When you do that, you might help a small segment of people in the short run, but you screw over everybody in the long run. So I guess you get to assuage your conscience and live out your It's a Wonderful Life fantasy, but in the long run you make life a lot harder for a lot more people.
As for "neoprotectionism" -- try moving to India to cash in on those $5/hr jobs. Guess what? You can't. "Neoprotectionism", as you call it, or "sanity", as the rest of the world calls it, is the law of the land in India and prolly everywhere else as well. Foreigners are NOT allowed to move over en masse.
That's India's problem. Do you think it's a coincidence that the US is both the richest country and the country with the highest rate of immigration? They both feed off each other.
I really don't understand how American techies are supposed to compete with Indians that are willing to work for much, much less, and the companies don't even care that the work that's being done is shoddy at best.
Maybe by providing a product that is superior to what will no doubt be the shoddy result of such awful Indian labor? After all, if the work Indian techies provide is going to be as terrible as you say, that should open up a huge market for quality products. When the quality of HP desktops goes down the toilet, you can be there with your locally-produced, exceptionally tested PCs, complete with native-speaking tech support.
I agree with you that we should call large corporations on their bullshit when they ask for protectionist measures from the government -- like the steel tariffs, for example.
If Dell doesn't pass those price cuts on to consumers, Gateway will, and put Dell out of business. If Carly at HP decides to pocket those extra cost savings, she'll be out of a job and a company in two years.
If you pay any attention to the business press, you know that the PC companies run on absolutely razor-thin margins.
When the products that make our lifestyles so expensive are made by cheap labor overseas (as in fact, many of them already are), the cost of living here will decrease.
Not only that, but there are still plenty of computer jobs that can't be done overseas -- can engineers in Calcutta set up wireless points in local coffeehouses?
Why would the US become an economic shithole because there are good-paying high-tech jobs in India? There are good-paying high-tech jobs in England, are we in a depression yet?
You're definitely right about that. I won't pretend to know whether Carly's free trade position is consistent no matter which side of the stick she's getting, so I don't want to hold her up as an example.
But yeah, I will have no sympathy for her if she demands protection from Indian tech firms in the future.
Note to brewster: The global economy is not a zero-sum game. When Indians get richer, that does not make me poorer. In fact, it creates a larger market for products and services I can provide, which will make me richer.
The more globalization spreads, the more my education -- in linguistics and foreign languages -- is worth. There are plenty of opportunities out there, if you don't expect Monolithic Corporation A to drop a 9-5 coding job on your desk and leave you alone for the next 40 years.
When the prices of HP crap are reduced by using Indian labor and the buying power of Indian labor is increased by working for HP, then you will start to see India and such places buy the crap that HP sells.
Her job surely isn't a God-given right. When an Indian company produces products comparable to HP's for a fraction of the cost, her executive position will effectively have been outsourced.
Huh? Our Senators are cowards who stay at home and have 'voice votes' when its time to pay their owners. See DMCA vote or yesterday's 87 billion Iraq vote. Almost 90 senators stayed home for the Iraq vote.
Sorry to get OT, but voice votes are as close to a bomb as far as democracy is concerned.
You really don't understand how the legislature works. The Iraq funding bill was debated and worked out two weeks ago, this was just the approval of the conference committee's fixing of the discrepancies between the House and Senate bills.
There's kind of a big difference between a privatized industry and a government-granted monopoly. With the latter, they have all the disinterest of the government in providing new and better solutions to best their competition, with none of the public oversight come election time.
Run by an organization with "Inc." at the end of their name != Free Market Privatization
Granted, I'm not american, but judging how the country has been going, I'm surprised the people uncensoring these reports arent vanishing without a trace.
We're too busy lynching black people, shooting each other, and mindlessly devouring indigenous cultures to bother with something this trivial.
Read the following demonstrably untrue statement to listeners of NPR and watchers of Fox:
"The latest economic slowdown began after George W. Bush took office."
Now, which group do you think will be wrong on this more?
As the aforementioned study only addresses misconceptions conservatives would tend to have, it's totally worthless. If CBS watchers were clueless and 25% of them thought Tikrit was the capital of Iraq, does that mean CBS has been telling its viewers lies about the cities of Iraq?
Remember -- just because an organization with acronym produces it doesn't mean it's true.
If you read listeners of NPR and viewers of Fox the demonstrably untrue statement "the latest economic slowdown started after George W. Bush became president," which group do you think will be wrong in a greater percentage?
Slashdot Mirror
When you do that, you might help a small segment of people in the short run, but you screw over everybody in the long run. So I guess you get to assuage your conscience and live out your It's a Wonderful Life fantasy, but in the long run you make life a lot harder for a lot more people.
That's India's problem. Do you think it's a coincidence that the US is both the richest country and the country with the highest rate of immigration? They both feed off each other.
Maybe by providing a product that is superior to what will no doubt be the shoddy result of such awful Indian labor? After all, if the work Indian techies provide is going to be as terrible as you say, that should open up a huge market for quality products. When the quality of HP desktops goes down the toilet, you can be there with your locally-produced, exceptionally tested PCs, complete with native-speaking tech support.
I agree with you that we should call large corporations on their bullshit when they ask for protectionist measures from the government -- like the steel tariffs, for example.
If Dell doesn't pass those price cuts on to consumers, Gateway will, and put Dell out of business. If Carly at HP decides to pocket those extra cost savings, she'll be out of a job and a company in two years.
If you pay any attention to the business press, you know that the PC companies run on absolutely razor-thin margins.
When the products that make our lifestyles so expensive are made by cheap labor overseas (as in fact, many of them already are), the cost of living here will decrease.
Not only that, but there are still plenty of computer jobs that can't be done overseas -- can engineers in Calcutta set up wireless points in local coffeehouses?
Why would the US become an economic shithole because there are good-paying high-tech jobs in India? There are good-paying high-tech jobs in England, are we in a depression yet?
You're definitely right about that. I won't pretend to know whether Carly's free trade position is consistent no matter which side of the stick she's getting, so I don't want to hold her up as an example.
But yeah, I will have no sympathy for her if she demands protection from Indian tech firms in the future.
Note to brewster: The global economy is not a zero-sum game. When Indians get richer, that does not make me poorer. In fact, it creates a larger market for products and services I can provide, which will make me richer.
The more globalization spreads, the more my education -- in linguistics and foreign languages -- is worth. There are plenty of opportunities out there, if you don't expect Monolithic Corporation A to drop a 9-5 coding job on your desk and leave you alone for the next 40 years.
When the prices of HP crap are reduced by using Indian labor and the buying power of Indian labor is increased by working for HP, then you will start to see India and such places buy the crap that HP sells.
I doubt that tech support call centers in Bangalore are being run by SS officers.
Her job surely isn't a God-given right. When an Indian company produces products comparable to HP's for a fraction of the cost, her executive position will effectively have been outsourced.
Carly's totally right -- what makes a job yours by birthright? Compete like everyone else.
Neoprotectionist policies help a few people out in the short run, but hurt everyone in the long run by imposing unnecessary costs on products.
For being such a high-minded European, you're quite a bigot.
Given his complete and utter ignorance of the American political process, I'll take it his Nobel Prize is no guarantee of any political knowledge?
You really don't understand how the legislature works. The Iraq funding bill was debated and worked out two weeks ago, this was just the approval of the conference committee's fixing of the discrepancies between the House and Senate bills.
Is slashdot complicit?
There's kind of a big difference between a privatized industry and a government-granted monopoly. With the latter, they have all the disinterest of the government in providing new and better solutions to best their competition, with none of the public oversight come election time.
Run by an organization with "Inc." at the end of their name != Free Market Privatization
We're too busy lynching black people, shooting each other, and mindlessly devouring indigenous cultures to bother with something this trivial.
It's a typo on the georgewbush.com site. Check your original citation (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/10/2 0031022-12.html)
In the context of the speech, it's pretty clear "seek" is correct. He's talking about his hopes for the future.
Mod this down, please... the quote is "seek," not "see."
Here is a good summary of all the holes in the BBC story.
ME: I wrote a two paragraph post
YOU: Only read the first paragraph
Read the following demonstrably untrue statement to listeners of NPR and watchers of Fox:
"The latest economic slowdown began after George W. Bush took office."
Now, which group do you think will be wrong on this more?
As the aforementioned study only addresses misconceptions conservatives would tend to have, it's totally worthless. If CBS watchers were clueless and 25% of them thought Tikrit was the capital of Iraq, does that mean CBS has been telling its viewers lies about the cities of Iraq?
Remember -- just because an organization with acronym produces it doesn't mean it's true.
If you read listeners of NPR and viewers of Fox the demonstrably untrue statement "the latest economic slowdown started after George W. Bush became president," which group do you think will be wrong in a greater percentage?