Offshore outsourcing of hi-tech white collar jobs - Is globalization devaluing labor?

Great Debates
101

If India and china get the addtional 10 - 20 million new jobs that they expect in the next 5 years, by unemploying americans, you can easily figure out a rough estimate.

Calculate the amount of social security, state and federal income taxes that 10 - 20 million workers will NOT be paying for the next 30 years or so. Add to that, the amount of money, tax welfare dollars it will cost to house and support 10-20 million workers and their wives and children, and multiply that by 30 years or so.

Add in another 10-20 million workers who got laid off from good jobs and are now flipping hamburgers or working at Walmart as a greeter, to get the "under"employed figures. These people used to pay lots of taxes, and now are paying very little, if any at all.

Finally, add in all the taxes that companies no longer pay after re-locating to china. e,g, , they dont pay state income tax, no business taxes, no social security taxes for their workers, no unemployment taxes, etc

The grand total of the above, is the bare minimum cost, which is probably a very low estimate.

Then take that new grand total of lost revenue, and divide it by the diminishing number of americans who WILL still have jobs to get how much each individual has to pay in order to get trinkets from china. The price you pay at Walmart or the dollar store for trinkets does not include the cost listed above.

The point is, that those who are for free trade, are not allowed to whine when their taxes eventually get raised by an amount greater than the amount of lost taxes and increased welfare. For a free trader to whine when his taxes will get increased, would be hypocritical , and would fall on deaf ears anyways, since the free trader whos taxes get increased, is the only one, besides some chinese prison laborer, or some Indian, who is getting their way.

Ancient chinese curse:
“may you get what you ask for”

102

ooops, the answer above is the price of UNrestricted trade.

The price of unrestricted trade, cannot be calculated, since you are trying to measure a hypothetical.

In earlier days, when our government was protectionist(1780’s - 1980’s decreasingly), and when our government was mostly financed by tarrifs, it is hard to say how much it actually cost us. We were the greatest country in the world, far above any other with the highest standard of living.

The only way I can figure it, is to see how many families worked how many hours to pay their taxes up thru the 1950s. Exactly how much in taxes did each family pay, income taxes, property taxes, social security taxes, etc.

As I recall, up thru the 1950’s the average family had only one wage earner, and all of his taxes were a very small percentage of his income. Any high school graduate could get a good high paying job, making more than enough to buy a house, car, etc

I cant really measure how our country which relied on tarriffs, when it relied on tarriffs and protectionist policies, was worse off.

103

[**Susanann, ** are you even going to bother doing the math you suggest above? Actually, nevermind, because the presumptions on which the math would be based are already flawed. I’m no economist, but just to name a few:

All jobs that India and China might gain are directly at the expense of U.S. jobs, because the entire universe consists of the U.S. , China, and India. There are no other economies, and there is nothing happening internally in those three economies that might explain changing employment levels.

“workers and their wives”? What century are you living in? What proportion of U.S. househholds have at least one female worker in them?

Since when is a custom-developed software program a “trinket from China”?

The U.S. economy supports two types of jobs: hi-tech jobs that pay $80k per annum or greater, and greeters at Wal-Mart. And never the twain shall meet.

And of course, nobody who is ever laid off from a job will ever find a job again, let alone one at a comparable level, because jobs in the U.S. never simply move between regions or are created, and workers are incapable of retraining for another solid career once they leave college (or high school, for that matter). Because, of course, none of those IT workers ever learned how to do anything else first, like get an engineering or physical sciences degree.

I’m going to sleep now, so I’m fresh as a daisy to go to work tomorrow, to my decent-paying job which has nothing to do with either my undergraduate or graduate degrees, and bring in some more foreigners to steal American jobs.

Eva Luna, Immigration Paralegal

104

Jobs: Coming or going?
CNNMoney ^ | July 8, 2003 | Kathleen Hays

"Payrolls fell 30,000 in June on top of 70,000 in May and they have been falling for five months in a row. (Manufacturing is especially depressing, cutting jobs for 35 months in a row!) "

ed. this loss of jobs report refers only to jobs “in the United States”, overall, jobs have increased: with many new jobs being created in mexico, india, and china in the past 3 years.

Manufacturing in the United States will continue to decline, until there is no manufacturing left.

Manufacturing will go(relocate) to where the costs of labor, taxes, osha, epa, business taxes, unemployment taxes, property taxes, are the lowest(and therefore profits are maximized for the companies)

105

If you really wanted to help, instead of bringing in more immigrants, you could tell us all where people who are in their 40’s or 50’s, who are no longer employed because of their factories closing, or because of H1-B or outsourcing, can go to college.

What fields of study do you say they should take up?

Most of these people will need federal loans to go to college to retrain, so in 4 years, they will be heavily in debt.

What/where are the jobs you are talking about which will enable these people to not only pay their current bills, but in addition, pay for the retraining, going back to college to get new degrees, etc?

Please provide a detailed list of companies and jobs and locations where these people will get employment after retraing.

Please also list which of companies that you know of and speak of which willingly hire people/trainees in their 40’s, 50’s and 60’s starting a new carreer.

I sincerely hope you have the answers to these questions and will share them with us.

106

That is such a manipulative cry-baby assertion. It shrieks of “woe is me” xenophobia which is patently NOT based in reality.

The assertion that if trends continue that there will be no manufacturing industry left at all within the United States is so outrageously egregious that any merit your arguements have offered thus far Susanann have diminished to zero - and have done so with far greater finality than the dire prediction quoted above will ever do so.

The saddest part for me is that so many Americans will agree with you, and in doing so, will inspire policy decisions by your government which ultimately, will cause even greater harm to your economy.

The ability of the United States to remain competitive on the international stage is purely based on good governance, and intelligent fiscal policy. The symptoms manifesting themselves within the USA as of todays date are a result of a decade or more the USA lving beyond it’s means - living on credit, as it were.

The amount of foreign investment INTO the USA as of today’s date has diminshed for one single reason - the USA is no longer seen or perceived as the “safe bet” that it was a decade or more ago.

To explain this syndrome as being caused by corporate policy WITHIN the United States to outsource a shitload of jobs to countries with far lower labour costs is nothing more than a small minded knee jerk warcry which will doubtless get immense press amongst those who would believe such bullshit, but it will PATENTLY not solve the USA’s trading position or fiscal debt position.

Bottom line? The USA owes a shitload of money to the rest of the world and those bills are being called in now. The net result is a loss of jobs as the USA’s economy stumbles and fumbles. What you’re doing Susanann in you’re posts is you’re confusing the symptoms with the causes.

International trade, and more importantly, international competitiveness, is a sustained game of relativity. The USA’s dollar is falling in relative worth to other currencies because her trading position is no longer as strong - and most importantly because she no longer deserves the levels of foreign investment she once obtained. And most importantly, you can’t FORCE the rest of world to invest into the USA in the future. It either happens because you deserve it, or it doesn’t happen at all.

The falling US dollar is the net result of this. It reflects the lower levels of competitiveness which exists within the USA as of todays date. Job numbers are diminishing as a result. It means that foreign markets are worth MORE to US Corporations than ever before, and that’s where the job numbers are going to tap into those markets.

107

That’s okay, let’s take a look at that stuff too.

Your model assumes a one-to-one correlation between jobs gained in other countries and jobs lost in the United States. Firstly, a goodly portion of new production in developing nations is used to satisfy local demand. This typically refers to “import substitution” although some of that production is also used to satisfy demand that didn’t exist before, but now does thanks to new production (the ol’ “circular flow of money”).

Another point is that, more than likely, productivity “per job” is lower in such countries. It’s entirely possible that two jobs created in Malaysia replaced only one job in the U.S., although the overall cost of labor is still significantly lower (this is how productivity is traditionally measured, product per dollar, rather than product per “job”).

Finally, you appear to be assuming that labor displaced by lost production cannot produce anything else. Historically, this just isn’t the case. Tens (hundreds?) of thousands of textile laborers were displaced thanks to technological advances, and somehow we survived it. Five years ago, the economy was doing pretty okey-dokey, despite the fact that most consumer electronic equipment was being manufactured in East Asia. As a society, we learn to make other goods and services that we and our trading partners find valuable. It’s painful for millions of people, but there’s a reason why economics is called the dismal science.

Economics is the science of calculating the, um, uncalculatable.

How does the Hawley-Smoot tariff fit into this model?

Here’s a fairly decent review of U.S. trade policy. I’ll see if I can’t dig up a better one short of referring you to a textbook… for a little heavier reading, here’s a good selection of papers on the development of the American economy. This guy is a noted specialist in historical U.S. trade analysis.

The problem with this sort of analysis is the ol’ post hoc ergo prompter hoc fallacy. The way we get around this is to hypothesize… some prefer nice general models such as the Hecksher-Ohlin model, but I think it might be more relevant for our purposes if we consider a particular good and a particular trade restriction. For an example, let’s look at the television industry… Americans used to make nearly all of the world’s televisions, and now (if I’m not mistaken) there’s not a single television manufacturing facility in the United States. Now, let’s propose a specific federal response that should have occurred to prevent the current state of affairs (your choice; quotas, flat tariffs, variable tariffs based on wage differentials, subsidies, whatever).

What would be the gross, rather than net, costs to the American economy as a whole, for whatever restriction you suggest? Once that’s out of the way, we can talk about the gross costs, in those same terms, of losing television manufacturing jobs to East Asia. Their difference is the net cost (or benefit) to the whole economy of choosing one action over the other.

I can maybe put something a bit more coherent later when I’m not high on decongestants (damn mold and pollen in this state).

108

Susanann, I find it interesting that you refuse to adress any of the flaws in your own arguments, but prefer to continue poking at mine. Well, some flaws in your hole-poking:

Who said anything about laid-off workers needing an entire new 4-year degree to retrain? Most of those who switched careers to IT did it with no more than a few months of formal retraining, if any at all. Here in Chicago there was (and is) a program at DePaul U. for retraining workers with tech aptitude for IT careers; it used to be a 4-month program, but I think it’s up to 8 months now. And that’s just the best-known; there are tons of others like it, from 3-course part-time certificate programs at other universities to storefront schools marketed primarily at the Russian-speaking community.

And I happen to know what I’m talking about when it comes to retraining and placing older workers; during the past recession, in 1990-1991, I was employed full-time as a job placement counselor for refugees from the former Soviet Union. My caseload was definitely an uphill battle; imagine being responsible for over 200 people with little or no English, no experience with a capitalist economy, completely different standards of personal hygiene in some cases (to put it politely), and most over the age of 40? It’s impossible to create a balanket solution for everyone; you need to adapt to each person’s skills and circumstances. But if I can make a computer programmer out of a Russian-speaking concert pianist during a recession, then many things are possible.

And yet very, very few of these people took longer than 6 months to find a new job. Why? Because they were willing to be flexible! We sent many to short-term retraining courses of various types, and for most their first job in the U.S. was not the professional equivalent of the jobs they’d held in the USSR. Everyone took English classes, and my agency worked very hard to develop relationships with employers. And lest you think this sort of help was available only to immigrants, the agency (Jewish Vocational Service) has the bulk of its programs dedicated to client populations other than immigrants; two of their specialties are older workers and workers with disabilities. They have offices in many major U.S. cities, are nonsectarian, and provide services on a sliding fee scale (if you’re unemployed, generally you pay nothing). I got my own job there by visiting there as a client.

Also, both my parents have been laid off after the age of 40, my mom on multiple occasions. Dad found a new job with no retraining, although he did have to move to NY for it, and has been there ever since. Mom is a bit more difficult for various reasons (I love her, but let’s just say she’s not the most efficient person around and is a bit of a fake), but has also managed to find other jobs with minimal assistance. I imagine most people without major employment barriers can do the same, with a little creativity and flexibility.

And until you address some of the issues I’ve raised with your arguments, I’m not wasting any more time on you.

109

Eva Luan,

I find it particularly interesting that you have not provided any listings of jobs, carreers, factories, companies, locations, etc where jobs are available and can be had for those laid off because of free trade and foreign competiton.

Until and unless you list specific companies that are wanting to hire all of the millions who have lost their jobs to cheap foreign labor, I will not waste my time with you any longer.

I really would like to settle this, to solve this situtation that millions of americans are experiencing, and the tens of millions more americans who will be experiencing unemployment, so I hope you give us this list.

I really want to agree with you, and I would like to see lots and lots of jobs available, (as was promised by those who supported and passed free trade, NAFTA, and H1-B visas, etc.)

As soon as you list the millions of jobs and careers available, we, and others , can really get into this.

Until we see exactly what and where all these available alternative jobs specifically are, my predictions are what is happening, what is going to happen, are unchallenged by anyone.

Anyone else??? who knows specifically where the unemployed can go to get jobs, feel free to help out and list them.

Until and unless these jobs are identified and provided by someone, unemployment, jobless benefits, welfare, higher taxes, budget deficits, negative balance of trade, falling dollar, etc will continued to be paid by those still working.

So hurry up free traders and give us your lists of jobs available!

110

Some places in the Chicago area that are hiring, in spite of layoffs, because the skills of those being laid off don’t always match the skills the company needs:

United Airlines, soon, believe it or not

My friend Tom who runs a small IT consulting company, and swears that every time he puts an ad in the paper, he gets 200 responses from unqualified people with outdated computer skills

Accenture, again, in spite of layoffs of other people

One of my firm’s competitors (they have a hard time retaining good people because their pay sucks)

Hundreds and hundreds of small businesses, educational institutions, nonprofits, and government offices: the job ads have several thousand listings this week

OK, Susanann, where are my cohesive statistics proving that free trade and/or immigratuion are the sole, or even primary, reasons for unemployment of U.S. skilled and professional workers, especially in the IT industry?
Again, unless you give me a specific situation, listing specific skills of an unemployed person, it’s pretty nonsensical for me to suggest potential employemnt. People are individuals, not warm bodies.

And again for immigration restrictionists: it is impossible to get an employment-based green card for anyone except a long-term multinational manager or someone who is a complete genius in an area of national interest (one example of an approved case for someone like that, to give oyu an idea of the level of geniusness required, was a guy who is a world leader in pollution control for the petroleum industry; others have been for top-level medical researchers and the like) without a test of the U.S. labor market for that position.

Basically, before you can get a green card for your foreign national worker, you have to advertise the exact position in sources approved by the state labor department (and believe me, they are very strict about what constitutes an approved publication; for upper-level positions, they frequently require ads in the Wall Street Journal or national technical journal, depending on the field of expertise), and then you have to give lawful, job-related reasons for rejecting every U.S. applicant that you reject (such as "this position requires an M.S. in polymer chemistry and experience with X techniques/machinery, which this applicant does not hae). Plus you have to pay the prevailing wage for the position and location, just as with an H-1B. All this is documented to death, and the smallest error and the state labor authorities frequently have you start the process all over again.

This process, called labor certification, Stage 1 of the green card process, can take anywhere from a few months in some states to 3+ years in other states, and even after you’ve advertised the position and gone through recruitment, if the state feels like economic conditions have changed, they can make you go through it all over again (and they frequently do; my office did a batch of these for a major telecom company in Washington State and did recruitment 2+ years ago. The state has left the applications in the queue since then. Obviously, conditions have changed since 8/01, so now they will have to recruit all over again.)

111

The NAFTA treaty, a small-scale version of globalization in my view, took huge numbers of jobs away from my community. We heard this same garbage from economists then–that there would be new jobs when the economy was boosted by NAFTA.

It never happened. :mad:

I see empty storefronts.

I see growing numbers of homeless people.

I see abandoned factories.

NAFTA left my community a gutted shell. Why the hell won’t globalization do even worse?

Boo Boo Foo–your opinion counts for zip. This isn’t your country. You don’t get any say about our national policies, economic or otherwise. Period. If you want to affect US policy, get your citizenship.

Eva Luna–your remarks are intellectually dishonest. I object to much of what Susanann has written here, but she raises a point. Social Security is falling apart, pension funds are woefully underfunded, and America’s Baby Boomers are aging. They are going to have to work, just to survive. If the jobs go ‘pop’ how will we cope? You may not remember the deaths of the elderly during the recession of the 70’s, but people were dying because they couldn’t heat their homes, buy food, and take their medications, all on a fixed income. You have persisantly ignored the human costs of what Globalization will do, and drown out objections & protests with a flurry of statistics, dubious in nature, & unproven in any way.

Despite all your rubbish, I still see nothing persuasive about your counter-intuitive notions. From here, it just looks like another example of how private intrests here in America will benefit at the expense of public or national intrests. No different from the artificially-created energy crisis of the 70’s, or the various invasions of Central American nations at the urging of moining & bananna intrests.

BTW-- while the mathematical average of income in 3rd world nations may go up, the assertion that ordinary people will benefit is something that only a baby would believe. The money will all stay with the top 1% of the nations’ income earners.

Look at the Philippines under Marcos. The relationship between the US & the Philippines was a miniature version of globalization–low or no tariffs. Greedy, corrupt officials took all the wealth, & left the citizens to rot. Those people are damn poor, and all your empty jabber won’t change that.

I see no reason to believe that won’t happen everywhere else inthe 3rd world.

As for the claim that free trade will create democracy–bull-pucky! This is completely unproven. In fact, liberty may create free trade, but I see no reason to believe that the theory of " Capitalisim=Democracy" is true.

The pro-Globalization posters ask me to ignore the evidence of my own eyes and elementary common sense. You ask my country to work against its own, obvious, self-intrest.

If all of this is too complicated, ask yourselves this–if Globalization is so benevolent, why all the police-state tactics against protesters? Why the senseless violence? The coroporate-sponcered media ridicule? The organized efforts to silence dissent by totally unprincipled means?

The worth of a political/econmoic movement is measured by the ethics they keep, or fail to keep. The history of Fascism, of Nazism, of Communism, all support this premise. Your “benficial” Globalization gets its way by beatings, tear gas, violation of free speech, & libelous “coverage” by coroprate-owned media. Who’s foolish? The people who object to a movement hallmarked by this behavior, or the people who try desparately to rationalize this evil mistreatment of people in an allegedly free society?

112

>> it is impossible to get an employment-based green card for anyone except a long-term multinational manager or someone who is a complete genius in an area of national interest

I once saw a funny exchange about how easy or difficult it was to get a visa. A name was mentioned as an example and someone said the only reason he could get one was because “he was outstanding in his field”.

Someone said with a puzzled look “why would they give visas to farmers?”

Puzzled looks back: “what do you mean?”

"Well, you said he was ‘out. standing in his field’. . . " _

113

Bosda: Yes, it does suck for something like that to happen and it especially sucks when it happens to you. Its hard to see something like this from a less than personal perspective but sometimes sucky things have to happen. Hundreds of people around the world live in far suckier conditions than you yet I dont see your sympathy towards them nor do I especially expect you too. However, similarily, dont expect other peoples sympathy either.

So phillipines flopped. What about South Korea? Japan? Honk Kong? Singapore? China? India?

114

Well, here goes again but it’s like talking against a brick wall…

Susanann: Okay, actual discussion of the benefits and costs of free versus restricted trade in an intellectual manner isn’t your thing. You want someone to give everyone an education and a job. If you’re talking about post-secondary education for middle-aged people, just about every state university has something similar to this. In addition, there are of course vo-tech and trade schools which typically have loans and such available for income qualified students. If someone thinks there’s no way they can educate themselves at the age of 50, then they haven’t tried very hard, if at all.

Job availability? If you’re suggesting that there are no jobs available at all right now in the United States (or even jobs that pay more than minimum wage) then you’re either living in a cave or being intentially dishonest. There are manufacturing employers out there that are currently expanding and looking for unskilled, semi-skilled, and skilled labor alike. Simonton Windows just built a new manufacturing plant in McAlester, Oklahoma and is still looking for about 200 more employees. If you’re looking for statistics on job availabillity, your state employment agency has got this stuff available. Here’s what the Oklahoma Employment Security Commission put together. Maybe the jobs that are available aren’t right next to your house, and maybe they require skills you don’t have, but they’re out there. If you’re suggesting that “free-er” trade should be providing full employment, I see no reason why the current economy should provide something centuries of highly restrictive trade didn’t.

Bosda Ask yourself, when did NAFTA take effect? Why is it that the years after NAFTA provided unparalled prosperity, and why should the current economic climate be blamed on NAFTA?

So your local community saw layoffs… fine and dandy. I have absolutely no way of verifying any of this, and you’ve failed to provide any sort of citation or reference, but fine. The Tulsa metro area saw tremendous job growth in the mid 1990’s, which can be verified through the tables here.. Here’s where I’m going with this…

So, what would you rather we do? Take a vote here on the boards, “does your local economy suck, and is it the fault of free trade?” Statistics and theories are how we analyze economies. The former is used to either support of debunk the latter. If you’ve got specific objections about specific statistics, go ahead and post 'em and I’m more than happy to discuss. So far, at least in this thread, all the assertions and non-cites I’ve seen have been on the part of the protectionists (such as the “evidence” Susanann provided that somehow proved something she apparently said was right).

As to your assertions of police-state tactics to force globalization, have you got something specific in mind with a cite? WTO protests and whatnot have, of course, been done to death on these boards…

115

Bosda, your arguments are not worth shit.

Totally irrelevant and uncalled for. Anybody and everybody can have and express their opinions.

No, YOUR remarks are intellectually dishonest and utterly stupid. You paint a picture of doom and gloom which is simply not true. You throw at us a litany of problems you see and you affirm protectionism will solve them. You affirm that without proof or support or evidence. That is intellectually dishonest. Show me examples of countries which have beciome prosperous with protectionist policies. Protectionism was at the root of the policies of the USSR and Comunist China and look how far it got them. There are plenty of countries which were open to foreign trade and became stronger and that includes pretty much all the western democracies.

The awful situation you paint of America is actually no worse on average than it has been in many decades so your arguments have no base. Today it is certain people being laid off and decades ago it was other occupations. That is part of adapting to new times. Three decades ago office clerks and accountants were being laid off because of computers and any one of them could have presented the same arguments to stop progress. Your arguments make no sense. History has shown over and over again that protectionism harms more than helps the countries it tries to protect. That is concerning countries.

Now if you want to come in here whining and making it personal then I have even less sympathy for you. People lose their jobs? Sure. The intelligent, the enterprising, those turn around and use their skills somewhere else or learn new skills. Only losers stop trying and moan and whine. If you cannot find a job doing X it means X is not needed and I have no sympathy on your trying to impose on others having to pay for you to do X. Go and do something people are willing to pay for. Nobody owes you a living doing whatever you want to do. Go out and earn a living doing what other people are willing to pay you for but quit trying to get the government to extort money from other so that you can keep doing stuff others do not want to pay for.

116

Ahhhh… the old xenophobic “SDMB” is American, ergo all perspectives should ALSO be American position. I was wondering how long it would take for such a position to manifest itself.

In my time here on the SDMB, I’ve been impressed beyond description with almost every one of my American friends on this messageboard. Consistently, they’ve shown a worldliness, and a magnanimity which is a joy to read and behold. Such posters are wonderful because they expedite the free flowing exchange of ideas, and knowledge, and opinions with other posters from other countries - and they do it here, right here on the Straigh Dope Message Board. It’s fantastic.

Most importantly, I totally dig the mututal respect and sensitivities which are demonstrated by the various nationalities who post on this messageboard. By far the majority of Americans who post on this board are truly interested in what posters from other countries have to say, and it’s a wonderful thing.

Occasionally however, an American poster on this messageboard (who is decidely NOT very worldly) will read something by foreigner which is less than thrilling. If it turns out that the message is factual and basically inarguable, when this happens, the results are invariably quite humourous. The target of the message becomes hostile and reverts to the old chestnut “This is an American postboard, and we’re talking about America, and you’re a foreigner and your opinions count for zip blah blah blah…”

It’s a particularly xenophobic response, and it’s one which shows all the graciousness of a Seargeant Rorke in Gomer Pyle with his hands over his ears screaming “I can’t hear you!”.

In the quote above, I enjoyed the assertion that I’m not entitled, or qualified, in any capacity to express an opinion on the USA’s national policies. Also, to ensure beyond any doubt whatsoever that the author of said quote was as insular as a microscope deep inside one’s upper colon, the author also suggested I obtain citizenship before being entitled to express an opinion on US fiscal policy in the future.

Hmmm… the immediate hole in this logic is that US fiscal policy directly affects the majority of the world’s economy. Certainly, US fiscal policy inarguably affects the economys of her trading partners. And there is a long, long history of the US applying selective protectionist policies (both tariff wise and/or subsidy wise) which have directly adversely affected the prosperity of citizens WITHIN those trading partners. In this aspect alone, most reasonable people would agree that ANYONE is entitled to express an opinion on US fiscal policy… absolutely anyone.

But let’s also consider the sympathy card angle… in this particular instance, we have an American who is bemoaning the fate which has fallen upon them regarding their own private history of employment. The author has attempted to extrapolate their own highly localised personal experience as being an accurate representation of an inarguable syndrome or trend relating to the pros and cons of US economic protectionism. When confronted with the nebulous logic in such an extrapolation, the author’s sole defence has been to assert that I, being a foreigner, am not entitled to express any further comment therein.

It’s humourous… inarguably. All I can say is thank goodness, that the huge majority of Americans on this postboard are incredibly better informed and worldly and magnanimous.

So Bosda my message is this… if you must whine, be aware that when you do so, you’re choosing to try and pull on people’s heartstrings to either win, (or amplify) your arguement. This is a slippery slope. It’s the nature of whining. By introducing a personal story you consciously chose to play the sympathy card, and as such, you’re fair game… all bets are off… coz there’s always, ALWAYS someone worse off than you. In this case, at least 1 or 2 billion people actually.

117

Please explain to me how it is intellectually dishonest to support my opinions with several batches of statistics and various real-life experiences of my own and of people I have known in various personal and professional capacities.

Look, I’m sorry you lost your job. I’m sorry it took you a long time to find another one. I’m sorry you had no health insurance. I’m sorry the economy sucks in your town.

However, I have not in any way ignored the human costs of globalization; I think you and I are talking about separate batches of people. I am talking about skilled workers and professionals, and it seems you are talking about manufacturing workers.

Why should a college-educated Indian earn a tenth of what an American does for the same exact job, by the accident of where he was born? Why should an assembly line worker in a village in Indonesia live on rice and beans, while a U.S. manufacturing worker at the same level lives in a three-bedroom house andsends his kids to college? Why should my Russian ex-boyfriend, with a Ph.D. and several dozen publications, earn $40 a month working for the Russian Academy of Sciences (on those rare months when he actually got paid on time), because his grandparents turned east upon leaving their village in Ukrainian Galicia, while I, with less education, have the opportunity to earn a middle-class wage by American standards because my grandparents turned west instead of east when leaving a village 20 miles down that same Ukrainian road? (BTW, he is now doing just fine; he used his superior brain to get a job with an American university and applied successfully for a green card under the highly technical Outstanding Researcher category *pro se, * with no help from me. Anyone who works his butt off like he has deserves whatever good fortune he can earn for himself.)

Again, sometimes life is harsh, and sometimes people have to adapt. My dad adapted by moving cross-country after an over -40 layoff and taking a job in the public instead of the priovate sector. My mom is trying to adapt after being laid off twice in the past year at the age of 60, but is certainly not complaining about how foreigners and free trade are the source of all her problems. At the age of 34, I’ve changed careers on multiple occasions and am not working in a field directly related to my education, although so far I’ve managed just barely to stay ahead of layoffs. I’ve helped scores of older unemployed workers adapt.

The difference is that the successful people make compromises. I don’t know about the situation in your town or even what the factory produced, so I cannot evaluate your claim that NAFTA killed your job or that there are no other employment options. I have no idea what your education and skills are. But I do know that you have brought absolutely nothing constructive to this argument, so I find it amazing that you take issue with my statistics, as you have not shown that they are false or flawed in any way.

If you’re so upset, then stop kvetching and do something constructive! I have no problem with providing assistance to people who are trying to better their own situations, but I have no sympathy whatsoever for people who do nothing but complain about how miserable their lives are.

118

The USA–for generations.

So-the various economic embargos the WEST placed against them slip your mind, huh? The fact that for decades we refused to trade with them doesn’t spark any memories?

But there are no new jobs. No better-than-minimum-wage jobs. And your analogy stinks–technological changes restructing the workplace are not the same as this Globalization movement, created in a spirit of dishonesty for the enrichment of a very few at the expense of billions.

Hey, let’s just shoot the poor! After all, the above statement reeks of the worldview that believes we have no moral obligations to our fellow man.

Except there will be no new consumers overseas, and no new jobs. Economies are driven by consumers. Wages overseas won’t go up. I discussed that in my previous post. Something you avoid mentioning at all costs–the basic fact that Globaliztion Theory doesn’t work in small scale tests!

It didn’t work in the Phillipines. And the so-called “prosperity” from NAFTA principaly benefitted a very few corporate CEOs, for a very brief period. And then the bubble burst. If NAFTA was so great, why did its “successes” fall apart at the least threat of tough times? I don’t believe NAFTA had anything to do with the 90’s. I think the economy was revving on Internet stock speculation, & when the “New Economy” turned out to be junk–POOF! No more good times.

Globalization is a theory that has been tested, & has failed those tests. It is not a path to economic growth, it is a path leading to a global depression. One that may linger for a decade, if only because our political leaders will be too blind to accept its failure.

Now, sailor, desdinova—why have you failed to address the question I asked earlier? I’ll ask it again, and I promise not to use big letters or multicolored posts.

If all of this is too complicated, ask yourselves this–if Globalization is so benevolent, why all the police-state tactics against protesters? Why the senseless violence? The coroporate-sponcered media ridicule? The organized efforts to silence dissent by totally unprincipled means?

The worth of a political/econmoic movement is measured by the ethics they keep, or fail to keep. The history of Fascism, of Nazism, of Communism, all support this premise. Your “benficial” Globalization gets its way by beatings, tear gas, violation of free speech, & libelous “coverage” by coroprate-owned media. Who’s foolish? The people who object to a movement hallmarked by this behavior, or the people who try desparately to rationalize this evil mistreatment of people in an allegedly free society?

119

You dare come in here and talk about shooting at the poor? Sure, lets look at the poor why don’t we. 2 billion people live on less than $1 a day, how much are you living on? Are you suffering from malnutrition? Did you have access to primary and secondary education? clean water? And what about moral obligation? I’ve yet to see you be concerned for your “fellow man”. In fact, its been you, you, you all this time.

Have you actually ever been to an anti-globalisation rally? Trust me, its a lot more boring than what you see on the news. Mainly, what you have is a large bunch of people singing hippies songs, a large bunch of police lounging around chatting with the protesters and a FEW d*ckheads who go out specifically with the intent of causing violence.

120

Why don’t you ask me if I stopped beating my wife yet?

I’ll ask you my question again, but I’ll try to be a little less condescending than you were: do you have anything in particular you want to discuss here, a particular example of this, citations, that sort of thing? I mean, you’re accusing “the media” of libel, you’re accusing the governments of developed nations of “police-state tactics”, have you got something in particular in mind here, with cites? Or this is all some kind of first world conspiracy to silence dissent?

Also, since it’s apparently kosher to demand why people haven’t addressed your points, why haven’t you touched mine?