While we’re on the subject, I should point out that (according to the article I read) our Army’s new beret hats are made in China.
A lot of things are made in China that aren’t labeled as such. Components, electronics, etc… they certainly aren’t just churning out cheap t-shirts anymore. Taiwan and Japan (ironically so) both outsource manufacturing to China as well. A full on xenophobic boycott won’t do diddly it’ll just make us look stupider than we already are. Oh, and even if China is out of the picture it’ll be India coming into it. The fact is the world is the developing and countries are catching up. We’ll face more outsourcing and greater competition on the horizon which is what capitalism is all about.
Tell me, xtisme, will we also have pie in the sky when we die?
Because I hear this kind of crapola all the time from free-market types when people complain about the lack of jobs in this recovery (and the lack of jobs prior to the recovery). Some wonderful techno-revolution is going to come charging over the hill just in the nick of time and save us all.
Well, maybe that’ll happen, xtisme. Maybe. But I think RELYING for our very livelihoods on the prospect of an economic/technological miracle saving us is, to say the least, incredibly naive. Isn’t it smarter and more responsible to think about what we can do to maintain our economy WITHOUT the aid of pie in the sky?
yes, a man who’s hungry is free to ask for a job or starve or steal something and risk jail. That’s exactly the same as being a stockholder who’s free to hire and fire people. No power differential there, nope, nary a bit. It’s purely an equal relationship.
We need some kinda mega-rolleye smiley here …
Well, my most important assumption was for the sake of argument. I know it is incorrect in the long run, but there are many useful approximations – a straight line is a useful approximation to a circle, if you are only looking at a small arc. So, even if overall wealth is growing, my argument is still valid if the transfer of production (i.e., jobs) is proceeding at a much greater rate than growth of wealth.
I wasn’t talking about handing them money, I was talking about helping them build factories, schools, other infrastructure that would directly lead to jobs – and doing it in such a way that we could help minimize the effects of dog-eat-dog market economics as well as blunting the long-term effects on our economy. How? Precisely by transplanting/growing wealth in the third world instead of just transferring jobs. (This goes back to my original model – if you increase wealth fast enough, the effect on us of transferring jobs should be much less severe.)
You know, I agree about that. They will catch up, and when they do, most of us hope they will adopt what we think are better rules for the game.
But that’s essentially the problem as I see it. Capitalism per se leads business decision-makers to cut costs whenever possible. Left unchecked, this produces worker rights abuses, dangerous products, pollution – the list is endless. What counterbalances this tendency? Public outrage – in the labor market (in the form of unions), in the consumer market (in the form of boycotts), and in the political market (in the form of laws and regulations), just to give some examples.
To get back to the OP, and to summarize my earlier post, I think it is immoral to allow businesses to exploit poor, starving workers. By “exploit” I mean setting up unsafe or inhumane or environmentally dangerous (Bhopal?) conditions just because you can and if you don’t someone else will.
And the argument that “eventually, those countries will develop, the people will benefit, and they will put a stop to this abuse when they’re ready to” has two flaws: (1) the ends do not justify the means and (2) pragmatically, if the people of a country eventually perceive business behavior as exploitation, they probably will not be friendly toward the exploiters (for instance, they might nationalize the businesses – which, as we know, isn’t necessarily good for either side, but it is particularly ironic for businesses that moved there to enhance profits in the first place).
So, I’m advocating that developed countries use their influence to create (as much as possible in the real world) a true level playing field so that businesses can’t find a place where violating basic human rights is profitable. But they would still be able to go to the place with the lowest costs within that framework.
(BTW, msmith537, IT jobs are really a different topic, as I don’t think third-world IT workers are being exploited. I agree with you on that.)
No, they didn’t forget. Hence the lack of reply to your question. They just don’t give a fuck about the workers in the box packing machine plant. That’s a free market ideologue for ya.
No particular jobs or set of jobs in necessary. Presumably, jobs lost in one sector will be replaced by jobs gained in another. More magical jobs are going to come from nowhere to save us all. If we all shut our eyes tight and believe really hard in the free market and worship the invisible hand, it will be so.
There’s a reasonable compromise here. The government could facilitate ethical buying practices rather than mandate them simply by requiring products that are made (or contain parts that are made) in countries using child labor, slave labor and/or sweatshop conditions to put a bright red label on the outside saying in big yellow type, “This product was made with slave labor!” or whatever.
I’m amenable to such a compromise. After all, you aren’t FORCING people to not by such products, and you aren’t FORCING companies to not use child labor, etc. You’re just facilitating ethical decision making.
I await your delighted agreement.
From Evil Captor
Only if you lie, then you may get a sty in your eye or possibly a tie on your thigh.
From Evil Captor
And I have to hear the whinning about ‘lack of jobs’ from the, um, non free market types when they know very well (or they SHOULD) that jobs are always the LAST indicator of a recovery, as they usually follow many months behind the other indicators. Now, if its this time NEXT year, and there have still been no indications that jobs are recovering, then you may have a case. Oh, and before you get all steamed, I was out of work about half a year when the bubble burst on the IT industry, and have been building a business of my own for the last two years…on less than half salary. So, I’d say I’m qualified to talk about the whole jobless thing…from PERSONAL experience.
From Evil Captor
Who is RELYING on them Evil? Not me. IMO, the economy is recovering nicely, and I think there are some very good indicators that jobs will recover also…in the existing tech industries as well. I said that if the US is to stay ahead, they BETTER find new services and industries and be on the cutting edge, like they were in the tech field. Because the world has already moved into the existing industries and technologies, and the US no longer has a lock on those things.
From Evil Captor
I see. So, because the public doesn’t care enough to do the research on their own (the info is pretty readily available, no?), you want to save them from themselves, huh? In theory, I actually don’t have too much of a problem on this to be honest…as long as they charge Evil Captor for the lables and other expenses this will incur (which would be significant IMO), and not me directly or indirectly (i.e. increase the price of the product or take it out of my taxes). I’ll be sure to have them send you the bill. 
Of course, in practice, I can see lots of problems I would take exception too. Like, who decides which country practices ‘slave labor’? Who defines ‘child labor’ and who’s standard do we go by (standards vary from country to country and culture to culture…or do you have some universal code of ‘rightness’?)? Who decides which countries have unsafe labor laws/practices? Where do we set the bar for all this stuff, and who decides (new government agency?)? Are the tags going to lump the various ‘violating’ countries/products/companies all together, or separate categories (maybe with separate color codes)? As Evil Captor actually won’t or can’t pay for the lables, who will (Taxes? The companies themselves through making their products more expensive?)? Will it be voluntary for companies to do this, or mandatory, and who will enforce it if its mandatory? What will the penalties be for not complying if its mandatory? What mechanisms will be in place to make sure coutries/companies aren’t unfairly judged (I see a lot of potential for abuse here)? What mechanisms will be in place for countries/companies to appeal any decisions made against them? How often will countries/companies be re-judged?
I’m sure you aren’t seeing any of the above…just more ‘crapola’ from the free market guy I’m sure. I’m sure that the fact that doing such a thing would probably hurt the folks you are trying so desparately to ‘save’ more than simply letting the situation correct itself is not something you are willing to even entertain.
From Evil Captor
Hopefully you aren’t holding your breath for this.
Reguards,
XT
well, it looks like a lot of economic theory has been discussed with a lot of talk of “fairness” and competition and the like. But lets get down to a hard question here. I’ll give you a scenario:
Jorge is 30 years old. He graduated with a Masters degree in Computer Science about 5 years ago with a respectable GPA. He is married with 2 kids. His wife and Jorge have the typical things a relatively young educated married couple has - a mortgage, a couple of car payments, and about $50,000 of student loans between the two. Jorge’s wife is a stay-at-home mom.
Jorge works at a mid-sized software development firm. He makes good money; lets say for the sake of arguement, $80,000 per year.
Now, the CEO at Jorge’s company is in a quandry. He wants the Super-Duper-Mega Deluxe Yacht, but he can only afford the Ultra Deluxe Yacht. So he calls up the Patni Alliance or Satyam and gets himself a whole bunch of Indians over in India working for $5,000 per year. Of course, they all visit the U.S.A. for some training from our pal Jorge and the rest of his team.
Jorge arrives at work Monday morning. There are three Indians sitting in his cube and his boss is waiting for him. His boss informs him, along with his associates, that they are to train these Indians in their job functions. If they do not, they forfeit severance and will be terminated immediately.
Jorge’s job is being sent overseas - his days at this company are numbered. He may or may not be able to find another job in the area.
Keep in mind that Jorge and family have a high debt load, much of which is unsecured. Also, if the area is losing jobs rapidly, it may not be possible to sell their house for more than or equal to their mortgage amount.
Now, the questions for the free market/invisible hand folks: What should Jorge do? What if he can’t find another job? What if his wife can’t find a job paying enough? What should Jorge retrain for? Where will the money for retraining come from? Where will the money come from to pay his student loans? the mortgage? food for his kids?
Think of this at the personal level of Jorge. He has kids and a wife to consider. Will the invisible hand put food on the table for them? Where is the free market that the family can get groceries and doctor’s visits? How is it fair that his two kids might be deprived of having their mom at home during the day?
Please answer honestly and don’t pull any punches.
Well Gllrnz, leaving aside your vitrol (and general hyperbole) at these mythical CEO’s that do such thing only so they can afford a bigger Yacht :rolleyes:, Jorge can always do what I did when Williams Communications/Nextira One folded…he can use his severence to get by while he either:
A) Looks for a new job (or maybe become a consultant to his old company if he really was a valuable asset…many of my friends went this route, especially if the new guys can’t be spun up to speed in the short time frame), or B) Takes a chance and starts his own business if he’s really good at what he does (this is what I did…its quite painful, especially in the short term) or C) Go on unemployments and/or retrain for another job or do lesser work to make ends meet (I have friends that did this…and I worked at Electronic Bouteque for 4 months in the first stages of building my business after hours to bring in a bit of extra cash…Engineer level IV, $120k/year without counting bonus’s or stock options to doing IT for a software game store for $15/hr…its a come down, but you do what you have too).
Of course, if Jorgey boy lost his job TODAY, it shouldn’t be that big a deal, as many of my friends are getting offers again (and I’ve had several calls from people that are looking to re-fill IT billets). If he lost it 2 years ago, well, thats another matter…times were certainly tough and I would definitely sympathize with him. If he has a good network of friends (its ALL about the network) then he can probably get enough short time gigs and consulting positions to make it by, if he augements with something else (if he doesn’t let his pride get in the way…I’ve known several who wouldn’t ‘stoop’ to doing lesser work, and so didn’t).
That about answer your question, Gllrnz?
BTW Gllrnz, I have a wife and 3 kids…the newest baby is only a year old. I was out of work completely for over 1/2 year, and have been on less than half salary (interspersed with NO salary some months) for over 2 years now, though things are FINALLY starting to pick up. My life style has been cut back to bare bones. For me, its not an academic game…its been my life.
-XT
well, it looks like a lot of economic theory has been discussed with a lot of talk of “fairness” and competition and the like. But lets get down to a hard question here. I’ll give you a scenario:
Jorge is 30 years old. He graduated with a Masters degree in Computer Science about 5 years ago with a respectable GPA. He is married with 2 kids. His wife and Jorge have the typical things a relatively young educated married couple has - a mortgage, a couple of car payments, and about $50,000 of student loans between the two. Jorge’s wife is a stay-at-home mom.
Jorge works at a mid-sized software development firm. He makes good money; lets say for the sake of arguement, $80,000 per year.
Now, the CEO at Jorge’s company is in a quandry. He wants the Super-Duper-Mega Deluxe Yacht, but he can only afford the Ultra Deluxe Yacht. So he calls up the Patni Alliance or Satyam and gets himself a whole bunch of Indians over in India working for $5,000 per year. Of course, they all visit the U.S.A. for some training from our pal Jorge and the rest of his team.
Jorge arrives at work Monday morning. There are three Indians sitting in his cube and his boss is waiting for him. His boss informs him, along with his associates, that they are to train these Indians in their job functions. If they do not, they forfeit severance and will be terminated immediately.
Jorge’s job is being sent overseas - his days at this company are numbered. He may or may not be able to find another job in the area.
Keep in mind that Jorge and family have a high debt load, much of which is unsecured. Also, if the area is losing jobs rapidly, it may not be possible to sell their house for more than or equal to their mortgage amount.
Now, the questions for the free market/invisible hand folks: What should Jorge do? What if he can’t find another job? What if his wife can’t find a job paying enough? What should Jorge retrain for? Where will the money for retraining come from? Where will the money come from to pay his student loans? the mortgage? food for his kids?
Think of this at the personal level of Jorge. He has kids and a wife to consider. Will the invisible hand put food on the table for them? Where is the free market that the family can get groceries and doctor’s visits? How is it fair that Jorge’s kids will be deprived of a mother at home?
Gllrnz - Forgetting your ridiculous backstory, what do YOU think Jorge shoud do? He should not do anything to get himself fired, but he should also start making preparations for being out of work. He should also start looking for a new job, IMMEDIATELY.
After having my start date delayed 3 months, witnessing my classmates have offers posponed or rescinded, watching the collapse of my companies largest competitor, seeing the overall decline of the economy and my industry, and having a freakin skyscraper fall on my companies headquarters, I had a slight inkling that my job might not be the most secure.
In any event, you don’t wait for the ax to fall to begin your job search.
I don’t know what you are asking. Sometimes bad things happen to people. People lose jobs. They go bankrupt or have to sell their homes. That sucks but why does Jorge deserve a job any more than Sanjay over in India who willing to work for half the pay because he’s twice as poor?
That’s what people do when times are tough. They go without. They take jobs for less pay than they are used to. The cut luxaries like cell phones or cable tv or dinner out with the family.
“Where is the free market that the family can get groceries and doctor’s visits? How is it fair that Jorge’s kids will be deprived of a mother at home?”
While Jorge’s personal economics is important to Jorge, the economy does not bend to his personal problems.
I’ll you people who prefeced your posts with “I am not an economist but…”. Please pick up an economics book and learn the basics. It will help you understand that economics is about choice in allocating resources. Often the choice is unpleasent.
Did you miss the part whee I said nobody owes you a job or a living? Ok then, I’ll say it again: nobody, and certainly not me, owes you a job or a living. You get a job by offering services which are in demand.
The stockholder does not himself hire and fire, he voluntarily puts his money at risk in hopes of making a profit. The management hires and fires and, you know what? If they don’t hire they don’t make money so they are forced to hire, just not you. And if they can make money without hiring, so what? It is their money to do as they please. You get that? It is not your money. It is their money. They do not owe you a job and neither do I.
And if you are going to appeal to my humanity and give me a sob story about how you have a mortgage to pay and kids to feed then I’ll tell you a million sob stories of people in China who are much worse off and deserve my money more than you do.
Don’t forget it: You are not owed a job. Now roll your eyes all you want.
well, it looks like a lot of economic theory has been discussed with a lot of talk of “fairness” and competition and the like. But lets get down to a hard question here. I’ll give you a scenario:
Jorge is 30 years old. He graduated with a Masters degree in Computer Science about 5 years ago with a respectable GPA. He is married with 2 kids. His wife and Jorge have the typical things a relatively young educated married couple has - a mortgage, a couple of car payments, and about $50,000 of student loans between the two. Jorge’s wife is a stay-at-home mom.
Jorge works at a mid-sized software development firm. He makes good money; lets say for the sake of arguement, $80,000 per year.
Now, the CEO at Jorge’s company is in a quandry. He wants the Super-Duper-Mega Deluxe Yacht, but he can only afford the Ultra Deluxe Yacht. So he calls up the Patni Alliance or Satyam and gets himself a whole bunch of Indians over in India working for $5,000 per year. Of course, they all visit the U.S.A. for some training from our pal Jorge and the rest of his team.
Jorge arrives at work Monday morning. There are three Indians sitting in his cube and his boss is waiting for him. His boss informs him, along with his associates, that they are to train these Indians in their job functions. If they do not, they forfeit severance and will be terminated immediately.
Jorge’s job is being sent overseas - his days at this company are numbered. He may or may not be able to find another job in the area.
Keep in mind that Jorge and family have a high debt load, much of which is unsecured. Also, if the area is losing jobs rapidly, it may not be possible to sell their house for more than or equal to their mortgage amount.
Now, the questions for the free market/invisible hand folks: What should Jorge do? What if he can’t find another job? What if his wife can’t find a job paying enough? What should Jorge retrain for? Where will the money for retraining come from? Where will the money come from to pay his student loans? the mortgage? food for his kids?
Think of this at the personal level of Jorge. He has kids and a wife to consider. Will the invisible hand put food on the table for them? Where is the free market that the family can get groceries and doctor’s visits? How is it fair that Jorge’s kids will be deprived of a mother at home?
Please answer honestly and don’t pull any punches.
- What mechanism do you think creates jobs? Actually, one would have to appeal to “magic” only if one doesn’t understand how market capitalism works.
- Are you saying that new jobs have never been created in the past?
- What conditions are different now that makes you think jobs will not be created in the future?
Actually, the rolleye smiley would be for the 2 logical falacies in your first sentence. Let’s just deal with the False Dichotomy. People in a free society also have the option of working for themselves. This can range from the Bill Gates example, down to Joe Handyman who puts an add for his services in the paper. More commonly it is working as an independent, professional tradesman (electrician, carpenter, etc.).
So, are you this much of a cad in real life? If I told you, in person, that I don’t like American jobs being shipped overseas, and that no silly arguments would change my mind, would you stand there, stamp your feet like an annoyed child and say “Well excuuuuse me!! D’uh! It’s like, you know, a good thing!”
People like you are the reason I’m glad god doesn’t exist because I’d hate to float around strumming harp strings next to you for eternity.
G.
- If there is someone who wants or needs a product or service, and that someone also has money to spend or services/products to barter, then you can get jobs. At least, that’s the microeconomic view.
- Not my issue.
- Please see my earlier posts, if interested.
To elaborate on #3, if you look at it historically, you will see that there are periods of prosperity and periods of terrible conditions, even in this country. The market, in any given location, seems to work like that – in fact, just like ecosystems that have boom-and-bust population fluctuations, stable climates vs climatic change.
Point is, the market, whether in response to individual greed or just in the course of being a blind and invisible hand, can go from being a great generator of jobs and wealth to being “busted” for a while.
And I think the real argument is not how the market works, but whether we, as thinking and feeling human beings, should accept all of the fallout from the market. Or should we put some mechanisms in place to ameliorate its fluctuations and protect people from its worst abuses?
I think, ultimately, the sending of jobs offshore is a good thing. I think it will – after a few decades or more – create a better global economy. But not in my lifetime. And at the cost of how many lives lost or ruined?
And at the core of the defense of the pure market, let me suggest, is this message: “anyone can do anything they set their mind to, and if they don’t, they’re just lazy or scared or something…” Well, the only thing anyone can really do is decide how they want to respond to situations – in a defeated, victimized way or in a creative, challenging way.
That doesn’t mean the situations are fair, and it certainly does mean that one form of positive response is to take action to change the system that created the situation.
That isn’t whining, it’s the pursuit of happiness taken to a higher level.
And if you can’t figure out why people want to do that, you don’t understand people, even if you do understand markets.
First off, sorry for the duplicate post - I received no indication that the post had gone through successfully more than once…
http://www.zazona.com/ShameH1B/
http://comment.cio.com/comments/12747.html
After about a 2 minute google search, there are some more personal comments about how offshoring has affected them in the tech sector. I could start telling you about the 25% unemployment in some Southern rural factory towns due to Chinese competition, but the focus of my initial post was about IT.
And why else would a company offshore - for fun? No, its cheaper, hence they can make more profit and buy bigger yachts to impress their other rich friends.
http://boston.bizjournals.com/boston/stories/2003/07/14/focus1.html?t=printable
Obviously, as soon as you knew you were being “offshored”, you’d be looking for unemployment. But what if there aren’t decent jobs available, like in Boston, in the above article. Somehow, the article’s focus character doesn’t seem likely to make his former wage at the Home Depot.
Free market types always claim to that some fantastic new class of jobs will come along to replace the ones that went overseas. The reality of the situation is that people just become poor, taking jobs far beneath their skill level and for much lower wages.
Ah, yes, the old “fairness” article of the free market. The concept of “fair” is relative. Is it fair that Jorge was born in the United States with its high cost of living, but Sanjay was born in India with low costs of labor? Before you say, “well move to India”, remember that the “free” market we have today is a one way street - the US is free to bleed money and jobs but the other countries are locked up tight. Try to get a job in India and compete with Sanjay on his own terms, it won’t happen. So much for fair…
So I guess Jorge should start going without plumbing or a leak-free roof to compete with Sanjay as well, because you’ll have to cut costs a lot more than just cable and cell phone…
Hmm, well Jorge’s problems are already a national problem. In February or March, after all the tax refunds and xmas cash are blown through, the economy is in for a major sink, IMHO. Unemployed people can’t buy nifty Indian written software and cool Chinese plastics…so I do think the economy will bend to Jorge’s personal problems.
OK, College Boy, I did my 4 years and 9 credits of economics too. I know how the free market should work in theory, but guess what! It doesn’t, theory != reality.
You forget the effects of unemployment on neighborhoods. You have people move out next door and no one moves in. Crime increases. There’s less money for schools and police. Other businesses loose money because there are less people to buy. The glut of available workers puts downward pressure on current wages, only making the problem worse. Insurance costs go up. Welfare roles and cost to the govt increases. The list goes on.
Also, as I mentioned above, the market isn’t level. Its only the U.S. that advocates free trade and practices free trade. Many other countries tariff our goods and/or have massive govt subsidies in their industry that makes our goods very expensive. Fitting, these are the same countries that we have a trade deficit with - like China. Not to mention they peg their currency to the dollar instead of letting it price per the market. Some “free” market!
Sure enough, Jorge will loose his job and have to collect unemployment for awhile. Free market types will pay no notice. But be sure, Jorge and his associates and all the unemployed in America have noticed. This is why Bush will not be re-elected, barring a Diebold “error.” Most people are like me, only concerned with job security; we don’t care about the free market - oh, and unemployed people vote. Your “free” market will come to an end.
But really, you didn’t answer my question. What should Jorge retrain for in this global economy of ours? How should he pay for it? Or should he and his family just go live in a box somewhere? What is the solution to his dilema in the free market? Is he SOL?
Every factory we build in Mexico or India is a factory that we don’t build in the United States. That is essentially the same as shipping jobs overseas. (What do you think? They work in grass huts?) The only diference is that you are advocating training them to take our jobs as well. Why should my taxes also go to pay for Malaysian schools. Our interests are far better served by investing in our own infrastructure. Modernizing OUR plants, educating OUR workforce. That way, companies would be encouraged to keep jobs and wealth here.
The goal is not to have a level playing field (while that would be nice). The goal is to gain a competitive advantage in the marketplace.
Remember that we aren’t advocating moving jobs overseas. We are simply giving reasons why it happens.
That’s fine that you don’t like jobs being sent overseas.
It is quite another to put your head in the sand and ignore all the reasons why this can “be a good thing” because you are unable or incapable of learning the basics of economics. Economic theory isn’t a justification for greed or averace. It’s an attempt to understand and explain why things happen in an economy - why jobs move overseas, why prices rise and fall, even why CEOs can command such high salaries. If you insist on seeing the world in terms of rich fat-cats and oppressed workers, you will continue to not get it.
First of all, understand that your “job” is a result of some need or want in society for a particular good or service. Look around you. Everything you see has to be created by someone else. A job is not something that has been created to occupy your time and pay your bills just for it’s own sake.
Now look at society. Is it perfect yet? Is there stuff that can be worked on or improved? Of course. When labor and capital are freed up, that allows those resources to be utilized to work on other things. Will Joe Sixpack laid off from the plant start a new company? Probably not. Or maybe he might turn his love of fly-fishing into a profitable business. Either way, we do have safety nets like unemployment insurance in place to give Mr Sixpack time to find something new. And most people do find new jobs eventually.
Anyhow, I don’t know what you think works better than a properly regulated free market to create jobs. That is truly wishing on the Job Fairy.