I’m obviously not an economist, but I’m getting more and more ticked off at how this so-called “economic recovery” doesn’t translate into more decent-paying jobs here in the U.S. While at this time it doesn’t affect me personally (I’m blessed with a good job in the healthcare field), I still don’t understand why U.S. businesses can get away with exporting so many good jobs overseas and leave the average worker with the crap work. I guess the almighty dollar is all that matters, eh? I think there should be consequences for these businesses, not a pat on the back from our government. :mad:
Lucy, there are many, many. MANY threads in Great Debates wherein our economist dopers explain why “exporting jobs” is not the horrible thing you seem to think it is. You may want to read some of them before advocating simplistic solutions to complicated issues.
Moderator’s Note: I think there should be consequences for not giving Great Debates threads descriptive titles, so go and flog yourself with a wet noodle.
Well, try explaining that to someone who used to earn six digits and now flips burgers! I don’t have to be an expert in something to know that something’s just not all right about it. For example, I’m not a cop but I know darn well that it’s not right to shove a stick up a suspect’s butt (alluding to the infamous incident in NYC).
There are consequences - long term.
Sooner or later, as we export and outsource more and more jobs, there will come a time when unemployed american citizens will be able to afford to buy goods made by the chinese in factories in asia owned by american corporations.
Most of these companies will eventually go bankrupt when not many americans are employed, and not many americans can afford asian made goods with a worthless US dollar.
The current CEO’s of american companies probably realize this(who wouldnt?) but they dont care, because they get paid now, and they arent worried about the long term future of their companies, or our country.
SweetLucy, what about your state?
Your city?
Your area code?
Your zip code?
Alright, new rule for Ms. Lucy: You may not spend any money on anything outside of your own zip code. If somebody in your zip code doesn’t make cars, well that’s too damn bad, but it is your fault because you failed to support your own home-grown zip code automotive industry. Shame on you.
The point is that by introducing a global rather than a national market, you can reduce ineffeciencies and overall produce a more effective economy. Everythin goes both ways. Do you get all upset when Europeans purchase the intellectual services of American firms rather than home-grown ones? Have you considered the fact that there is a high correlation between the trade defecit and economic prosperity? Would you like to pay three times what you pay now for any given manufactured good?
Basically, trade is a good thing. I don’t know why you are so upset about this. American workers should and can learn new competitive niches to create new jobs. And guess what, you won’t get any new jobs without economic recovery and you won’t get economic recovery without free markets.
Then again, if you wish to Buy American, or what not, I’m not going to stop you.
Lucy:
Should there be consequences for a company that buys parts (or services) from an overseas company? What’s the difference if a company “exports jobs” to China to manufacture a subassembly for their widget vs buying the subassembly from a Chinese supplier. Unless you want to completely isolate the US from international trade, there is simply no way to accomplish what you want.
I’ve already taken what at least appears to be the opposite tack in other threads of this sort, but it really isn’t. My position boils down to: the only answer to the woes of free trade is: freer trade. Just like the only answer to the problems of democracy is: more democracy.
The problem doesn’t come from free trade, the problem arises from protectionism.
No, but it will certainly feel like it without a job.
Ok, so when is all said and done and we’ve created the Time Machine company, won’t that company want to reduce costs again by moving those jobs overseas? Basically it’s going to be an endless loop; move jobs, build economy, make jobs, move jobs again. Where’s the security for an American worker? A lot of folks in the future aren’t going to be able to depend on Social Security and Medicare, and would rather have a pension or a 401k to live off of. Kind of hard to keep things consitant when there’s no consistant cash flow.
Keep in mind I’m no economist, just trying to understand how this benefits American workers. Not trying to be selfish here, but priority for myself and loved ones come before anyone else in another country. Sorry. I cannot begin to understand how it must suck to live in a third world country and have nothing, but that is not our fault! This is nothing more then a profit machine for CEO’s and a feal good measure for supporters. Why can’t they do what we’ve been doing for over 200 years? Get your head out of your ass and start inventing for yourself, loved ones and your country, just like we did.
The free trade as we have it, is not free trade. And it does not result in lower prices, that was not the intent of the law. The intent was to lower costs and increase profits. Nike shoes are NOT cheaper now that they are made by cheap foreign labor, and neither is anything else.
The american consumer is not the one who is benefiting from the free trade that we have, and ultimately, he will have to pay increased taxes to make up for the lost taxes that the unemployed no longer will be paying.
So the real results of the “free trade” that we now have are the same or higher prices, more profits for companies outsourcing their labor, and increased income taxes for those who still have a job.
Yeah, those $500 DVD players are proof, right? Oh wait, I meant $50 DVD players…
Yeah, on DVD players the price movement down was just ridiculously fast.
Anyway, as I’ve said before, if protectionism was the key to prosperity, Mexico would be the richest country on the planet. If you want to live in a protectionist/mercantilist country, there’s tons to choose from. All of them significantly poorer than us, but I’m sure in the long run that’ll work out, right?
Of course in the long run we’re all dead too, so the timing might be inconvenient…
There isn’t any. You want a guaranteed job-for-life? Communism’s your system.
The point is the new jobs are better than the old jobs. Fifty years ago we had a lot more factory workers, coal miners, and manual laborers. Now we have computer programmers, software engineers and public-relations people, and an overall unemployment rate that is lower than most other developed countries.
You wanna go backwards?
Susanann:
Further…
You single out Nike, but the fact is you are paying for marketing expenses to wear a “totally cool” shoe. Nike does not have a monopoly on shoes and there are plenty of other brands to choose from-- some of them dirt cheap. And guess where these dirt cheap shoes were made. I’ll give you a hint: Not in downtown Manhattan.
When unemployment starts shooting upwards and the median and mean incomes start dropping, let us know.
As it is, unemployment is down in the USA since NAFTA was introduced, and the median income is up (in real dollars, it’s not just inflation.)
So where is the evidence the U.S. is bleeding jobs to the nasty Third World?
I was curious about something (btw, I am with the pro-globalization folks on this issue).
Let’s draw a parallel between importing goods and out-sourcing as both seemingly benefit some “foreign” entity. Doesn’t the govt. create barriers that discourage, say, Chinese corporations (driven by their cheap labor costs) from easily setting up shop and competing with US firms?
litost:
Can you clarify your question? Are you talking about tarrifs?
Consequences for exporting jobs? What’s next, consequences for exporting cars? Every car exported means someone has to ride a bike!
This zero sum thinking is tiresome and simplistic. And dangerous, because it’s constantly raising the spectre of xenophobia.
wow… I agree with adaher. Thought the exporting the car wasn’t the best example. 
Zero Sum thinking is simplistic always…
Yes. I have read that steel and agriculture are protected from foreign competition. But, I also wonder why there aren’t any Chinese or Bangladeshi firms selling apparel or toys if they can make it so cheap there? All it takes is a bunch of savvy entrepreneurs. Can a company just come in and set up shop in the US like any other American firm would? With such an uproar over buying drugs from Canada, isn’t the pharma industry protected by the government to an extent too? Can foreign companies run airlines, telecommunication services or own media?
What I am getting at is that the government does seem to intervene in many industries at various levels. To dismiss the notion of governmental interference in the issue of outsourcing may be difficult.