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.'"

49 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 Trepidity · · Score: 4, Informative

      You might want to look at the effective corporate tax rate, since no actual corporations pay 39% with our loophole-riddled tax code of exceptions, credits, and deductions. The actual rate they pay is about 22%, the 2nd-lowest in the developed world (after Ireland).

    5. 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.
    6. 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
    7. 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.

    8. 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.

    9. Re:And the solution...? by Trepidity · · Score: 5, Interesting

      That would be the sensible solution, I agree. But I suspect it in no way would benefit the corporations who whine about corporate tax: they want it to have a high headline rate (so they can whine) but lots of hidden deductions (so they don't have to pay it). In particular, if you were to pick any exception as a place to start eliminating loopholes, you'd immediately run into an army of lobbyists who care very much about that particular exception. They're all there for a reason, after all, and usually the reason is that someone with deep pockets really wanted that loophole.

    10. Re:And the solution...? by blind+biker · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The truth is, nowadays more than ever, getting a top management position is due to effectively manipulating other people - and who is more effective at manipulating than corporate psychopaths, especially in the chaotic world of publicly traded corporations?

      This is why

      1) executives rarely care for the long-term viability of the company they lead, opting instead for a short-term uptick where they can cash in and then leave.
      2) these people can always find another executive position, once they leave their previous company, regardless of how dire the state they caused their company to get into - they can manipulate people so well that they will find an accepting armchair immediately.
      3) BODs are filled with people who just move from company to company, from one executive position to the other.
      4) golf is so damn important for them - that's where they network and prepare their parachutes.

      I strongly recommend you read this book. It's an eye-opener.

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    11. 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.

    12. 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. re: Chasing them away? by King_TJ · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I recommend reading a book called "IBM and the Holocaust" (http://www.ibmandtheholocaust.com).

    This is a company that happily accepted huge sums of money from the Germans during WWII to computerize the process of hunting down and exterminating Jews, and even "hardened" several of their facilities so they'd survive Allied bombings. All the while, they claimed to be an American business.

    It's arguable that in a sense, they "left" the United States back then, even if they still retained a big physical presence here. Despite the law preventing IBM from being able to move their profits out of German banks during the war, they STILL happily worked on their projects for them, knowing full-well they couldn't even touch the money for years.

  6. 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 thetoadwarrior · · Score: 4, Informative

      You're right that the jobs aren't automatically American jobs but even if Obama is a "redistributionist you're still ignoring the original guy's point that this happened long before Obama came into office.

      In fact a load of it happened under Bush. Are you telling me he's a "redistributionist" who scared off companies? In fact it's usually Republicans that allow companies to import people on H1-Bs and allow them to move work over seas with no negative effect. That is probably what makes companies move.

      The fact is that when it comes down to it, neither Obama or Bush really make a difference. Foreign workers definitely don't do a better job (like wise their work isn't inferior). What it's all about is someone in Manila can be paid for a year on a couple months of my salary, they have no expectations of pensions, private health care, etc. They're just happy to have a good job.

      My company employs over seas staff. I know what they're paid, what they get and it's quite obvious why my company uses them. The employment laws are more lax and they 6 people for 1 of me.

      It's not fucking rocket science.

    2. 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
    3. 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
    4. 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.
    5. Re:Solution is You and Me by Philip+K+Dickhead · · Score: 4, Informative

      Quit your bitching.

      You knew what they were up to when Watson was still in charge. He didn't rename the company "American Business Machines". The Nazi banks ran on equipment he sold them. The Nazi rockets were modeled mathematically on equipment he sold them.

      The ethnic populations were CERTAINLY tabulated by the Nazis. On equipment he sold them.

      Funny. I know Jews who won't ride in a Volkswagen, but make sure iBM is in their portfolio.

      So, screw Godwin, and screw INTERNATIONAL Business Mahines.

      --
      "Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
    6. Re:Solution is You and Me by Fallen+Seraph · · Score: 5, Informative

      I can't help but wonder if people modded you flamebait because of the anger in your post or because they didn't think you were correct.

      If the latter, then I'd like to point out to the people modding you that IBM was indeed the provider for the tracking software used at the concentration camps and labor camps of the Third Reich. The numbers tattooed on Jews weren't just decoration, they were tied to a punch card system IBM developed and maintained for the Third Reich. The numbers represented what "crime" you were arrested for (Jew, Gypsy, Homosexual, etc), your point of origin, and the camp you were assigned to. And this wasn't like a modern system where IBM can say they only sold it and didn't know its use. The systems which were used would've required constant on-site maintenance by IBM employees, which means there's no way they couldn't have seen what was being done to the prisoners held there. Additionally, contracts, internal memos, and other paperwork still exists showing that IBM's headquarters in the US was well aware of what was going, and what their equipment was being used for. They simply didn't care.

    7. 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
  7. You get what you pay for. by jonpublic · · Score: 4, Informative

    This is what our factories have to compete with. Plants which poison children.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090820/ap_on_re_as/as_china_lead_poisoning

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

    Democracy isn't cheap.

    1. 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.'"
  8. Re:Who's chasing them? by sumdumass · · Score: 4, Informative

    I hope the "we" you are talking about isn't the US. We actually have one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world.

    Perhaps Google would have helped you a little.

  9. 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.
  10. 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
  11. 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.

  12. Re:they're not stupid! by Renraku · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Well, let them all move to India/China/etc, then.

    Let them move to countries that rely more on rote memorization of facts, and little in the way of independent thinking. Let them move to countries where the employees could feed themselves for a year by stealing a few pieces of their product. Let them move to countries where the government could very well decide that the company isn't pious or nationalistic enough, and take over their assets.

    America has many great and successful companies for a reason.

    It's hard to put a dollar amount on how much money will be lost by them moving overseas, but I guarantee it'll be a net loss. I look forward to hearing some CEO's say, "Well, we had record profits this year, but no one can seem to actually find any of this money, and we can't even pay rent on some of our offices anymore!" Metrics aren't perfect, and no one with a marketing degree or above the level of middle management seems to know that.

    --
    Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
  13. 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

  14. 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.

  15. 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.

  16. 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.

  17. Some Perspective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Look I am an Indian, and I think that there are a few things all of you need to know.

    America is not going anywhere for now. The fundamentals of your future lie in the hands of your people, especially the select few who have a vision and can buck the status quo. As long as you have plenty of such individuals you are going to weather any geo-political storm.

    Whereas in my nation life is so linear that it is a goddamn joke.

    Almost every kid is expected to be an engineer and most of these engineers hardly even know what the hell they are talking about. As Feynman would say their knowledge is fragile.

    Our educational system itself is a joke. Trust me on this.

    At the same time entrepeneurs are discouraged and looked down upon. They are sorta treated with ice, as everyone wants a *son* in an MNC with a prestigous MBA. So, basically our society is choking itself. Sure, these people are awesome paper pushers, but despite the fact that some of them do have a decent brain they all seem to fail to do anything different.

    No revolutions are put into motion. No brilliant new synthesis are formulated. No groundbreaking patents are filed. In short, the truly important stuff is in stasis.

    Your society whereas pushes its outliers and that is why, as Kay once put it, most software is written on one side of the atlantic. I think that you should stop looking at IBM and start looking at MIT. That is where your future lies.

    And seriously drop all of that economics mumbo-jumbo. As the foundations of society are the ability to create things, transport those things and dessiminate them. I think that those earning a living by making a killing in stocks are living a sham.

    Oh and Thomas Jefferson would kill himself if he saw Bush in action. Despite his failings Obama is, at least, a breath of fresh air. So, value him for that. At least he had the courage (unlike me) to step up to the plate.

    P.S. - /.s javascript is screwed, haven't they heard of simplicity?

  18. Re:Who's chasing them? by sumdumass · · Score: 4, Informative

    In 2007, Exxon reported paying a 44% effective tax rate in their sec filings.

    Goldman sax went bankrupt in 2008 didn't they? Remember the bank bailouts? Besides, they paid a 34% effective tax the previous year and attributed the lowered tax rate to the increase in permanent benefits as a percentage of lower earnings and changes in geographic earnings mix. This means that the their profits were paid out and the tax money didn't disapear, it will be paid by those people.

    You entire 0% rate is fictional to any company that is solvent. It isn't because of loopholes and it isn't because the rates set down don't have any meaning. The rates have an effective disposition because they are higher then what they should be and the government lowers them for companies who do certain things they want them to do. It's like the mortgage interest deduction, if your making over a certain amount of money, you should be owning instead of renting in order to lower your tax burden. That's by design and accurately reflects the intended rates. What doesn't accurately reflect the intended rates, is you misunderstanding of the tax system and those who participate.

  19. Re:Who's chasing them? by HangingChad · · Score: 5, Informative

    We actually have one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world.

    You're quoting KPMG and right wing propaganda machines as authoritative sources on corporate tax rates? Edwin Feulner runs the Heritage Foundation, one of the groups helping organize the "Tea-Birthers". One of his own favorite quotes:

    "We conduct warfare in the battle of ideas."

    Yes, they do. And those ideas are almost always promoting conservative policy items including corporate welfare. The tax rate is meaningless, the US is actually a corporate tax haven. Because of exceptions, credits, deductions, depreciation and amortization, plus a little lawful and unlawful income shifting, tax deferments and shelters, the effective rate paid by corporations in the US (13.4%) was below the average (16.1%) for the 19 OECD nations in 2000-05. So, sure, lower the tax rate and close off the deductions, then watch those very sources have a collective heart attack.

    You'll believe anything if it's on Fox News.

    --
    That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
  20. Re:Who's chasing them? by sumdumass · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Exxon, They paid about 44% in 2007 and 47% in 2008. BTW, that comes to around 35 billion per year in taxes they paid.

    The rate isn't there to be actually paid. The government provided deductions and exemptions in order to steer businesses into certain directions and to get certain things accomplished that wouldn't have normally happened. The rate, just like you do no pay your actual rate, is 1: graduated progressively so it will never be the entire amount, and 2: it's there only for people and companies who do not follow the direction the government wants them to.

  21. Re:Who's chasing them? by HangingChad · · Score: 4, Funny

    You got a little spittle running from your foamy mouth there skippy. Maybe the nurse can wipe that off for you after computer time is over.

    --
    That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
  22. Money mobility caused this by catchblue22 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Following the Great Depression and World War II, the leaders of our society decided to start taxing the wealthy more and more, while using that money for the betterment of society as a whole. It was called the New Deal. And this policy worked quite well, propelling America into a period of rapid economic growth, while at the same time creating a profound sense of economic security for the middle class. Vacation pay became the norm (it largely didn't exist before the Great Depression), and middle class Americans had enough disposable income to spend on luxuries like vacations.

    This system was made possible by several other policies that prevented the rich from quickly withdrawing their money from the country. If you were wealthy in the UK in the 1950's, it was extremely difficult to get your money out of the country. It became common in this period for rich British citizens to build huge sailing yachts, which they sailed to other countries and then sold. They used their boats as a store of their wealth (read Myles Smeeton's Once is Enough for a story of one such couple).

    Then came the right wing "neo-liberal/neo-conservative" politicians. When they got into power, one of the first things they did was to remove the barriers to capital mobility. Money was able to flow almost completely freely across national borders. This has brought economic growth for some, especially in countries like China. But it has also ensured that the countries that originally used taxes on the wealthy to ensure a healthy middle class were at a huge disadvantage. Rich individuals have withdrawn their money from America, and invested it in countries like China.

    What many of us don't realize is that the complete and free mobility of capital will lead to the virtual disappearance of the American middle class as we have seen it over the past four decades, because it will ensure that money will flow away from countries with high taxes towards productive countries with low taxes. The country will increasingly look like Britain in the 1800's during the beginning of the industrial revolution (i.e. the world of Oliver Twist). There will be a very wealthy class. And there will be a worker class, which will comprise the vast majority of the population. Things like vacation pay, comfortable pensions, affordable quality health care, and disposable income will slowly but surely disappear for the vast majority of the former middle class. I am not prophesizing this; I am watching it happen before my eyes. IT IS ALREADY HAPPENING! Take an honest look at America right now, and tell me that our standard of living isn't slipping. And this at a time when we have never been able to make products more efficiently!

    And to those of you who reflexively demonize those like me as "liberals", ask yourself this question? Are you a Billionaire? If not, then why are you thinking like a billionaire? Why do you think that lower wages for most of society is in your interest? Why do you think that taxing billionaires and spending that money to build roads isn't in your interest?

    Do you think that the $20000 you have invested in stocks will pay for your comfortable retirement? What you seem to forget is that the billionaire who owns $200 million of those same stocks will make slightly more than you. And he will use the money he makes to buy even more stocks. Meanwhile, you, with your ever decreasing salary will have less and less disposable money to invest.

    --
    This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when first he appears as a protector - Plato (423 to 327 BC)
  23. Re:Who's chasing them? by Profane+MuthaFucka · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'm not sure why this is a troll, unless we've got some very unschooled libertarians moderating tonight.

    Corporations owe their complete existence to the government and the people. A corporation is a legal entity created out of nothing by government action, and supported by the people. Benefits include tax breaks, jurisdictional freedom, limits on officer liability, access to publicly run and regulated markets (Wall Street), and so on.

    Private companies, on the other hand, are not corporations, and do not owe a certain responsibility to the public.

    --
    Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
  24. Re:The truth isn't just relative by SnapShot · · Score: 4, Informative

    As a public service, I have to reiterate: sumdumass is wrong. Bush increased the debt by about $7 trillion dollars in his 8 years. Obama, in the middle of a recession, has budgeted an additional $1.7T of deficit spending in his first year.

    --
    Waltz, nymph, for quick jigs vex Bud.
  25. Re:Who's chasing them? by HanzoSpam · · Score: 5, Informative

    Wikipedia says the US has one of the highest corporate tax rates. Ireland is only 12.5%, making it a corporate tax haven.

    Too bad that's not stopping IBM from laying off Irish workers, too.

    --

    Progressivism: Parasites helping parasites to help themselves - to other people's stuff.