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.
did you let you boss know that indian managers were cheaper?
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).
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.
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.
Um... sure... and what should be done exactly? Protectionism doesn't work. Period. And why do you assume that it's a rightious thing to do? A techie in the Philippines makes about ten times less than an American doing the same job. Do you think that this is equitable? I personally think that Filipinos/Indians are being used. Basic economic theory states that as more job opportunies open up in those countries, the higher the median salaries will be. That means a *lot* of people in the world are going to have much better lives. At some point equilibrium will be reached and the outsourcing will wane significantly. 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. 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. All in all, seems like a win-win situation.
Entrepreneur : (noun), French for "unemployed"
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 **
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.
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.