Skip to comments.
The Harsh Truth About Outsourcing
Business Week ^
| March 22, 2004
| Paul Craig Roberts
Posted on 03/20/2004 12:30:25 PM PST by sarcasm
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 241-258 next last
To: sarcasm
For comparative advantage to work, a country's labor, capital, and technology must not move offshore.This fellow must have got his econ degree in a box of Cracker Jack.
21
posted on
03/20/2004 2:17:48 PM PST
by
edsheppa
To: Southack
Do you think America became an economic powerhouse by farming out all of our industry to other countries? I assure you that's not how it happened.
To: Southack
Our wages are not rising. Paul Craig Roberts is a Reagan era supply side economist and not a Marxist (ad hominem attacks).
23
posted on
03/20/2004 2:33:49 PM PST
by
Mel Gibson
(Suffer from Allergies, Asthma or Adversely Affected by Foul Air ? See "About Me")
To: LibLieSlayer
RE: "How many jobs do we Americans enjoy now due to foreign "outsourcing" to the US? 6.4 million of us work for foreign automakers. . . ."
How do they do it when many free traders say our guys have to offshore to "developing countires'" cheaper labor and fewer government obstacles to stay in business. I am not being facetious I really would like to know.
24
posted on
03/20/2004 2:34:50 PM PST
by
WilliamofCarmichael
(Benedict Arnold was a hero for both sides in the same war, too!)
To: MegaSilver
I wouldn't agree that someone who's leery of letting our capital leak out to a country run by a crazed Communist Party is a communist. Anyone who thinks that privately-owned capital is "ours" is a communist, or a socialist, or someone who has not really thought through what he just said.
|
25
posted on
03/20/2004 2:49:11 PM PST
by
Nick Danger
(Give me immortality... or give me death.)
To: WilliamofCarmichael
"How do they do it when many free traders say our guys have to offshore to "developing countries'" cheaper labor and fewer government obstacles to stay in business. I am not being facetious I really would like to know".
Pardon my redundancy:
"This is directly due to productivity levels of the US worker (in comparison to their domestic force), coupled with savings from the elimination of shipping product via sea-lanes". (Build it here, sell it here).
Here is an example as far as tech-outsourcing i.e. Dell Computer. Lets say Dell pays $17.50 and hour to "customer service reps", plus health benefits, FICA, Workman's Comp etc...$17.50 a day for a worker in Bombay (doing the same job, trouble-shooting using a tech manual) looks enticing. No retirement plan, no health care costs, and far less government red tape.
Building electronics, assembling automobiles, and other "skilled" positions are better filled workers of the quality of those in the US work force.
BTW, a friend of mine works in marketing for Dell. He said that Dell is reconsidering its outsourcing due to complaints both in principle, and in service.
LLS
26
posted on
03/20/2004 2:54:46 PM PST
by
LibLieSlayer
(We point out Kerry's record and the facts, and they just THINK it's attack politics.)
To: Southack
care to compare the U.S. living conditions in 1920 with half of our country not even having running water or electricity to today, for example
Isn't that true for any country?
27
posted on
03/20/2004 3:04:48 PM PST
by
lelio
To: sarcasm
First, it should be noted that economists don't really produce anything. Economists are mostly college professors who spin theories and bore students.
Secondly, the winning country in almost every major war in the past 150 years has been the country with the greater industrial strength. Keeping production in the United States is a matter of national security.
Thirdly, we should be concerned when productivity moves to other nations. People can say that other jobs will replace those that are lost, but we need to question whether those jobs are really productive. Shuffling paper for a bureaucracy may be a job, but often bureaucracies are just a means of bleeding the productivity from companies that are actually making something. If the companies that are actually making things eventually disappear completely, there won't be any productivity for the bureaucracies to bleed. Then both the bureaucrats and the workers will be without means of financial support.
Fourth, I think things will get better only after we begin outsourcing lawyers, bureaucrats, and TV personalities. I vote that this process begin at FOX News with Fred Barnes. He's just not that appealing, and his commentary could be just as easily outsourced to some guy sitting in India and reading into a TV camera. They could put a screen in Fred's chair and get the same quality of commentary at a much lower cost.
Ready for a Repeat
Bill
28
posted on
03/20/2004 3:27:20 PM PST
by
WFTR
(Liberty isn't for cowards)
To: sarcasm
Paul Craig Roberts must be a communist.........
I saw him on Lou Dobbs and he was great. A great American telling the truth while bought and paid for economists and free trade cultists are busy drinking their PURPLE KOOLAID
29
posted on
03/20/2004 3:35:00 PM PST
by
dennisw
(“We'll put a boot in your ass, it's the American way.” - Toby Keith)
To: LibLieSlayer
I was remiss in not stating my inquiry was more general than just Indian call center and IT jobs. To wit, China gets many of our electronics and other manufacturing jobs.
What you say about the American worker is absolutely true.
BTW, the "productivity levels of the US worker" and "the quality of those in the US work force" extend to IT, engineering, and back office jobs as well. And that is not just my opinion.
Still though even manufacturing jobs -- offshored here or not -- have costs that you mentioned and for government red tape. If it's still cheaper for Japanese and European folks then that makes sense.
"Cheap labor" is relative and our guys are sending jobs chasing after "cheap labor" in India and China and elsewhere. I just hate it when they call it "free" trade for the reasons Mr. Roberts listed.
Thanks for your reply and I do not wish to appear contentious but there is something I'm missing if it's not just "cheap labor."
30
posted on
03/20/2004 3:37:43 PM PST
by
WilliamofCarmichael
(Benedict Arnold was a hero for both sides in the same war, too!)
To: sarcasm
BTW, real wages are falling. Sure they are. And the Earth is warming.
31
posted on
03/20/2004 3:49:41 PM PST
by
1rudeboy
To: Batrachian
Do you think America became an economic powerhouse by farming out all of our industry to other countries? I assure you that's not how it happened.Please describe the manufacturing capabilities of the United States during the first one hundred years of its existence in comparison to those of Britain, etc.
The US shipped its raw goods across the Atlantic to be processed into salable goods long after the Revolutionary War, and up until the Civil War (when the North imposed high import duties to try and force Southern raw materials to be shipped North instead of overseas). So what you claim was not how it happened is exactly how it happened. That's how emerging markets mature...
32
posted on
03/20/2004 3:50:48 PM PST
by
Charles H. (The_r0nin)
(If [economic] ignorance is bliss, these must be the happiest people on the planet...)
To: WilliamofCarmichael
Thanks for your reply and I do not wish to appear contentious but there is something I'm missing if it's not just "cheap labor"."
You are welcome. I enjoyed your post. The one thing I think that you overlooked is the prime motivator of Capitalism.....increased profits, followed by higher stock yields, increased net worth, higher market share/ratings, and a stronger position with which to raise capital for expansion or acquisition.
Thanks for the chat!
LLS
33
posted on
03/20/2004 3:57:50 PM PST
by
LibLieSlayer
(We point out Kerry's record and the facts, and they just THINK it's attack politics.)
To: Charles H. (The_r0nin)
America wasn't an economic powerhouse in the first hundred years of it's existence. It only became so after the industrial revolution, and it became so by building factories.
To: 1rudeboy
There you go again.
35
posted on
03/20/2004 4:34:04 PM PST
by
sarcasm
(Tancredo 2004)
To: edsheppa
This fellow must have got his econ degree in a box of Cracker Jack. I'm sure that's why Reagan hired him.
36
posted on
03/20/2004 4:35:38 PM PST
by
sarcasm
(Tancredo 2004)
To: dennisw
A great American telling the truth while bought and paid for economists and free trade cultists are busy drinking their PURPLE KOOLAID I'm waiting for someone to call him a socialist.
37
posted on
03/20/2004 4:37:19 PM PST
by
sarcasm
(Tancredo 2004)
To: sarcasm
C'mon, post that Canadian study. Or have you found another one yet?
38
posted on
03/20/2004 4:37:48 PM PST
by
1rudeboy
To: sarcasm
Paul Craig Roberts must be a communist. Little Ad Hominem there Sarcasm?
Why don't to go after the argument instead of the author?
39
posted on
03/20/2004 4:45:06 PM PST
by
navyblue
To: 1rudeboy
Are you denying that real wages are lower now than they were in 1975?
40
posted on
03/20/2004 4:48:13 PM PST
by
sarcasm
(Tancredo 2004)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 241-258 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson