In the UK during the postwar period, maybe. In the US the notion of factory workers, by and large, being able to afford to consume what they produced pretty much defined the concept, at least in the beginning.
The grand middle class of a century ago, with fourteen room gabled Victorian houses and servants; nor the middle class of movie depictions today, in which the houses are hardly less grand and the people who live in them always have ready cash for things like walk-up-fare plane tickets to faraway places–I don’t think this is the “middle class” we’re talking about here.
Since the so called doctor shortage is done by limiting the amount of students allowed in medical school classes ,I don’t buy your argument. We could open it up and have a lot more medical schools and a lot more students . But they are terribly expensive, and the educational institutions are making tons of money, it will not happen here. I have 2 young guys i play racketball with who got accepted to medical school for September. They sat out a year ,applying to lots of schools until they got in. They went to college for 4 years and have great grades. One works in a medical lab for one of the schools he applied for. But foreign students pay a lot more. University profits are a big component in who gets in.The AMA wants to maintain the doctor shortage. It helps them make even more money.
Interestingly, I work for a company who’s niche is near-sourcing. Many of the large corps outsourced their support operations to India and the Philippines (AT&T, Dell, etc…) ten or so years ago, found out that their US customers were unhappy. My company has established operations in economically depressed areas of the US where there is an underemployed and inexpensive workforce, who speak native “American” English. Sort of the best of both worlds. The wages aren’t high, but they’re far above minimum, and in the areas where we operate, the employees are very happy to have jobs. The company is minority owned and employs a very high percentage of minorities. Growth over the past five years has been measured in the thousands of percent. There is definitely a demand from the fortune 500 for some sort of middle ground.
That’s clever. My fiancee works for an employee benefits outsourcing firm, and some of their clients are federal agencies, which are referred to as “nonconsenting” - that is, it’s against federal law for any work related to them to be outsourced.
I’m curious and a bit skeptical of this. Were these objective third-party studies? Or is there a self-interest bias from the sourcing companies to report better satisfaction? Are the before and after metrics being measured with the exact same metrics and methods? Are they including the outsource services that were fired or not renewed for contracts for failing to provide good service?
Having myself been through Six Sigma, they are heavy on bumper-sticker claims of this sort that may or may not be accurate.
Even domestic outsourcing of back-office functions can be a near-fiasco. it adds a layer of complexity, and often, of incompetence. At my last job, health benefits were based on a self-funded system in which the employer ultimately paid the bills for care, but this was administered through an actual insurance company. To inquire about coverages and claim decisions we would go through them just as their own actual policyholders would. This part was fine, and the insurer maintains an up-to-date website that allows you do take care of a lot of these questions online. But when we had to go to COBRA, then we were paying our premiums to a third company that did administration only. The clerical errors and failure to apply payments were almost as bad as the lack of any meaningful web presence, and the non-bills that turned out to be bills. Yet even with all this, we often had to deal with a fourth company which was really a nationally known brokerage, and who also administered the pensions and 401(k) programs.
This is no way to treat people whether they’re customers, employees, or even ex-employees trying to hang on to their COBRA benefits by the skin of their teeth. When did “doing business” cease to include things like customer service, billing of accounts, and human resources?
I could go on about the medical billers, who often seem to have 1970s-era computer systems–that is, if they don’t still do it by hand. And, in one case of my own experience, send out mail to patients with postage due.
To return to the point, outsourcing benefits short term employment costs, saving money for the company. On the other side ,the quality of work suffers. But if you are an accountant for the company, you can justify it easily. If you are an exec, your bottom line is improved and you get a bonus and a higher salary.
The USA suffers because shipping jobs abroad results in unemployment and stress to make wages lower. Middle class jobs have a multiplier effect. Restaurants, bars, shows and local businesses suffer. You can argue that offshoring is Un-American because it hurts the country and its people. The American purchasing power is also diminished. You can pay a ton and go to college and wind up with few opportunities . That too is bad for America.
The tradeoff is short term and benefits the few, the rich ownership class.
But the problem is that for something like software development you aren’t making 10,000 widgets all with the same design, you are making 1 single widget that requires 10,000 different informed decisions each requiring experience and expertise and availability of information to the problem at hand and interaction with people locally.
Some might argue you can do design work and then write specs and send them off to be developed. But, based on many years of experience, I have never seen that method beat the time and cost of a small group of competent tech people.
They don’t take our jobs. Our corporations give them away. They also give them the programs, the history of innovation that we made, all patents the experience and anything else they need to do the job. Then they force a group of America workers to train them until the Americans are no longer needed.
Illegals are hired by companies because they work cheaper. If we wanted to stop it tomorrow, just give heavy fines to companies that hire illegals. The companies that do it, know damn well what they are doing.
I don’t blame Mexicans who are here for better opportunities. I blame the companies that illegally hire .Keep it legal and pay the rates.
Blame doesn’t matter. If you want to forcibly separate companies that want to hire non-native workers and foreign workers who want to work, dissuading the people does just as good a job as dissuading the big bad corps.
Any other policy preference is pointless symbolic status-raising and status-bashing, and looks just as silly as the Church opposing condom distribution in to prevent AIDS because it doesn’t want to raise the status of the promiscuous.