Slashdot Mirror


India Outsourcers Find Back Door in Canada

securitas writes "Metro International newspapers Toronto edition reports that more Indian companies are opening back doors into the United States by setting up shop in Canada. The issue of outsourcing, offshoring and nearshoring has become a hot issue, with the 2004 presidential election less than a week away. Candidate John Kerry has said he will close the tax loophole that makes it advantageous to outsource call centers."

95 of 717 comments (clear)

  1. Less than a week to pack... by grub · · Score: 5, Funny


    I guess that makes me an evildoer, eh? Ah well, at least Guantanamo Bay will be warmer than Winnipeg this winter.

    --
    Trolling is a art,
  2. So now we can really... by LWATCDR · · Score: 5, Funny

    Blame Canada?

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    1. Re:So now we can really... by Bajanman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think you should blame your CEOs. They make billions every year, while their employee's make basic pay. Maybe I don't get it, but isn't it wrong, for management to make disgusting amounts of money, and decide they want more, by outsourcing to other countries?
      Why can't the employees just shoot their CEO's? ummm errr I mean push them down the stairs? We all know CEO's don't do much, other than try and look good. IF CEO's were good, wouldn't they lower their own paychecks to make product prices more competitive?
      Hey, here's an idea, why don't we outsource our CEO's?

      hmmm Guess I'd never make it in the business world, better stick with being a simple Systems Admin.

    2. Re:So now we can really... by Alan+Hicks · · Score: 2, Informative
      ... *sigh*

      Please learn something about business before shooting your mouth off.
      I think you should blame your CEOs. They make billions every year, while their employee's make basic pay. Maybe I don't get it, but isn't it wrong, for management to make disgusting amounts of money, and decide they want more, by outsourcing to other countries?

      We can argue whether greed is wrong or not, but let's not quibble over a moral issue. Contrary to popular belief CEOs do not make "billions". Many of them make a couple million dollars a year, but a lot of that is in stock options. Now as for making more money by outsourcing, let me offer you this scenario.

      Two companies A and B exist right beside each other in the US. They both make the same product and charge the same amount for it. Their costs to produce the product are the same.

      Now let's suppose that A outsources its tech support to India. Before hand they had 12 technicians paying them $12 an hour. For the cost of one of those technicians they can hire all 12 India technicians and pay the phone bill. Now their costs have dropped $132 an hour not counting what they save on the telephone bill. You can drop the cost of your product and gain market share from B without loosing profit margins.

      Now everyone might be pissed that A is outsourcing, but they're still going to buy from A over B because A's widgits are cheaper. The fact that they outsource doesn't matter. Loyalty in America these days extends only to the pocket book.

      --
      Slackware, what else when it must be secure, stable, and easy?
    3. Re:So now we can really... by 2old2rockNroll · · Score: 2, Insightful

      We can argue whether greed is wrong or not, but let's not quibble over a moral issue. . . . Many of them make a couple million dollars a year, but a lot of that is in stock options.

      The average CEO makes 300 times the salary of an average worker. This one burned the company's original stockholders, leaving them with nothing, and walks away with $100 million because he's being replaced. And his options were vested as a reward. Let's not forget the $1.5 million bonus. And he gets to stay on the board of directors where he gets to set the compensation for the next CEO. It's not a quibble over a moral issue, it's a financial obscenity. It's called looting a company.

  3. Near-shore is still off-shore by fembots · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I think near-shore or off-shore makes no difference as they're still outsourcing, ie taking away jobs which could have been given to locals.

    Bush said druing a debate that he will let Mexicans to come to US to work legally, and gradually obtain residency. If this happens, the Canadian-Indian issue is small in comparison.

    Maybe the ideal "screening" is based on the percentage of employees' residency status, so if over 50% of a Canadian company is from developing countries, it's no deal.

    1. Re:Near-shore is still off-shore by MaelstromX · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What's so wrong about people seeking work that pays better than what they had originally? Just because they're of a different ethnicity than you, or they speak a different language, you think we should forbid them from coming here to work?

      News flash: People are people, some of us had the fortune of being born and raised in stronger economical and freer political environments, but to act like it's wrong for a person to find a better job somewhere and for a company to hire that person is completely antithetical to what freedom and our capitalistic nation is all about.

    2. Re:Near-shore is still off-shore by QuantumRiff · · Score: 3, Insightful
      If this happens, the Canadian-Indian issue is small in comparison.

      I think there are two different keys parts to this statement, (no, i'm not defending one candidate or another).

      The first issue is the location of the worker. A mexican immigrant that comes here to work, gradually gaining citizen ship, is contributing to the economy. His wages are taxed, and the things he consumes are local. i.e. he's going to be buying groceries, goods, renting a house, etc. All of this keeps the money in the US, and in a roundabout way, helps create more US jobs. (need more grocery clerks, more construction, etc.)Once they gain Citizenship, they have a vested interest in staying in this country, and continuing to work and consume.

      The second issue is the level of education, and the skill level of the jobs. There is a huge percentage of highly educated and/or skilled workers in India and Canada that are "taking" american jobs, and spending the money in their own country. The majority, (no, not all, but the vast majority) of workers from Mexico are relative unskilled laborers. They are not taking over $40k/year jobs with benifits. Of course, this does saturate the lower level, unskilled jobs, and drive their wages down.

      To get technical though, in the long run, sending the money to other countries raises their income, and lowers the value of the dollar, making american goods less expensive than before. Exports will go up, but profit will go down, meaning more jobs outsourced to get more profit, and down the downward spiral our economy goes!

      --

      What are we going to do tonight Brain?
    3. Re:Near-shore is still off-shore by Drakon · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The argument is basically that illegal foreigners working in the united states have jobs which may have otherwise gone to unemployed americans, whome the government is supposed to represent.
      However, if they are working legally, then they have to be working at least at minimum wage, which means there is little or no incentive to hire them rather than an unemployed american citizen, which means that basically they're contributing to the economy. I believe maddox wrote something about this,

    4. Re:Near-shore is still off-shore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It has nothing to do with race. If I entered this country legally from Mexico and now have to compete with those who illegally entered the country from Mexico for jobs, is that fair? Especially considering that they can work illegally for lower wages than I can and there is almost no enforcement of this situation?

    5. Re:Near-shore is still off-shore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Rule #1 opens the door for the government to control your life. After all, that fatty big mac could cause you a heart attack. Better pass legislation to make sure we are all good vegetarians. Then, we pass another law to make sure we all get our eight hours of sleep per night. Outlaw skydiving and other 'dangerous' activities. I'm sure we can come up with more.

      Believe it or not, Gov't is not there to protect you.

    6. Re:Near-shore is still off-shore by dghcasp · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The main difference (and I'm stereotyping here; I'm sorry) is that Mexican labour usually comes in to do jobs that American's don't want to do, like pick lettuce and clean office buildings.

      FYI, Canada is already the second biggest outsourcer for U.S. jobs.

    7. Re:Near-shore is still off-shore by jlseagull · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "If Bush wins the popular vote it's time for revolution. EVEN IF HE LOSES THE ELECTION."

      See, this is where our Time of Troubles is going to start. REGARDLESS OF WHO WINS IN A WEEK, THE OTHER SIDE IS GOING TO SAY THAT THE WINNERS CHEATED AND WILL CALL FOR REVOLT. Think about that. We've brought this upon ourselves with our politics, our electioneering, and our untrackable unaccountable unreliable voting machines. Please, think before you act.

      --
      'Be always mindful, even when ditch-digging.' --D. T. Suzuki
    8. Re:Near-shore is still off-shore by tompaulco · · Score: 2, Informative

      The tax loophole was not voted in. I don't even think it is actually a loophole, but just something that nobody ever bothered to propose a ruling on. That is, that labor is not taxed as an import.
      In some cases, companies in the U.S. own and operate offshore facilities, where they pay the foreign countries associated wage taxes. But in many cases, the offshore facility is actually owned by a foreign corporation as well, meaning that the entire transaction is merely corp-to-corp service. There is no tax on corp-to-corp services, so there is no tax on the U.S. company whatsoever (except we assume the foreign corp pays their proper payroll taxes and that is built into the pricing structure.) Not that I am in favor of a tax on services. Since my wife owns a consulting company, that would not be beneficial for me specifically, but it would certainly even the playing field.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    9. Re:Near-shore is still off-shore by fmaxwell · · Score: 2, Informative

      Do you have the ability to think beyond step one, or are you really that dull?

      Apparently, I am much brighter than you are when it comes to economics. Read on.

      What happens to dollars that are sent to foreign markets?

      Typically, those dollars are used to purchase goods and services in the home country of the recipient. For example, an Indian software engineer from Bangalore who has an income of $6,000 per year is not going to be buying a new Ford Mustang with that income. Neither is he likely to spend much of it at U.S. owned and staffed businesses.

      Now let's examine the effect on the U.S. economy. Suppose that a U.S. engineer who was making $60K/year is laid off and his company outsources his job to the aforementioned $6K/year Indian engineer. Until that U.S. engineer is employed again, he has no income and, thus, is paying no income taxes. He may collect unemployment, socking the tax system with a double whammy. As a result of his unemployment, he is likely to drastically reduce spending on non-essentials, like restaurant meals, movies, DVDs and CDs, vacations, or that motorcycle that he's had his eye on. That, in turn, affects the restaurants, movie theatres, merchants, hotel keepers, and motorcycle dealer where he would have been spending his money. It also means that the state collects no sales tax on the now-forsaken purchases.

      If he is forced to accept a job at a lower wage (due to so many tech workers flooding the job market), then tax revenues, both federal and state, collected from him will go down, too. So will his discretionary income, meaning fewer purchases of non-essentials for the long term.

      All of that has a domino effect. Reduced spending for restaurant meals leads to loss of jobs at restaurants. Out of work restaurant workers will look for jobs at the mall, probably driving down wages there. The reduced discretionary spending might mean job losses at movie theatres, resorts, motorcycle dealers, snowmobile dealers, hobby shops, etc.

      Still feeling frisky?

  4. Kerry in the senate... by havaloc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    He could of introduced plenty of bills supporting his current election platform as a senator, why didn't he? What makes you think he'll do it now if elected president? Just asking.

    1. Re:Kerry in the senate... by skraps · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That is a valid point, but we know for sure that Bush won't do anything about it as President. Kerry, we have reason to suspect that he may not do anything. But "may not" is better than "will not".

      --
      Karma: -2147483648 (Mostly affected by integer overflow)
    2. Re:Kerry in the senate... by Monkius · · Score: 2, Funny

      I guess he could by lying.

      I personally think Kerry's record shows that he has integrity, and that he'll at least try to keep this promise.

      --
      Matt
    3. Re:Kerry in the senate... by Doctor+Crumb · · Score: 4, Informative

      Could *have*, or "Could've". Not "could of".

    4. Re:Kerry in the senate... by Peyna · · Score: 5, Informative

      Kerry's record for introducing and passing bills.

      At least try to find out if your claim is true before you try to reason based on it.

      --
      What?
    5. Re:Kerry in the senate... by cubicledrone · · Score: 4, Insightful

      People running for the highest office of the land have often stumped, claiming that they would do such-n-such a thing, and people accept it as if it were a done deal. Why is that?

      Because our education system fails utterly to teach people about the basic function of our government.

      --
      Business isn't willing to pay for products, innovation and careers, so we get brands, mortgage commercials and layoffs.
    6. Re:Kerry in the senate... by AhabTheArab · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Also, how does he expect to create jobs if he also plans on raising the minimum wage? That will give companies more incentive to move operations overseas. This incentive will probably be even more than the lost incentive of the tax loophole being closed.

    7. Re:Kerry in the senate... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm no kerry fan, but I must point out that a lot of minimum wage jobs are *service* jobs. You'll be hard pressed to buy a hamburger if the pimply teenager is thousands of miles away.

    8. Re:Kerry in the senate... by killjoe · · Score: 4, Informative

      "I don't understand how that is ideologically consistent."

      That's because you don't understand the ideology. You have simply reduced it to the simplest form possible presumably because you are not capable of understanding more complex thought patterns.

      "Because you are born in America, you are worthy of help, but if you are born in India, you are not?"

      Once again your inability to think beyond black and white has painted yourself into a corner.

      I am not really going to go into it but here are the salient points.

      1) We should help people all over the world if they need it to the best of our ability.

      2) It's impossible to help everybody in the world because there is so much poverty and we really don't have enough money or willpower. Even if we really wanted to give a 100% effort to help the destitute of the world we would be fought tooth and nail by the republicans.

      3) Charity begins at home. We really ought to tace care of our own problems first. We should devote MOST of our resources to making sure our own citizens are taken care of first.

      You see, it's not that hard. Just compassion mixed with a little bit of realism. We still favor giving money to poor countries and helping them as much as we can but not at the expense of denying our own citizens.

      BTW I noticed that you said "A tenet of the democrats is to help the disadvantaged.". Doesn't it bother you that republicans don't even have that tenant. That they don't believe in helping the disadvantaged?

      --
      evil is as evil does
    9. Re:Kerry in the senate... by killjoe · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Clinton didn't spend 200 billion dollars occupying a country.

      Kerry is smarter then my dog. *

      Right there you have two reasons not to vote for bush.

      * I bought two toys for my dog. I named one "abu abbas" and the other one "abu nidal". My dog was able to differentiate between the two in less then ten tries something Bush was not able to accomplish.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    10. Re:Kerry in the senate... by gfxguy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      But in the overall picture there will be many more people looking for a lot fewer jobs. A lot of people take minimum wage jobs now because they HAVE to, which locks out a lot of other unqualified workers. Raising the minimum wage is a BAD idea, as is a so called "living" wage.

      Frankly, minimum wage jobs should not be held by people with familial responsibilities - they are a stepping stone to bigger and better things. More often than not, only slackers who need to change jobs often (from one McDonalds to Wendies to Burger King) because they aren't doing a good job are the ones stuck at minimum wage. I'm not saying good people don't get stuck at minimum wage, I'm saying people make decisions and if they don't like their current positions they need to make better decisions - like taking that minimum wage job that has the potential to pay more in the future if you do good work, or taking the minimum wage job that might actually give you some worthwhile work experience.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    11. Re:Kerry in the senate... by Shihar · · Score: 2, Insightful

      2) It's impossible to help everybody in the world because there is so much poverty and we really don't have enough money or willpower. Even if we really wanted to give a 100% effort to help the destitute of the world we would be fought tooth and nail by the republicans.

      The point you clearly miss is that while the US can't help the entire world, the US IS helping India. India is going through a massive economic boom right now. One of the poorest nations in the world is rapidly rising out of third world poverty. I don't understand why this brings such horror to Americans. God forbid any place other then Europe and America enjoy some of the wealth in the world. India is rapidly rising and the American economy continues to chug away despite 9/11 and the popped technology bubble. With a miniscule 5% unemployment is it suddenly time to throw up trade barriers and stamp out the historic growth of India? Are the people of India not worthy of being put on an equal footing when it comes to employment by American multinationals?

      3) Charity begins at home. We really ought to tace care of our own problems first. We should devote MOST of our resources to making sure our own citizens are taken care of first.

      That opinion is not only disgustingly selfish, but foolishly naïve. The US government will never solve its citizens' problems. The US government has failed to solve its own problems for the past 200 years. You think that John Kerry or George Bush if reelected will suddenly just solve these problems? I know American politicians have promised everything but the kitchen sink, but did it ever occur to you that they do this same thing every four years?

      If the US is going to solve all of its problems before it helps the rest of the world, then they are never going to help the rest of the world. The rest of the world has thrown open its doors to US products allowing Americans to live at the high standards they enjoy today. Americans would not have such high incomes and high standards of living without the rest of the world. The least the Americans can do is allow the rest of the world to compete. If the only place India can compete are low end IT jobs, why in the hell should America complain? America doesn't need to save the world, just give the rest of the world a fair chance to compete.

      If Kerry's attitude is that the US should selfishly protect a few low end jobs that could do wonders for other world economies, then I actually hope he loses.

    12. Re:Kerry in the senate... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      BTW I noticed that you said "A tenet of the democrats is to help the disadvantaged.". Doesn't it bother you that republicans don't even have that tenant. That they don't believe in helping the disadvantaged?

      The difference is that conservatives (of which I am one, who also happens to be a registered Republican) don't buy the original argument: that some people are, by default, "disadvantaged". We believe that all people are equal and capable of great things. Yes, each and every individual - if they try and work hard - can be successful.

      I'm obviously excluding physical handicaps which I think we can all agree on are truly disadvantaged. But it appears that liberal Democrats see disadvantage in everything: race, religion, sex, weight, diet, geography, household circumstances, upbringing, the color of socks one wears, etc.

      Liberals' desire to "help" (read: take from producers at the point of a gun and under the threat of jail to redistribute to said "disadvantaged" people) all these groups gets back to your #2 point: "It's impossible to help everybody in the world" mixed with #3 "We should devote MOST of our resources to making sure our own citizens are taken care of first." - we suddenly can't afford to help anybody in the world because we can't afford to devote "MOST" of our resources to helping everyone who is suddenly "disadvantaged" here. Hmmm, starts to look like a plan, eh?

      Also note that it's important to point out that once we get into the liberal world of endlessly designating (!cough! i.e. vertically-challenged !cough!) "disadvantaged" peoples, who is the designator? Who makes those decisions about who is better than who, and why, and for how long, and for how much? Affirmative Racism^m^m^m^m^m Action comes to mind as just such an ongoing anti-disadvantaged-solution debacle...

      No, this post wasn't PC, but like you said - "Just compassion mixed with a little bit of realism."

      (Score:-5, Conservative on /.)

    13. Re:Kerry in the senate... by TheSync · · Score: 2, Interesting

      A lot of economists argue that the minimum wage leads to unemployment. Yet we keep on raising the minimum wage every now and then, and it doesn't seem to have a significant effect on unemployment.

      The reason is simple: only 2% of US employees earn the minimum wage. Most of that 2% is retail fast food workers. It is so low that the vast, vast majority of jobs have market-based prices higher than the minimum wage. It may have a deleterious effect on teenage unemployment, but not unemployment in general.

      The "smart" politician will say to the public "Oh horrors, there must be a minimum wage hike so people aren't in poverty". What he means is "The market prices for 98% of jobs in this country went up, so raise the minimum wage just enough to make it look like I care, but won't actually lead to significantly higher unemployment."

      Take this reasoning and apply it to China and India, both of which also have a minimum wage, though much, much smaller than that of the US). Their min wage t probably only affects a small part of their population as well (as many of the people in those country don't work for wages anyway but are subsistence farmers, and the ones who do tend to make more than them minimum wage).

  5. Tech Support by elid · · Score: 2, Funny

    If Dell outsources their tech support to Canada, at least I'll be able to understand the guy as opposed to the current situation....

    1. Re:Tech Support by JamieF · · Score: 5, Funny

      not necessarily...

      User: it's a Latitude CPi-A.
      Tech: Got it, a CPi.
      User: no, it's a CPi-A.
      Tech: I heard you the first time, eh? A CPi.
      User: No, a CPi with the letter A.
      Tech: With what letter, eh?
      ...
      User: I think it's a boot virus.
      Tech: What's about virus?
      User: No, it's a boot virus.
      Tech: What does "it's about virus" mean? What virus, eh? ...

    2. Re:Tech Support by sevensharpnine · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I was doing a tech support call to Dell the other day to replace a DOA monitor. This item had a warantee under Dell's "Higher-Education Service Contract." Now, I only spoke to one person, so I can't comment on the entire situation. But for what it's worth, the guy on the other end spoke clear english, but he had a certain emphasis on vowels that struck me as odd. And when he was reading me back the letters, expanding each with a word for clarity, he said "...and 'p', as in Pierre."

      --
      "God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh." -Voltaire
    3. Re:Tech Support by decipher_saint · · Score: 4, Informative

      If?

      I guess thats one reason, but let me maybe present another one. The company I work for recently did some outsourcing to India, even though we mostly went through Chicago when the RFP negotiations were going on when it came to the nitty gritty (i.e. the "real" work) communication was a huuuuge problem. Even after we worked that out the quality of the code we got back was, let us say lacking (this might have just been this one company, but I'm just saying...). Anyway, by the time the project was done it cost us more and took us longer than if we had just hired local contractors to do it. Edmonton is kind of a weird place, there are at least four post-secondary institutions pumping out IT grads three times a year, putting it bluntly we have a lot of skilled IT people flipping burgers around town. Getting those people who are still keen on the IT industry (but don't want to move away) into low paying but IT-related jobs isn't exactly hard to do.

      Edmonton has always been an IT hub because of the Provincial Government (and the IT jobs it attracts), but in the last decade big IT firms have moved in and paled that aspect of Edmonton's IT community, firms like IBM, Microsoft, Fujitsu, BioWare, Intuit (etc, etc...).

      P.S. It's good to see NAFTA finally doing what it was designed to do, form an even stronger economic partnership between the Americas.

      P.P.S. If these Indian companies have indeed found a back door to profit in the good ole USA, you can be sure that the Canadian Revenue Agency will be sucking the life-blood from them if they are profitable. If there's one thing our Government knows how to do, it's tax the bejesus out of any pocketbook...

      --
      crazy dynamite monkey
    4. Re:Tech Support by azuretek · · Score: 2

      that's what I go through everyday here in canada, oh how I miss the days of A being a letter

    5. Re:Tech Support by Gentlewhisper · · Score: 2, Funny

      The last two support calls I made were total waste of time. 9 days to get a broken hard drive replaced!

      Good Lord!

      You stayed on the phone for NINE straight days?! Jeez!

  6. Well at least you will be able to understand them by Megor1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    As anyone knows who has hit someone in India the accents can be very hard to understand, Canadian accents (if any) are very close to americain ones so you might be able to get the help you need!

    --
    Everyone that disagrees with me is a paid shill
  7. this doesn't worry me, for some reason. by wintermute1000 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I think it's because there was a fad for awhile for directors of TV and movies to film in Canada, because it was cheaper, and for a little while a lot of places in Southern California were feeling it. But then prices started going up in the areas in Canada where filming was being done because there was awareness that there were lots of rich people there all of a sudden, and the locals acted accordingly. It'll balance itself out. At least, in my youthful optimism, I'm going to hope it will.

    1. Re:this doesn't worry me, for some reason. by bigberk · · Score: 2, Informative
      I think it's because there was a fad for awhile for directors of TV and movies to film in Canada
      Was a fad? Buddy, I've got news for you... there have been no fewer than three American movies filmed in my own neighbourhood (Canadian city), couple blocks away from my house. This place is cheap for the industry, they love filming movies in Canada.
    2. Re:this doesn't worry me, for some reason. by Esion+Modnar · · Score: 2
      It'll balance itself out.

      Yeah, and when it does, they move on to greener, leaner, poorer (or richer, depending on your perspective) pastures. Like a farmer rotating his crops. Many people would call this exploitation, unless you're one of the gaunt-faced people finally finding employment. Others just call it the reality of a free market.

      I'm sure there's a Ferengi law covering this. (And I'm sure somebody here might just tell me which one...)

      --

      They say the first thing to go is your penis. Well, it's either that or your brain. I forget which...
  8. Full disclosure by typobox43 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Did they follow proper disclosure procedures and report the backdoor to the Canadian government before submitting it to Slashdot?

  9. splendid by BungoMan85 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why doesn't anyone ever talk about all the jobs being insourced? The real "Benedict Arnold" companies are those that move their headquarters overseas -- in the form of a rented office in Bermuda -- to avoid paying US taxes, not US-based companies with manufacturing centers in other countries. Those are the real tax cheats.

    --
    Bungo!
  10. Close the tax loophole? by phorm · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What tax loophole is this exactly? I know that the companies avoid certain expenses just due to lower wages offshore, but taxes too?

    If there is a loophole, closing it would mean more revenues for the government (plus for them) and/or less outsources (plus for us)

    1. Re:Close the tax loophole? by LardBrattish · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think what we might be dealing with is fallout from the Free Trade Agreement with Canada whereby the Indian company sets up an office in Canada which then negotiates with the American company as a Canadian firm with all of the FTA related breaks but the work is actually carried out in India.

      I'm sure the Canadians view this as pretty ironic given that a similar trick was used by the Americans to destroy the Canadian car industry vis using the two FTAs with Canada & Mexico to sell Mexican built cars to the Canadians as if they were American for the purposes of tarriffs.

      And John Howard has just signed Australia up for an FTA with America - smart move John, we'll be thanking you for that one for the next 50 years. The only hope Australia's got IMHO is to sign a FTA with China & threaten America with mutually assured destruction if they try to play fast & loose with the terms of the contract. Note - first ever correct usage of the word "loose" in the history of slashdot

      --
      What are you listening to? (http://megamanic.blogetery.com/)
    2. Re:Close the tax loophole? by GeorgeMcBay · · Score: 2, Insightful
      What tax loophole is this exactly? I know that the companies avoid certain expenses just due to lower wages offshore, but taxes too?


      Lower wages equates directly into lower taxes. You may not have noticed but the government taxes your wages. The less an employer pays for an employee the less taxes the government gets. Not to mention the secondary issues, such as the fact that overseas workers won't be paying US sales tax on bought goods.

    3. Re:Close the tax loophole? by rhakka · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's an effect, not a loophole. Unless you're saying that we should be taxing foreign workers or something.

    4. Re:Close the tax loophole? by Quikah · · Score: 2, Informative

      Money which a corporation makes overseas is not taxed if it is kept overseas. They basically say they are investing the overseas profits overseas. Without the loophole the company would need to pay the US tax rate on the money less any local taxes paid.

      A WSJ journal article about this is posted here.

      --
      Q.
    5. Re:Close the tax loophole? by Peyna · · Score: 2, Informative

      Basically moving subsidaries and what not to places like the Cayman islands or Bermuda and avoiding paying taxes on the profits.

      decent article on the subject.

      It's not about outsourcing jobs so much as tax sheltering.

      --
      What?
    6. Re:Close the tax loophole? by pavon · · Score: 4, Informative

      Basically, the current tax laws for American companies operating overseas is a mess, and does have loopholes. The way I understand it,

      * Companies do not have to pay US taxes on foriegn operations, until (unless) they bring it back to the US.

      * If you pay taxes in another country and the US you can get deductions on your US taxes to account for this double taxation.

      These two individually are not that bad, but thanks to the complexity of the tax code and fancy book-work a company can take advantage of both simultaneously. Ie they pay taxes only in the foreign country on their foreign operations, but at the same time, they get deductions in their US taxes, even though there is no double taxation. So essentially the US tax payer is paying part of their foreign taxes for them. This is what Kerry means when he says he want to close loop holes that force you to subsidize the outsourcing that is taking your job.

      He plans to simplify the tax code, which as you said would bring in some revenue, and use that to decrease the overall corporate tax rate. It would also illiminate the relative penalty on bringing money back into the country, verses keeping it (and thus investing it) abroad. I can't find the document I read that explained this plan well - both the bullet point, and detail plans currently on the John Kerry site are fairly vague.

    7. Re:Close the tax loophole? by zxcvbpoiu · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And those are not loopholes. You can't double tax companies just because the government wants to spend it. Removing those laws will put American companies at a further disadvantage as foreign companies will not be paying those double taxes. I also fail to see how these tax laws affect where a company has its employees. The money will still reside in which ever country it was earned in. You don't need the majority of your engineering staff in India to keep your Indian proceeds in India. Besides, the thing Kerry ignores is that taxes are not the reason for offshoring. The expense of American labor is the reason. The truth is that an American employee with a $0 income is more expensive than the average engineer in India. When you look at the cost of medicare, social security, health care and everything else laws require employers to pay, American's are very expensive. An American earning $60k costs their employer between $100k to $120k. What Kerry does not want you to realize is that Democrats have so sold out to labor unions for votes/campaign cash, that they have enacted so many laws a regulations that union employees are losing jobs to cheaper countries.

    8. Re:Close the tax loophole? by pavon · · Score: 2, Informative

      And those are not loopholes. You can't double tax companies just because the government wants to spend it.

      Yes they are. Like I said, neither of them are really bad by themselves. If a company only paid the foreign tax that would be fair. If they paid foreign taxes + US taxes - a deduction to offset the double payment, that is fair. But when a company pays only the foreign tax - a US deduction to offset double payment, when there isn't double payment, then that is a unfair tax loophole. It means these outsourced companies have advantages over both domestic and foreign companies who both have to full taxes for the country that they are in.

      I absolutely agree that we shouldn't double tax our companies. So we should get rid of one of these two discounts (and simplify that portion of the code to make in less gamable). IIRC, the plan Kerry offered was to get rid of tax deferments, and make every US company pay the full US taxes minus the foreign taxes. Then outsourced companies would pay the exact same total taxes as US domestic ones. Outsourced US companies would have no more of a tax disadvantage than domestic US companies, when competing with foreign companies. It has the added advantage that there would be no tax penelties for investing money earned abroad back home. Not the best solution (IMHO, we should get rid of corporate tax altogether), but much better than the current situation.

      Besides, the thing Kerry ignores is that taxes are not the reason for offshoring.

      Well, he doesn't really ignore it. He has said repeatedly that his policies will not stop offshoring - just end some government interferences that encourage it. You are right that less expensive labor is the primary reason that work has been moving out of the country. But I don't know that causing some companies to leave by requiring better treatment than they are willing to give is any better or worse than convincing them to stay by giving into all their demands and joining into a race to the bottom. More importantly, I don't know that we will have much of a choice in the long run. I just hope that China's and India's internal markets grow quickly and evenly.

  11. Call Centres by Kenshin · · Score: 2, Funny

    Candidate John Kerry has said he will close the tax loophole that makes it advantageous to outsource call centers.

    Good thing there's only Call Centres in Canada, then. (Spelling loophole?)

    --

    Does it make you happy you're so strange?

  12. Re:why do we care what kerry said? by twiggy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I knew from the post that someone would immediately whine that it mentioned Kerry's stance.. and immediately wanted to post something about it...

    Slashdot is not a TV or radio network. There is no reason for it to give "equal time" or avoid showing bias. It's "news for nerds" - it doesn't claim to be nonpartisan (or partisan).

    The internet is not the same as other "media outlets", and Slashdot has no "responsibility" to be any certain way.

    --
    http://www.babysmasher.com
    http://www.openingbands.com
  13. Thats transitivity for ya by Ars-Fartsica · · Score: 4, Interesting
    The US has two free trade agreements with Canada, so get used to finding out what agreements Canada has with other nations..they will quickly become agreements with the US by transitivity.

    Also please remember that the US has spent the last twenty five years literally ramming free trade down the world's collective throat (admittedly, an effort made on behalf of the financial elite, not workers).

    1. Re:Thats transitivity for ya by cubicledrone · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What, you've got something against the international free market of ideas and products?

      No. There is no free market. There are massive no-cost incentives to fire people and destroy their careers. That's not a free market.

      --
      Business isn't willing to pay for products, innovation and careers, so we get brands, mortgage commercials and layoffs.
    2. Re:Thats transitivity for ya by Brandybuck · · Score: 3, Funny

      Except for the fact that what politicians call "free trade" isn't free at all. These are micromanaged trade agreements running hundreds or thousands of pages long.

      Like "deregulation" and "privatize", the term has been twisted by the politicians to prevent the public from ever wanting it. It's orwellian language redefining in action.

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
  14. Re:Guess this makes Canada... by grub · · Score: 5, Funny


    Be sure you show George where we are on the map. It could be embarassing seeing him saying how great Canada's burritos and Corona are after he conquers Mexico.

    --
    Trolling is a art,
  15. What exactly can be done? by brandonp · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I really fail to see any real solution to this issue being presented. Tax loopholes won't erase the fact that there are qualified workers in a cheaper business environments. All the tax loophole becomes is a Red Herring for the real issue. Let's come up with serious and real solutions to this. A. India has very qualified workers B. They are very will to work and will work for a lower wage C. The end result usually comes out to be similiar to what would be done in the U.S. I'm not sure what could be done, but I know that Tax Loopholes have nothing to do with the real problem of outsourcing. --- Get Firefox!

  16. Re:why do we care what kerry said? by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Normally I'm pretty pro-republican, but I don't see particular story as biased. Kerry has said he will close the tax loophole that essentailly encourages outsourcing. Bush says (see debate #3 transcript) we should get retrained and go to community college.

    It's a fact that outsourcing is a hot issue (for some). It's a fact Kerry has made that statement a number of times that he'll fix it. Will he? Can he? What is he going to fix exactly? I doubt it, but it's a pursuasive (and noteable) statement.

    Now the fact that /. and it's moderators are left leaning can't be denied. This just isn't a good example.

  17. give me a break by asv108 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    "Candidate John Kerry has said he will close the tax loophole that makes it advantageous to outsource call centers."

    First off I'm voting for Kerry, but the idea that new legislation is going curb the tax advantages of outsourcing is ludicrous. So lets say Kerry does pass such a bill, what will happen? Large companies will simple open up offshore subsiaries to skirt the law, similiar to what Haliburton did under the leadership of Dick Cheney, by having a Caymen islands phantom corporation in order to business with nations like Iran.

    1. Re:give me a break by NardofDoom · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The moral of the story is that all of those trade agreements that enjoyed huge bipartisan support in the 80s and 90s were probably not a good idea.

      No, they *could be* good ideas. If they were used to ensure human rights and environmental protections matched what's in the US, then costs would be similar and people in foreign countries would have better lives.

      --
      You have two hands and one brain, so always code twice as much as you think!
  18. Add it to the list of apologies by stilbon · · Score: 5, Funny

    from an old episode of This Hour Has 22 Minutes

    An Apology to Americans
    By Reporter 'Anthony St. George' (Performed by Colin Mochrie)

    Hello. I'm Anthony St. George on location here in Washington.

    On behalf of Canadians everywhere I'd like to offer an apology to the United States of America. We haven't been getting along very well recently and for that, I am truly sorry. I'm sorry we called George Bush a moron. He is a moron, but it wasn't nice of us to point it out. If it's any consolation, the fact that he's a moron shouldn't reflect poorly on the people of America. After all, it's not like you actually elected him.

    I'm sorry about our softwood lumber. Just because we have more trees than you, doesn't give us the right to sell you lumber that's cheaper and better than your own. It would be like if, well, say you had ten times the television audeince we did and you flood our market with great shows, cheaper than we could produce. I know you'd never do that.

    I'm sorry we beat you in Olympic hockey. In our defence I guess our excuse would be that our team was much, much, much, much better than yours. As word of apology, please accept all of our NHL teams which, one by one, are going out of business and moving to your fine country.

    I'm sorry about our waffling on Iraq. I mean, when you're going up against a crazed dictator, you want to have your friends by your side. I realize it took more than two years before you guys pitched in against Hitler, but that was different. Everyone knew he had weapons.

    I'm sorry we burnt down your White House during the War of 1812. I see you've rebuilt it! It's very nice.

    I'm sorry for Alan Thicke, Shania Twain, Celine Dion, Loverboy, that song from Seriff that ends with a really high-pitched long note. Your beer. I know we had nothing to do with your beer, but we feel your pain.

    And finally on behalf of all Canadians, I'm sorry that we're constantly apologizing for things in a passive-aggressive way which is really a thinly veiled criticism. I sincerely hope that you're not upset over this. Because we've seen what you do to countries you get upset with.

    For 22 minutes, I'm Anthony St. George, and I'm sorry.

    1. Re:Add it to the list of apologies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      We're sorry you don't have a sense of humour.

      Regards,
      Canada

  19. Outsourcing to Canada by Bigbutt · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It won't last. As someone else pointed out. Hollywood used Canada for a while until the locals wised up and prices went up.

    The difference is that Canada has a significantly better quality of life than the average Indian. So the Indian company can pay an Indian call center employee 8,000 a year, he'd still have to pay a Canadian call centre employee 30,000 or 40,000 a year. This is vs a call center employee here making 40,000 to 50,000 a year. (All WAG's, recent tech support position advertised on dice.com was for 55 an hour).

    When India starts fining the companies dumping waste into the Ganges, the companies will pass on the costs to the citizens which will then require raises in order to be able to afford the goods these companies sell. When the wages get too high, they'll outsource to China. Then China will start fining the mining companies (chinese dieing in unsafe mines because it's either work the mine or starve) or waste management folks (chinese exposed to toxic waste from computer salvaging) and the cycle starts again.

    I think my salary (currently non-existant) is globally balanced. When you consider all aspects, I was getting paid the same amount, adjusted for living conditions, as the guy in India who got $10,000 and pays .50 for lunch. Once India starts cleaning up, the rates will rise and they'll outsource again.

    --
    Shit better not happen!
  20. Re:History repeating itself by wing03 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    However, soon the manufacturing costs in Japan rose and they found they could serve their customer better and make their cars cheaper if they opened auto plants closer to the customer.

    The result is that majority of Toyotas sold in the U.S. today are built right here by workers who get paid lower than before.

    Same thing might happen in the IT industry.


    Doubt it...

    It cost time and $$$ to ship raw materials to Japan and it cost more time and $$$ to ship the finished product back. Thus it makes perfect sense to put the plant near the customers.

    With IT, your finished product is not as tangible. The cost to ship support or software from a boiler room to North America is the cost of the phone/data lines in between.

  21. Re:Well at least you will be able to understand th by nomadic · · Score: 3, Funny

    You're allowed to smack Texans upside the head. They usually deserve it.

  22. Pot Kettle situation by niall2 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If I hadn't been through all of this election I probably wouldn't have believed my eyes. This report from last February from people in Wisconson finding Caller ID signatures from Canada for the Kerry Election Call Center? Makes you wonder if there will be political loopholes in any laws similar to those for the National No Call list.

    --
    Today is a gift. Save the receipt.
    1. Re:Pot Kettle situation by Politburo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm sorry, but the issue is very different.

      What some people are implying is that Kerry, through his wife, through Heinz, is personally outsourcing American jobs. That's simply a joke.

      People don't talk as if Cheney runs Haliburton. The idea is that Cheney uses his position as VP to benefit Haliburton. The reason he does this is because he still has deferred payment from Haliburton, and has Haliburton stock options. When Haliburton does well, Dick Cheney directly benefits. To put together the dots for you, the idea is that Dick Cheney is using his position as Vice President for personal financial gain.

      If Kerry started awarding 2 billion dollar no-bid contracts to Heinz, or some other similar move that would benefit him or his wife personally, you can bet there would be a stink. To date, there's no evidence of this, circumstantial or otherwise. Try again.

  23. Re:Well at least you will be able to understand th by Camel+Pilot · · Score: 2, Funny

    Why does not someone just come up with a real-time accent and artifact removal filter. For Indians you will need to spread out the syllables while maintaining the pitch. For Canadians you will have to remove the trailing "eh" from sentences.

    I would suppose you could optimize the filter per individual and maybe one of the options on the phone menu is that you can select the dialect you are comfortable with. For example you can select:

    + West Texas drawl (replace all "you" with a you'all so "you do have the power turned on eh?" becomes "ya'all do have the power the turn").

    + New York/Jerseyan insulting snarl (remove all r's from the stream and add a little color. For example "Yo you idiot, you do have the powe tuned on doncha."

  24. Re:why do we care what kerry said? by mark-t · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Yeah... heh... "get retrained"... just like that.

    Remarks like this cause me to think perhaps people who make 6 or 7 figures per year forget that going to school isn't particularly cheap, and that doesn't even consider the dynamics and costs of supporting yourself while taking classes full time just so that one can complete their education in a timely manner. Student loans help matters somewhat, but one has to remember that they are, in the end, just loans... and one has to pay it all back.

  25. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  26. Re:why do we care what kerry said? by TheSHAD0W · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Slashdot is not a TV or radio network. There is no reason for it to give "equal time" or avoid showing bias. It's "news for nerds" - it doesn't claim to be nonpartisan (or partisan).

    Except that it used to be a place to read about really cool stuff, really neat stuff, things on topic for the online community, not stuffed with politicking. And maybe you don't mind Taco's obvious bias, but it gives me agita, and I don't need it. I want my old Slashdot back! Maybe things will be back (or closer) to normal after the election.

  27. Sad how ... by mi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    the supposedly liberal crowd, that would often complain about the rich countries not giving enough aid to the poor ones, quickly rushes to highly illiberal views depriving the poor of ways to build honest wealth through honest work.

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  28. Re:what the article means (after you read it) by takochan · · Score: 2, Informative

    The article only explains half the story. This is actually worse, and I had been expecting it for somtimes.

    This is how Canada is a backdoor to the US:
    You'd think that because Canadians are cheaper (slightly) that they are using Canadians to do Americans jobs.

    Having lived there, I can say that nope, this isn't how it works at all, its worse than that!

    Here is what they are doing: (basically, they are moving the Indians to Canada, to outsource them on US projects, because it is easier to get an Indian to Canada than it is to the US. So Canadians aren't even getting the jobs either, because even Canadians are too expensive!)

    Canada has a very lax foreigner friendly and immigration policy. Especially if companies go waving around money about 'investing in Canada', the Canadian govt. will buy into it, because they (think) that this will create Canadian jobs rather than destroy them.

    Satyam opens his company (I wonder how many of his 120 employees in company in Canada are not Indian). Then bring in Indians/foreigners to do the work less than Canadians will.. (but the office wouldn't have been opened anyways if you couldnt do this, so the Cdn govt doesnt mind that much really).

    Then outsource the Indians in Canada, to US projects. Voila! Timezone and connectivity problems all go away because the cheap Indians are now in Canada and not India!

    Then it gets even better! Unlike the USA, Canada has a very quick and easy naturalization process (takes only a few years), and then the Indians become 'Canadian' and get Canadian passports.

    Then, because of the NAFTA agreement, those Indians can come to America, and take Americans jobs as that is now a T1 Free trade visa, and not an H1B. T1s have no limit, anyone who wants one who is Canadian with a college education in IT can get one and move to the US.

    T1s hadn't been a problem since Canadian and American standard of living were almost the same anyways, but with this scam, the whole safeguard goes out the window.

    So no one in North America really benefits from this, not the Americans, nor Canadian IT people either..its a purely Indian play.

    Its a great plan really, surprised they didn't think of it earlier. Hard to fix it though, if Canada stops the practice, then they can just use Mexico the same way I suppose.

  29. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  30. Re:why do we care what kerry said? by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 2, Informative

    I don't think you can make ANY conclusion at all about their political leanings as a whole.

    If you've been here long enough and have read enough comments and seen enough moderations, I think that you can draw conclusions. I would say that about 50% of Slashdotters lean leftward, 25% lean rightward, and 25% are in the middle. I'm technically in the middle but tend to lean rightward on the issues that are debated the most often and the most furiously.

    Because there is no wrong, there is no right
    And I sleep very well at night
    No shame, no solution, no remorse, no retribution
    Just people selling t-shirts
    Just opportunity to participate in the pathetic little circus
    and winning, winning, winning
    -- Don Henley, "The Garden of Allah"

  31. Re:what the article means (after you read it) by mobets · · Score: 3, Insightful

    maybe we are just expecting to be over paid. Why would Indians in canada get paid less than Canadians? They both have to pay the same for their stuff. Just because you arn't willing to work that cheap doesn't mean someone else shouldn't be able to.
    Personaly, I like having cheap tech support workers because even if they don't know much more, they are still better than talking to a computer. And, they can pass me up to somone who doesn't need a script if the script won't solve my problem.
    Not to mention the the fact that the money these companies are saving will be invested on other things which creates more jobs.

    --

    It was me, I did it, I moved your cheese
  32. Re:Unpopular consideration... by tarunthegreat2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Everything you've said so far is good except for the
    Maybe in 3rd world nations were slave labour is fine

    comment. Software Developers in India (including me) are paid 350 times the prevailing minimum wage in India. They aren't slaving away at all. That's the REAL reason outsourcing is working. Because the people in the 3rd-world companies are NOT being exploited. They're paid astronomical sums by their country's standard, but dirt cheap by American standards, so it works out just fine. This article may help. Eventually our salaries will rise (they've been rising about 6% every year for the past 5 years) and eventually the work will move elsewhere - or it might even move back to USA after y'all make a painful adjustment and decide to work for $30,000 instead of $40,000 At some point, it will no longer be worth the communication, distance and time lag problems to hire 50 Indian workers to do the work of 12 American developers. Yes the work might then be outsourced to the Philipines or China or some place but this is unlikely and I'll tell you why: The reason India is a chosen destination is population. There is just such a LARGE pool of english-speaking univeristy graduates relative to other developing nations. So philipines might take some of the work, but never as much as was shipped to India. China is unlikely, because its standard of living is already higher than India's. This means that Chinese workers are already more expensive than Indian ones (plus in terms of english-speaking people and IT China has some ways to go - by the time China catches up with India in this particular demographic its standard of living also be higher thus meaning that the price differentials between Chinese and American workers ain't too big so no outsourcing). In order for this to truly be a race to the bottom as all of you Slashdot panickers assume you would need another country of India/China's size in terms of population, with a standard of living lower than them and with a large percentage of young, university graduates that can speak the language of the western world. There is no other country. So this is what the future holds - American wages fall a little, Indian wages rise a LOT. It becomes financially unviable to outsource to India so some work comes BACK to the US, some work gets shipped to Sudan or the Philipines or Croatia or whatever and some other work stays in India. And now that India has higher wages, they start buying more developed world products, trade increases, your economy picks up again blah blah. But yes, if you're a software engineer, it'll be hard to find a job for the next 5 years or so - this all hinges on how fast Indian wages rise, and how fast American wages fall. If Americans are willing to work for less, then less jobs will be outsourced. I'm not saying you SHOULD be willing to work for less, I'm just stating the facts.

  33. ORIGINAL POST: Important details, Satyam Chairman by securitas · · Score: 4, Informative


    I'd like to point out that the story as posted edited out the attribution.

    Editors: Please don't remove quotation marks where they are necessary because that effectively results in plagiarism. The words in quotes are not mine. They belong to the reporter.

    Also, the reference to the interview with the Chairman of Satyam - an Indian outsourcer that has set up shop in Toronto - was removed. Knowing that Slashdotters often don't read the source articles, I included that detail as an incentive for people to read what the leader of a large outsourcing company has to say about this politicized business practice.

    Original post follows:

    Metro International newspapers Toronto edition reports that 'more Indian companies are opening back doors into the United States by setting up shop in Canada.' The issue of outsourcing, offshoring and nearshoring has become a hot issue, with the 2004 presidential election less than a week away. Candidate John Kerry has said he will close the tax loophole that makes it advantageous to outsource call centers. The article includes an interview with Ramalinga Raju, chairman of Satyam Computer Services Ltd., India's fourth-largest computer services firm.

  34. OT but what the hell. by killjoe · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Wusthof knives are OK but I have given up on henckels. If you really want great knives I would go for the japanese brands myself. Global (forged only) or masahiro are fantastic.

    If you want German knives the messermeisters are a great value and are as good as wusthofs IMHO.

    If you want the best bang for the buck I'd go with forschner or Tramontina Professional Series. Tramontina are made in Brazil and are an exceptional value for being forged.

    If I was buying something for my mother I'd by the tramontina, for myself I am saving up for a nenox.

    --
    evil is as evil does
  35. Yes and no.. by goldcd · · Score: 4, Informative

    ..what you say is correct, but there are other aspects to consider. A US company competes in a global marketplace, they're competing against products made all over the world. If for example an Indian company makes a piece of software similar to your entirely "made in the USA" product, their costs will have been much lower, they'll be able to sell it for less and nobody will buy your software - you're completely screwed. Outsourcing allows you to lower your costs, which isn't just trying managements evil attempt to fire you. Outsourcing also allows other advantages, you can exist as a small startup company in the US with a core R&D team and a great idea. When you've designed the product you can suddenly have a team of 100 in Bangalore coding like banshees for 6 months to make it a reality - and when you've got your product you can wave them goodbye. Without outsourcing you'd either be trapped as a small company, have taken years to code the same yourself - and miss your window of opportunity, have been bankrupted taking on US contractors or have taken on employees and either kept them on afterwards (bankruptcy) or laid them off. Because of outsourcing you're now a small company, with a great product you're selling around the world, making a tonne of money and paying a lot of tax into the US system. Point I was trying to make is that outsourcing isn't right or wrong, good or bad, it's another tool and if you refuse to accept it exists or use it if available you'll be screwed.

  36. Re:Unpopular consideration... by pipingguy · · Score: 2, Insightful


    wow you've totally missed my point haven't you.

    He's likely (understandably) worried that by the time everything's evened-out he'll be dead and gone. Not earning enough to drive a Porsche is one thing; not being able to afford a $250,000 mortgage or $300/month healthcare is another.

  37. Re:Unpopular consideration... by forgotten_my_nick · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Exactly I think if the cost of living was on par then a lot of developers wouldn't be overly bothered by a pay cut or working for less.

  38. *sigh* by EmagGeek · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ok, first of all, it is not this phantom tax loophole that makes offshoring attractive - and it's not as if this tax "loophole" even exists. It is not a loophole at all. What makes it advantageous for taxes is that the US cannot collect income tax from people who don't live and work in the US. Duh! That's not a loophole, it's just the law. We will never be able to close this loophole because we cannot collect income tax from foreign citizens working in a foreign country.

    Moving on. The factor that really makes offshoring attractive is that, for a call center as an example, the labor and utility costs are so much less. An American might demand $12/hr to work at a call center, which is expensive for someone who just reads a script over the phone all day. On top of that, the company has to pay for real-estate (which is ridiculous in this country right now), insurance (which is also ridiculous thanks to frivolous lawsuits), payroll taxes (FICA, Medicare) which are high because of government fat, high utilities due to high cost of energy in general, and a host of other factors that makes low-income jobs difficult to maintain in the US.

    What makes these things cheaper in a place like India? Well, first of all, a dollar in America goes a long way in India because of the exchange rate and the differentiated standard of living. Something that costs $10 to buy here costs $1 in India, including labor. Second, India itself has a hugely growing economy and infrastructure, and for American businesses to participate in building that growing nation, they have to have a presence there anyway. India has a very nationalist government and they won't allow foreign companies to simply walk in and take money out of the country. India needs call centers for India, too, and those call centers by Indian law must be located in India. Also, Indian law also requires things that are sold in India to have some % of Indian-manufactured content. So, for infrastructure companies to sell their goods, they have to have a presence there as well.

    India's nationalist policies are working well for them because they are a growing nation. There is so much stuff to be done and sold there that it is worthwhile for companies to locate jobs there. Nationalist policies often work for rapidly growing countries because it keeps money in the country. However, once that nation is mature, those companies and the jobs they brought will leave just as quickly as they came. This is why nationalism does not work in a world where it is easy to move resources around, or in a matured nation that is in a state of continuation rather than development.

    This is also why nationalist policies will not solve our outsourcing "problem." There really is no solution because we cannot control what is going on in other nations. The best we can do is do what we've always done - persevere. I've been fortunate enough to keep my job even though I can definitely see my job going to India in the next 24-36 months. I will have to get another one, which is why I am training for it now and not later.

    This really is a sink or swim situation, and the choice lies with each individual. One cannot be dead-set on a specific job at a minimum rate of compensation. If you are flexible, willing to learn a new profession, and willing to relocate, you will be able to find employment. The jobs are out there. The unemployment rate has been falling steadily since the post-9/11 peak, and is lower now than it was for the first 4 years of Clinton's presidency. Historically, the unemployment rate has fallen in between 5 and 7%, which occasional excursions outside that range both above and below. Right now it is 5.4%.

    What we're seeing is a shift away from technology jobs because that period of growth is over. The explosion of the Internet is what gave us the first period of prosperity, and now we're in a period of continuation. Time to find something else to do.

  39. Re:Guess this makes Canada... by AndroidCat · · Score: 3, Funny

    Well, it wouldn't be the first invasion that had "gone south" on him.

    --
    One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  40. Re:Guess this makes Canada... by multipartmixed · · Score: 3, Funny

    > It could be embarassing seeing him saying how great Canada's
    > burritos and Corona are after he conquers Mexico.

    Would that be more or less embarrassing than when Dan Quayle was heading for Latin America and mentioned that he needed to brush up on his Latin?

    --

    Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
  41. Re:what the article means (after you read it) by MKalus · · Score: 2, Informative

    Canada has a very lax foreigner friendly and immigration policy. Especially if companies go waving around money about 'investing in Canada', the Canadian govt. will buy into it, because they (think) that this will create Canadian jobs rather than destroy them.


    What are you smoking? Yes, Canada is friendlier and the way to get a Work Permit is a lot easier than doing this in the US, but "easier" doesn't mean they just roll over.

    I am currently sitting here for almost 2 months waiting for my new Work Permit and the last update I got was that HRDC (who has to approve the job) is still fiddeling around with the paperwork.

    Mind you, I am going to move from Toronto to Edmonton, a place where "talent" if you want to call it that, is a bit more scarce, but the point is that it costs companies money and a lot of time to hire foreigners, and I am not even Indian, I have a German passport.

    Satyam opens his company (I wonder how many of his 120 employees in company in Canada are not Indian). Then bring in Indians/foreigners to do the work less than Canadians will.. (but the office wouldn't have been opened anyways if you couldnt do this, so the Cdn govt doesnt mind that much really).


    The company has to proof for ANY employee they are hiring that is not landed or a citizen of Canada that they couldn't find a person who was. This takes (depending on the market) 4 - 8 weeks and a LOT of paperwork (Who else did they try to hire, how did they advertise the job etc. etc.).

    So even if they have "indian" guys sitting there, those are most likely already landed immigrants or Canadian Citizens, especially Toronto has a large Indian / South East Asian population.

    Then outsource the Indians in Canada, to US projects. Voila! Timezone and connectivity problems all go away because the cheap Indians are now in Canada and not India!


    Not likely, the company would have to proof that every person they bring over from India HAS to be brought into the country because they couldn't find anyone local, and believe me HRDC in Toronto is nasty to deal with, I know, I did a couple of times.

    What is more likely to happen is that they have some people here in Toronto who then delegate the work to the Indian Headoffice but that in and on itself isn't that bad in Canada, because the Canadian Subsidiary gets paid on the contract and pays it's taxes still in Canada.

    Also, people on a Work Permit have to be paid "comparable wages", so you cannot simply hire an indian for 10% of what the Canadian would make AND unlike the US H1B the Work Permit belongs to ME not the Company, if I want to leave I can, I just have to find another company who wants to do the HRDC portion again, and the old company would never even know.

    Then it gets even better! Unlike the USA, Canada has a very quick and easy naturalization process (takes only a few years), and then the Indians become 'Canadian' and get Canadian passports.


    It takes around 2 1/2 years to get your landed papers, you have to apply in your country of Origin or (if you are already in Canada on a temporary permit) in Buffalo, after you have this paper in your hand it takes another 3 years before you can apply for Citizenship.

    The Landed Status, btw, will cost you ~5K CAN, that includes language proficency tests, medical exams and a host of other things. 5K is a lot of dough for a dude in India.

    Then, because of the NAFTA agreement, those Indians can come to America, and take Americans jobs as that is now a T1 Free trade visa, and not an H1B. T1s have no limit, anyone who wants one who is Canadian with a college education in IT can get one and move to the US.


    The T1 ONLY applies to Canadian Citizens, by the time the guy has this he has already been in Canada for at least 5 years, chances are pretty good that by then he has settled and the last thing on his mind is moving to the states.

    So no one in North America really benefits from this, not the Americans, nor Canadian IT people either..its a purely Indian play.


    Geez, tone down your fear a bit, will ya?
    --
    If you want to e-mail me, use my PGP Key.
  42. Re:Roman Empire by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 2, Informative
    Umm, no. The Roman Empire failed because:

    1) Its taxation system was designed to destroy its tax base,

    2) There was this nasty plague,

    3) The Empire had no system for picking Emperors beyond "the guy who wins the Civil War after the last Emperor died". Note though, that they had a working system for a while, and abandoned it when one of the Emperors decided to stop using it, and let his son inherit.

    4) There were these barbarians living beyond the borders who wanted the good stuff like the Romans had.

    Add all those things together, and the WESTERN Empire fell. The Eastern Empire lasted another thousand years, finally falling to this Turkish army that wanted the good stuff like the Romans had.

    --

    "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  43. Sigh. Slashdot libertarian economists. Sheesh. by bstarrfield · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It is a sink or swim situation. However, when the ship suddenly plunges, it's difficult to avoid being sucked in. Your wages, your job, are dependant not just on your abilities and efforts, bu the state of the entire (in this case) American economy. Being a good mechanical engineer on the Titanic probably didn't help so much when the ship hit the iceberg.

    As many people have said on Slashdot, and on more academic boards, the entire point of outsourcing is to lower labor costs. That's it. Nothing else. Nothing more. A capitalist system exists primarily to generate a return to those who own the capital. Cutting labor costs increases the capitalists returns. No, I'm not speaking from any Marxist point of view here. Read Adam Smith.

    India's policies work do to the low pay of their workers. Nothing more. Not a policy choice, but a cheap labor force due to a massive and desparate population. So, do you really think American workers can compete against about two billion Indian and Chinese workers? The only way we can do that is to have our own wages plunge to a level that would be difficult for most American's to imagine.

    As wages fall for workers facing international competition, wages fall in other fields. Think of this: if the automobile factory closes the next town over, business probably won't be that good. When we combine outsourcing with a taxation system that encourages the concentration of wealth, we can foresee serious structural problems in the American economy. I've tried to think of a simple way to explain this - maybe the greatest evidence is the fact that American real wages have been flat for thirty years, despite incredible increases in productivity.

    Jobs are out there - but job quality, measured in wages and in hours, is falling. If your job is outsourced, its unlikely - and against economic theory - that you'll be able to find an equivalent job in the same field and roughly the same locale for the same wage. And as the Democrat's have been happily pointing out, the new jobs being created pay far lower than the ones lost.

    Other employers understand outsourcing, and they'll be happy to give you a lower offer. Of course, your bank doesn't care about outsourcing and your mortgage stays the same. So does your health insurance, children's tuition, etc. So your in serious trouble.

    I have a question for all of our fun Libertarian economists on /. If immigration to the US averages about 200,000 per month, and the Administration claims that 1.7 million jobs were created in the last four years, how many new jobs were available for the native population? Guys, unemployment statistics are easily manipulated. I'd recommend you visit the Bureau of Labor Statistics site and, well, read between the lines. Alos, please consider that unemployment statistics only count those who are receiving unemployment benefits. Once you've exhausted your six months, you're no longer unemployed, you become a "discouraged worker." Off the roles, out of thought. Same thing occurs if you take a low wage job - say go from being a chip designer to a chif fryer. Still counts as a job.

    I have to say this: The government of the United States exists to protect the welfare of the American people, not to protect the welfare of the wealthiest American's bank accounts. And the two are not one and the same.

    --
    /* Dang, I can't type that well. */
  44. It's easy to say that if you are not unemployed by mandrake*rpgdx · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Nor any finincial responsibilities other than yourself. I spent two years between "real jobs" and had to work two or three minumum wage jobs just to make ends meet and help keep my child and my wife fed and in shelter. It's not laziness- it's a staggering economy. Right now I'm back to work in IT, doing what I love (software design). But it was much harder to find work now than it was the last time I was out of work (right out of college, 5 years ago). The main problem I had looking for IT work is that I was over-qualified (I'm working aan entry level job right now. I had to convince my current employers that yes, I wanted to do this even though it was lower than my level of experience because finding a job as a lead programmer was taking way too long.) Bigger and better things my ass. It's only bigger and better if it's still ours to achieve. If the jobs are over seas than there is nothing bigger or better.

  45. Re:Unpopular consideration... by RalphSlate · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So this is what the future holds - American wages fall a little, Indian wages rise a LOT.

    This would be fine if it was true for all workers (although people would call it deflation and it would probably be bad for other reasons). The problem is that there are still many industries -- and therefore goods and services -- which are priced as high as ever.

    Healthcare is an ideal example. If most of the people in the US could afford to pay their medical bills, everything would be fine. But as you send more jobs overseas and replace them with wages that are minimal, now many people can't afford health care.

    Housing is another one. Same situation, a job for an unskilled worker 80 years ago let that worker afford a modest house. Now that worker is on government assistance, living in subsidized housing.

    The IT industry might be just a small chunk of the US economy, but outsourcing, which has been going on for years, is raising the standard of living for some US citizens while lowering it for many others. Taken to the extreme, all jobs should be outsourced, and then no one would be left to buy any goods or services, and no one would be left to innovate either (because innovation comes from the ground up). That isn't good for this country in the long run.

  46. Re:Unpopular consideration... by glsunder · · Score: 2, Informative

    First, I agree that eventually things will even out. And, hopefully, interconnected economies and cultures will do wonders for peace. However, the cost of outsourcing to some americans is greater than you might think and it should be no surprise many are upset. $40K per year isn't a fortune over here and if I only made $30K, I'd qualify for multiple types of government assistance.

    What does it cost per month for rent? What is the monthly food budget for a family of 5?

    Obviously, in the US rent (or mortgage) will vary depending on where a person lives, but for most middle class people, it'll be between $500 to $1500 per month. Food will be at least $500/month for a family. Tack on at least another $500 in other expenses such as utilities and we're at a $1500 to $2500 per month, or $18K to $30K per year without even considering clothing or medical costs. At a minimum, tack on another $5K/yr. We're now at $23K/yr to $35K/yr. The poverty line for a family of 5 in the US is $22K/yr, so I'm not talking about an extremely rich lifestyle here. We haven't even touched discretionary income or the cost of a car.

    This is why many americans are so upset. Its not that they're tired of being extremely rich, its that there's a lot of people who are already having a hard time getting by and losing even $10K per year makes a big difference. While most americans might be richer than most people in India, most are no where as rich as they appear on TV.

  47. Re:Guess this makes Canada... by Zcipher · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Would that be more or less embarrassing than when Dan Quayle was heading for Latin America and mentioned that he needed to brush up on his Latin?

    Amusingly, even had he actually said it, it wouldn't actually be that bad of an idea. When we lived in Tucson (not far from the Mexican border), my father was actually the "go-to" guy for children who only spoke spainish when none of the doctors who actually spoke spainish were around.

    He doesn't speak spainish, but he'd had years of Latin; however, he discovered that if you speak latin with a Mexican accent, even most kids can guess what you're trying to say, and by treating their spainish as badly accented Latin, he could fumble through what they were trying to say.

    I can verify from my own experience that the same applies to Italian ^_^

  48. Re:Guess this makes Canada... by mdfst13 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Also French (as verified by a girl who transferred to my high school which had French classes from a school which had Latin classes), Portuguese, and Romanian. Learning Latin makes it very easy to learn the other five Romance (Latin-based) languages.

    It can also improve one's English, since English has many words that derive from Latin.

  49. Politics is "Stuff that Matters". Deal with it. by StevenMaurer · · Score: 2, Insightful
    (Slashdot)... used to be a place to read about ... things on topic for the online community, not stuffed with politicking.

    Hmmm. Don't like after-the-purchase EULAs the UCITA enforces interfering with your ability to examine code? Worried about the Patriot act leading you to be investigated because of your opinions or curiosity? (note: happened to friend of mine). Concerned with Microsoft OS security flaws in eVoting? Dislike the broken U.S. patent system? Don't like the DMCA forbidding what you can and cannot release? Want a good anti-spam law, or at least the existing laws to be enforced (or not?) Here's a clue: these are all LAWS. LAWS are approved by various Representatives we colloquilly call POLITICIANS. Selecting the most acceptable Politicians is called Politics.

    Maybe it was true 20 years ago that Nerd-type news could safely ignore politics. But not today. Why? Because we nerds collectively create a lot of money, and where money is involved, there will be a lot of businessmen pushing and shoving, power plays, and even less savory things that require our attention, unless we want to be steamrolled.

    Oh, but you are not really upset about Politics per se. It's really that Slashdot allows people of any opinion to post. In this very discussion, I've read several Libertarian viewpoints, some Democratic, some Republican, a number of foreigners, and one that might be considered too socialist to be Green. This obviously disturbs you. Like most US conservatives these days, you are obviously more comfortable with the "Shut up Shut up Shut up Cut His Mike" style of GOP cable news in the U.S., so anything that doesn't censor opinions you disagree with must be, perforce, "Bias". You want validation, dammit!

    In truth, you're right: Taco is "biased". He's given a substantial media platform to third party candidates far disproportionate to their ability to ever get them implemented. He seems positively enamored with Libertarians. That's ok. I'm not whining. I like having my views challenged. Enjoying intellectual discourse is part of being a "Nerd".

  50. Tax loophole? by Richthofen80 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Candidate John Kerry has said he will close the tax loophole that makes it advantageous to outsource call centers.

    So Kerry is going to close that pesky tax loophole that allows indian and other workers to get paid a fraction of what US workers make?

    The reason outsourcing is profitable is because workers are willing to work for a lower wage outside the U.S. That's not a tax loophole.

    --
    Reason, free market capitalism, and individualism