In age of outsourcing, do the old rules apply?

Christian Science Monitor ^ | March 5, 2004 | David R. Francis |

[dfwgator]

And after India gets too expensive, watch out for Africa, many speak English there too.

[Lael]

CEOs and shareholders do not need to migrate - they can move their assets with the click of mouse.

And...that is part of the "IRON TRIANGLE" being seriously proposed by thinkers 'outside the box'...TAXATION of the MOVEMENT of CAPITAL.

Anything to...

MONKEYWRENCH

the situation!

[Iscool]

The protectionists can hide behind all the "American sovereignty" rhetoric they want but what they truly want is to not have to compete against foreigners.

Well Low, you got it all wrong...Americans can compete with any foreigner and win...We do it all the time...We're just not willing to live with outside toilets like they do in Mexico and China so that you can make a buck off us...

You seem to be pretty anti-American Low Joe...I'd like to see you walk thru a neighborhood of working stiffs spouting your stuff...Veterans at that...You likely wouldn't come out the other end...

So you got invesments in these internationalist pukes that are intent on raping the American workforce...Well Low, if that's the way it's going to go, then the only reasonable solution is to level the field with a One World Currency...That's been the plan all along anyway...Sorry Low, the value of your investments just dropped significantly...

[LowCountryJoe]

And Red China makes certain that the competition is skewed towards them, utilizing labor rates, zero regulations, extremely favorable taxes, and tariffs against imported goods (like from here...)

Ask yourself, "Self, do countries trade with each other, or do businessmen and private individuals engage in mutual transactions with one another?" Then ask, "Self, why would anyone want to conduct transactions with those labor exploiting bastards?"

I'm kinda slow, so forgive me for asking the following: why don't we just go in and kick China's @$$ and make them have a more level playing field as it relates to their labor markets? Why don't we help the dumb bastards (the Chinese) have a major revolt and take over the government? - economic reforms are too slow and painful; for us! Why do we let those Chicoms own our government debt instruments when we're at "war" with them? When they own our debt, how could that possibly be a help to us? I don't understand how, for a mature economy, we've had impressive growth while we've had "massive" trade deficits. How could this be?

I would start to argue on behalf of "your side" if I could get someone to help me out with my questions.

[Stallone]

What about this point?

When unemployment was slightly lower, reaching the mythical theoretical absolute lowest unemployment level (4%), the price was too high.

We got a bubble economy, high interest rates to brake the runaway train, and then...*KAPOW*, the economy collapsed before being handed to President Bush.

5.6% may be the PERFECT balance of low unemployment, low inflation, low interest rate, and steady, sustainable growth.

SELL IT, FOLKS!

[LowCountryJoe]

You seem to be pretty anti-American Low Joe...I'd like to see you walk thru a neighborhood of working stiffs spouting your stuff...Veterans at that...You likely wouldn't come out the other end...

I did my VA work study at the downtown Charleston, SC unemployment office while attending the College of Charleston. I had numerous conversations with the unemployed and I relayed my thoughts to them. As a student of economics I did my best to explain the forces that are in play that's creating the structural changes to the economy. The majority of them were grateful that I was actually helping them not only look for a job or write a resume but teaching them tidbits about the labor market. Oh, and when veterans came in I asked them which branch of service they were in. Sometimes we shared the same duty stations only during different time periods. Many times that wasn't the case though because most of our clients were Air Force. At times I convinced many of them to attend college part-time. I made it through and came out the other end just find and with much appreciation thrown my way. In fact do you know where many of our clients wanted to work? Bosch and American LaFrance...what do you suppose those two companies have in common?

So, do you have a DD-214 Iscool? [at the risk of pulling a Kerry for affect] Because amongst the stuff printed on mine are: Staff Sergeant/E-6, Combat Action Ribbon, Southwest Asia Service Ribbon/2 Stars, Kuwait Liberation Medal, Net Active Service 9yrs 11mos 24days, and an RE-1A for the reentry code.

And you know what, some of YOUR tax dollars are paying for my higher education. Hopefully I'm helping in spreading the knowledge amongst the thick headed. So before you call me anti-American again, and spout your hyperbole about outside toilets and a one world currency, at least investigate my FR homepage and do some reading. Recommended topics to read: comparative advantages, capital outflows and their relation to exports, economies of scale, the "catch up" effect, "dead-weight" losses, the components of the GDP, market elasticities, incentives, and thinking at the margins.

[RightWhale]

Lower the corporate tax rate. Impose tariffs on countries that impose tariffs on us.

Simple. All jobs should be community service. The work of the proles should be done by robotics. The work of the people should be shifted to leisure time. Utopia is staring us in the face and we don't see it.

[Orbiting_Rosie's_Head]

places I see US intellect go: 1. Ireland, 2. New Zealand,

I have very specialized and lucrative (theoretically, anyway) software skills. I am certified as a programmer and instructor, and also have an engineering degree, with 16 years experience. I've already gotten positive responses from New Zealand.

[Orbiting_Rosie's_Head]

Simple. All jobs should be community service. The work of the proles should be done by robotics.

Government employment (community service) has skyrocketed. Why buy and maintain robots when you can hire people who live in cardboard shacks for pennies a day?

[RightWhale]

Buy and maintain robots? What an antiquated concept. Robots are passe. It's robotics now. The birth of robotics = the death of the proletariat. Robots are recherche to the point of ignorance. One word: plastics robotics.

[brianl703]

The 80MPG carburetor is a myth.

You saw nothing.

[DustyMoment]

We need to address this from the 30,000 foot view. For starters, I am unemployed and my job has been outsourced. Let's look closely at the field. Having been involved in making outsourcing decisions DOMESTICALLY, the first thing that struck me about it was the cost of bringing the work back in-house should the company decide to do so at some point in the future. This often occurs with outsourced elements; at some point, new management becomes discontented with the vendor and decides that the work could be performed better and quicker in-house. And the reasons are usually good ones: shorter turn-around times, fewer communications problems, reduced costs for shipping prototypes/etc. for approval, and so on.

When the work is outsourced (such as engineering, for example) bringing it back in-house is more problematic. For starters, the corporation has been paying to have the work performed by the vendor. To get the work back, means that, in all likelihood, the corporation will have to buy back all of the engineering design documents and revisions. Then, they will have to buy back any special tools/equipment that went to the vendor with the jobs, plus all of the prototypes; particularly if they want those prototypes to be proprietary.

So now, the corporation is looking at a stiff bill just to bring back the jobs that it used to have in-house. If the vendor makes the cost high enough, what do you think the Board of Directors will do?

Again, assume that we are talking about engineering positions that have been outsourced for, say, 5 years. The expertise within the corporation is gone. So new engineers must be hired. After a 5 year gap, finding experienced engineers could be challenging, at best. Then, they have to ramp up to understand the corporation's current product line as well as be able to start developing upgrades and/or new, complementing products. If there are no experienced engineers, who is going to lead the development team? Who has the experience? Is the corporation willing to pay them for up to a year to catch up on the technology?

Now, let's broaden our focus. As more engineering jobs are outsourced, more potential engineers begin to understand that if they pursue an engineering education, their career could well consist of driving a cab because the engineering jobs are gone. So, engineering enrollments decline; most likely to the level that makes it untenable to maintain colleges of engineering at universities. Where do the new engineers come from when corporate America decides it wants these jobs back?

Then let's broaden our view even more. Countries such as India, China, etc., engage in protectionism to keep jobs from moving offshore. Employers are trading short-term profit gains for heavy long-term losses. If the US won't drop corporate income taxes to bring these jobs back (and we know they won't) and maintain the ones we have, then let's level the playing field. There is a domino effect at work here that must be taken into consideration.

Bush's hand-off attitude to the lost jobs is counter-productive. Simply saying "oh, well, Americans need to be more innovative" is not the response of a leader. When millions of highly educated American workers are unemployed or losing their jobs to foreigners, there is a problem. Case in point: Richardson, Texas used to be known as Telecom Corridor, employing nearly 200,000 telecom professionals. Today, Richardson is a virtual ghost town, having lost approximately 180,000 jobs. If the Indians are equally educated to their American counterparts, let THEM exercise their innovativeness and develop the industries that provide them with their own jobs as opposed to being handed ours.

It isn't about Christianity or not making money, it's about making sure that ALL the players are on a level playing field. Currently, the field is heavily tilted in favor of India and China. Currently, the US remains the world's largest consumer nation. When we outsource high-paying white collar jobs to socialist, labor-intensive countries such as India where it takes 2 workers to do the work of 1 American (documented stat), sooner or later America will lose its position as a world leader and as the world's leading consumer nation. When your job is gone, you have bills to pay, your family is on the verge of losing its home and moving into a box under a bridge, I'll be interested to see how much Christian charity you will feel towards people who took your jobs for a lower hourly wage and a subsidy from their own government. I may be wrong, but I'd be willing to wager that you might see things a little differently.

It's easy to talk about running right out and getting another job, but those of us who have earned college degrees and worked in high-tech industry are a little reluctant to fight with the teenagers and high school graduates for the job of greeter at Wal-Mart or selling toilets at Home Depot. When it's your turn, let me know if I'm right or not.

[LowCountryJoe]

Where are you Iscool?

I'm waiting for you to tell me that I should be ashamed of being on the taxpayer dole for utilizing the Montgomery G.I. Bill. Go ahead! I used to feel the same well about the program myself until someone clued me in on the real reasons why the program exists and why the federal government actually sees a net revenue increase. Would you like to engage in that argument with me?

Just don't ask me to defend the fact that, until recently, all veterans, retired or not, were eligible for health care at no cost to themselves. I don't believe that this is good stewardship of taxpayer money.

Once again, where are you?

[Luis Gonzalez]

GM Unveils Concept Car That Gets 108 Miles A Gallon

PRECEPT IS LATEST CHAPTER IN GM'S 
CONTINUING STORY OF ADVANCED CLASS VEHICLES

DETROIT - January 11, 2000 - General Motors Corp. (NYSE: GM) today unveiled the Precept advanced class vehicle, in both hybrid and fuel cell powered forms, at the North American International Auto Show at Detroit's Cobo Center. The Precept is the latest demonstration of GM's capability and commitment to building vehicles that will ultimately help to remove the automobile from the environmental debate.

The Precept is an example of the type of ultra-high-efficiency architecture that GM is developing on its way toward putting millions of environmentally friendly vehicles on the road. The key to GM's advanced vehicles strategy is to focus on a number of options for clean transportation solutions, not just one.

The parallel-hybrid Precept uses the most aerodynamically efficient design in the world, with a drag coefficient (Cd) of 0.163, 20 percent less aerodynamic drag than the production record-holder, the GM EV1 (0.19). Its four-wheel drive, dual-axle set-up features a 35kW three-phase electric motor driving the front wheels and a lean-burn compression-ignition, direct-injection (CIDI) heat engine driving the rear wheels.

CONTACT: Jeff Kuhlman
PHONE: 248-680-5999

General Motors Vice-Chairman Harry Pearce poses next to the Precept, a fuel cell powered vehicle, that breaks the 100 mile-per-gallon barrier with a stunning 108mpg. The Precept was introduced at the 2000 North American International Auto Show in Detroit 1/11. The Hydride Hydrogen storage system can deliver up to a 500 mile range.

January 1, 2000 - REUTERS

General Motors Corp. Saturday unveiled an experimental, teardrop-shaped sedan called the Precept, which is capable of getting 80 miles per gallon. The GM Precept, an experimental sedan built by General Motors Corp. travels about 80 miles on a gallon of gasoline.

Both the five-passenger Precept and the Prodigy by Ford Motor Co. will make their official debuts at the North American International Auto Show in Detroit, which opens to the media on Jan. 9. Ford provided the first glimpse of the Prodigy, which gets more than 70 miles per gallon, on Dec. 29.

The cars were developed under the federally sponsored Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles (PNGV). Members of the industry-government collaboration, launched in 1994, are committed to building by 2004 production-ready prototypes that can offer triple the fuel economy of a typical family sedan without sacrificing performance.

Company officials say the Precept and Prodigy will probably never go into mass-production because of their high costs. But some of the advanced fuel-economy technology could wind up in consumer-ready cars and trucks.

"Eighty miles per gallon really pushes you to the edge of the envelope," said Robert Purcell, executive director of GM's Advanced Technology Vehicles. "Pieces of what we've got in Precept could find their way into production vehicles."

The hybrid-electric Precept is driven by a battery-powered electric traction system that moves the front wheels, and a lightweight, 1.3-liter, 3-cylinder diesel engine in the rear. The direct-injection engine, featuring turbocharged compression ignition, was developed by Isuzu Motor Co. Ltd., one of GM's Asian affiliates.

GM has developed the electric motor to run off either a nickel metal hydride battery, like the kind used in the new version of its EV1 electric car, or a lithium polymer battery. The electric traction system also captures energy from braking and sends it back to the battery.

Designers of the Precept took their overall design cues from the EV1 and constructed the car to be as aerodynamic as possible. Exterior door handles have been eliminated, and outside mirrors were replaced by a camera system. Because front-facing grills create wind drag, the Precept has special air
openings behind the rear wheels.

The Ford Prodigy also has cameras instead of side-view mirrors. It has a more conventional look, featuring a body style similar to some luxury cars made by Germany's Audi.

The Prodigy, based on the P2000 LSR that Ford introduced in October, uses a 1.2-liter, 4-cylinder diesel engine and nickel-metal hydride battery. Use of lightweight materials such as aluminum and titanium have brought the car's weight to 2,387 pounds, about 1,000 pounds less than a modern family sedan.

"The vehicle represents an interim stage between our P2000 research programs and the development of an affordable, production hybrid in 2003," said Neil Ressler, Ford's vice president of research and vehicle technology.

The U.S. government is estimated to have spent about $240 million on PNGV projects last year. GM, Ford and DaimlerChrysler AGspent close to $1 billion, industry officials estimate. DaimlerChrysler will not show a PNGV vehicle at the Detroit auto show, but is on track to have one ready to meet the 2000
concept timetable.

All content © copyright 2000 Knight Ridder Inc. and may not be republished without permission.

[Luis Gonzalez]

Correction.

YOU saw nothing, you weren't there, I was.

[LowCountryJoe]

You’ve taken me aback with the revelation that you’ve been laid off. It’s tough and awkward to know what to write in response to that. But I will continue to advocate for the economic freedom of capital because in the end, I believe it is still best for America. I will not be swayed by the pains of another man and let those pains infringe on the freedoms that we have always had in order to alter an inevitable market outcome.

Is the corporation willing to pay them for up to a year to catch up on the technology?

You bet, if there's a shortage of engineers! Or, they'll attempt to get qualified foreigners to fill them at a lower wage.

So, engineering enrollments decline; most likely to the level that makes it untenable to maintain colleges of engineering at universities. Where do the new engineers come from when corporate America decides it wants these jobs back?

If the compensation level does increase due to job shortages, the enrollment will take care of itself. If it does not, Corporate America - the firms looking to employ engineers - will have to contribute money to universities to continue programs for such degrees, provide private scholarships (with or without strings attached) to the highest qualified candidates, or simply train people on the job.

Then let's broaden our view even more. Countries such as India, China, etc., engage in protectionism to keep jobs from moving offshore. Employers are trading short-term profit gains for heavy long-term losses. If the US won't drop corporate income taxes to bring these jobs back (and we know they won't) and maintain the ones we have, then let's level the playing field. There is a domino effect at work here that must be taken into consideration.

Countries that engage in protectionism will get hurt by those measures that are put in place. It leads to retaliation and general domestic unrest. Another thing that protectionism does is lead to an increase in exports. If the exports are not balanced out by imports – from wherever they may be – the exporting country’s capital is being used to finance the debt (or in some cases providing direct investment called FDI) of the country with the trade deficit. The U.S. has been running deficits for years and we’ve made out like bandits from it, while all the while, the foreign countries get a paltry real rate of return (compared to our return on the investment) and more American hegemony. But we as consumers overspend and live way beyond our means. We have rampant class warfare being fought in this country by people who actually think that they are poor and not getting their fair share of the pie. I don’t know how many “poor” people I’ve seen with newer cars, a cell phone, and not looking as though they’re malnourished.

You are correct about level of taxation burden the U.S. places on its citizens, it’s ridiculous! On a recent post I told of how I get “freebies” just for being a veteran; I didn’t even put in 20 years! I can defend the Montgomery G.I. Bill but I cannot defend “no cost” health care – no cost to veterans at least.

Competition is inevitable and it exists from everywhere. If were not up to the challenge and we want our government to level the playing field by restricting the natural flow of capital, it will only lead to a larger more intrusive federal government. If that’s the direction we want to go in we’ll find more and more people that hold the capital, taking their “winnings” and going elsewhere with it. That’s the real domino effect at work or downward spiral might be more appropriate. We should prevent the encroachment on our freedoms at any cost.

I wish you well in your quest for employment. You still have a “job title” – salesman – now get out there and sell yourself and don’t quite ask for your true market value until you’ve gotten in there and shown your true value. Then you’ll bend those #^*&ers over the barrel.

[LowCountryJoe]

Oh great, several years from now people that work in the gasoline refining industry will be bitchin' that their jobs are being outsourced to countries that actually have a majority of cars still being run on gasoline.

The good news will be that Middle Eastern countries will either have to develop some kind of new good, commodity, or service (other than terrorism) to export. Then again, they could just eat their fricken oil with a side of sand.

[brianl703]

What the hell does this GM concept car have anything to do with what you claim Carrol Shelby was testing however many years ago that it was?

Was Carrol Shelby testing a hybrid many years ago? I highly DOUBT it.

Was Carol Shebly's hybrid technology (if indeed that's what he was testing) purchased by one of the big 3 never to be seen again?

Obviously not, given the Toyota Prius.

What you have posted proves nothing.

[brianl703]

Just in case you "forgot":

"The engine design was purchased by one of the Big Three, and was never seen again."

Not true of a hybrid engine design.

[brianl703]

By the way Luis, I'm pretty well read in technical and engineering subjects. Only in one language though, but that's all that matters.