Obama Says Offshoring Fears Are Unwarranted
alphadogg writes "The perception that Indian call centers and back office operations cost US jobs is an old stereotype that ignores today's reality that two-way trade between the US and India is helping create jobs and raise the standard of living in both countries, US President Barack Obama told a gathering of business executives in Mumbai on Saturday. President Obama's remarks come after some moves in the US that had Indian outsourcers worried that the US may get protectionist in the wake of job losses in the country. The state of Ohio, for example, banned earlier this year the expenditure of public funds for offshore purposes. US exports to India have quadrupled in recent years, and currently support tens of thousands of manufacturing jobs in the US, he said in a speech that was also streamed live. In addition, there are jobs supported by exports to India of agriculture products, travel and education services. President Obama, who is in India on a three-day visit, said that more than 20 deals worth about $10 billion were announced on the first day of his visit."
Several weeks ago I remember hearing a negro professor on the radio mention that even the black community recognized he was not dramatically different from other politicians on issues of civil rights and bringing our jobs home. Too many put their hope and faith in a man that didn't deserve it.
Cohen, Lebowitz - hmmm. I guess Grisby is the token goyim.
Ignorant gayim like you shouldn't front in languages where you don't know how the plurals work.
Worth ten billion dollars to whom, Mr. President. Is that ten billion leaving the U.S., never to been seen again, or are we getting something worthwhile in return? [...] What? What's that you say? I may not ask those questions?
Reading comprehension fail.
The 10 billion is the money is coming from India to the US. How it gets distributed within the US depends on how you vote in elections.
Not at all. You can't be accused of not comprehending that which you didn't read in the first place. As I explained to jo_ham, I prefer to go on a good rant first. That gives all of you a chance to feel haughty and superior, leaving you thoroughly disarmed before I eviscerate you with my sharp logic and rapier wit.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
He is what he is, another tax-and-spend Democrat with delusions of grandeur like all the rest of the Washington crowd, and we're getting precisely the leadership for which we cast our votes. I did my research, and had a pretty good idea how he was going to turn out, and alas, I was not wrong.
You sure did your research. For the past 30 years every Republican president has increased the debt while every Democrat has decreased it. Damn those tax and spending Democrats and their lowering of the national debt. Here's a clue: stop repeating unfounded talking points.
Stop trying to make an argument where there isn't any. And my research included a number of other topics besides what passes for fiscal policy in Washington, as should yours. I didn't like what I saw, and at least I went well past what Fox News and the rest were presenting as "information" about our Presidential candidates. Did you?
And to me, so far as damage to the economic fabric of the country is concerned, whether he is "taxing and spending" or "borrowing and spending" they are activities that we can't really afford for much longer. Both are irresponsible, and while Congress is responsible for appropriations, the President has considerable influence as to how those appropriations are made, and for what purpose. I would expect better from the man elected to the highest office in the land. You may defend him if you wish, but he is not proving to be what everyone hoped, believed, he would be.
Shame on us.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
$10 Billion dollars... Oh whoop-de-doo! Your Ms. Hillary scored $60 bil from the Saudis with a single "deal". Who do you think Wall Street will favor in 2012?
For justice, we must go to Don Corleone