YEah it has employment in india and wages in china. There is also a big difference from having jobs in the US being made obsolete by technology and jobs being outsourced. When railroads started cutting back you could still apply in a trucking company. That's not true in a global economy. if jobs are created overseas the fact of the matter is laws in china and india and most other countries mean you can't work there. IF that wasn't the case I might agree with you. Since it's not we really need to look after jobs in the US for our own survival. The standard of living might be rising on a global level, but that doesn't necesarily mean it's benefiting us in america much. Besides their is no reason we can't raise the american standard of living keep the middle class and still increase productivity for everyone. We just have to look out for our own country to some extent instead of just pandering to big multinatiopnal corporations.
There is a big difference in trying to protect the american way of life and protctionism as economic policy. What you're saying about protectionism as an economic policy is probably true, but it's hardly the only way to protect american jobs. Other things we could do is make it easier to hire worker in the US. We could have national helthcare something that would be a big break to corporations btw. Or we can try to drive the cost of the dollar lower. We could try to cut down the increase in property prices. Lots of things we could do which would make it easier to be middle class that would benefit the country as a whole.
UM no my firend it has nothing to do with protecting our jobs or protecting compnaies either it has to do with the government doing what's best for society at large. THeir are numerous government policies that can be put in place to encourage domestic job growth over foreign job growth (i.e: tariffs, tax code changes, worker subsidies, govt contacts to americans) that are perfectly capitalistic. Not you can argue the merits on way or another that's fine, but calling it communist just because we change regulations, tax law, and maybe try to make it cheaper to do business in the US is a little extreme. I mean do you think the governments in india and china aren't tryinbg to get more jobs in their countries? Of course they are. Nothing wrong with our governmnet trying to do the same thing. And we don't need to become communist to do it.
Yeah no doubt I totally agree I men hell i certainly don't want to live in a third world country. What all the ignorant ppl in favour of rampant outsourcing don't seem to understand is that we need to hold the line here before it gets worse. Before were all living in countries live india where their are no services or china where the goverment tramples people rights and pollutes the environment.
What are you dreaming? Bill gates still rides on the roads like the rest of us. The army defends his house along with mine and microsoft has tons of goverement contracts. Add to that the government has all kinds of programs to help out big corporations, so hell yeah he should pay taxes with the rest of us.
LOL I spent 3 years working as a consultant for small companies and I saw all kinds of pirating all the time. Big companies usually don't I agree with you, but i saw lots of small companies that probably had their windows licneses straight, but were pretty lackadaiscial about everyhting else. Either they would install office like 5 times from the same copy or have some hacked copy of some shareware progrma someone installed. Now large companies tend to be very careful about licensing. I saw tons of small companies everyone up to the president knew about it and could care less. Not that it matter much in a legal sense. If you as an employee install some bootleg software the often the company is still just as liable.
NO way are you responsible for everything your company does. Now if the corporation asks you to do something unethical, by all means even if it means your job your should quit. I mean if they ask you to cook the books at enron or lie at the trial at aco i could see quiting over something like that. But in practical terms all big corporations are going to do something you disaprove off or just something unethical in gernal. The big fortune 500 companies have thousands of ppl working for them. It's bound to be that at some point somewhere someone didni't somehting unethical or even illegal. If you quit just because of that you couldn't work for half the corporations in the world. That's just not that practical. I mean you can hold the managemnet at enron accountable and anyone in the ranks who did something illegal, but not anyone who happend to work for some unrelated subsidiary that got brought out a few years back. It just makes no sense.
Slashdot Mirror
YEah it has employment in india and wages in china. There is also a big difference from having jobs in the US being made obsolete by technology and jobs being outsourced. When railroads started cutting back you could still apply in a trucking company. That's not true in a global economy. if jobs are created overseas the fact of the matter is laws in china and india and most other countries mean you can't work there. IF that wasn't the case I might agree with you. Since it's not we really need to look after jobs in the US for our own survival. The standard of living might be rising on a global level, but that doesn't necesarily mean it's benefiting us in america much. Besides their is no reason we can't raise the american standard of living keep the middle class and still increase productivity for everyone. We just have to look out for our own country to some extent instead of just pandering to big multinatiopnal corporations.
There is a big difference in trying to protect the american way of life and protctionism as economic policy. What you're saying about protectionism as an economic policy is probably true, but it's hardly the only way to protect american jobs. Other things we could do is make it easier to hire worker in the US. We could have national helthcare something that would be a big break to corporations btw. Or we can try to drive the cost of the dollar lower. We could try to cut down the increase in property prices. Lots of things we could do which would make it easier to be middle class that would benefit the country as a whole.
UM no my firend it has nothing to do with protecting our jobs or protecting compnaies either it has to do with the government doing what's best for society at large. THeir are numerous government policies that can be put in place to encourage domestic job growth over foreign job growth (i.e: tariffs, tax code changes, worker subsidies, govt contacts to americans) that are perfectly capitalistic. Not you can argue the merits on way or another that's fine, but calling it communist just because we change regulations, tax law, and maybe try to make it cheaper to do business in the US is a little extreme. I mean do you think the governments in india and china aren't tryinbg to get more jobs in their countries? Of course they are. Nothing wrong with our governmnet trying to do the same thing. And we don't need to become communist to do it.
Yeah no doubt I totally agree I men hell i certainly don't want to live in a third world country. What all the ignorant ppl in favour of rampant outsourcing don't seem to understand is that we need to hold the line here before it gets worse. Before were all living in countries live india where their are no services or china where the goverment tramples people rights and pollutes the environment.
What are you dreaming? Bill gates still rides on the roads like the rest of us. The army defends his house along with mine and microsoft has tons of goverement contracts. Add to that the government has all kinds of programs to help out big corporations, so hell yeah he should pay taxes with the rest of us.
LOL I spent 3 years working as a consultant for small companies and I saw all kinds of pirating all the time. Big companies usually don't I agree with you, but i saw lots of small companies that probably had their windows licneses straight, but were pretty lackadaiscial about everyhting else. Either they would install office like 5 times from the same copy or have some hacked copy of some shareware progrma someone installed. Now large companies tend to be very careful about licensing. I saw tons of small companies everyone up to the president knew about it and could care less. Not that it matter much in a legal sense. If you as an employee install some bootleg software the often the company is still just as liable.
NO way are you responsible for everything your company does. Now if the corporation asks you to do something unethical, by all means even if it means your job your should quit. I mean if they ask you to cook the books at enron or lie at the trial at aco i could see quiting over something like that. But in practical terms all big corporations are going to do something you disaprove off or just something unethical in gernal. The big fortune 500 companies have thousands of ppl working for them. It's bound to be that at some point somewhere someone didni't somehting unethical or even illegal. If you quit just because of that you couldn't work for half the corporations in the world. That's just not that practical. I mean you can hold the managemnet at enron accountable and anyone in the ranks who did something illegal, but not anyone who happend to work for some unrelated subsidiary that got brought out a few years back. It just makes no sense.