Bush strikes back at critics of outsourcing

The Financial Times ^ | 9. March 2004 | Edward Alden

[goldstategop]

Yes... Kerry wants to kill Walmart and choke off cheap goods for ordinary Americans. That's what he and his party would do if they got their way on outsourcing - higher prices and fewer choices in consumer goods for Americans.

[Semper Paratus]

He's on thin ice here. No matter how logical his arguement is those that have jobs outsourced have families and friends who vote not to mention peers who worry if their next as well as those who have had their salaries reduced.

It adds up.

[e_castillo]

He's on thin ice here.

Thats an understatement. I'm still wondering (wishing) if the article is for real.

[BikePacker]

Kerry wants to kill Walmart and choke off cheap goods for ordinary Americans

What I want to know is what happens when "ordinary Americans" can't afford even "cheap goods"?

[goldstategop]

Then our economy goes under.

[Raleigh's Golden Mountaineer]

I would like to know Bush's justification for outsourcing government jobs - like the Wisconsin food stamp program. Here is Wisconsin, using the tax dollars of her citizens to pay people in some other country to answer the telephone questions of the citizens of Wisconsin on how to get Wisconsin tax dollars since they don't have jobs.

It seems to me that more people in Wisconsin would have jobs (and therefore need less food stamps) if the state of Wisconsin hired some of her citizens to answer the telephones.

[ConservativeMan55]

bump

[BikePacker]

Doesn't "TRADE" imply selling goods to other countries, and in return buying goods from them?

When did "Free Trade" become defined as: 'Sending as many jobs as possible to countries with lower living standards in order to maximize profits by slashing payroll'

[westerfield]

But the administration now appears set to mount a more robust defence of companies that move US jobs abroad.

Rut roh, I doubt that this is going to go over well with the general public.

[InterceptPoint]

He's on thin ice here.

Maybe, but I'm not so sure. Bush can surely make the case that the U.S. is a net beneficiary of world-wide outsourcing. He just has to tell the story and keep telling it.

Don't forget those 5 million or so folks who work for Toyota, BMW, Seimans, Thomson CSF et al that are the benefactors of outsourcing from other countries. They know where a Kerry isolationist policy would take them and they are not going to go down that road.

And Walmart employees are not going to be jumping up and down when they listen to Kerry. They are, I assume, mostly folks who are inclined to lean Democrat who would also not look kindly on anything that would restrict their company's ability to import the cheap chinese goods that are the fuel that runs Walmart.

[SolutionsOnly]

The term "economic isolationists" is unfortunate. It frames the debate as binary, either/or choice between two extreme positions.

The fact is that we are being taken advantage of. "free trade" does not exist. Anyone who suggests otherwise has no supporting evidence and will not until AFTER our HUGE, growing, and continuous trade imbalances are rectified. There are a certain few who are making a lot of money off these imbalances. They are the ones screaming the loudest in defense of their own self-interests and against the interests of the nation as a whole.

Rock on, Lou Dobbs! Expose what's going on and let consumer and citizens decide!

[BikePacker]

There are a certain few who are making a lot of money off these imbalances

Ding! Ding! Ding!

[MinuteGal]

Correct. The President (or his advisors) are making a critical error here. In fact, it may be fatal when coupled with the immigration issue.

Right or wrong in this position, these campaign policy-makers appear to be isolated from reality. The concerned talk on the American street today is not terror, but is primarily related to jobs and the work place....i.e.....outsourcing, getting laid off, getting dismissed, immigrants taking jobs from Americans, trying to deal with employees who don't speak English, corporations moving overseas, immigrants working for lower wages than Americans, falling salaries or no raises, cuts in benefits, established, respected companies going bankrupt or out of business.....it goes on and on.

If conservatives try to explain some valid Bush or Republican logic on some of these issues, it falls on deaf ears. Folks in the workplace, whether white collar or the trades, are upset and are blaming everything on Bush. The level of discontent is more widespread and serious than conservatives allow themselves to think.

Leni

[BikePacker]

I wonder how these folks will feel about it...
'One in six' Silicon Valley tech jobs ripe for offshoring

Ehhh, I guess computers are the new buggy-whips.

[Cronos]

Doesn't "TRADE" imply selling goods to other countries, and in return buying goods from them? When did "Free Trade" become defined as: 'Sending as many jobs as possible to countries with lower living standards in order to maximize profits by slashing payroll'

In economical terms, a service IS a good. Hence, importing the services from another country is NO DIFFERENT than importing in a manufactured product. Jobs are not being exported, services are being imported. And that's nothing new, the US has been and is still the world leader in services.

[westerfield]

And Walmart employees are not going to be jumping up and down when they listen to Kerry. They are, I assume, mostly folks who are inclined to lean Democrat who would also not look kindly on anything that would restrict their company's ability to import the cheap chinese goods that are the fuel that runs Walmart.

I don't think that you understand how the typical Walmart employee thinks - I think he is more likely to resent being stuck in a deadend job that pays $7 bucks an hour rather than worry about where it is that Walmart imports its products.

[Cronos]

And in exporting of services i.e. importing jobs from other countries....

[expat_panama]

There are a certain few who are making a lot of money off these imbalances

Read carefully what you're saying:  it's a terrible thing if someone makes a lot of money-- either everyone gets the same amount of money or we all have to loose money equally.

[Mr. Bird]

Interesting situation. Pay higher taxes so more people can work for the state, or pay lower taxes and fewer people work for the state. Can't do a static analysis with so many variables, but the basic principle behind protecting the state job is to extract the wages for that job from the taxpayer. So, if you are the one getting the state job, you're happy. If you're merely paying for it, it's not that great.