'Outsourced' economy {"Free" trade}

The Washington Times ^ | March 7, 2003 | Paul Craig Roberts

[Jason Kauppinen]

"The question is then, from a purely economic perspective, when firms en masse obtain their labor from a new lower-cost source, what happens to the labor that the firms utilized previously?"

Well that would depend on who bought the goods the firm made after they moved.... and whether or not those consumers had money left over for other things. Maybe they would buy more American goods.

[nanny]

I have always wondered about giving people access to the inner workings of a company when they are so far away - they can't be held accountable. They could literally ruin a company.

My husband was asked to help an elderly man with a problem on some money he was due. The older man said every time he called, he couldn't understand the people - they didn't speak good English. My husband made 3 calls, talked with 3 different foreign sounding people and got 3 different reasons why he was not due the money - including he had gotten it and cashed the check. My husband asked for a copy of the check and was told it was lost. Now finally my husband got the money.

What was their plan? Had they already cashed the check and how many others? It just made me think how much damage could be done to an American company by just a few people.

Now this was not standard procedure for this company. Strange?

[nanny]

farmers, trucking, construction companies, and government for our economic growth. At least those are the sectors that the president highlights in his economic speeches.

Well, they are making a profit - thanks to illegal alien labor - but that labor is being subsidized by the taxpayers. What happens when we can no longer afford to feed, medicate and educate them?

Trucking is about the only one listed that hasn't been taken over by the illegals - but it is happening. LEgals are buying trucking companies and hiring illegals to drive. Also, just wait until Bush gets the Mexican truckers on the road.

Wait, I get it - he obviously wasn't talking about America and Americans having economic growth in these areas - he was talking about illegals and Mexico have growth in these areas.

[Jason Kauppinen]

That sounds like 2 good plusses for keeping operations in the US.

[nanny]

traditional American work ethic".

Oh, no - mostly on these threads you hear how Americans are just lazy, uneducated and ignorant and therefore the foreign workers are so much better and we just have to have them.

Thanks for that.

But sad to say - it seems most people are only thinking of how much money I can pocket from this deal - right now.

[nanny]

That sounds like 2 good plusses for keeping operations in the US.

It looks that way to me.

[Jason Kauppinen]

"3) Stop globalism dead in its track and bring industry and good-paying jobs back to the US."

Who do you think created those jobs in the first place???

[Beck_isright]

I've missed this thread somehow, but I wonder how many of the FRtraders have actually been to Mexico, Venezuela, and the Far East.
The problem is not the myth of "free trade". The problem is that we, as a nation and thanks to our laziness as an electorate, have made it more profitable to outsourse than to retain our economic power internally. I hope all of the demorats realize that unions are powerful when they number in the tens of thousands, but when they number in the tens (in their districts) they are, well, "moot". The pubbies will also learn this lesson as taxes increase on the investing public (like us semi-retired and retired folks) to cover state budget deficits. The potential for a third party is very strong. Too bad all of the "potential" leaders of a third party are fruitcakes.

[3LostLegions]

>>>Well that would depend on who bought the goods the firm made after they moved.... and whether or not those consumers had money left over for other things. Maybe they would buy more American goods.

Or maybe they'd by more offshore goods.

Do you agree that those who lose their jobs as firms switch labor sources face a time of uncertainty, during which they could end up in one of three conditions: better off then they were before, equally well off as they were before, or worse off then they were before?

[3LostLegions]

>>>Too bad all of the "potential" leaders of a third party are fruitcakes.

Agree on this one. I'd vote for a Jacksonian Democratic Party -- pro-small-government and pro-America.

[Beck_isright]

Or a Forbes Libertarian Party; but that would mean getting that nutcake Browne out of there.

[Jason Kauppinen]

Sure, but that happens every day to someone in the US.

[chasio649]

And what political party is apt to do that?

[3LostLegions]

Do you agree that the set of all people who lose their jobs can be divided into two subsets: those who lose their jobs because of offshoring (let's call them set A), and those who lose their jobs because of non-offshoring reasons (set B)?

[3LostLegions]

I'm not too familiar with Forbes' policies, but Browne -- nice guy though he may be in real life -- is not helpful to his cause as a politician.

[Beck_isright]

Forbes wants to eliminate and/or revamp the IRS and tax code. He is very Smithian in his business policies. But then again, most true conservativs are. Browne is just a figurehead to be taken as serious as Elmer Fudd. Since I've met Mr. Browne, I can attest to his ability to win "nut of the year".

[3LostLegions]

Well, sounds like Forbes would favor unrestricted offshoring of US jobs.

[PuNcH]

Gee I didnt know Adam Smith was a protectionist, isolationist, nationalist, fascist and probably a racist as well somehow. ;)