agree that moving jobs overseas = elimination of jobs. Walter is right--more jobs appear and the product is cheaper for Americans to consume.

[HighWheeler]

Your post was shortsighted and short-term focussed. But I will only expand on only one part of it with an example based on what I am doing, and many others are doing.

"In the second case, higher paid, higher skilled workers are displaced by low-wage foreign substitutes, which generally forces either a competitive reduction in domestic salaries or a downscaling of employment opportunities."

I am a licensed engineer, and have 11 Mexican engineers working for me in Mexico. They are not as competent at my projects as I, but they only get paid about 1/20 as much as my old salary, too (which to them is a HUGE wage). They are doing the dreariest parts of my old job, while I oversee the whole project far more efficiently. Therefore, I can produce about 3 times as much as before I had them.

As far as the U.S. is concerned, I am producing about 3 times as much and spending only about 1.5 times the money ----> Big Productivity Increase.

The lesson is that you have to be quick on your feet. There is ALWAYS work to be done, sometimes you have to make a change, and you find out it's to your own benefit.

[optimistically_conservative]

Forgive me for not reading through th 200+ posts to see how far this point has been discussed, but ...

There is not much difference. Outsourcing to lower wage markets creates other jobs to support the operational, logistical and other business mechanisms to produce, transport, market, etc.

Since tech outsourcing is a hot topic, outsourcing has focused much of the indigenous techie minded into new technology areas. IT developers, programmers, administrators and other traditional techie jobs are being cut or their salaries reduced; and rightly so.

Those smart unemployed or underemployed techies will need to innovate the next technology or use their skills to innovate a new product.

Sounds good in theory, but I'm seeing it being done.

[moehoward]

Bump that.