Slashdot Mirror
Builder.com Writers Outsourced to India
An anonymous reader writes "Builder.com, which is part of CNet.com, is now outsourcing some of their writing to India. The funny thing is, the editor claims it's not as much about money as because he's 'getting a better interface with producers of the content.' He claims CNet isn't giving up control, but if they're the publisher, and he's the editor, and they can't hire and manage their own writers, why shouldn't the Indians just put up their own website to replace CNet, and we can all read what they write direct? I mean, we're all going to be buying software direct from Indian companies soon, so why not?" Newsforge and Slashdot are both part of OSDN. OSDN also runs sites like devchannel.org which are more-or-less direct competitors of builder.com.
When i worked for featureprice, most of the non phone based technical support was done from india. They are some smart people, but they are lacking in alot of things we take for granted. Our boss always happily let us americans know that he could hire 3 or 4 of them to each 1 of us. Hows that for making you take your job seriously? :) Too bad hes a bastard and should be rotting in jail as hes a scamming prick
First developers (Or many tech related jobs) and now writers.. This is starting to get really scary, especially for people my age; I'm still in high school and it's going to be a few years before I can get a _real_ job, and at this rate it's going to be hard to find any local ones. This really needs to stop, or at least be done in moderation, it's getting out of hand.
Buckethead
Soon you can buy the new Indian operating systems Indows XP for the desktop and Inux for the server market!
You say things that offend me and I can deal with it. Can you?
They would outsource Mr. Fancy Pants Editor and his bosses. Clearly the big bucks are going to these guys. If the writers can live on $1.00 per day in Bangalore, surely then can management live there on $2.00.
I am a fairly skilled nerd with experience in digital and analog electronics testing, as well as some programming. I lost my job a while ago due to a sweatshop my old company opened in china.
/. readers grew up hearing that I was "lucky" to love computers because "thats where the money is". I don't care if I make 20k or 100k, I WANT TO BE A PROGRAMMER. it is a sad state of affairs when all this stuff gets sent over seas. Now we see cases like this where even remotely related jobs are sent away.
I was out of work for a while and just recently was lucky enough to score a job working in an irrigation supply house... doing deliveries and stuff like that. I like so many
NAFTA SUCKS
world trade SUCKS
any american who HONESTLY believes otherwise SUCKS
Obama is a twitter sock puppet
What happened to that free markets thing?
"I think this line is mostly filler"
Probably because CNet pays them more than they could make running their own web site. Running a web-site would involve getting out and selling ad space and buying lots of bandwidth. Both of these roles are probably more cost-effecively done from the fancy CNet building in San Francisco, because it's a better place to shmooze with advertisers and suppliers.
CNet still has a nice cushion of IPO cash that they can use to pay Indian developers well as well as buying more expensive things like Esther Dyson's EDVentures
I'm sure Esther didn't come cheap, so I think CNet's right when they say it's not just for the money savings. If a writer in India can produce better content for the same price they'll hire one there. If Esther can provide even-better content for a much higher price, they'll hire her too.
My guess is that the cost of the Indian writers to build out the sales side of the proposed website wouldn't be possible in the post-.com-ipo era.
... I'm guessing some will be moving there soon. I'd rather have 1/3 or 1/4 pay for 1/6 the cost of living that 0/100 job at 1/1 pay for 1/1 the cost of living.
We just need to outsorce the gov't so we can keep our Constitution.
Wait, does Pakistan like the U.S.?
The message on the other side of this sig is false.
Where are the new jobs going to come from?
What should people train/retrain for?
You also forget to point out that most of the new jobs being created in the US to replace the outsourced jobs do not pay nearly as much nor do the have near the same level of benifits.
People who support offshoring of everything need to realize that it can not continue. The USA can not survive if most of our high paying jobs go away. Cut peoples incomes enought and they go from being tax payers to tax consumers (and they will elect people who will keep the money coming).
I can understand the frustration, but that statement is quite misinformed, it seems.
From what I have seen, it seems that Indian companies, not just in the computer software/IT industry, but in almost every industry, has always been and for the forseeable future will always be sub-contracting for US and European companies.
Of coure, there will always be exceptions, but that would be a very small minority.
This means that the profits will stay in the US/Europe.
It is a lot like Chevy trucks being made in Mexico. Does anyone say we will be buying trucks direct from Mexican companies soon.
Or say, Chinese products, I have seen a lot of product 'Made in China', but very few from Chinese companies.
I am by no means supporting outsourcing or anything, I am just pointing out that it will only benefit US companies.
If you're in highschool, here's a serious suggestion from someone who's about to enter the workforce from college-
Find some skills other than computing.
No, seriously. Computing is out-sourceable, the rest of your skillset + computing is not. If you speak Hindi and Chinese AND can program C++, you might be a great project leader for one of these overseas projects. If you have a great handle on economics and business AND can code perl, you might be the person who they need to run their software division, because you'll have an eye for both the cash and the technical. If you're a science dork (like I am), you've got an instant-in with any professor that runs his lab using any sort of technology, because not only did you get an A in Genetics, but you can really understand how the PCR Sequencer works.
If Software Geeks in highschool would turn their computing prowess into A marketable skill instead of their only marketable skill, they'll have a much better time on the job market.
Just the way it's worked out for me.
By the way: Perl for the Perseus Project (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu), since I'm a Greek / Latin Major, and Visual Basic in the Avian Cognition Lab, (http://pigeon.psy.tufts.edu), where I do research on Avian Cognition and Concept formation (coz I'm a Psych Major too).
you will see WHY you are being replaced.
The Asians and Indians outperform the Americans
by a ratio of 6 -4
Thats why your job is going to India
Its silly to think they lack the "American"
intellect, or fail in sophistication.
Study Math and Science and study it like its your
life,not like its one big frat party.....
Exporting America: false choices
In none of the attacks on my position on outsourcing has a news organization addressed the facts.
March 10, 2004: 11:12 AM EST
By Lou Dobbs, Lou Dobbs Tonight
NEW YORK (CNN) - You may have noticed recently that I'm being attacked for my views on the exporting of American jobs and my calls for a balanced U.S. trade policy.
Gerard Baker of the Financial Times called me the "high priest of demotic sensationalism."
An editorial in the Economist magazine accused me of embarking "on a rabidly anti-trade editorial agenda" and "greeting every announcement of lost jobs as akin to a terrorist assault."
Lou Dobbs comments on recent attacks of his views on the exporting of American jobs and U.S. trade policy.
Play video
(Real or Windows Media)
Daniel Henninger of the Wall Street Journal excoriated me, I must say, in high style for my troglodyte views on outsourcing by saying, "It's as if whatever made Linda Blair's head spin around in 'The Exorcist' had invaded the body of Lou Dobbs and left him with the brain of Dennis Kucinich."
Washington Post columnist James Glassman has simply accused me of being a "table-thumping protectionist."
Those quotes are from some of the most respected news organizations, and there have been dozens of other articles critical of my view that outsourcing American jobs is neither sound, smart, humane nor in the national interest.
Makes a fellow think
I will tell you it does make a fellow think when attacked so energetically and so personally. But in none of the attacks on my position on outsourcing has a single columnist or news organization seen fit to deal with the facts.
Number one: We're not creating jobs in the private sector, and that's never happened before in our history. Our economists and politicians need to be coming up with answers, not dogma.
Number two: We haven't had a trade surplus in this country in more than two decades, and our trade deficit continues to soar.
Number three: We've lost three million jobs in this country over the last three years, and millions more American jobs are at risk of being outsourced to cheap overseas labor markets.
That seems to me, at least, to be more than sufficient evidence for all of us, Republicans and Democrats alike, to question critically the policies of both parties that have led us to this critical juncture in our economy and our history.
Check out the "Exporting America" list
Frankly, I would love to be proved wrong in my views, and I would gladly change my position, if only my critics would answer a few questions factually, empirically and straightforwardly.
One: How many more jobs must we lose before they become concerned about our middle class and our strength as a consumer market? Two: When will the U.S. have to quit borrowing foreign capital to buy foreign goods that support European and Asian economies while driving us deeper into debt? Three: What jobs will our currently 15 million unemployed workers fill, where and when?
My critics and proponents of free trade and outsourcing suggest I'm a protectionist because I want to curtail the export of American jobs to cheap foreign labor markets just to reduce wage levels, and to eliminate our trade deficit and to pursue balanced trade policies.
YOUR E-MAIL ALERTS
Lou Dobbs Tonight
International Trade
Labor
or Create your own
Manage alerts | What is this?
Our principal trading partners, Canada, China, Japan and the European Union, all typically maintain annual trade surpluses and pursue balanced trade. Why don't my critics call them protectionists? Why not call them economic isolationists?
My critics, and proponents of the status quo, are offering false choices. They say we must decide between protectionism, or economic isolationism as the president said today, and free trade. I'm sure they believe those choices are the only ones available.
But maybe they also fear our policymakers may discover a middle ground for a desperately needed new U.S. trade policy: a balanced trade policy in the national interest.
What happened to that free markets thing?
First, I said "if it upsets you" and secondly, free trade implies some sort of equality of trade partners. There's no such thing as free trade with China because they aren't a free market (Communist state with near-virtual slave labor), nor with India as they don't have a modern economy. Free trade is only "free" with an equality of partners playing by equal rules. For example, the US vs. Europe.
We're also free to boycott who we want.
read what the Indians think of their own abilities here.
BTW, "Coolie" is a word that roughly translates into menial laborer.
Magnus.
Answers on Outsourcing
A finance professor argues against placing blind faith in outsourcing. His views follow.
March 12, 2004: 8:18 AM EST
By Rory L. Terry
The following is a guest column by Rory L. Terry, an associate professor of finance at Fort Hays State University.
NEW YORK (CNN) -- A great deal of effort is being expended to convince us all that the outsourcing of jobs under the rubric of free trade is a good thing. I would like to discuss some of these arguments.
Our labor force is not better trained, harder working, or more innovative than our foreign competitors. The argument that we will create new jobs in highly paying fields simply is not true. We have no comparative advantage or superiority in innovation. To assume that we are inherently more creative than our foreign competitors is both arrogant and naive. We are currently empowering our competition with the resources to innovate equally as well as we. Consider the number of new non-native Ph.D.s that leave our universities each year; consider our low rank in the education of mathematics and the sciences; and consider the large number of international students enrolled in our most difficult technical degree programs at our most prestigious universities.
Most of our best, high-paying jobs can be exported.
1. doctors (even surgeons)
2. mathematicians
3. accountants
4. financial analysts
5. engineers
6. computer programmers
7. architects
8. physicists
9. chemists
10. biologists
11. researchers of all types
Our trading problem is an externality
An externality exists in economics any time there is a separation of costs and benefits, and the decision maker does not have to incur the full cost but receives the full benefits of the decision. The fact is, there is no economic force, no supply and demand equilibrium, no rational decision process of either business or consumer, that will make an externality go away. Classic examples of externalities are when a business dumps toxic waste into a nearby river and the downstream residents incur the costs of cancer. The business is able to lower its costs and pass those lower costs on to its customers, and never pay for the treatment of the cancer patients. We have laws in this country against dumping and pollution because they are externalities -- they require a legislative solution.
Cost reductions and other benefits provide a strong incentive to outsource jobs. A company that decides to move its production overseas cuts its costs in many ways, including the following:
1. Extremely low wage rates
2. The circumvention or avoidance of organized labor
3. No Social Security or Medicare benefit payments
4. No federal or state unemployment tax
5. No health benefits for workers
6. No child labor laws
7. No OSHA or EPA costs or restrictions
8. No worker retirement benefits or pension costs
Besides cutting costs, there are other benefits to exporting jobs, including the following:
1. Tax incentives provided by our government
2. Incentives from foreign governments
3. The creation of new international markets for the company's products (which ultimately empowers the company to turn a deaf ear to this country's problems and influence)
4. The continued benefits of our legal system and the freedoms that we provide
The net effect of all of this is lower costs, higher revenue, higher profits, higher stock prices, bonuses for management, and the creation of wealth for a subclass that benefits from low taxes at the expense of the rest of us.
The costs of the decision to outsource are not borne by the decision maker. As a society and as a country, we experience many costs from outsourcing, including the loss of jobs, social costs, higher costs of raw materials and loss of national s
Posted by: StrugglingInMI on Tue, 09 March 2004 14:49:15 | (2324 Reads)
http://www.itunemployed.com/xaraya/index.php?mod ul e=articles&func=display&aid=264
Elegy for a Profession
A song of the discarded
Hello, Corporate America. Do you know us? Do you remember?
We are I/T.
We are the men and women who helped you build the 21st century.
We flocked to the new technologies, taught ourselves the skills we needed when colleges could not, and forged the tools you asked for.
We signed up willingly, knowing that of all professions, ours was the one where today's knowledge would be tomorrow's obsolescence, where last week's skill is worthless now, and where falling out of touch with progress is career suicide.
And we knew, some of us, that ultimately it would be impossible to keep up with the pace of change - but we tried anyway.
We are I/T.
We are the ones who embraced the idea of 7 x 24 operations, who willingly condemned ourselves to odd hours, unpaid overtime, and ever-increasing expectations, so "expensive equipment could be used most efficiently."
We are the ones who gave up families, friends, and "life outside" to spend endless hours building, fixing, and changing the systems that kept you going and growing. We learned that the dream of a 40-hour workweek would never, ever apply to us.
We are the ones who carried pagers when they were almost exclusively the tools of doctors, pimps and drug dealers.
We are a young mother, sitting in a cubicle at 3:00am, troubleshooting a software problem while her new baby sleeps in a carryall next to her desk.
We are a husband, called from his bed in the dead of night, on call not to save a life, or rescue a trapped motorist, but to rebuild a database index, or repair a broken disk drive. And sometimes, the problem was fixed, and it was the marriage that stayed broken.
Do you know us? We are I/T, too. We are the family of a "computer geek", who learned that vacations, holidays, and sick days did not mean freedom from stress for our loved ones, or uninterrupted time with us. We watched as our parents and spouses took cell phones, laptops, terminals, and manuals with them everywhere, ready to give up our family plans on a moments notice to keep your business running. We heard the phones ring in the middle of the night, at the park, or during dinner. We tried to understand.
We are I/T.
Yes, we are the ones who listened when the siren song of ever higher salaries beckoned. Are you surprised? Do not blame us for taking the salaries you offered. Rather, look to yourselves for creating a work environment so intense, so stressful, so demanding that for ten straight years, the schools to teach the next generation found fewer and fewer applicants.
But your demands did not decrease. In desperation, you threw money at us to buy the expertise your own voracious appetite made scarce.
We are the ones who welcomed foreign workers into our midst, when things were so bad you had to recruit overseas to feed your endless demand. While other departments struggled with racism and intolerance, we became a United Nations in miniature, grateful for help from any quarter, any society that could ease the crushing workload. We built a society of equals, holding no prejudice except technical inadequacy.
We watched our budgets shrink each year, while demands for productivity soared, and our pleas for more help were ignored. And we endured the criticism when the inevitable failures occurred, as overwork, stress, and tension took their inevitable toll on our skills.
We are I/T.
We had to learn not only our profession, but yours too. We learned your business practices so well that sometimes we knew more about them than you did; and we are the ones who had to stand by and listen to your "voice of experience" while we watched you make fatal decisions.
We designed the systems you asked for, only to watch as t
I know I'll be flamed to death and modded down, but the government should have nothing to do with outsourcing and restricting those companies who do.
It should be responibility of the consumer to buy American-produced products, not for the government to control whether we can decide who we hire or not, or where.
Vote with your dollar, but don't let the government have more power to control us.
Also, let us not forget that Indians are people too. Countries are man-made divisions between people, but in the end, we all need to eat, drink, get medicine, and have fun. Is an Indian life less important than an American one?
Really, I don't have much of an opinion on this issue, because I just want to buy cheap, efficient products, and I use Linux anyway so most of the software is freely available. I can see why people are complaining (Americans need jobs!), but then again, so do Indians, and they work for less.
So, again: If you don't like a companies' practice, don't buy their products. Don't let the government have more control.
---
Never criticize religion on Slashdot. You will be modded down for "Troll" no matter how factual it is.
It seems to me that when the music and film industries complain about prirating, we often cry out that they are just refusing to deal with changing technology. They ought to adapt. If they can't adapt, they ought to go out of buisiness.
Funny that when the topic is the American industry and not technology, everyone refuses to adapt. Well, surprise! The economy and the industries of the world change, but Americans refuse to adapt. Instead, we'll see more anti-trade and anti-captitalist legislation such as tariffs or requirements for employing Americans citizens only. Not too different from anti-piracy legislation. What hipocracy!
OK, enough ranting from a non-American point of view. Have a nice day.
** Sig-a-licious **
Indian Translator Translation = Hello please explain... I've been working with developers from india on and off for about 3 months. It is torture. They are absolutely incapable of communicating complex business rules. Sorry, 2nd, 3rd 4th language learners just can't get down like that. People we need to vote and stop this insanity.
Me type god Englis
Actually, virtually all Indians have a native language other than English. SO, their exposure to English is actually via the written text. Newspapers, magazines, textbooks...etc Barring formal conversations in school, Indian kids* don't speak English. But all of their homeworks and exams are answered in English. So, their grasp of the written form, is adequate.
*I'm only refering to the urban middle-class segment.
US gets more BPO work than India: US commerce dept
d line=US~gets~more~BPO~work~than~India
US commerce department data quoted in a news article in The Wall Street Journal show that a lot more work is being outsourced to the US in comparison with other countries like India.
http://us.rediff.com/money/2004/mar/18bpo.htm?hea
Then how are third worlders supposed to get a modern economy if not competing?
Here in South America we are hard pressed to sign the ALCA and open our markets, but USA won't open the markets were we could be competing. It's a one way openess. And we are democratic countries, but we are poor.
"I think this line is mostly filler"
It seems that too often we're for lower tariffs on anime, imported gadgets, etc., without fully realising that economic liberalism must be mutual. Look at President Bush's ill-advised tariffs on foreign steel -- he talked up freer trade, and then undermined it.
If we can't bring ourselves to buy Indian software, why should they buy anything from us? Maybe they won't. Maybe it'll start a trade war, and everyone will lose.
Just my thoughts.
free speach
Did you mean: free speech
The jobs can be outsourced BUT at some point someone has to actually touch the computers located inside the main offices.
Also when it comes to hardware repairs not only dose the corprate IT force need to be phisicly present to make the repairs this is also true in the computer shops however be prepaired for thies jobs to become the tech equivlent of McDonalds drive throughs.
Also have back up skills. No matter how diverse your technical skill remember that with most of the jobs being outsourced the programmers and phone support people will retrain to the jobs that are left and will leave fewer opennings for you.
And advice for any generation DO NOT go for the "HOT" jobs becouse when you graduate you'll be fighting everyone for those jobs plus the market will have evolved a few steps just out of hipness and media attention.
Look for fun & well paying yet less visable jobs. Like industry jernalists and look at the trends such as... Ahem.. Blog and Forum media. (Slashdot).
Someone suggested learning Hindi and being the project cordinator. There are probably a whole bunch of possable jobs created by outsourcing alone. Look into the outsourcing industry.
But have a wide range of skills and get some non-tech skills as well.
Translating Anime and Manga sounds like fun....
I don't actually exist.
I'm truly sorry if you guys are losing your jobs and I wish ill on no one here, but whenever outsourcing comes up the /. community automagically becomes a protectionist democratic bunch.
We are amused by the hypocrisy thrown in ultra-sharp 4mega-pixel relief.
Why is it that everytime *another* corporate decides to ditch their bonafide american employee and jump in to bed with an indian firm so that he can save 20% and earn 50% more bonus for the Senior staff, all of the slashdot crowd and rest of the civilized society starts bad mouthing the people across the ocean who does their job for a fraction of the original cost?
Why is it that your Indian counterparts end up the bad apple, while you safely chose to ignore the people who made the decision to outsource and the govt who chose to standby and watch. Is it because that its easier to do so?
What happened to the path of civil disobedience? What happened to when people disagreed with the policies of the Govt chose to clog the streets with political rallies, shoulder to shoulder with thousands of others and march in unison?
What happened to "lets start a campaign against firm "A" who has decided to ditch loyalty for quick cash" and actually follow through with it by actively campaigning against the corporations who chose to fire its employees, stash their millions in Cayman Islands by withholding tax and reward their CXO's with millions in bonus and stocks.
Nope, its far too easier to just blame the Indians!
Rapid Nirvana
An interesting fact for you; India has the second largest English speaking population in the world. In fact, there is concern over the relegation of India's native languages, of which there are many. School is taught in English, and for some it may be regarded as a first language.
I'm going to go ahead and say that an Indian writer may be as competent as an American writer. I think the bigger issue is context and perspective; can an Indian writer offer an American audience the same perspective, from their different context, as an American author?
I ran a benchmark on my quantum computer, now I can't find it anywhere!
Oh no. Some nameless, faceless person that I have never met in my fucking life is gonna take my job. And it is my god-given fucking right to earn a living so I can have obese children that listen to too much Justin Timberlake and I won't be able to have a perfectly manicured yard enclosed with a white fuckin' picket fence for their fat asses to play in.
You don't have a job? Acquire some goals. It won't cost you a cent. Get off of your fucking ass. Your job got shipped overseas? Get yourself a big-assed crate and fill it with all the fucking negativety, self-pity, and loathing and ship that the fuck out of here too.
Take the easy way out and mod me as flamebait. Or reply with your plan to improve the situation for yourself and the people around you that you care about.
Prosperity is there for anyone that desires it. The breadcrumbs are for the losers.
That sir, is the gauntlet. It is go time.
I hate to burst a long running bubble around these parts, but producers, managers, marketers, and publishers actually do a job that is necessary to make a decent product, whether that is music, web content, software, or apples (the edible kind). I won't get elaborate, but I think you know what I mean. There are those that suck at their job and there are those that are good. Those that suck do not automatically disqualify the purpose of the position they are in, they disqualify themselves for being in said position.
Just like selling software, an ephemeral--and in most cases intangible--object, these people do unseen work to make a product happen that brings the bacon home--for all of us.
Whenever I encounter someone trying to speak English, I keep in mind that their English is superior to my ability to speak their native tongue.
Although, I can speak Southern with some facility.
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
Who knows?
By the same token though, if you were to say in 1950 that the next 50 years would be marked by a long slide in industrial employment, the very same question would apply. Indeed, given all that was known at the time, it would be quite reasonable to say that "the new jobs [that would be] created in the US to replace the [displaced industrial jobs] do not pay nearly as much nor do the[y] have the same level of [benefits]."
The same could be said in 1890, if it was pointed out that farm employment in the US would decline massively over that subsequent 50 years.
Capitalism is an inherently dynamic force. Any attempt to control this dynamism results in catastrophes like the Great Depression (largely caused by the errant adoption of anti-free trade laws during a normal recession).
Where do you think the new job will come from and what field should displaced US workers retrain in?
China and India have much greater tarrifs on our imports then we have on theirs.
Hell, why don't we just pass a law that says that our trade policy with a country is the exact mirror image of their trade policy with us?
I'm 41. I grew up in a small town about 30 miles outside Detroit, and I remember well the fuel crisis of the 70's, and the Detroit response to the growing stream of imports that followed. I also vividly remember the Polish coal miner's strike and proudly wearing my red "Solidarnosc" t-shirt. I was - and am - a punk. I come from a blue collar home, and I share many of my father's ideals - a man who worked thirty years as a union pipe fitter. I am definitely no corporate apologist.
Yet I'm saddened to see the same nonsense being repeated in this field that happened nearly three decades ago in the auto industry. Only this time it's doubly embarassing to me, because Japan in the 70's was already a very developed, affluent nation (remember when they were taking all that heat for buying up US properties?). This time, however, it's India - a nation brutally overpopulated where people regularly die needless deaths from ailments like burst appendices and dysentary.
I had an appendicitis attack a few years ago. I didn't have a job and I had no money in the bank. Yet I showed up at the hospital and they asked zero questions when it came time to resolve the issue. Total cost was several thousand dollars and the fact I couldn't pay for any of it at the time meant essentially nothing: I got my treatment. If I hadn't, I likely would have died a slow, painful death from paretenitis.
We live in a nation where no one HAS to starve. Where no one HAS to sleep on the street. Where no one HAS to die from common little ailments simply because they can't get basic medical attention or clean drinking water.
Isolationism is cowardice. Isn't this that same community of folks who routinely chant "evolve or die" when it comes to issues like RIAA protectionism, proprietary software protectionism, and absurdly overblown patent laws? Yet I've not seen ONE comment from anyone here of that sort.
I'm ashamed for the lot of you.
Concerning the charge that nations enacted retaliatory tariffs against the United States for passing the Smoot-Hawley bill, historical documents do not support this view. Great Britain did not release any formal protests since it regarded the United States as a sovereign nation that did not look favorably upon other nations meddling in their affairs. Great Britain was also concerned that a formal protest might encourage still higher tariffs, which might work to the disadvantage of their exporters. Great Britain was one of Americas leading trading partners, and avoided any formal protest. Sir Esme Howard, the British Ambassador to Washington at the time, informed London that "official representations...against the proposed tariff increases...[would be] a mistake."
Foreign diplomats generally avoided specific threats of retaliation against the United States since any such language would be considered an infringement upon national sovereignty, and it was not the place of foreign governments to protest the Constitutionally enacted laws of the United States. Furthermore, the word "protest" during the time of the Great Depression did not automatically express dissatisfaction with U.S. trade policy. The word "protest" usually represented the argument that treaty rights of a foreign nation had been violated.
Canada briefly discussed retaliation in 1929 with U.S. Secretary of State Frank Kellogg. Canada warned Kellogg that upwardly shifted tariff rates might result in a high probability for retaliation. Canadian Minister Vincent Massey was encouraged to release an official statement representing Canadas position, but none was ever written. Canada did not want to antagonize high tariff legislators in Congress. Instead, Massey decided to go a more discreet route via the American press. After meeting with the editor of the New York World, Massey was "impressed" by the position of the editor "that Canada will never be taken seriously by the United States...until she is prepared to strike back." This author supposes that a similar opinion is shared by the Chinese about the United States today. The United States repeatedly languishes over its huge trade deficit with China, but our market remains open to their goods while their market is virtually closed to ours. China will never take the United States seriously until we have the courage to take a stand, strike back, and apply higher tariffs on Chinese goods like the Chinese have applied to our goods!
Many nations of that time embraced the idea that retaliation would be counterproductive. They feared antagonizing Congress or a grass roots brushfire of national patriotism among U.S. citizens that might lead to discrimination of their imported goods. Historical records show that the Smoot-Hawley tariff did little to encourage foreign countries to retaliate with high tariffs of their own. In May 1931, the State Department report found that "by far the largest number of countries do not discriminate against the commerce of the United States in any way." Data from the U.S. Commerce Department show that the reason for the severe drop in exports in almost every American export industry was because of economic problems related to the depression, not foreign retaliation for higher U.S. tariffs. Some U.S. exports, however, did see significant gains in foreign market share. Exports of apples, pears and grapefruits increased. Exports of prunes went up 31 percent, and exports of dried apricots soared higher by 72 percent. Exports of raw materials such as cotton and rayon held steady. Exports of American films increased 49 percent, and exports of false teeth rose 24 percent.
Myths of the
Smoot-Hawley Tariff
by Roger Simmermaker
July 12, 2001
To be able to accurately explain the affects of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff of 1930, it is necessary first to rid ourselves of popular myths so that we can start with a clean slate and derive conclusions from fact, rather than fantasy. I will list some common myths here, and then disprove them using facts according to history. The myths that prevail, even today, some 61 years after the tariff bill was signed by President Herbert Hoover, are as follows:
1.The Smoot-Hawley Tariff established the highest tariff rates in U.S. history, and the sharp rise in tariff rates caused countless nations to retaliate with tariffs of their own.
2. The Smoot Hawley-Tariff contributed to the instability of the stock market.
3. The Smoot-Hawley Tariff was responsible for causing the Great Depression.
Campaigning against Herbert Hoover for the presidency in 1932, Franklin D. Roosevelt saw the tariff as a way to get a leg up on his Republican opponent's incumbent bid. Even Republicans eventually began to mischaracterize their party's former president in later years, as well as the tariff bill he signed into law in 1930. Even Ronald Reagan said "The Smoot-Hawley Tariff helped bring on the Great Depression." Someone should have told Ronnie that the Smoot-Hawley Tariff was enacted over eight months after the Great Depression. Later, former President Reagan said "the Smoot-Hawley tariff...made it virtually impossible for anyone to sell anything in America...and spread the Great Depression around the world." Someone should have told Ronnie that over two-thirds of the goods imported into the United States entered duty-free, and that some nations actually increased exports to the United States after the Great Depression. Al Gore fell for the same politically correct lie as Reagan in 1993 in his debate with Ross Perot, claiming the tariff "was one of the principle causes...of the Great Depression." There was actually a higher percentage of imports on the duty free list in 1930 than there were after Ronald Reagan left office.
Even the Democrat party platform of 1928 proclaimed that tariffs were necessary to sustain "legitimate business and a high standard of wages for American labor." The platform also encouraged the equalization of the cost between production at home and abroad to "safeguard...the wage of the American laborer." Today, most Republicans and Democrats alike regard equalizing tariffs as extreme. Only the Reform Party considers it fair and common sense to treat our own producers equally with foreign competitors in the realm of U.S. trade policy.
The confidence Hoover expressed in high tariffs in his re-election bid was echoed throughout the campaign. If the word of the day was that high tariffs had caused the Great Depression, Hoover's stance would have obvious political suicide. Even FDR was unable to totally shake the call for high tariffs. On the campaign trail in October 1932, he proclaimed, "I favor continued protection for American agriculture as well as American industry." The creation of the myth that the Smoot-Hawley tariff caused the Great Depression would have to wait.
Regardless of how one calculates tariff rates, as either a percentage of imports where tariffs are applied or as a percentage of all imports, duty-free or not, the Smoot-Hawley tariff did not have the highest rates in U.S. history. That claim belongs to the Tariff of Abominations of 1828, which caused neither a depression nor recession. With the belief that high tariffs cause depressions and hamper economic growth, one has to wonder why there wasn't a Great Depression of 1830? The reason is that there are several factors that cause recessions and depressions. Some of these causes will be discussed in this chapter, and revealing these factors will show that they were the cause of the Great Depression, not the Smoot-Hawley Tariff.
In their attempts to vilify Senator Smoot and Representative Hawley for proposing such extre
"A techie in the Philippines makes about ten times less than an American doing the same job."
It's called "cost of living". In the US, you can't afford food, shelter and clothing at 1/10th of what you're making now. You might have a job, but you will not be able to keep it very long living in the homeless shelter.
"Basic economic theory states that as more job opportunies open up in those countries, the higher the median salaries will be."
Yep. It's called "inflation". It happens when more capital flows into a region. So they double their income. They're still 20% of your salary which still means "homeless shelter" for you.
"That means a *lot* of people in the world are going to have much better lives."
Probably. They'll have twice as much money as they had before.
"At some point equilibrium will be reached and the outsourcing will wane significantly."
Huh? It will level off and then fall significantly? I don't see that. I see it leveling off. But that's just the race to the bottom of the wage bucket.
"As an American techie, I'm not at all worried about my career. There will always be work here for people like me who are creative, resourceful and motivated."
At $15,000 a year (before taxes). I wouldn't worry so much about a career. I'd worry more about food, shelter and clothing. But that's just me.
"Hopefully that means that much of the chaff in IT will be eliminated; I'll be working with more knowledgable people in my field--the opportunists who got into IT for the quick buck will be off chasing their next white rabbit."
Statistics. There are a LOT more people in India and China and so forth. Statistically, your skills are NOT at their level.
Here, let me put some numbers to that.
You are in population A. There are 1,000 people in population A. You are in the top 90% there. That means that there are 100 people as good or better than you and 900 people who are less talented.
Population B has 10,000 people (10 times more than population A). Their 90% mark is 1,000 people. In other words, their best people are more numerous than your best people.
So, while you're CURRENTLY competing with 100 other people for a good paying job, when you combine both population, you'll be competing with 1,100 people.
And, of that 1,100 people, 1,000 will have expenses lower than your's. So they'll be able to do the work for LESS than you.
So, statistically, you'll have to convince an employer to hire you over someone better qualified and yet pay you MORE than that better qualified person wants.
Good luck on that.
Both India and China artificial undermine their currency to ensure that their products undercut the West. This has been a very quiet issue, but the US has been raising some serious objections to this as of late.
Let's be realistic about this news item -- basically the editor of a failing website got a dictum that he needs to slash the content budget (because the business model was a failure). In such a case one's options are very limited, and basically include significantly reducing the amount of content, or finding cheaper labour. He chose the latter. The alternative of those options was basically to fold the failure which obviously wouldn't help anyone's jobs out.
Personally I find this whole offshoring paranoia (it's a paranoia because it's a short term trend - already there has been a huge equalization, with savings now being quoted in the 30-50% range. Just a few short years ago the savings were quote at between 90-95%) in these parts fascinating -- I remember having a frank discussion with a Slashdot/Linux enthusiast peer probably 4 years ago, at which point he assured me that in a few short years all software would be open source, and there would be very few professional programmers left (yes of course there'd still be a few, but the idea was that there is such overlapped effort in the industry because of closed source, that the shared effort would dramatically reduce the gross number of man hours), and we'd all be consultants and support. How fascinating to see what is largely the same group of people advocating this utopian world so up in arms about Indians taking software jobs that aren't even supposed to exist anymore.
Newsforge and Slashdot are both part of OSDN. OSDN also runs sites like devchannel.org which are more-or-less direct competitors of builder.com.
Slashdot isn't pretending to be unbies unlike say MsNBC (when reporting on technology).
What all this outsourcing IS doing is forcing us to face a reality we were long overdue on anyway.
There are only just so many jobs in a given field and everyone wants to be in the technology field.
Microsoft did you all a favor in that reguards by making it HARDER to use and support Windows. More people washed out and fewer could pay the Microsoft bribe (The liccensing and trainning fee) needed to get into the Windows field. Also Microsoft derailed all the Unix classes so Unix and Linux experts aren't increasing as fast as demand.
Also Windows breeds ignorence. Windows simply discurrages users from understanding the PC where as all other platforms (including MacOs) encurrage it.
As a result the complex operation "right click" is byond the users understanding.
I don't actually exist.
You missed the main "equalization" -- the standards of living. Our "leaders" (of either wing of the ruling party) have sold us out. All this terrorism hysteria is being whipped up to help build a police state to protect the thieves when it hits the fan. The way they're hurrying it up last few years, suggests it won't be long.
There are several problems with this criticism.
1. Copyright which exceeds the life of the author is not something the voting public desired. Intellectual property rights have been extended far past their original intent and people with the money to do it are writing their own laws *cough*Disney*cough*cough*. These laws should not be considered legitimate products of a representative democracy.
2. Shutting down file trading systems because they could be used to transmit copywrited material is like eliminating cell phones because they could be used by drug dealers, or by eliminating sewing machines because they hurt the trade of seamstresses. The current notion that technology should be restricted because it might be used for illegal purposes is is an unfair use of government power.
2. Americans, and citizens of any nation, have the right to have laws that are in the best interests of the general public. This should be the basis of representative democracy. Do excessivly long copyrights serve the public interest? The purpose of a copyright is NOT to simply reward the author, but to reward the author so that he/she moves their work into the public domain. Copyright extention is only valid if it serves the public good.
For example, does allowing the patenting of naturally occuring genes serve the public interest? Or would it be beter for the public to restrict gene patents to use patents as was the original intention for patent laws. Patenting the base codes for finding a particular gene is about as useful as patenting the individual words that a printer can print. The laws simply aren't serving their original intent.
Finally, when all our trading partners are protecting their markets rather fiercely, why shouldn't American workers? The ability to freely use the labor of other countries (even those with abysmal labor rights laws) may help to keep down prices, but it also keeps American wages low. If people in the US don't find this to their advantage, they should oppose it.
If people are trying to reach a 'fair' common ground, you can work with them for a fair solution. If you have powerful opponents out to get all they can regardless of what's 'fair' and the law has failed to stop them, then it's a competition and you fight back however you're able.
___
It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.
Nobody really wants to hear this, and I'm sure I'll get flamed, but my company has done business with several Indian software companies and the reason we choose to work with them was NOT because of cheaper labor and costs. The bottom line is that on average, the Indians are BETTER PROGRAMMERS than most Americans. You can get better-quality work and better service.
Nobody wants to really address this issue, but in my experience, when we need something done, we don't get the whiny, flaky experience that is so common with American developers. There are definitely cultural issues which can impede certain efforts, but the Indians know code, especially on a lower level far better than their American counterparts, and they're not obsessively distracted or inconsistent.
The issue with outsourcing isn't half as much about cash flow, as it is a testimonial to the fact that if American developers were half as productive as Indians, it would be cheaper to use them, and we'd have better quality software.
Before you argue this point, stop and look around you. Do you think the quality of the majority of things you use on a daily basis, especially anything made in America, has dramatically improved in the last 20 years? Do you think this culture's work ethic is even near as substantive as it was many years ago? We live in a society where we're constantly taught that everything can be upgraded, we're fed disposable products, we screw in lightbulbs that are manufactured to fail, we sit in front of televisions all day long and can't pay attention to anything, and you want to talk about who can program better? The educational system in this country has been sliding downhill rapidly. The reason India is so appealing is because they haven't turned into ADD self-absorbed mega-consumer capitalists yet, so their production is superior. And what's the US's "solution" to this problem? Pass a law making it difficult to outsource. How ironic.
I disagree with you (I'm an immigrant Canadian BTW.) I'm a leftist and don't subscribe the view of a nationalist (capitalist?) like Lou Dobbs. So even though I am against what is transpiring, I am nowhere near Lou Dobbs on the econopolitical spectrum. The reason against the present type of "free trade" can be summed up as follows.
First of all, I support trade. It is a way for all countries to prosper (check out 'absolute costs and comparative costs' to see why.) However, I am against what passes for "free trade". We can go into lengthy argument over this but I'll just describe where you are wrong.
Who Benefits?
What you fail to contemplate is the benefits--in particular, who is benefitting from this? Indian workers, for instance, do not benefit in the long term. What is to stop the jobs from being outsourced to another lower-cost country? In fact, it WILL happen. When that happens, India will lose jobs while another poorer country gets the jobs for a short while. Rinse and repeat. You cannot build an economy in such a manner. This is nothing more than capitalist voodoo magic (except the capitalists won't tell you that there is no such thing as real magic.)
If the outsourced workers don't benefit overall in the long-term, who does? Well, it is pretty simple. It is the capitalists. When I say capitalists I am talking about shareholders of corporations. The vast majority of the benefit accrues to the shareholders. It doesn't accrue to India or Indian workers, or American workers. This is blatantly obvious to anyone that follows these things. For instance, corporate profits go up almost in full proportion to the "free trade."
Why most leftists oppose
Another serious problem with "free trade" is that one of the major reasons corporations carry it out is to circumvent environmental regulations and working conditions. This isn't so much a problem in the tech sector but plays a big role in manufacturing, textiles, and others. In other words, there are many cases where corporations simply move to another part of the world just so that they can hire workers that they can fire at will, pay no benefits, etc.
What passes for "free trade" is coming at the expense of workers. Most leftists would not want to see all the benefits accrued by worker movements in the past to be destroyed.
US Imperialism
You are a sympathetic person. I am glad you are--we need more like you. However, what is happening isn't going to help anything even if what you are saying were true. The US economy is too small relative to the number of poor people. Even if 100% of US "jobs" were transplanted elsewhere, it probably isn't enough for 1/3 of Africa alone. If you really care about the lives of the less privledged in other countries, stop US imperialism! US imperialism has set back many countries by decades (particularly Latin America.) Get your country to stop meddling in other countries' affairs, overthrowing goverments, bribing--and hence solidifying--corrupt evil politicians/autocrats, and don't provide military "aid" to any of these countries. That will help the poor more than what "free trade" ever will.
Auto Industry and Japan (circa 80's)
The auto industry survived in the 80's because of protectionism. Basically, USA and Canada slapped on a massive tariff on imports (this happened because auto unions are stronger than anyone else, including the capitalists who own the car companies.) So Japanese companies came and built factories in USA and hence manufactured cars there. If it weren't for government intervention, the auto industry would have completely dissapeared. There is no way USA and Canada could have competed against Japan at that time. So this isn't a good example for you case. Whether this was a good thing or a bad thing depends on your ideology. Capitalists claim the intervention was bad because it jacked up car prices (cars would be cheaper if it weren't for that); socialists and most leftists would say it was good because it kept the auto industry.
Sivaram Velauthapillai
Sivaram Velauthapillai
Seeking the meaning of life... @slashdot of all places
Several decades ago Karl Polanyi, IMNSHO the world's astute economic historian and philosopher, discussed pretty clearly how we were building up to a rehash of the world economic crisis of the 1930s.
To put simply, the world is split into the developed industrial and post-industrial nations, and the developing nations. The developed nations (USA, UK, Germany) are typically rich in knowledge assets, whereas the developing nations (India, Mexico, and to an extent, China) are rich in natural resources.We in the US and Western Europe have the creativity and the skills, but tend to be in short supply of labor resources and materials. The reciprocal is true in the developing nations. This permits us to exert bargaining power over these nations, resulting in cheap materials and cheap labor.
Through Western education, developing nations are beginning to develop the creativity and the talent, with which to complement their ownership of the resources. However, we in the post-industrial West (and Japan and Taiwan) are not as able to gain the resources.
This is where things get scary. India has been a good place to pump out cheap code - even if the code isn't innovative or even original. The Chinese are good at assembling parts, despite not being talented at designing them. That's changing. With this growing independence in creativity and talent, combined ownership of the factors of production, developing nations are shifting the balance of power in their favor, and most likely will be able to exert greater economic (and thus political) power over the current post-industrial nations.
In my opinion, American and Japanese ingenuity will continue to save our two economies; however we'll lose much of the bargaining power we already have once it becomes desirable for an Indian firm to outsource some of its processes to cheap American labor. We can definitely expect the price of materials to increase for Western businesses as a result of the balance of power.
In case anyone's interested...
The Great Transformation - The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time, by Karl Polanyi ISBN: 0-8070-5643-X
While I've met any number of Indians in the US and India with a fine command of the English language, I'm not sure how well a two month attempt to create a writing mill from scratch will play, even run from San Jose, much less India. If the quality of written matter goes down (for a number of reasons, of which ESL writers are only one), customers aren't going to browse the site, and advertisers are going to bail.
Luke, help me take this mask off
The biggest reason that Indians are such good programmers (and engineers) is because, at the current time, only the best and brightest in India are being educated and trained to do this work. On average, America and India have the same proportion of people who are smart at some given level (assuming an equivalent educational level). But in India, the educational system, and the economy, are just not up to par with America in terms of cranking out more programmers. That doesn't mean India's premiere school, IIT, is bad. In fact is it an excellent school, despite the limitations of resources they still have to work with. But IIT is pretty much all there is in India (several campuses around the country). In proportion to population, America cranks out far more programmers than India does (at least for now). That means it has dug deeper down the barrel in its population. There are many times more programmers from America as from India.
Right now, there are lots of people in America who can be considered "la creme de la creme". But they just happened to be in the wrong place (like, working for a mismanaged company that failed) when things went downhill. There are plenty of these highly experienced, well educated, people around looking for work. But they are also drowned out by even more people who just can't come anywhere close. The "noise level" is basically drowning them out.
But in India, it's mostly just "la creme de la creme" that's available. The "bottom of the barrel" isn't even trying because they don't have the educational system scaled up the way America has, so they don't even have a hint of the basic skills needed. If you take 1000 random resumes of people in India looking for work, and 1000 random resumes of people in America looking for work, on average you're going to find that a much higher proportion of Indians are better qualified for that work. And that's only because such a higher proportion of the population in America is (still) trying to get these jobs, and thus you have lots of lesser qualified people in the pool (in America, but not in India). Give an employer a choice of which stack of resumes to take to fill a job, and quite many will choose the Indian stack just because of the better signal to noise ratio (even if the salaries would be exactly the same).
Ultimately, what America needs to do is cut back on cranking out more programmers (and engineers, and other high tech people), so that "la creme de la creme" can take the work and get well rewarded for it, regardless of which country they come from.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
Sorry, but you are wrong; it has already started. High tech companies are already popping up all over India (but generally concentrated around where the IIT campuses are). In some cases these startups are even stealing American intellectual property (though the Indian government is trying to crack down on that to avoid scaring away future businesses from employing in India).
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
My US based company, in the Fortune 1000, went through the following cuts
2000 - cut US headcount
2001 - cut US headcount
2002 - cut US headcount / hired India software developers to 'help out with maintenace'
2003 - cut US headcount down to 1 USA developer per product, and 1 USA QA person per 2 products / Tripled India headcount - India somehow manages to go from 'helping out' to 'leading develoment'
This took the company from 5,000 USA based developers, qa, doc, sales, etc down to less than 1,500 of which most of them are in Sales, accounting, HR, and executive management.
This left the entire USA based development, QA and doc with less than 20 percent of the original headcount.
Our development schedules accross the board slipped 6 months to 2 years. This includes a dramatic reduction in functionality enhancements.
Guess what, that means that many critical high sales dollar generating products are solely dependant on 1 USA developer.
If we lose 15 key people in the US, our company will have 33 percent of its total sales at risk.
All the while the executives, who are sad that their stock options have been under water for 4 years, have been saying:
The IT spending environment is bad - it's not our fault
India development is comming on board.
Many of us USA based developers are looking to exit this company since the company does not even want the software products it develops to suceed.
This is from my experinces in:
1. Listening to management parrot some powerpoint cheerleading 'our company is great. We care about our employees.' complete BS
and most importantly
2. Seeing how the actual actions of the management do not agree with the words, beliefs, and corporate agenda presented by upper management.
I look forward to 2005 when stock options will have to be carried on the balance sheet as a future expense.
I came to USA to pursue masters degree and it is a great prestige for my famiy if i complete this program
Everyone was saying , life in Us is the best.This further fuelled my desires
Im gonna finish MS now and probably return back to India becuz of obvious reasons
Whats worse is my undergrad friends are so F**** skilled in programming now that i feel its utter waste to do MS
At the end of day i ahve skills that r not welcomed so much in industry
My indian buddies work for Intel sun Thoughtworks IBM and i bet im no inferior to them in skill when i came here.
Bad decision.Life in USA is materialistically awesome.
Family wise , i dont wanna explain.
I really mean it , u guys should see some laid back countries and relatiosnships of people there.
Hello , this is my way.
Which way is yours ?
btw there is no right way
Unless, of course, if you have bought every penis enlargement pill that was offered through your emails, you may be able to reach all the way to India.
Methinks those 15 should get together and start a startup.
It would be especially interesting if the NDA/noncompete with the Indian Outsourcing company is weak - perhaps they could by the rights to the products from the Indian co.
I you can't buy American, do without. I do. I only deal with American made products, in what I buy and in what I sell..
:)
That's cute. Did you know that the US Army contracts to India as well? Did you know that many of the Bush-Cheney campaign's official sweatshirts were made in Burma? Do you drive an American made car? If so, what country was the engine assembled in? There are a couple of BMW models built here in the US by Americans. Would you buy one?
I'm not meaning to be crass with you... this time. I can feel your pain. If you really want to help the situation though, this "Buy American" crap idea has got to go.
Buying exclusively from an American company that has a predominantly foreign workforce doesn't help things. Refusing to buy from a foreign company that has a strong American workforce only makes things worse.
Here's an idea. We could publicly shame those companies that dump jobs overseas when there is a glut of qualified workers domestically. We could start a movement. Say we get a petition with the names of every out-of-work American who can't find a job due to outsourcing, or who has lost a job to foreign outsourcing. We then create our own virtual Wall. We then make a banner that reads, "I lost my job so that executives can get paid more." or something to the effect. Since top-level executive pay has been increasing dramatically, we'd have a powerful statement. We could go one step further and make a list of companies that outsource and publicize that.
I for one have already taken my Protectionist vow
Guess what, what is happening is a natural leveling out of this inequity. My bet is the US (and europe but likely to a lesser extent) will be stuck with this for a while.
Hopefully, India and China will have open enough trade that the US can export to them enough to level things out. Once they are richer, like south Korea or Japan are today, the outsourcing trend will diminish.
It's already happening, gaz prices are going up thanks to increase chinese demand. It's not going to be easy for the western world for the next 20 years.
Another example of outsourcing issues:
My mom was wanting insurance info from her insurance agent in Arizona... she heard a few clicks,then it got weird and static-y, then someone with an indian accent picked up the phone, and you could hear lots of other people with indian accents on the phone.. andh ewas trying to give her help... but she could barely understand him...she just hung up, very pissed off that her insurance company had gotten so cheap that they outsourced their phone help to india... for a company that's just across the state, She doesnt like the idea of someone in some foriegn country knowing her personal info...
So outsourcing isnt good for the employee, and the consumer doesnt like it.
These companies need to rethink their decisions...
It's not as bad when they outsource more internal, less consumer interactive work.. but when it's something that directly affects the consumer..and they dont like it... it's not pretty.
My complaint here is, how good will editing be from someone who isnt a native speaker of english?
With today's travel technology and communication infrastructure, what ISN'T an outsourceable skill set?
Doctor
Nurse
Veterinarian
Auto Repair
Bartender
Server
Construction
Sorry if those aren't your cup of tea but no matter how grim things get, there are some jobs that will always be around. If you really think that the writing is on the wall, start reading...
Although you are correct in that it is difficult to oursource these jobs directly, outsourcing has an indirect effect on these professions. For instance, if large numbers of people in the US are out of work:
- they won't be buying very many cars,
- they won't be spending money on their pets,
- they won't be building their new dream house,
- they won't be going out to eat a lot,
- they won't have health insurance to pay all those medical bills
As you can see, even those professions which you say can't be outsourced will be affected. It's funny how interconnected the economy is.
------
www.moneybythenumbers.com
A lot of people have followed George Soros on his very vocal position against outsourcing. He's the funder behind moveon.org and has claimed he'd be willing to part with his billions of dollars of wealth in order to get rid of Bush, the "outsourcing nightmare president." (Soros has launched a new ad campaign through MoveOn.org that specifically blames Bush for outsourcing job loss and lack of overtime pay which unfortunately ignores the same campaign finance reform laws. Just like Martha Stewart, Soros apparently feels that laws are for little folk, not rich folk like him).
Interestingly, if one looks at the companies Soros's investment company, Soros Fund Management, holds, (specifically check the Form 13F-HR), you'll discover outsourcing company after another. I spent an hour looking at just the companies starting with "A" and "B" and found over 90% were aggressively outsourcing. Several had financial reports literally bragging about how they've saved investors money through this process.
I had wondered where Soros was at. A few years ago, a Soros disciple approached a company I worked for and strongly recommended the company dispose of its information technology and call center operations to India as a precondition of the fund looking at the company. The disciple insisted outsourcing had worked well and Mr. Soros used it as part of his investing strategy to differentiate investments.
Imagine my surprise when I've heard Soros himself (as well as his moveon.org group) blaming the current president for the flight of jobs. How is Bush supposed to stop Soros from demanding his holdings "optimize"? Is it Bush's fault that he hasn't stopped Soros before he moves-jobs-on to India again? For those of you who've fallen sucker to the moveon.org ploy, do your own research and you'll confirm what a few of us who have crossed Soros's path have learned first hand. You're unfortunately playing in the guilt trip of a very rich man who must not like how he makes his money. For anyone in IT supporting moveon.org, it'd be like a Linux advocate joining a SCO fan club.
Take a look at the list. Search google for the company name. It's shocking. My only theory is that Soros has the typical upper class guilt trip going where he wants to be thought of a better person than he is per his destruction of IT in the US.
For these Fortune 1000, it's not easy to tell Soros (who may be holding 5% or more of your company) to blow off and keep those jobs in the U.S.
In other news (which didn't make a dent in the U.S. press), Soros apparently has one-upped Martha Stewart. Just like Martha, he's liberal, a Bush hater, a rich fat cat, big business guy, believes he's immune to trading laws, and liberal. Warren Buffet, the U.S.'s second richest man, is also a big time Democrat and despises Bush. I think we can put away the myth that Republicans have a monopoly on "big business/special interest." Democrats seem to be leading the pack these days.
It would be especially interesting if the NDA/noncompete with the Indian Outsourcing company is weak
This raises a really interesting idea. How about our congress critters pass a Technology Level Playing Field Act with provisions such as:
1. employers that outsource jobs to non-US locations automatically forfit CNDA provisions with US workforce. Rationale: how is the US IT worker competing with the Indian/Chinese/etc. worker? (I'd be interested to learn how effective CNDAs are in China, incidentally. There is no comparable playing field). The company has abandoned the US IT workforce, even with one outsourcing employee, so it cannot hold anticompetitive work contracts in effect which harm the US workforce and keep the US workers out of production.
2. apply index-based labor tariffs. Rationale: implement an employment cost index assessing the cost/employee for US regulatory factors such as health care requirements, social security, employer income tax portion, workmen's compensation, environmental compliance, OSHA compliance, ADA compliance, etc. Measure India, China, etc.'s status with respect to the index, and then factor a per-hour cost for the items they are not providing. Assess this tariff per hour of outsourced labor to the outsourcing company, and place the receipts of the tariff into job training tax credits and such.
This legislation would not only benefit the US workforce, but it would finally show compassion to workers in developing nations by demanding these American and European firms not treat them as low-wage slaves. Intelligent Phillipinos, Indians and Chinese don't appreciate U.S. firms paying off local officials to continue poor working conditions, and in the long term, will breed considerable anti-American resentment (just as the US middle class is also increasingly hostile to the process). This sort of legislation would effect positive developments on both sides of the outsourcing process.
I love these big good versus evil rants which paint a picture where on one side you have the faceless corporate gods and on the other you have the poor oppressed little middle class wage slaves. I love these black and white scenarios that make everything so simple to understand.
From reading this rant you get the impression that the person who wrote it (the ghost of I/T past) is some sort of slave incapable of making a decision for itself or having any sort of personal responsibility at all. You would swear that everybody in I/T was forced at gun point to take high payed, high stress jobs and that their was no other alternative for them. You would sware that everyone in "Amerika" was marched down to the bank and forced to mortgage their house, borrow as much money as possible and rack up huge credit card depts. You would swear everybody was obliged by law to spend money like it was water and not think about the future at all.
Did anyone honestly expect the I/T boom to last ? Did everyone think it was just going to get better and better all the time? That salaries were just going to multiply by two every year? You can blame the bosses up until a certain point but remember you were a willing participant in the whole show. You could have gotten off the ride at any time, you took the money and you took the risks.
I understand the sentiment of the whole rant. I can feel sorry for the techie who's job got moved over sea but why should I feel any more sorrow for him/her than the worker from the "insert industry here" who's had the same thing happen to them. Any one who has ever read anything about the history of trade unionism in America knows that workers in other professions have had it far worse than anything the American I/T workers are experiencing right now when outsourcing happend to them. The difference between a lot (not all) of people with I/T jobs and say for example coal miners is/was that people working in the I/T sector could have put aside a lot of money but a lot of them choose not to where as people in traditional industrial jobs (manufacturing) where this sort of thing has happened before often did not have this luxury, often they were making just enough to get by. Now I am not saying that everyone in I/T who is stuck for a job now was a heedless spendaholic who thought the party would never end, a lot of them are, but that relative to others who have suffered a similar fate people in I/T have not had it so bad.
This experience is not just some distant memory, the author of the rant himself/herself admits that : "Do not blame us, Corporate America, for the cynical attitude we have toward you, for some of us remember 20 years ago, when we could not buy a job, and you threw us out on the street at a moments notice." This has happened before and it will happen again, this is not the last time you will hear rants like this nor has it been the first time I'm sure. Shrugging everything off onto some faceless entity called corporate America and relieving yourself of all personal responsibility isn't going to help you in the long run . Raising awareness on issues like who pay's corporate America's salaries or what companies contribute how much to who's campaign are worth far more in my opinion than mono perspective rants
like this.
_________________________________________________