If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Hot Air)   "Why are 'progressives' opposed to outsourcing?" Well I can only speak for myself but all things being equal I just didn't think it was a funny show   (hotair.com) divider line 304
    More: Dumbass, Bruce Bartlett  
•       •       •

1852 clicks; posted to Politics » on 17 May 2012 at 1:24 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



304 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-05-17 02:20:48 PM  
Jim Hoft of Gateway Pundit found a historical antecedent for the slogan in a Hitler youth marching tune.

Oh, COME on!!
 
2012-05-17 02:21:08 PM  

Citrate1007: When corporations start buying foriegn governemnts instead of ours


What do you mean "when?"

They didn't call 'em "banana republics" for nothing...
 
2012-05-17 02:21:10 PM  
The idea of a free market is great until they buy out all the competition and have a monopoly on the market.

I'm for regulation. And the first regulation would be on outsourcing. Make it cost prohibitive to use foreign labor.
Throw up some tariffs like in the old days when tariffs protected American jobs.
 
2012-05-17 02:22:08 PM  
My summary of the article:
Libs are such hypocrites. They hate it when companies remove jobs from the US. But they don't seem to mind when companies add jobs in the US! Ha gotcha there didn't I !?!!
 
2012-05-17 02:22:16 PM  
Laying you off before you reached your pension so we could send your job to New Delhi was good for you - STUPID LIBTARDS!!!

lol - that's some tricky logic there. Sad thing is that the GOP base is stupid enough to swallow it.
 
2012-05-17 02:22:30 PM  

Shaggy_C: I believe in equal opportunity for all people and that means giving people in the third world the dignity of a good job."


Wage slavery is not a good job.

You should have gone with better than digging dirt. That argument might hold up.
 
2012-05-17 02:23:28 PM  

whidbey: Citrate1007: When corporations start buying foriegn governemnts instead of ours

What do you mean "when?"

They didn't call 'em "banana republics" for nothing...


and then use american military forces to prop up the puppet regimes.
 
2012-05-17 02:24:11 PM  

mathmatix: Outsourcing doesnt equate losing American jobs because we insourced just as many(if not more)?

But we're still losing jobs overseas, if those jobs stayed in place wouldnt unemployment be hovering under 5% again?

I'm confused, brain hurts


Technically more $ are insourced than outsourced. The problem is that jobs that are insourced are highly technical, legal, etc jobs. While the jobs outsourced are manufacturing, low technical, etc jobs. This balance of moving away from low end jobs could work if we had a way of moving money from the high end earners to pay for the low ends lost wages..
 
2012-05-17 02:24:57 PM  

Splinshints: MyRandomName: Progressives only support the poor that can vote them more power, fark non citizen poor. How dare India and China raise.their standard of living, they can't vote for American progressives. foreign pour should stay that way.

To liberals it is all about an increase in their political power.

Soooo... basically.... your argument is that U.S. citizens shouldn't support liberals because liberals want to help U.S. citizens whereas conservatives want to transfer U.S. wealth overseas?

I'd say you just put conservatism through the looking glass, but you nuts are lost so deep in Wonderland at this point that I'm not even sure you remember how you got there in the first place.


This makes perfect sense in context with other conservative actions like bankrupting the country to wage wars spreading freedom, supporting Israel to a degree even most Israeli's don't measure up to, and asking Americans to lower their working standards to that of third world counties. Conservatives just love other countries more than they love America.
 
2012-05-17 02:25:08 PM  

Biological Ali: whidbey: Biological Ali: There's nothing wrong with outsourcing

As long as it doesn't negatively affect employment locally or nationally [1], and said outsourcing obeys US laws, including labor laws [2].

Unfortunately, it doesn't meet those criteria, so yeah, there's plenty wrong with it.

1 - How do you define "negatively affect employment locally or nationally"?


Well, I mean obviously if a company decided to outsource its entire call center from Seattle to the Philippines, and I and about 50 other people suddenly lost the jobs we depend on, the move would be a negative effect on employment in Seattle, and in the region.

We suddenly lost our jobs so some company could save money, and they pay the people in the new call center sh*t wages and no benefits.

2 - What would that accomplish?

It allows a company to make more money with little or no growth.

As for the area where they picked up and left, they don't care about that anymore.
 
2012-05-17 02:25:24 PM  

Shaggy_C: I will take the free market equilibrium



There is no free market equilibrium when you throw in desperate workers in a low wage country willing to work for almost nothing as pressure on your own wages in a high income country.
 
2012-05-17 02:25:38 PM  

MyRandomName: Progressives only support the poor that can vote them more power, fark non citizen poor. How dare India and China raise.their standard of living, they can't vote for American progressives. foreign pour should stay that way.

To liberals it is all about an increase in their political power.


Somewhere in that mess of poor spelling, inconsistent capitalization and random punctuation, you raise a point that I think is worth discussing.

Would I like to see Indians and Chinese enjoy a greater standard of living? Sure. But legislating to their benefit at the expense of the American people is not the proper role of our government. It's almost the exact opposite. Our government is supposed to be of the people, by the people and for the people. The American people. It's suppose to serve our interests, not to ease suffering around the world at any cost. That's utopian globalism or something, not American liberalism. If they want their interests to be paramount to the US government, they can apply for statehood (or hire a shiat-ton of lobbyists).

Also, exploiting their cheap labor is not going to do much for those foreign workers in the long run. They might make more sewing your sneakers together than they would in agriculture, but when their wages get too high companies flee to a cheaper country leaving them with economic crises.
 
2012-05-17 02:26:10 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: It is their typical display of "fark you, I have mine, you get nothing."


Which is why progressives always campaign for lower taxes on the rich and cuts in all social services for the poor.
 
2012-05-17 02:27:24 PM  

Saiga410: whidbey: Citrate1007: When corporations start buying foriegn governemnts instead of ours

What do you mean "when?"

They didn't call 'em "banana republics" for nothing...

and then use american military forces to prop up the puppet regimes.


Yeah they did. So why are you cool with corporations doing the same thing in China or India?
 
2012-05-17 02:28:55 PM  
"JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS ... where did you get the impression that we were interested in creating jobs? ... OMG LOOK AT UNEMPLOYMENT THIS IS OBAMA'S FAULT ... why are you libs so unhappy about outsourcing?"

Conservatism is indistinguishable from schizophrenia.
 
2012-05-17 02:29:54 PM  

whidbey: Biological Ali: whidbey: Biological Ali: There's nothing wrong with outsourcing

As long as it doesn't negatively affect employment locally or nationally [1], and said outsourcing obeys US laws, including labor laws [2].

Unfortunately, it doesn't meet those criteria, so yeah, there's plenty wrong with it.

1 - How do you define "negatively affect employment locally or nationally"?

Well, I mean obviously if a company decided to outsource its entire call center from Seattle to the Philippines, and I and about 50 other people suddenly lost the jobs we depend on, the move would be a negative effect on employment in Seattle, and in the region.

We suddenly lost our jobs so some company could save money, and they pay the people in the new call center sh*t wages and no benefits.

Yeah, so? They pay people in the new call center the market rate. Not enough to live on if they live in Seattle, but a fine wage if you live in the Philippines.
Isn't the job of the company to make money or is it to coddle employees who provide a commodity capability?


2 - What would that accomplish?

It allows a company to make more money with little or no growth.
and that is bad for the shareholders of the company how?


 
2012-05-17 02:30:31 PM  

wheelofpain: Hobodeluxe: Shaggy_C: "We have to have compassion for the countries in the world that are not as developed as we are. If you want to deny opportunity to people just because of where they are from, does that not make you racist? I believe in equal opportunity for all people and that means giving people in the third world the dignity of a good job."

yeah the kind of job you'd die for.

[www.thestand.org image 450x328]

/die to get away from that is..

Still better than dying of starvation, or being sold off to prostitution.


So, why don't you give up your job so that some poor bastard living in a third-world shiathole can have a job? What's that? You like to be able to afford to eat? Well, so woul every American who's job was sent overseas.
 
2012-05-17 02:30:35 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: They don't care about the poor people in nations that provide the outsourced services.


What a businessman might say about that:

Link
 
2012-05-17 02:31:13 PM  

intelligent comment below: Shaggy_C: I will take the free market equilibrium


There is no free market equilibrium when you throw in desperate workers in a low wage country willing to work for almost nothing as pressure on your own wages in a high income country.


Especially when many low wage workers live in countries where the government actively works against the ability of the workers to improve their plight in any way.
 
2012-05-17 02:32:35 PM  

Felgraf: Question: If workers are not allowed to move freely from country to country on a whim without great cost to themselves, why the HELL do we let corporations do it? Doesn't that create in inherent imbalance, resource wise, and in and of itself prevent any sort of free market?


Yes.

Michael Lind touches on this in his defense/foreign policy book, The American Way of Strategy. I imagine he follows up in Land of Promise: An Economic History of the United States, but I haven't read it yet.
 
2012-05-17 02:32:40 PM  

intelligent comment below: tenpoundsofcheese: Call centers in India and Singapore are unsafe?
Do you know how much they make in those countries?


That's why they're all moving to the cheaper Philippines. Can't have people making an actual decent middle class wage. Off to the new cheap labor haven!

http://www.usatoday.com/money/world/2011-01-10-callcenters10_CV_N.htm


yeah. so?
can't have your cheap products and services without cheaper labor. (legal thing to do)
can't have you cheap arugula and lettuce without illegal immigrants. (illegal thing to do)

and yet the lefties whine about how important illegal immigrant labor is
 
2012-05-17 02:32:51 PM  

Tommy Moo: "Insourcing, the importation of jobs by the U.S. from other countries, has historically added more jobs to the economy than have been lost to outsourcing. Bartlett writes that for the 15 years between 1989 and 2004, the U.S. economy experienced an 82% increase in insourced jobs compared with a 23% increase in outsourced jobs."

Bullshiat. An absolute fabrication. Notice the cute use of statistics here. Yeah, between 1989 and 2004 the total number of outsourced jobs increased from 100,000,000 to 123,000,000, and the total number of insourced jobs increased from 100 to 182, so insourcing increased by 82% which is more than 23%.


This. The main thing I look for when reading a statistic is whether they use a percent or actual number. They'll use a percent to mention job growth from insourcing, yet use solid numbers when talking about jobs added (ooh 1,000 jobs added last month... of course that's only going to employ 1% of the 100,000 unemployed in , so let's not use a percent there)
 
2012-05-17 02:32:57 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Isn't the job of the company to make money or is it to coddle employees who provide a commodity capability?


That is why we need regulations because companies will victimize people to make a profit, you are absolutely right(for once) that a company has no obligation to their workers unless the society the operate in forces them to.
 
2012-05-17 02:34:12 PM  

skullkrusher: Philip Francis Queeg: Shaggy_C: unexplained bacon: yeah, but the problem with that is these corps doing the outsourcing for the most part are paying next to nothing (like 31cents an hour) and driving their neo-slave labor to suicide.

That is just what the local labor market supports. It's simple supply and demand. Only a fool would think that the cost of living should not factor into the wages. For 31 cents an hour a man can live like a king in some areas of the world. Why do you think that a top-down approach where everyone earns the same should be the proper model? They tried that in the Soviet Union and see how that worked? I don't know about you comrade but I will take the free market equilibrium any day over the politician's grand schemes.

So why don't you emigrate and take one of those 31 cents an hour jobs where yo\u get to live like a king?

[iam141.org image 340x255]

[i140.photobucket.com image 640x426]

because in those places they're paid 4 cents an hour


You always have been, and will always be, a dishonest prick.
 
2012-05-17 02:34:15 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: whidbey: Biological Ali: whidbey: Biological Ali: There's nothing wrong with outsourcing

As long as it doesn't negatively affect employment locally or nationally [1], and said outsourcing obeys US laws, including labor laws [2].

Unfortunately, it doesn't meet those criteria, so yeah, there's plenty wrong with it.

1 - How do you define "negatively affect employment locally or nationally"?

Well, I mean obviously if a company decided to outsource its entire call center from Seattle to the Philippines, and I and about 50 other people suddenly lost the jobs we depend on, the move would be a negative effect on employment in Seattle, and in the region.

We suddenly lost our jobs so some company could save money, and they pay the people in the new call center sh*t wages and no benefits.

Yeah, so? They pay people in the new call center the market rate. Not enough to live on if they live in Seattle, but a fine wage if you live in the Philippines.
Isn't the job of the company to make money or is it to coddle employees who provide a commodity capability?

2 - What would that accomplish?

It allows a company to make more money with little or no growth.
and that is bad for the shareholders of the company how?


I bet those corporations could get a Filipino CEO and management team for a fraction of what they are paying now. Think how much more money they would make then. I simply can't imagine why more companies aren't taking that path to prosperity.
 
2012-05-17 02:34:24 PM  

whidbey: Saiga410: whidbey: Citrate1007: When corporations start buying foriegn governemnts instead of ours

What do you mean "when?"

They didn't call 'em "banana republics" for nothing...

and then use american military forces to prop up the puppet regimes.

Yeah they did. So why are you cool with corporations doing the same thing in China or India?


I am not cool with using military forces to aid in securing a corporate puppet regime. Just adding in another historical factoid that adds to the fact the the us govt at that time was cool with the puppet regimes.

I just cannot back the hate for outsourcing. It is market forces, adapt or die.
 
2012-05-17 02:36:42 PM  
Since there seems to be some confusion about my suggestion for a wage subsidy instead of a minimum wage, here are some graphs to help out.

A minimum wage is a price floor on wages. In this diagram, the "surplus" is surplus labor, i.e. unemployment:
upload.wikimedia.org

Here is a diagram for a subsidy (some kind of console, but the graph is clear enough for illustration). Both supply and demand increase (supply, because producers -- i.e. workers -- get more, but employers pay less for their labor):
econhelp.org

It would be my contention, though, that a labor subsidy would actually be a Pigovian subsidy (increasing the supply of labor produces positive externalities), or a graph like this:

courses.byui.edu
 
2012-05-17 02:36:45 PM  

Saiga410: I just cannot back the hate for outsourcing. It is market forces, adapt or die.


Not at the expense of people's jobs. Sorry.

See, this is why government eventually steps in and levels the playing field, just in case you were wondering.
 
2012-05-17 02:36:55 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: yeah. so?
can't have your cheap products and services without cheaper labor. (legal thing to do)
can't have you cheap arugula and lettuce without illegal immigrants. (illegal thing to do)

and yet the lefties whine about how important illegal immigrant labor is



You were just saying how everyone should be thankful for all those well paying jobs being created by call centers. I showed how those companies are fleeing because of the well paying wage and going to a new cheap labor haven, and all you can say is yeah. so?

Of course you can still have cheap products with higher wages. Paying a kid in a shoe plant a living wage would only add pennies to the final sale price. The problem is stock holders and executives all believe they are entitled to 99% of the profits.

Lefties point out that the job illegal immigrants do in America is a job that someone like yourself would never volunteer to do. And that's the truth.
 
2012-05-17 02:37:27 PM  

Ed Grubermann: skullkrusher: Philip Francis Queeg: Shaggy_C: unexplained bacon: yeah, but the problem with that is these corps doing the outsourcing for the most part are paying next to nothing (like 31cents an hour) and driving their neo-slave labor to suicide.

That is just what the local labor market supports. It's simple supply and demand. Only a fool would think that the cost of living should not factor into the wages. For 31 cents an hour a man can live like a king in some areas of the world. Why do you think that a top-down approach where everyone earns the same should be the proper model? They tried that in the Soviet Union and see how that worked? I don't know about you comrade but I will take the free market equilibrium any day over the politician's grand schemes.

So why don't you emigrate and take one of those 31 cents an hour jobs where yo\u get to live like a king?

[iam141.org image 340x255]

[i140.photobucket.com image 640x426]

because in those places they're paid 4 cents an hour

You always have been, and will always be, a dishonest prick.


in places where you can live like a king on $.31 an hour people aren't generally paid $.31 an hour, they are paid far less. Otherwise, you'd have a country filled with ordinary workers living like kings. Does this country exist? Of course not.

Please, do not mistake your own abject stupidity for my alleged dishonesty, ok?
 
2012-05-17 02:37:34 PM  
When we made corporations people, we effectively gave them citizenship. Don't we have laws about dual citizenship?
 
2012-05-17 02:38:03 PM  

Headso: tenpoundsofcheese: Isn't the job of the company to make money or is it to coddle employees who provide a commodity capability?

That is why we need regulations because companies will victimize people to make a profit, you are absolutely right(for once) that a company has no obligation to their workers unless the society the operate in forces them to.



how exactly are people victimized?
how would you force companies to have an obligation to workers?
what obligation, if any, would workers have to the company?
 
2012-05-17 02:39:53 PM  

Saiga410: I am not cool with using military forces to aid in securing a corporate puppet regime. Just adding in another historical factoid that adds to the fact the the us govt at that time was cool with the puppet regimes.

I just cannot back the hate for outsourcing. It is market forces, adapt or die.



Government regulation is a means by which we can adapt rather than die.
 
2012-05-17 02:40:57 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: KJUW89: Aar1012: Why are 'conservatives' in favor of putting Americans out of work?

Exactly. I'd rather have a thousands more Americans working than put a thousand more dollars in the CEO's hands.

so are you against all of those illegal immigrants who are working here? Or are you just against people from china, india, and other countries that provide a lot of outsourced services?


Both. Economic activity within the US should be subject to American laws. Immigrants should be working on the books, and goods produced overseas should not come from sources that undermine our labor and environmental standards.

BTW, where are you and MyRandomName getting the idea that the US government is obligated to altruistically hand out favors to people it does not govern?
 
2012-05-17 02:41:30 PM  

whidbey: Well, I mean obviously if a company decided to outsource its entire call center from Seattle to the Philippines, and I and about 50 other people suddenly lost the jobs we depend on, the move would be a negative effect on employment in Seattle, and in the region.

We suddenly lost our jobs so some company could save money, and they pay the people in the new call center sh*t wages and no benefits.


The problem with how outsourcing is perceived is similar to the problem with how free trade in general is perceived - the losses are concentrated and highly visible, while the gains are diffuse and harder to see; this can cause the former to loom larger in the imagination even if they are practically outweighed by the latter. For instance, in the case of the hypothetical 50 outsourced jobs, do you take into account any additional investment the company was able to undertake due to their reduced costs, or the benefits to consumers themselves from having cheaper products available (including the stimulative effects of any additional purchases it would allow them to make)?


It allows a company to make more money with little or no growth.

As for the area where they picked up and left, they don't care about that anymore.


What? I don't quite follow what you're trying to say there.
 
2012-05-17 02:41:51 PM  

Ed Grubermann: wheelofpain: Hobodeluxe: Shaggy_C: "We have to have compassion for the countries in the world that are not as developed as we are. If you want to deny opportunity to people just because of where they are from, does that not make you racist? I believe in equal opportunity for all people and that means giving people in the third world the dignity of a good job."

yeah the kind of job you'd die for.

[www.thestand.org image 450x328]

/die to get away from that is..

Still better than dying of starvation, or being sold off to prostitution.

So, why don't you give up your job so that some poor bastard living in a third-world shiathole can have a job? What's that? You like to be able to afford to eat? Well, so woul every American who's job was sent overseas.


Well, good thing I've got a job that isn't going to be replaced by a peasant with minimal education.
 
2012-05-17 02:41:58 PM  

skullkrusher: Ed Grubermann: skullkrusher: Philip Francis Queeg: Shaggy_C: unexplained bacon: yeah, but the problem with that is these corps doing the outsourcing for the most part are paying next to nothing (like 31cents an hour) and driving their neo-slave labor to suicide.

That is just what the local labor market supports. It's simple supply and demand. Only a fool would think that the cost of living should not factor into the wages. For 31 cents an hour a man can live like a king in some areas of the world. Why do you think that a top-down approach where everyone earns the same should be the proper model? They tried that in the Soviet Union and see how that worked? I don't know about you comrade but I will take the free market equilibrium any day over the politician's grand schemes.

So why don't you emigrate and take one of those 31 cents an hour jobs where yo\u get to live like a king?

[iam141.org image 340x255]

[i140.photobucket.com image 640x426]

because in those places they're paid 4 cents an hour

You always have been, and will always be, a dishonest prick.

in places where you can live like a king on $.31 an hour people aren't generally paid $.31 an hour, they are paid far less. Otherwise, you'd have a country filled with ordinary workers living like kings. Does this country exist? Of course not.

Please, do not mistake your own abject stupidity for my alleged dishonesty, ok?


What living like a king on 31 cents an hour might look like:

feathersproject.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-05-17 02:42:13 PM  
LIBSLIBSLIBSLIBSLIBS ~A conservative on policies they supported up until the Purge of Intelligence from their side.
 
2012-05-17 02:42:41 PM  

Snarfangel: Since there seems to be some confusion about my suggestion for a wage subsidy instead of a minimum wage, here are some graphs to help out.


I have no idea what any of that means, but the bottom line is that if your "wage subsidy" isn't giving a worker the equivalent at least 9-10 dollars an hour, it's useless in our society.
 
2012-05-17 02:42:43 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: intelligent comment below: tenpoundsofcheese: Call centers in India and Singapore are unsafe?
Do you know how much they make in those countries?


That's why they're all moving to the cheaper Philippines. Can't have people making an actual decent middle class wage. Off to the new cheap labor haven!

http://www.usatoday.com/money/world/2011-01-10-callcenters10_CV_N.htm

yeah. so?
can't have your cheap products and services without cheaper labor. (legal thing to do)
can't have you cheap arugula and lettuce without illegal immigrants. (illegal thing to do)

and yet the lefties whine about how important illegal immigrant labor is


The Chamber of Commerce is lefty now?
 
2012-05-17 02:43:40 PM  

intelligent comment below: tenpoundsofcheese: yeah. so?
can't have your cheap products and services without cheaper labor. (legal thing to do)
can't have you cheap arugula and lettuce without illegal immigrants. (illegal thing to do)

and yet the lefties whine about how important illegal immigrant labor is


You were just saying how everyone should be thankful for all those well paying jobs being created by call centers. I showed how those companies are fleeing because of the well paying wage and going to a new cheap labor haven, and all you can say is yeah. so?

what is the problem? Of course they go to a better labor market. Haven't you seen the positive transformation outsourcing has had for India?
FTFA. they also go their because the english spoken in the Philippines is better than that in India.


Of course you can still have cheap products with higher wages. Paying a kid in a shoe plant a living wage would only add pennies to the final sale price. The problem is stock holders and executives all believe they are entitled to 99% of the profits.

uhhh, yeah. The shareholders entitled to 100% of the profits. The board decides how much cash to hold, how much to reinvest and how much to return via dividends, etc.
That is why shareholders decide to invest in a company. Those pension funds and teacher unions who invest in companies expect a return. WTF is wrong with that?


Lefties point out that the job illegal immigrants do in America is a job that someone like yourself would never volunteer to do. And that's the truth.

you would volunteer to work in a call center for $5/hour? It is the same thing.

 
2012-05-17 02:44:43 PM  

Philip Francis Queeg: Saiga410: I am not cool with using military forces to aid in securing a corporate puppet regime. Just adding in another historical factoid that adds to the fact the the us govt at that time was cool with the puppet regimes.

I just cannot back the hate for outsourcing. It is market forces, adapt or die.


Government regulation is a means by which we can adapt rather than die.


That is not adapting. That is trying to maintain the status quo. All it will do is remove the forces necessary to cause change.
 
2012-05-17 02:46:07 PM  

whidbey: WhoIsNotInMyKitchen: Outsourcing = fine
Offshoring = big problem.

There's a difference?


Yes, it is called "consulting." It feeds my family.
 
2012-05-17 02:46:19 PM  

Shaggy_C: unexplained bacon: yeah, but the problem with that is these corps doing the outsourcing for the most part are paying next to nothing (like 31cents an hour) and driving their neo-slave labor to suicide.

That is just what the local labor market supports. It's simple supply and demand. Only a fool would think that the cost of living should not factor into the wages. For 31 cents an hour a man can live like a king in some areas of the world. Why do you think that a top-down approach where everyone earns the same should be the proper model? They tried that in the Soviet Union and see how that worked? I don't know about you comrade but I will take the free market equilibrium any day over the politician's grand schemes.



I think it's supported with the help of ignorance don't you? Do you think it would hurt the sales of certain products if the consumers here in america knew what was being done to these people over seas? sure they're vaguely aware of something, but most people actually think..."well, these people can live like kings on that pathetic wage over there" which isn't true...should we talk about the living standards of these kings?

if support requires you to keep a dark secret then you really have support for a lie, wouldn't you agree?

I'd pay 30% more for the next iPhone if I could buy one that was made by free people who weren't working in the conditions they're in now. Bet I'm not alone.
 
2012-05-17 02:47:02 PM  

Biological Ali: whidbey: Well, I mean obviously if a company decided to outsource its entire call center from Seattle to the Philippines, and I and about 50 other people suddenly lost the jobs we depend on, the move would be a negative effect on employment in Seattle, and in the region.

We suddenly lost our jobs so some company could save money, and they pay the people in the new call center sh*t wages and no benefits.

The problem with how outsourcing is perceived is similar to the problem with how free trade in general is perceived - the losses are concentrated and highly visible, while the gains are diffuse and harder to see; this can cause the former to loom larger in the imagination even if they are practically outweighed by the latter. For instance, in the case of the hypothetical 50 outsourced jobs, do you take into account any additional investment the company was able to undertake due to their reduced costs, or the benefits to consumers themselves from having cheaper products available (including the stimulative effects of any additional purchases it would allow them to make)?


No. The company basically farked 50 people's lives, their families' lives and whoever is affected personally or professionally by those losses.

Whether stuff is cheaper now is pretty irrelevant.

It allows a company to make more money with little or no growth.

As for the area where they picked up and left, they don't care about that anymore.

What? I don't quite follow what you're trying to say there.


I'm saying that the company has no responsibility to the community once it has picked up stakes. They've left a hole just so they could make more money.

You can't be in favor of this. Just because of cheaper stuff? Come on. That doesn't sound very compassionate.
 
2012-05-17 02:47:35 PM  
.....I hope the republicans take this stance....wow

Ross Perot was right.
 
2012-05-17 02:48:26 PM  

Saiga410: Philip Francis Queeg: Saiga410: I am not cool with using military forces to aid in securing a corporate puppet regime. Just adding in another historical factoid that adds to the fact the the us govt at that time was cool with the puppet regimes.

I just cannot back the hate for outsourcing. It is market forces, adapt or die.


Government regulation is a means by which we can adapt rather than die.

That is not adapting. That is trying to maintain the status quo. All it will do is remove the forces necessary to cause change.


"Change" being "the destruction and impoverishment of the American lower and middle class"?

Are you under the impression that the labor conditions in these other countries are not strongly influenced by government regulation?
 
2012-05-17 02:48:55 PM  

Petey4335: whidbey: WhoIsNotInMyKitchen: Outsourcing = fine
Offshoring = big problem.

There's a difference?

Yes, it is called "consulting." It feeds my family.


It wouldn't if they decided your rates were too high.
 
2012-05-17 02:49:09 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Headso: tenpoundsofcheese: Isn't the job of the company to make money or is it to coddle employees who provide a commodity capability?

That is why we need regulations because companies will victimize people to make a profit, you are absolutely right(for once) that a company has no obligation to their workers unless the society the operate in forces them to.


how exactly are people victimized?
how would you force companies to have an obligation to workers?
what obligation, if any, would workers have to the company?


slave wages, unsafe working conditions
using regulation
whatever obligations the company wishes them to be within the regulations.
 
2012-05-17 02:49:12 PM  

Splinshints: SixPaperJoint: Belated birthday card. Wasn't that important of a date anyway.

I think if you're going to blame any single person as the source of all the modern GOP nuttery we have, it should be Jerry Falwell. He's the one that really started the ball rolling on the marriage between the conservative political establishment and religion, and once that paid dividends the GOP realized they could just open the doors to every unhinged nut in the country by paying lip service to their screwball causes in exchange for more manpower on election day.


I mostly agree.

ecx.images-amazon.com
Good read.
 
Displayed 50 of 304 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report