Slashdot Mirror


IBM, Other Multinationals "Detaching" From the US

theodp writes "If you're brilliant, work really hard, and earn a world-class doctorate from a US university, IBM has a job for you at one of its US research sites — as a 'complementary worker' (as this 1996 piece defined the then-emerging term). But be prepared to ship out to India or China after you've soaked up knowledge for 13 months as a 'long-term supplemental worker.' Newsweek sketches some of the bigger picture, reporting that IBM, HP, Accenture, and others are finding it profitable to detach from the United States (even patenting the process). 'IBM is one of the multinationals that propelled America to the apex of its power, and it is now emblematic of the process of creative destruction pushing America to a new, less dominant, and less comfortable position.'"

30 of 812 comments (clear)

  1. And the solution...? by XanC · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Instead of blaming them for leaving, why don't we stop chasing them away?

    1. Re:And the solution...? by bistromath007 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because the stuff that's "chasing them away" is the same stuff that still nominally keeps the American people from being totally subjugated and destitute like the Chinese and Indians are. A corporation has one goal, by law: make money for the shareholders. Once one has grown so large that the vast majority of its competitors are insignificant, the best way for it to do that is to rape the worker and the consumer as hard is it can. Companies aren't going to stop leaving the US until we are so broken by their flight that we are forced to become fascist. We are doomed to this fate. There is nothing we can do about it anymore. But it still bothers me that you're cheering it on with your suggestion that the whole thing is the fault of interference with the free market.

    2. Re:And the solution...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Fucking idiot! This has been happening for the last decade, before Obama even came into the picture. The problem is greedy short term investors who drive companies to short term profits over long term profitability and quality. That's what unregulated capitalism does it drives towards the lowest common denominator - fastest profit with the highest cost at the lowest possible quality until a company implodes and can be sold off piece meal in order to put even more profits in the hands of the investors.

    3. Re:And the solution...? by JWman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ummm.... what about the second highest corporate tax rate in the world ? It sits at about 39%. I think that just might have something to do with wanting to leave.

      Corporate taxes are a joke. They just get passed on to the consumer anyway, and they make businesses less competitive internationally. But it is politically rewarding to go after the big evil corporations and for them to pay their way.

      Really, and end to corporate taxes is a big reason why I strongly support the FairTax . It would no longer hide the taxes we pay, and special interests would not be able to carve out exceptions for themselves life they do all the time now.

    4. Re:And the solution...? by LaskoVortex · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You have to remember the higher ups are responsible for a lot and it's a risky job.

      Where did this myth come from that you get to be a higher up if you can just take the risk? 99% are "higher ups" because of birth right. The other 1% are held out there as tokens of the philosophy "if only you work hard enough for us higher-ups, you can make it too".

      Ask any poor guy with an inkling of sense and he'll gladly accept this "big bad risk" you speak of to make a truckload of money. I'd do it. Where is my executive position at Goldman Sachs?

      Nope. They aren't handing those positions out to people just because they want to take risks. You need to *KNOW* somebody, or better yet, be related to somebody. Otherwise, they could just hit any casino in Vegas to fill their empty executive positions.

      I'm not saying you can't make it in capitalist America if you try hard enough, but it sure does help if you choose your parents wisely. And the willingness to accept risk is not the reason people get to be higher ups.

      --
      Just callin' it like I see it.
    5. Re:And the solution...? by Nimey · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Honestly, it will take a /long time/. I've known conservatives to pull "but Clinton!" even in the final year of Bush's term. It's about equally retarded no matter which side is doing it... though I'm still pissed that Bush got away with what he did.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    6. Re:And the solution...? by node+3 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Instead of blaming them for leaving, why don't we stop chasing them away?

      How about instead of letting them run off, we impose heavy import tariffs that negate (and then some) any savings? That's what other countries to to keep jobs and wealth in their nation (and it's what we used to do until Ronald Reagan came along).

      This is the fundamental flaw with "free market" capitalism, and this worshipping at the altar of absolute individual (as if a corporation is a human, deserving of human rights!) freedom. It worked for a short while, because there was a lot of room for domestic growth. But once that ran out, those monsters that we unleashed which served us well now must go on and find growth that they can no longer find here.

      20 years ago, the Conservative mantra was "buy 'made in America'", now it's "outsource, baby. outsource".

      The Democrats may not be a whole lot better on this, but at least they *are* better, and one of Obama's promises was to punish companies which move jobs overseas. Hopefully we can get the healthcare issue taken care of so we can move onto this. Although, looking at how the Republicans have gotten people to take up arms in protest of giving them healthcare, I don't think they'll have any problem convincing the peanut gallery that keeping jobs in America means slave labor camps or some such nonsense.

    7. Re:And the solution...? by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Corporate taxes are a joke. They just get passed on to the consumer anyway, and they make businesses less competitive internationally. But it is politically rewarding to go after the big evil corporations and for them to pay their way.

      Bullshit.

      Are you telling me it's taxes are just enough that Sony has to â299 for the PS3 in the EU and $299 in the US and that it has nothing to do with the euro being worth more therefore allowing them to make a bigger profit for no additional work?

      Or why MS may be raising the price of the of the 360 arcade in the UK depsite the fact manufactuer costs are probably lower as is inflation? I'm sure it has nothing to do with the increase on the pound over the dollar and therefore a small rise means a larger rise in profits. http://www.edge-online.com/news/xbox-360-arcade-getting-a-price-increase

      The fact is nothing will ever be good enough for corporations as long as it's cheaper elsewhere. Even if they paid no tax in the US, if the over all cost was cheaper in India they'd go there.

      What they ought to do is allow companies to go where ever they want but the directors have to live where the majority of their employees live.

    8. Re:And the solution...? by canuck57 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Fucking idiot! This has been happening for the last decade, before Obama even came into the picture. The problem is greedy short term investors who drive companies to short term profits over long term profitability and quality. That's what unregulated capitalism does it drives towards the lowest common denominator - fastest profit with the highest cost at the lowest possible quality until a company implodes and can be sold off piece meal in order to put even more profits in the hands of the investors.

      I differ, to do business in the US is now too legally complex and too tax expensive. INS is too meddlesome, keeping the good people out... why tolerate it any more? Just like my investments, most of my trades on the NYSE are in companies with a healthy offshore content as with even more liberalism and associate loss of freedoms and more increases in taxation promised there is no way US is going to lead a recovery.

      Now if you believe the recession/depression is over, go ahead, the evidence says not with 550,000 job loss in a traditionally good month of July says different.

      Americans can compete, but the environment of more bigger expensive dominating government is a load too big to do it. Get the moneys off the workers backs, and recovery will occur. That includes making corporate welfare to banks and GM a federal criminal offense as it should be. Nothing in the constitution says people coast to coast should be subsidizing banks and corporations.

      Get the parasites and corruption out of the system and prosperity will return.

    9. Re:And the solution...? by FooAtWFU · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The idea that "import taxes will fix everything" is bogus magical thinking, because "jobs" aren't what makes a country rich. Wealth, ultimately, is something that you have (or possibly something that you experience) and the US imports a lot of Things from overseas and there ends up being more stuff for everyone. Forcing Americans to pay top dollar (or pay penalties) for American labor and American factories for their shampoo and their cars and their Ikea furniture does not mean that people in America will end up with more cars and shampoo and Ikea furniture.

      Economic studies have shown that your typical $50k/yr manufacturing job "saved" by tariffs costs the rest of the economy over $100,000-$200,000/yr. That's no way to make your country wealthy. And in the intermediate-to-long run it probably won't mean half as many jobs as it means "robots".

      And in the case of IBM employees, don't try to sell me baloney that says they're being "exploited" like a sweatshop. Mmf.

      --
      The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
  2. M*U*L*T*I*N*A*T*I*O*N*A*L*S by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They are multinational corporations... what kind of national loyalty are we expecting from them?
    They behave exactly as legislation allows them to behave. If you don't like it, change the legislation.

    1. Re:M*U*L*T*I*N*A*T*I*O*N*A*L*S by __aarzwb9394 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Attempt to change the legislation and be called an America-hating Hitler-Nazi-Communist-Socialist-Terrorist-Muslim-Paedophile.

  3. Corporations are Greedy by Nerdfest · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Large corporations are not good citizens and care little about the welfare of the nations that created them. I've heard them described as sociopathic is nature, which is probably quite an accurate description. They rarely have any long term vision in most cases and only seem to look a quarter or two ahead to make investors happy. Limiting their greed just slightly compared to their competitors might earn some good will in the future, but even that seems to be beyond most corporations.

  4. Its the law of the jungle by Tokolosh · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The Egyptians complained about the English "stealing" their cotton spinning and weaving business. The English complained about the Yankee New Englanders, who complained about the Southerners, who complained about the Mexicans, who complained about the Malaysians who are complaining about the Chinese and Indians.

    When I say "complained", I mean passed laws and regulations, imposed sanctions, taxes and duties, fought wars, battled smuggling, and whined.

    In the long run, the laws of econonics ALWAYS win. The US should fix the causes, not the symptoms.

    --
    Prove anything by multiplying Huge Number times Tiny Number
    1. Re:Its the law of the jungle by demachina · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "The US should fix the causes, not the symptoms."

      I'm pretty sure that entails:

      - Reducing the wages of most workers to the vicinity of a dollar an hour, maybe $10 an hour if you are highly educated and skilled, and maybe get work weeks up to around 70 hours with no vacations and no overtime pay.
      - Eliminate all taxes on corporations and reduce taxes on the wealthy below 15% which is where it already is on capital gains and billionaire hedge fund managers. They also don't want to pay any payroll taxes or health insurance. Taxing workers making a subsistence wage in to the ground is still OK as long as they don't pay any of it.
      - They want their taxes eliminated but they still want the government and tax payers to give them billions of dollars in government contracts, bail outs, low interest loans, free money from the Fed, subsidies, etc.
      - They want schools that drill their workers intensively for about 16 years in math, science, computers and obedience. Don't bother with arts, independent thinking or creativity... kind of like "No Child Left Behind" on steroids.
      - They would probably favor a totalitarian regime as long as its pro multinational, basically Fascist leaning as long as the party is their friend and makes them lots of money. Two ideal examples of perfect governments for multinationals are the new China and 1930's Germany. And yes IBM did love the Nazi's in the 1930's too. They want their workers thoroughly cowed, subservient, afraid and most definitely not organized.

      The best fix for these American idiot CEO's, out to make a quick bug with no regard to long term consequences, is to strip them of their citizenship, and deport to them to their new corporate headquarters in China and India. I think once they get to live in China full time, with no ticket home to the U.S., and get to endure the repression, censorship, corruption like a real Chinese citizen, they will change their tune. They will especially realize their mistake when they get on the wrong side of a party boss or a company owned by powerful party members. Right now China is nice to them and is kissing their asses while they turn over all their capital, jobs, IP and market access. Chances are once they have all those and have their own version of IBM, owned by powerful party bosses, like Lenovo, they will completely destroy IBM and every other western corporation who sold their long term survival down the river for a few years of cheap labor, illusory access to China's markets and short term profit.

      --
      @de_machina
    2. Re:Its the law of the jungle by demachina · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "my Chinese friends have never thought it's as bad as you seem to believe"

      Most people living in Fascist states don't mind them until they fall on them like a ton of bricks, and at that point you aren't likely to be chit chatting with them. Fascist states are usually very good at producing jobs and economic progress so as long as you aren't on the wrong side of the party most people are fine with them. Most people don't care if they are free as long as they are making a good living, I do... Most Germans loved the Nazi's in the 30's using the same rationale.

      You couldn't pay me enough to live in China. As flawed as the U.S. is, at least its not a Fascist police state yet.

      "if our workforce is capable then they'll be hired for those sorts of jobs instead."

      Not by CEO's looking for the cheapest labor they can get that can more or less do the work. They are looking to maximize their bottom lines to make good numbers for quarters, and one of the easiest ways to do that is to slash labor expenses. The quality of the work may suffer some, but you can throw more bodies at things so the cheap labor market always wins with bean counters. With the cost of living in Western Europe and the U.S. workers there simply can't compete until places like China stop manipulating their currency and their cost of living achieves parity with the West.

      Tariffs and trade barriers have been used by countries for centuries to compensate for the fact that other countries have lower cost of living and cheaper labor. It took some rocket scientist free traders in the U.S. to completely dismantle them, while all the countries they are competing against still have them in spades. Markets in Japan, China, Korea and India are still not free, they erect all kinds of barriers to prevent Western corporations from competing on a level field there. The U.S. is practicing unilateral economic disarmament and our economy is going down in flames as a result. I might be OK with free trade if every country we compete with was as free as we are, they aren't.

      --
      @de_machina
  5. Solution is You and Me by sanman2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The fact is that Obama is a redistributionist who claims that jobs are owed and not earned. Sorry, but that kind of attitude is what's driving employers away from the USA. You wish you had a girlfriend/boyfriend? Then make yourself appealing, so that someone will want to hook up with you. Don't go talking about how having a significant other is your inalienable right, somehow owed to you by society or other unspecified parties. You wish you had a job? Then make yourself appealing and more competent, so that someone will want to hire you. Don't go talking about how somebody else is "stealing" "your" job, as if a job is somehow owed to you, regardless of how incompetent you are.

    Obama is consistently talking about "American jobs" as if the jobs are rightfully American. His political stance is well known to be re-distributionist. Start earning, and stop whining for a handout.

    1. Re:Solution is You and Me by phantomfive · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is actually the 'old style' socialism you are complaining about. State of the art socialism is about empowering individuals and helping them become productive members of society, wherever you can.

      Denmark has a program called Flexicurity which is a popular example of this. Under that system, once you lose your job, you can get unemployment benefits as long as you are actively looking for another job. Or, if you prefer, you can go back to school, get some new skills, during which time the government will also help you out. This has worked out really well for the Danes: it allows companies to easily fire people they don't need, and allows people who are out of a job to easily find another one (or retrain for another one). It is a flexible, secure workforce.

      It isn't always a matter of whether it is 'earned' or 'owed.' Sometimes we can change things to make the path to productivity as easy as possible for our citizens. If we can help them out, why not?

      --
      Qxe4
    2. Re:Solution is You and Me by ucblockhead · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So you are saying that jobs are fleeing from the US to China because the US is becoming "redistributionist"?

      You might want to investigate the political and economic system of China before you hold them up as an alternative to Obama's "socialism".

      What is driving "offshoring" is not taxes, it's pure free-market forces. Labor is more expensive here than it is there, so companies attempt to cut costs by moving the labor there. Companies don't increase presence in China because the US raises taxes 5%. They move to China because they can hire a college educated engineer there for $15k a year.

      --
      The cake is a pie
    3. Re:Solution is You and Me by east+coast · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And how are we going to develop a more competent populace when we keep cutting funding for public education?

      Actually the amount we're spending per student is going up. So the real question is how are we going to create a more competent populace when all we do is keep throwing money at the problem?

      --
      Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
    4. Re:Solution is You and Me by demachina · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "The fact is that Obama is a redistributionist who claims that jobs are owed and not earned."

      The fact is some of America's greatest prosperity was during the 50's and 60's. Tax rates for the rich ran in the 70-90% range. That was when America was as redistributionist as it could get and America did great. So your Fox News/CNBC/Wall Street Journal propaganda rings hollow. I love it how they screen "class warfare" now that the Democrats are back in charge. They conveniently gloss over there has been class warfare for the last 30 years, but it was the rich waging it and they won, big time. They only use the term "class warfare" when the middle class is trying to claw some of it back.

      The progressive tax system started getting dismantled under Reagan and George W. finished the job. The more it was dismantled the sicker America got. For example billionaire hedge fund managers now get taxed at 15%, working people its closer to 40%. By the time W. was finished America was actually redistributionist again, except it was redistributing all the wealth to the top 1%. Income inequality now is the worst its been since the roaring 20's which is is coincidentally the last time we had a crash like the current one.

      So your claim America is "redistributionist" and that this is the problem is completely and utterly false.

      It simply isn't healthy to have all the wealth concentrated in the hands of a small number of people. You need affluent, happy workers who buy things to have a balanced economy. Rich people don't buy stuff(other than yachts and mansions). Americans have continued on the buying binge been for the 30 years even though their wages are stagnant, but its mostly been through massive debt accumulation and now the party is over. You will see how much it really sucks to have 1% rich and 99% broke now that the housing bubble has burst.

      --
      @de_machina
  6. achievable? by speedtux · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Because the stuff that's "chasing them away" is the same stuff that still nominally keeps the American people from being totally subjugated and destitute like the Chinese and Indians are.

    What makes you think that's achievable? Americans are competing with Chinese and Indians. What possible reason would there be for anybody to pay more to an American worker than to a Chinese or Indian worker?

    Companies aren't going to stop leaving the US until we are so broken by their flight that we are forced to become fascist.

    Companies don't care about fascism. We just need to become cheaper, or we need to help Chinese and Indians become rich.

    1. Re:achievable? by jonadab · · Score: 4, Insightful

      > What possible reason would there be for anybody to pay more
      > to an American worker than to a Chinese or Indian worker?

      In terms of the manufacturing sector, if they can make the same stuff, then there's really no such motive, ultimately.

      Well, to a small extent there is, to cover things like shipping costs (it's slightly better to produce widgets near to where they're going to be sold) and a bit of inertia (relocating a plant costs money, so it's worth a bit more to hire workers where the plant is as opposed to somewhere else, at least in the short term). But these factors only cover a relatively small wage differential.

      Why do you think the US economy has been, for half a century or so, gradually moving away from most kinds of manufacturing?

      Some kinds of services can be outsourced to the third world nearly as easily as manufacturing, but others really can't, or at least not to the same effect. Advertising, for example, needs to be handled by people who know the target market and culture. Design work requires a certain level of education, so even if you hire your engineers in India or China, they're still going to make a good deal more than the poverty-stricken masses you could hire to run manufacturing lines. (In fact, for a lot of that stuff you'd mostly be hiring the kind of people who could probably get H1B visas and work in the US if they were so inclined. That's going to drive wage expectations in a certain direction.) Medical professionals have to be hired in the places where people spend a lot of money on medical care, and the US is fairly high on the list there. And so on.

      > Companies don't care about fascism.

      Actually, they kind of do. On the whole, they're not generally real happy about it, although they prefer it to populism (hello, Latin America) or outright communism (Eastern Europe, I'm looking at you).

      > We just need to become cheaper,

      The market is sorting that out.

      Granted, it would be sorted out faster if the government would stop trying to delay the inevitable (particularly, the shift away from a manufacturing-based economy). I mean, come on, do you really WANT to work in a factory? Let it go, already. There are more worthwhile (and more profitable) things you could be doing with your time.

      > or we need to help Chinese and Indians become rich.

      Define "become rich".

      Because, if you mean "become rich compared to where they were a few decades ago", that's already happened, and continues to happen. The per capita standard of living in China today is much higher than in China fifty years ago, and the same is true in India.

      Of course, it's true in the US as well: fifty years ago, the average US household had one car, one radio, one record player, one rotary phone, no camera, no computer, no shelf full of movies, very few electric kitchen appliances, and only about a 50/50 chance of having a television. Today the average household has slightly more than one car per person over age 15, 2-3 radios per person, multiple CD players, multiple cellphones, several cameras, internet access, a shelf full of DVDs, a counter (or cupboard) full of kitchen appliances, cable and/or satellite television, and a bunch of other junk we don't actually need.

      (It is at this point not difficult to imagine our society reaching the point where attempting to maintain a household at the standard of living that was average in the fifties might put you in danger of having your children taken away by child services. Make it a hundred years instead of fifty and we're probably there now: the lack of indoor plumbing would just about do it, quite aside from everything else.)

      So if you mean "help Chinese and Indians become rich(er) relative to Americans", then that's a different thing. But I don't see how that would create a "reason ... for anybody to pay more to an American worker than to a Chinese or Indian worker". Quite the reverse, in fact.

      And, of course, "richer" in th

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
  7. Isn't the real fix... by Xenious · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Isn't the real fix that we improve the countries they are outsourcing to until the economy there demands the same as US salaries? At that point geography becomes the benefit instead of dollars and they want to hire the guy closer to "home."

    --
    -Xen
  8. Re:Who's chasing them? by ClosedSource · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Actually corporations owe the public a lot.

    Incorporation's primary purpose is to shield those who make the profit from the consequences of their company's actions. If this legal shield is ever removed we can start talking about everybody being on their own but it's absurd under current law.

  9. Time to detach from china and india by Eravnrekaree · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I find the fact that corporations such as this, especially in a time of economic hardship, are basically harming american workers and showing such contempt for the USA, to be greatly offensive and angers me to no end. i think its time that we detach from china and india which has basically decimated Americas economy and who have stolen our jobs. I think its clearly time that we need to stop allowing these companies to abuse the USA looking at it as only a market to sell their overpriced chinese crap, and start creating jobs here again. Globalisation is such a big scam its ridiculous, its destroying this countyr and allows these greedy companies to basically exploit slave labor in china. The US should and can, and must for its survival, implement a tariff on imports of cars, textiles, furniture, IT services, customer service calls to India and China, etc, and so on. When we have 15% unemployment in reality and people struggling to find work the notion of any company moving jobs somewhere else really should cause a revolt from americans and demands to implement tariffs. Its time to get past this irrational hysteria about tariffs. Tariffs are good and can help this countries economy rebound. There is nothing wrong with it since it simply allows americans to make products for other americans. Think about it, why cant the chinese make things for other chinese, and americans make things for other americans. it would be better for the chinese of the products that chinese workers stayed in china to benefit to the people there. It would be better for americans to create more jobs in the US making products for use by americans. The only people that globalisation benefits is the wealthy rich elite corporations who important products made by employees in slave labor camps in china making a few cents an hour, living in filthy dormitories, who are treated in the most inhumane way, beaten, and even not allowed to use the restroom, with litany of human rights abuses, the products these slaves make are then sold off at a 100% markup in the US and the wealthy elite take the profit. Both the american and the chinese worker are the losers. Globalisation is what has allowed as well corporations to basically dictate to countries basically how they will treat workers and the environment and rewards countries which allow their environment and workers to be ruthlessly exploited by massive global corporations. This is a system where massive global corporations get their way and make the laws through making countries compete against each other to see who can allow their employees to be treated in the most inhumane way. Through the global consolidation and globalisation the corporations are able to control markets resources, jobs, and so on in many different countries and operate as sort of transnational governments. Through this we are seeing a new world order emerge where the governments of countries are simply puppets of a powerful fascist global corporate order who controls wealth, resources, jobs, markets, capital, etc.

    If we value our freedom, we need to implement tariffs which would give our own worker welfare laws, our own democratic state, some force and allow us to implement unions without the corporations threatening to move jobs to other countries. If you want to be treated like a decently like a human being, to have a good life and to be paid decently for decent work, we desperately need to implement broader democratic unions which allow employees a democratic vioce where they can act as a safeguard against mistreatment and slave wages. Unions are essential to our economic recovery and for stopping the destruction of the middle class. The unions built the middle class in the USA and ironically created a middle class that had the spending power which made companies like IBM so successful. Unions are essential for workers to have decent wage since it more often than not is the tendancy of corporations to pay workers as little as they can, leading to a vast impoverished state in the economy. Its just shocking and disgusting tha

  10. Re:Who's chasing them? by bitrex · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As if US corporations ever actually pay anywhere near what the rates actually are - any corporation can find innumerable tax loopholes while setting up offshore holding companies to cut the effective rate down to nearly nothing. Goldman Sachs paid an effective 1% tax rate in 2008, many US corporations manage to get an effective rate of 0% and pay no taxes at all. I'm all for reducing corporate tax rates, if the loopholes are closed so that the rates set down have some actual fiscal meaning.

  11. Re:The big problem is our immigration system by ClosedSource · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think this idea of a lack of engineers with "valuable and unusual skills" in the US is more myth than reality.

    The primary value that the H-1B program has for companies is economic. If you convert these workers to citizens, you'll have to pay them competitive wages and they'll be free to change jobs. Not much economic value there.

    It's funny how people complain that illegal immigrants are cutting to the front of the immigration line but there's always a place for athletes, actors, and celebrities to go to the front. Of course, there really isn't a line anyway.

  12. Re:Isn't Chinese Law by jonpublic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't blame the consumer. I blame the people who wrote the trade laws that allow for slave labor to have equal playing field. Those trade laws completely destroy the fundamental American principle of freedom.

    I blame the trade laws which basically guarantee that if you build a product in a responsible manner, it's not going to succeed, because the people who ignore environmental and safety standards can build it cheaper.

  13. Re:You get what you pay for. by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Laws that protect us from this kind of behavior add costs that push companies to these countries.

    And here we find the weakness in capitalism — the tyranny of the masses, who want cheaper and cheaper DVD players and disposable razors, and don't care how many twelve year olds have to work in sweatshops to deliver them. (Me too. I'm trying to be better, but my habits are very bad. Like most of us.)

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"