Of course they go to Asia because it has a more exotic appeal. We have plenty of trailer trash here that could do simple monitoring work, but that just doesn't have the same ring to an executive's ear as going to the Orient.
Corporations are about image, not logic.
It's not just speech that's regulated in Canada. Look at all the ridiculus legislation that keeps American and other foriegn content off of cable & satallite cable TV services. They have legislation in that area that I'm sure is the envy of totalitarian regimes.
In fact, not even the Superbowl commercials are safe. The government orders Canadian commercials simulcast over the American ones.
Why would a democratic, capitalist country like Canada do that? It's all to do with money of course. The big boys running the telecom monopolies don't want competition, so they squash out the smaller players with laws masquarading as "in the public interest".
Well, they certainly won't be moving from Linux. I went to Microsoft's official site for Vista with my firefox 1.0.7 browser under Fedora Core 4, and I can't view the site properly! Now even if I wanted to trash my Linux for Windows, I can't because they won't let me see the information. See for yourself at http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/features/def ault.mspx
You are equating "outsourcing" with "offshoring". Outsourcing could be either offshoring or "near-shoring" or a combination of both. A company in Manhatten might find that it is more profitable to send some work to Bangor, Maine, and other work to Bangalor, India, than to work downtown. Many companies are willing to trade off expertise and customers for a better balance sheet.
It might be short term thinking, but then who is in stock market for a long term these days? Ultimately the senior executives owe it to themselves and the major shareholders to increase profits. The stock market will judge them by what they can produce in the next quarter, not the next five years. They do not owe anything to the employees beyond what courts would consider a fair severence if they outsource their work.
No, it is not "bleedin obvious". Often managers are forced to seek outsourcing as a solution in order to meet profit targets set by senior executives. Large companies typically have a large amount of overhead, and if a manager is assigned an aggressive target to meet and outsourcing is a solution, then he will be compelled to take that solution. Management can only fit the parameters to meet their objectives assigned to them. They can't speculate on what might happen with regards to market share, customer satisfaction. Even so, the executives might be willing to live with a smaller customer base if the company is able to deliver higher returns.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course they go to Asia because it has a more exotic appeal. We have plenty of trailer trash here that could do simple monitoring work, but that just doesn't have the same ring to an executive's ear as going to the Orient. Corporations are about image, not logic.
It's not just speech that's regulated in Canada. Look at all the ridiculus legislation that keeps American and other foriegn content off of cable & satallite cable TV services. They have legislation in that area that I'm sure is the envy of totalitarian regimes. In fact, not even the Superbowl commercials are safe. The government orders Canadian commercials simulcast over the American ones. Why would a democratic, capitalist country like Canada do that? It's all to do with money of course. The big boys running the telecom monopolies don't want competition, so they squash out the smaller players with laws masquarading as "in the public interest".
Well, they certainly won't be moving from Linux. I went to Microsoft's official site for Vista with my firefox 1.0.7 browser under Fedora Core 4, and I can't view the site properly! Now even if I wanted to trash my Linux for Windows, I can't because they won't let me see the information. See for yourself at http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/features/def ault.mspx
You are equating "outsourcing" with "offshoring". Outsourcing could be either offshoring or "near-shoring" or a combination of both. A company in Manhatten might find that it is more profitable to send some work to Bangor, Maine, and other work to Bangalor, India, than to work downtown. Many companies are willing to trade off expertise and customers for a better balance sheet. It might be short term thinking, but then who is in stock market for a long term these days? Ultimately the senior executives owe it to themselves and the major shareholders to increase profits. The stock market will judge them by what they can produce in the next quarter, not the next five years. They do not owe anything to the employees beyond what courts would consider a fair severence if they outsource their work.
No, it is not "bleedin obvious". Often managers are forced to seek outsourcing as a solution in order to meet profit targets set by senior executives. Large companies typically have a large amount of overhead, and if a manager is assigned an aggressive target to meet and outsourcing is a solution, then he will be compelled to take that solution. Management can only fit the parameters to meet their objectives assigned to them. They can't speculate on what might happen with regards to market share, customer satisfaction. Even so, the executives might be willing to live with a smaller customer base if the company is able to deliver higher returns.