Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

President Defends Global Outsourcing

Zonk posted more than 8 years ago | from the why-not-he's-set-for-life dept.

1075

mytrip wrote to mention a New York Times article discussing President Bush's trip to the Indian subcontinent. There, he urged Americans to welcome global competition for their jobs. From the article: "Mr. Bush, reiterating a theme of his trip, strongly defended the outsourcing of American jobs to India as the reality of a global economy, and said that the United States should instead focus on India as a vital new market for American goods ... 'The classic opportunity for our American farmers and entrepreneurs and small businesses to understand is there is a 300 million-person market of middle class citizens here in India, and that if we can make a product they want, that it becomes viable,'"

cancel ×

1075 comments

Bush Whacked. (4, Insightful)

JehCt (879940) | more than 8 years ago | (#14843957)

The classic opportunity for our American farmers and entrepreneurs and small businesses to understand is there is a 300 million-person market of middle class citizens here in India

How many of you are making more money because of all the people in China, India, and other cheap-labor locales, who buy stuff that you produce? To vote, Click here [republicans.org]

Now, how many of you know somebody who lost their job because of overseas competition? To vote, Click here [democrats.org]

Based on that unscientific survey, I'd say that George Bush is talking smack. The only people who really benefit from offshoring are the business owners who can costs by firing American workers and replacing them with cheap overseas labor. There may be more wealth, but it's all concentrated in a few hands.

Bush can't understand what's it's like for an ordinary family to suffer the devastation of unemployment because he's never lived through it.

Re:Bush Whacked. (5, Insightful)

CyricZ (887944) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844030)

Please keep in mind that the Democrats are, much like the Republicans, funded by the very corporations and wealthy individuals who gain the most from outsourcing. Voting for them is basically a vote for the status quo.

Re:Bush Whacked. (1)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844106)

If I could I would moderate you with +20 insightful. If we could get a 3rd Party president and a senate majority for a little while both sides should straighen up or risk having their parties religated to the Wigs. But the problem is people feel that their votes are a competition for them, So they vote for who they think is going to win. Not for who they actually like. I say give more power to your vote and vote 3rd party.

Re:Bush Whacked. (5, Insightful)

Cyphertube (62291) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844207)

Which is one of the reasons we need serious campaign finance reform.

Corporate donations should be out, as should corporate lobbying.

Lobbying should be funded solely with private donations that are capped. If you want to do more yourself, then lobby yourself, but organisations should be limited.

And I'd like to make campaigning limited to local funds. I don't want funds from New England rich boys or Texas oil tycoons funding political ads in my state. If you want to campaign for a federal office (House, Senate, or Presidency) in my state, then you should have to have the funding come from MY STATE. If you can't raise funds here for your advertising, well, too bad.

Imagine what THAT would do to corporations. It would strip their power to screw over the average citizen. Then, perhaps, politicians might actually have to listen to their home base, instead of big oil or big media.

Re:Bush Whacked. (3, Interesting)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844043)

And worse yet- there's nothing India wants anymore. Their basic trade theory- trade only what they have in surplus and keep everything else for themselves- serves them very well. I just talked to our dear intern about this- she said the last time she went home to Hydrabad, she thought she had picked out novel and unique gifts- but her relatives already had them all.

Besides- what the hell could we make here to sell to India that China can't make for 1/100th the labor cost?

Comparative advantage, not surplus. (4, Insightful)

CyricZ (887944) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844082)

It's not about trading what one has in surplus. The theory is that one trades in the goods in which one has a comparative advantage. That is, you trade in the goods that cost you the least to produce.

A surplus of a particular good will end up being eliminated by market forces. If the supply exceeds the demand, then the price will lower until there is no more surplus.

Re:Comparative advantage, not surplus. (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844189)

It's not about trading what one has in surplus. The theory is that one trades in the goods in which one has a comparative advantage. That is, you trade in the goods that cost you the least to produce.

But we have no such goods left at all. EVERYTHING can be made cheaper someplace else. If it wasn't for agricultural subsidies, we wouldn't have anything left at all.

A surplus of a particular good will end up being eliminated by market forces. If the supply exceeds the demand, then the price will lower until there is no more surplus.

Which is why if you send those goods to another market entirely, the price stays high.

Re:Bush Whacked. (1)

(trb001) (224998) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844081)

The only people who really benefit from offshoring are the business owners who can costs by firing American workers and replacing them with cheap overseas labor.

Consumers, which we all are, benefit as well because cheaper labor means a cheaper product. Sucks for the laborer who loses his job, but hey, that's free market capitalism.

--trb

Re:Bush Whacked. (3, Insightful)

Mr. Underbridge (666784) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844195)

Consumers, which we all are, benefit as well because cheaper labor means a cheaper product. Sucks for the laborer who loses his job, but hey, that's free market capitalism.

Not only that, but people have been making these silly arguments for labor protectionism for years. Specifically, for around 300 years, since the time of Ludd at least. The fact is that the US has one of the highest average incomes on the planet, and we do this by sloughing off the job that don't lead to growth. These jobs are invariably replaced by better jobs. The fact is, that jobs and job markets change. If they didn't, we'd all be subsistence farmers or working in crappy factories, and no one wants that.

I think we can separate a feeling of empathy for the employee from a sense of doing what's best for the country. No form of protectionism has ever been good, labor or otherwise.

Re:Bush Whacked. (1)

miskatonic alumnus (668722) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844203)

cheaper labor means a cheaper product

Ha. Ha ha ha. Haaaa ha haaaaa ha hee hee heeee. Good one!!

Re:Bush Whacked. (2, Informative)

guacamole (24270) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844113)

Based on this, you're not telling us the whole story. Yes, a relatively small number of people will lose their jobs. At the same time, the vast majority of Americans are benefiting from a higher standard of living due to lover priced consumer goods. Also millions of Chinese and other East Asian poor are benefiting from the jobs created in their export oriented economist. It's a tough world. Can you give me a reason why a textile worker in USA should have a job when there is someone else willing to do this work for 10 times less?

Re:Bush Whacked. (2, Funny)

einhverfr (238914) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844121)

As a technology consultant, I welcome competition in my consumer services division from India. Poor quality customer service from Dell, Microsoft, and the like are the bread and butter of how this part of my business makes money :-)

Re:Bush Whacked. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14844126)

How many of you are making more money because of all the people in China, India, and other cheap-labor locales, who buy stuff that you produce?

Look .. in teh 1900's etc. the country had child labor/near slave wages etc. that ran the economy.

Quality of life was crap back then. Especially for minorities. It may seem better because obviously everyone here got through it ok.

Also, you didnt have computers, instant messaging/internet infrastructure, etc.

Now, if you want to have all the same manufacturing jobs of back then go ahead and switch back to a factory labor economy. But be prepared to give up access to medical, cheap clothing, advanced high tech, super high cell cust. service and overall phone prices.

How come the US unemployment rate is at 6% ? Do you think that 6% can produce all the stuff China and India produce for us? You think if you got blocked off all trade the 6% would be working better jobs?? Fact is more things need to be produced. What would happen to all the jobs people CURRENTLY have? Expect people to have shitty automon factory jobs working crap hours.

We can make products they need over there such as infrastructure building technologies. They haven't the capacity to do it yet. Once they get that they will need more of other types of things we can do.
Have more faith and less suspicion and fear of people.

Re:Bush Whacked. (1)

Loether (769074) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844165)

I have benefited from outsourcing and so have you.

The computers that I buy from Dell and Gateway are cheaper because of the Indian support guy I get when I have a problem.

I am able to stretch my dollar by being able to by cheap crap at wallmart made in china. There is no way American wages could produce the stuff that cheap. Competition helps every consumer (you and me).

What would you have us do close our borders and only do business with US companies who don't outsource.

PS None of this is news and not all Democrats who understand basic economic principals agree with you.

Outsource him (4, Insightful)

chrismcdirty (677039) | more than 8 years ago | (#14843959)

Perhaps we should offer someone in India the job of American President for 1/10 of the salary he makes. Then we'll see how much he supports it.

Re:Outsource him (1)

ROOK*CA (703602) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844004)

Perhaps we should offer someone in India the job of American President for 1/10 of the salary he makes

You mean to tell me we're actually paying this idiot a salary ? :D

Re:Outsource him (1)

GmAz (916505) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844058)

Agreed. Not only that, but if we make a product India wants, they will buy it from us. BS, they will just product it in India for us and buy it from their market. Good job Duwbya

Re:Outsource him (5, Funny)

jcgf (688310) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844063)

Yeah, but make sure that he has to train his own replacement. No, wait on second thought maybe that wouldn't be a good idea.

Re:Outsource him (1, Insightful)

hypergreatthing (254983) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844200)

Come on. Outsourcing the president's job for 1/10th the pay? The man has never worked at a real job at all. I mean, you really want to outsource the job of someone who gets to play on his ranch 50%+ of the time?

Besides, the whole job of the presidency has already been outsourced to whoever has enough money. And i think that would be haliburton at this moment.

Good. (3, Insightful)

Eightyford (893696) | more than 8 years ago | (#14843960)

If you want a free market you have to accept the consequences.

Re:Good. (1)

Johnny5000 (451029) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844007)

If I don't want a free market, I still get to accept the consequences.

Re:Good. (1)

deepestblue (206649) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844105)

If I don't want a free market, I still get to accept the consequences.

The majority seem to want to. In other words, if you want a democracy, you have to accept the consequences.

To be frank.... (1)

MAXOMENOS (9802) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844155)

....I doubt that most of the people who want free markets have really thought this through. They just know that it sounds good.

Re:Good. (2, Insightful)

AlexMax2742 (602517) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844028)

In a perfect world.

Unfortuniatly, we're competing with Asia, which doesn't value things such as human rights. As long as we're at an inherant disadvantage because our standard of living is higher, we don't have a chance. Assuming all thing are equal, though, you're right.

Of course, there might be something I'm missing. Feel free to point it out.

Re:Good. (1)

deepestblue (206649) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844138)

Unfortuniatly, we're competing with Asia, which doesn't value things such as human rights.

Talk of clueless generalisations. You sounds as clueless as the Islamic jihadis who scream the West stands for depravity, loose women and degenerate morals.

As long as we're at an inherant disadvantage because our standard of living is higher, we don't have a chance.

Well, why do you think we inherently deserve a higher standard of living? Because we were born with it?

Re:Good. (1)

PygmySurfer (442860) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844163)

That's OK.. our standard of living won't be higher for long...

Re:Good. (3, Insightful)

tpgp (48001) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844180)

Unfortuniatly, we're competing with Asia, which doesn't value things such as human rights. As long as we're at an inherant disadvantage because our standard of living is higher, we don't have a chance. Assuming all thing are equal, though, you're right.

Of course, there might be something I'm missing. Feel free to point it out.


1) Asia is not a country. It has different human rights values depending on where you are.

2) You equate standard of living and human rights - quite incorrectly. (Singapore for instance has a higher standard of living then the US, with less attention to human rights)

Re:Good. (3, Insightful)

qwijibo (101731) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844249)

Human rights are a commodity. Do you take them into account when you purchase everything you buy? You pay a premium to not purchase Chinese products. Anyone who purchases solely on cost doesn't consider human rights to be a valuable free market commodity that they wish to purchase.

We are at an inherent disadvantage because we have a decadent lifestyle. Every time a person who is living in poverty in the US eats at McDonalds or buys a beer, they're taking advantage of something that is not available to the poor in many other countries. Next time you have ramen for dinner and think "woe is me", know that there are people who would kill you in a heartbeat for your $0.10 dinner.

If my services are a commodity that can be outsourced to a place where the wages are much lower, I'm not providing value to my employer. I'm ok with this arrangement, because it will exist whether I want to believe in it or not. No one is entitled to any particular job. We are a means to an end. If we are not doing something that helps someone generate profit, there will be no money for us to be paid with. It's just a harsh fact of life.

Re:Good. (1)

Daetrin (576516) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844040)

Good. If you want a free market you have to accept the consequences.

And if you don't want a 100% free market you're an un-patriotic un-american commie traitor? I'm sure that's what a lot Bush and a lot of his supporters would think anyways, so it seems like a lose-lose situation for the rest of us.

Re:Good. (1)

Eightyford (893696) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844084)

And if you don't want a 100% free market you're an un-patriotic un-american commie traitor?

No, but you end up with things like the softwood lumber dispute.

Re:Good. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14844060)

Let us know when you spot a free market. As far as I can tell, there's never been one--they exist only in economics texts and right-wing fantasies.

Re: your post--just try importing food, goods, or labor to India. Guess what--the India/US import controls are not reflexively symmetric.

Re:Good. (4, Insightful)

eln (21727) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844147)

A completely free market inevitably leads to the concentration of wealth in a few hands, because as people become successful they erect barriers to prevent other people from following in their footsteps. We saw this happen before with the plutocratic oligarchy of the early 20th century. Various antitrust legislation and government reform helped to bring things a little more into balance, but now those things have been largely abandoned, and we're headed back to a state where a very few people control the vast majority of the wealth.

100% free capitalism cannot sustain itself over the long term, we've seen that before. This is why the government has a role to play in the economy. There is a vast middle ground between pure capitalism and pure socialism, and neither extreme can produce a sustainable economy.

Re:Good. (1)

iamlucky13 (795185) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844149)

Tis true! And if you want any other form of economic system, you still have to accept the consequences of that.

As far as global competition here in the Pacific NW, there's been a lot of frustration from the timber industry, dairy industry, and pork producers since NAFTA took effect as Canada has been beating us on price with those imports. Loggers threw a fit when the shingle mill in my hometown started buying cedars from British Columbia, but they weren't able to compete against imported shakes unless they did.

Re:Good. (1)

Intron (870560) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844184)

According to our own government (the latest USTR report)

IMPORT POLICIES

India's economy is one of the most closed in the world. Thus, India's tariffs remain among the highest in the world.

So much for free markets.

Mmmm Curry (2, Funny)

Dimentox (678813) | more than 8 years ago | (#14843971)

"and that if we can make a product they want". Ok, you hear him well its time we all quit our jobs and become curry spice makers! We will be Ba-Zillion-Airs!.

Re:Mmmm Curry (1)

AKAImBatman (238306) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844096)

I think you're missing the point. India already had plenty of curry spice. That makes it more likely that they'll export it rather than import it. However, India does not have tons of greasy fast food and 30" Plasma TVs. America does. Ergo, America can export these products to India.

Now see, once every Indian "needs" McDonald's food and Plasma Televisions, they'll start demanding higher salaries to pay for these luxuries. Once they start demanding higher salaries, the outsourcing market will begin to become less profitable. India would then need to compete on product quality rather than price of production. Thus, outsourcing as we know it today would disappear.

Re:Mmmm Curry (1)

Dr Caleb (121505) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844186)

"However, India does not have tons of ... 30" Plasma TVs. America does. Ergo, America can export these products to India."

However, those are made in Taiwan.

Re:Mmmm Curry (1)

PygmySurfer (442860) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844190)

Except fast food won't be exported, they'll just set up a McDonald's in India.. and all those fancy plasma TVs aren't made in America, so the American working man won't benefit, but the big American companies will..

Umm, I'm not so sure about this (5, Insightful)

Calibax (151875) | more than 8 years ago | (#14843972)

'The classic opportunity for our American farmers and entrepreneurs and small businesses to understand is there is a 300 million-person market of middle class citizens here in India, and that if we can make a product they want, that it becomes viable,'

What becomes viable? Almost any manufactured product the Indian middle class want can be made in India less expensively than the US can make it. If the Indians can't do it, the Chinese will do it for them.

I can envisage US companies making products in Asia for sale in Asia, with the profits coming back to the US companies. The only people in the US who will benefit are the owners of the companies who do are successful doing this.

It looks to me like Bush is one more pushing the "increased business profits are good for my friends" line. I'm not sure how the average US citizen will benefit from this strategy.

Mod parent up! (1)

khasim (1285) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844052)

The only reason we buy products from China and such is that they are LESS EXPENSIVE than the same product made here.

It is NOT because it's a DIFFERENT product.

Which pretty much leaves just food, Intel/AMD chips and movies/music.

Yeah, that's going to help the average US citizen.

IP (1)

mosb1000 (710161) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844167)

Ever heard of Intellectual Property?

Re:Umm, I'm not so sure about this (1)

Austerity Empowers (669817) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844243)

I've heard it the other way, if the Chinese are too cheap, hire the Indians. All I know is I'm buying lots of property in Africa to catch the next wave.

Editors Shouldn't Bitch, Their Own Company Does It (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14843987)

Here's one article on it. [softwaremag.com]

VA Software in Fremont, Calif., a provider of software, information and community support to IT managers and development professionals, keeps core, business-critical work at home, according to Colin Bodell, CTO. "Work that benefits from close proximity to our customers stays in the U.S. Work that can be done anywhere is typically sent to India," he says.

Bottom line: Slashdot's parent company and President Bush are on the same boat on this one. Editors shouldn't ignore or forget that.

Another classic example of Slashdot hipocracy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14844034)

...not that anyone should be suprised.

to summarize (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14843993)

To summarize: This policy is good for large multinational businesses, bad for working Americans.

There is a point in this... (2, Interesting)

halivar (535827) | more than 8 years ago | (#14843997)

While I don't like outsourcing from a consumer perspective (spend four hours on the phone with a Dell "technician" that can't speak English), I think there is a point to be made in the fact that we don't try nearly as hard to sell our crap overseas as foreigners do selling their crap to us. Outsourcing wouldn't be such an issue if we weren't the only people buying our stuff.

Easy to swallow (4, Insightful)

Quasar1999 (520073) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844000)

Just lately here in Ontario (Canada), a bunch of manufacturing jobs disappeared. I am unaffected by it, since I work as a software developer. When the local politicians spin it as opportunity to grow towards more of a service workforce from a manufacturing one, I listen and agree... but when the bubble burst for dot-coms, I couldn't care less what they said, I was worried about my future employment.

Long story short, those unaffected by outsourcing directly will agree with Bush's view that there is a market to sell other goods (that are not already outsourced to India), and that is good for the country. Those affected by the outsourcing won't give a shit about a new market, and only care about their lost job/income/life.

Re:Easy to swallow (0, Redundant)

CyricZ (887944) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844202)

But you are affected by it, albeit indirectly. I'm not sure what sort of software development you do, but it's quite likely that you would be affected.

If you write consumer-grade software, it must be considered that you won't necessarily make money if all your customers have been laid off from their manufacturing jobs, and thus cannot pay for your software.

If you write the software that is used by (downsizing or bankrupting) manufacturers, you'll likewise be hurt. If there are no robotics to write control systems for, or few businesses requiring server and accounting software, due to an exodus of manufacturing, you suffer.

If you develop software in an academic setting, you'll likewise feel the pinch. People who aren't working likely won't be able to afford higher education. Of course, a place like Canada sports heavily subsidized university-level education. If people aren't working, or they are and making very little, they the tax revenue collected by the governments decreases. That will lead to smaller amounts going towards subsidizing higher education, for instance. For such a developer, that may translate to lower wages, or even job loss.

Everyone is connected when it comes to the economy. If Joe Neighbor loses his job, it can end up harming your prosperity, too.

I love bush (-1, Troll)

Rooked_One (591287) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844001)

the pussy
not the president

sorry... just saw Harold and Kumar last night :)

Time to realize the world doesn't care. (4, Insightful)

Shivetya (243324) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844003)

Too many people will either object because its Bush or object because they feel entitled to their job.

The fact is the world doesn't care. We either compete to win or we lose. If all you are willing to do is bitch about Bush or your employer (or usually the case - portraying yourself as victim even though it happened to someone else) then your going to lose.

The world economy is such fun. It doesn't care what you think and it don't care what you think your entitled to. Accept it and then deal with.

Re:Time to realize the world doesn't care. (3, Insightful)

MobyDisk (75490) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844098)

War is the great equalizer. What the world should fear is that some big country might go to war rather than lose control.

Re:Time to realize the world doesn't care. (1)

Threni (635302) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844154)

> Accept it and then deal with.

We have laws to protect the environment. We have laws to protect workers rights, and provide healthcare, insurance etc. We have laws to protect countries employees/citizens from the effects of companies from other countries dumping goods that are produced by companies who don't have to take the above concerns into account. With outsourced work it's the same issue, only it's labour that's being dumped, and not ram or cars or whatever. Same difference. I'm all in favour of free trade, but some policies are not defensible on moral or social grounds.

Quite apart from the fact that if you phone Tiscali.co.uk for help and you get put through to someone in an Indian call centre you often can't understand a fucking word they're saying and have to ring back and hope you get someone a little more intelligable.

Re:Time to realize the world doesn't care. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14844193)

Right on !!! For my part I'm not buying anything coming from companies that are outsourcing. I'm outsourcing my software needs and those of my company to the Open Source movement. I don't think cheap software coming from India will be ever able to compete with Free software.

american goods? (1)

gyratedotorg (545872) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844009)

"the United States should instead focus on India as a vital new market for American goods"

wait, what does america produce these days, other than malls and walmarts?

Re:american goods? (1)

ValentineMSmith (670074) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844136)

Well, we do manufacture very nice bombs, but we've been giving those away for free.

Re:american goods? (1)

Dystopian Rebel (714995) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844179)

what does america produce these days, other than malls and walmarts?


I pity you, you horrible, hopeless cynic.

The USA produces billions of dollars worth of movies every year based on 4 plots and 8 different types of character.

...but first, they need a job to pay for it.... (3, Funny)

xxxJonBoyxxx (565205) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844013)

"...understand is there is a 300 million-person market of middle class citizens here in India, and that if we can make a product they want..."

...but first, they need a job to pay for it, and that's where my fellow Americans can help today. God bless.

not much of market (2, Insightful)

acvh (120205) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844020)

per capita GDP is $3100. per capita GDP in US is $41,800. not much of a trade.

Bush's globalization focus is disturbing to me. It is reducing the US economy to one of consumption, while production is leaving the country. Couple that with increasing federal spending, and debt, and increasing personal spending, and debt, and the US will be an economic hostage to those who buy US debt securities.

Gas stations on the Garden State Parkway are now run by Lukoil, a Russian oil company. More and more of America's cash is leaving the country - our affluence is being purchased at the expense of our future.

Re:not much of market (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14844170)

Did you object when they were run by Citgo, BP or Shell (also foreign?)

Bush sucks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14844026)

He eats it. He eats it raw.

Rich preppy boy. Oil boy. Oil daddy. Oil family. Let's outsource that whole klan.

Repeat after me until you believe (0, Troll)

nysus (162232) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844033)

The maximization of profits brings the greatest amount of human happiness.
Chasing short-term gains will lead to long-term social stability.
Destroying good jobs creates better ones.

Remember, everyone can do everything! (4, Interesting)

zzyzx (15139) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844036)

Your job gets outsourced? Don't worry. Just upgrade your skills. Eventually everyone will be a CEO!

That's the usual refrain here when outsourcing debates start. In addition to the fact that we can't all be the best and ok but not amazing programmers have to do something for a living, if we don't have the entry level jobs here, who will learn the skills to let them design programs?

Re:Remember, everyone can do everything! (1)

nysus (162232) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844064)

Think about his, even if every person had a doctorates degree, you'd have a PH.d. all it would mean is that you'd have a lot of PhDs ringing registers at Wal-Mart.

I know that was supposed to be a joke. (1)

khasim (1285) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844201)

But this is /. and I'm pedantic ... so ... :)

It costs a lot of money to get a PhD. Which, for most people, means a lot of student loans. There's no way you're going to finance night school on a WalMart paycheck.

Which means a lot of debt that cannot be paid off on a WalMart paycheck.

Which means ... over time ... less focus on education because there just isn't enough of a payoff for it. Except for lawyers and doctors. And too many lawyers looking at a bunch of doctors has its own problems.

The same goes for a Masters degree.
The same goes for a Bachelors degree.

When the jobs will only require and support the "free" education you get at a public high school, that's all that most people will pursue.

And once the education rate is in decline, it's all over for the country.

Michael Dell (1)

Sporkinum (655143) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844037)

I bet Michael Dell sells a lot of computers to Indian Call centers. Or more likely, ships a lot of computers to "his" call centers.

The idiot is correct on this one (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14844044)

And this disaster of a president is not right on very much. The global economy is a reality. Cheap labor is a reality. No wall, physical or legislative, can hermetically seal the country away from this fact. Mostly, the congress can only hand out special dispensations to groups they expect to favorably vote for their particular party, and will make the situation worse. And make EVERY consumer pay more. Anyone promising to make globalism go away will never be able to deliver and will make things worse for everyone.

Indians have programmed for years. (3, Insightful)

wayward_son (146338) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844050)

For the industry many Slashdotters, including myself, work in, the situation has changed since the 1990's.

1990's - Indian programmers programmed for major US corporations in the US.
2000's - Indian programmers program for major US corporations in India.

The evolution of the internet made this possible and will also make this impossible to stop.

Re:Indians have programmed for years. (4, Insightful)

maelstrom (638) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844171)

2010's - Indian programmers program for Indian corporations in India
2020's - Indian programmers program for major Indian corporations in India
2030's - US programmers program for major Indian corporations in the US

Re:Indians have programmed for years. (3, Insightful)

LukePieStalker (746993) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844240)

1990's - Indian programmers programmed for major US corporations in the US.

2000's - Indian programmers program for major US corporations in India.

2010's - Indian programmers program for major Indian corporations in India.

2020's - Major Indian corporations outsource work to U.S. programmers because wages are so much lower here.

the reality is... (3, Insightful)

solipsist0x01 (887281) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844051)

The reality is that as the economy becomes global, Americans are going to loose money. Americans have been profiting off other countries poverty for so long that we have come to expect a certain level of (undeserved) wealth. As the global economy starts to balance out, the United States economy has nowhere to go but down.

Re:the reality is... (3, Insightful)

lgw (121541) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844237)

Perhaps this is true, but it's a very pessimistic way of looking at it. We are helping less-deveoped countries to become as wealthy as we are. Doing so does cost us somehting. But the result is not that every country is poor. When "all American jobs went to Japan", the long term result was that Japan became about as rich as the US, Japan stopped being a cheap labor market, and Japanese cars are built in factories in the US now.

Why will India be any different? People wil whine and complain, and 50 years form now India will be just as wealthy as the US, and Indian companies will have call centers in the US. I don't seem to be any poorer for the decades of manufacturing "moving to Japan", I just have a far better car than I otherwise would, and that car is built in a factory in the US, despite being a "Japanese" car.

Re:the reality is... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14844254)

You assume the world economy is a zero sum game. It isn't.

Why would they buy American? (3, Insightful)

rben (542324) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844057)

Why would a chinese or indian buy an American product when they can buy something made in their own country by people making one tenth what our workers make?

Globalization works great for the rich people. It forces their entire workforce to take pay and benefit cuts in order to eek out a living. At the same time, the people who sit on the top of the pile are getting tax cuts and crying about how unfair it is that they be asked to contribute anything to the society that made them rich in the first place.

Again, this shows that Bush and his ilk have no connection with the citizens of this country.

Re:Why would they buy American? (1, Troll)

amliebsch (724858) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844166)

Again, this shows that Bush and his ilk have no connection with the citizens of this country.

I see. So what's your proposal? Invade India and force them to buy American? Cripple the U.S. economy by cutting it off from the rest of the world? Stick your head in the sand and pretend that the rest of the world doesn't exist?

He's an idiot, but he's right this time (3, Interesting)

realmolo (574068) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844085)

At some point, in order for OUR economy to grow, we have to bring the rest of the world up to speed. Most of the world lives in poverty. That has to change.

Of course, until everyone is up to speed, shoving jobs to third-world countries means that developed countries are going to see a LONG period of economic depression. And, of course, the corporations and their CEOs are STILL going to get richer, becaues their labor costs will plummet at the same time their sales increase.

Still, it has to happen eventually. It's just gonna suck for the U.S. and Europe.

Re:He's an idiot, but he's right this time (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14844218)

Most of the world lives in poverty. That has to change.

Most of USA lives in poverty. Wouldn't it be better to fix that first before taking jobs away?

well... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14844115)

I don't care much for the president as a person nor as an executive, but to blame this on Bush is pointless. This overseas market/globalization has been coming about for a long time and no one person can rightly be blamed for it. Groups of people, maybe. Americans firstly, possibly. We as Americans expect to consume to our hearts content while still maintaining great wealth and job security.

George, "Jack and the Beanstalk" was a fairy tale (1)

nysus (162232) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844117)

Quick telling us fairly tales, Mr. Bush. Trading a cow for 5 magic beans will not lead to fortune, riches, and a life lived happily ever after.

Re:George, "Jack and the Beanstalk" was a fairy ta (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14844169)

Hey now, even Jack got the hen that laid the golden eggs.

Re:George, "Jack and the Beanstalk" was a fairy ta (1)

nysus (162232) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844191)

Yeah, in the fairy tale.

A new market, for WHAT goods? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14844118)

...and said that the United States should instead focus on India as a vital new market for American goods...

What goods, Mr President? ALL the manufacturing has gone to China. Maybe we can seel the Indians the 1,000,001 scams and rip-offs that remain the mainstay of American 'economics'?

Re:A new market, for WHAT goods? (1)

Electric Eye (5518) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844152)

Right on, bro. That's the first thing I thought when I saw the exerpt on the home page.

yeah, its Bush (1)

psycho chic (958251) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844133)

People do lose jobs as a result of globalization and it's painful for those who lose jobs," Mr. Bush said at meeting with young entrepreneurs at Hyderabad's Indian School of Business, one of the premier schools of its kind in India. Nonetheless, the president said, "globalization provides great opportunities."

In other words, its good for me but possibly not for the people I claim to represent. Oh well.

"Mr. Bush"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14844144)

Mr. Bush, reiterating a theme of his trip...

Not that I'd expect more from the NY Times, or the foaming at the mouth liberals of Slashdot, but it used to be that the office of President of the United States was something you'd respect, and so you would refer to the president as 'President Bush' instead of Mr. Bush, kind of like how you refer to a doctor as "Doctor SuchandSuch" instead of "Mr. SuchandSuch".

Anyone agree? Then reply!

Re:"Mr. Bush"? (1)

Electric Eye (5518) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844182)

Yes, I agree. However, this president (and his Dick) has done more to erode any respect his office deserves than anyone. Granted, Bill did his share, but at least he got shit done, didn't destroy our image across the globe and hand our country over to radical religious nuts.

Re:"Mr. Bush"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14844250)

Which "radical religious nuts" are controlling this country? And just what have those nuts done that's infringed on your liberties?

Let's outsource Bush. (1)

ip_freely_2000 (577249) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844150)

"There, he urged Americans to welcome global competition for their jobs."

Too bad we couldn't outsource Bush's job to the President of India.

Or alternatively, hire some some street urchin in Calcutta to do Bush's job. The urchin is probably smarter than what we got now.

OK. Lets start with his job. (1)

zorkmid (115464) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844156)

Manmohan Singh would probably make a much better president than our wee George.

I'm sure we can retrain him for an exciting career in fry cookery.

A few problems (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14844164)

1) We would not be making the products. They would. We will be changing bedpans, learning to be lawyers, or teaching snot nosed brats how to change bed pans. The only Americans in the value stream are the owners.

2) A global economy only means more money for shareholders, not joe blow. If his job needs to go overseas, he's pumping gas to whoever is left that can afford a car.

3) What the fuck do we care about India (or China)? They don't pay our taxes. They aren't getting shot at in Iraq. That they don't like Pakistan is really the only useful thing about them. They didn't vote for Dubya, hell not even half of us did.

4) Their workers cannot compete fairly against american workers, owing largely to property values in the US. Ever try to buy a small house near San Jose? 50 year mortgage ring a bell?

5) US dollars invested overseas are not ending up in american hands. They're ending up in India. How is that good for us?

6) Why should US children bother to learn math or science? There will be no jobs utilizing those skills. Instead they should be learning history, deceit and bed pan frisbee.

7) Who is going to be left to build and design missiles, aircraft, tanks, and navy ships if our unskilled factory jobs are done elsewhere, and all our highly skilled design jobs are done elsewhere? Oh that's right, we have a great track record of peace lately.

8) The only thing keeping the investors in the US is the relative safety, uncorrupt government (by comparison), and generally complacent populace. If they start getting hungry they will get angry, and have no problem shooting your ass.

Income Gap? (1)

digitaldc (879047) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844168)

Global outsourcing could lead to a race to the bottom where whoever is willing to do a satisfactory job for the least amount sets the standard for those wages.

Either you figure out a way to exploit those low-wage workers, or you end up being one.

300 million ... ignores the 700 million starving (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14844178)

"...understand is there is a 300 million-person market of middle class citizens here in India, and that if we can make a product they want..."

He forgot to mention along with the 300 million in the middle class and 700 million starving on subsistence wages it's a great market he wants to grow for us. We're so fortunate to have forward thinking leadership. Why New Orleans might even be a candidate for this kind of help.

I find it intriguing... (4, Insightful)

Infonaut (96956) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844181)

how the often libertarian gestalt of Slashdot suddenly advocates government-sponsored trade protectionism as soon as the topic of *computer-related* jobs comes up. Farm subsidies are economically inefficient, and they distort the true price of food. The same thing is true of the oil industry. Why can't the government get smart and start allowing non-distorted prices for gasoline?! Obviously the government is in the hands of special interests. Ah, but then the subject of outsourcing comes up, and the tech industry is under threat and in need of assistance!

There's clear hypocrisy at play here. We want competition and open markets, we want global cooperation in open source software development, we just don't want to give up top dog status in areas that directly affect our jobs.

Made in China is fine and programming in India is fine, as long as the price of laptops keeps dropping. When a product is even a few dollars more expensive than average, Slashdotters are more than willing to scream and yell about it. Well, lower prices are the result of global markets. More buyers, more sources of cheap production.

We'd rather get cheap, well-made goods and donate to aid organizations than truly allow developing economies to compete with us.

Big Box Mart (1)

Ranger (1783) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844217)

JibJab has a nice succinct summary on global outsourcing called Bix Box Mart [jibjab.com]

But... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14844226)

THEY TOOK OUR JOBS!

Read The World is Flat by Thomas Friedman (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14844227)

The book above covers the topic of globalization rather well. It would really help those of you who haven't read it understand that the issue is bigger than american jobs going over seas.

At any rate, the fact of the matter is not everything can be outsourced and that there is a lot of political reform that is going to have to happen in countries like CHINA/INDIA before higher level jobs are outsourced.

Protectionism isn't going to help us at all in the long run. Instead of complaining about a lot of jobs going overseas, we should focus on how America can continue to lead the world in areas like higher education and innovation/R&D. If we don't, it's only a matter of time before China/India/some other country steps up and takes the lead.

At any rate, read the book. It's actually pretty interesting. I have to read it for my telecomm class.

mod Down (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14844228)

Those who can, do (1)

randyjg2 (772752) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844230)

If you object to something that our government does, there is a simple solution:

Get someone else elected! Join a campaign! Even if your representative agrees with you, it is likely there is a nearby district that doesn't. Go over there and join that campaign, instead.

You have a printer, print and distribute leaflets. Get to know your neighbors, talk to them.

It doesn't even matter if you win on the issues you care about, as long as you win. Use local issues. If you are in Texas, for example, remind everybody that Sam Travis would never have ceeded american ports of our southern borders, and the republican congressmen that rolled over on that one aren't true texans...true texans never retreat, never surrender.

How can anyone hear if you aren't willing to raise your voice?

Bush just doesn't get it (4, Informative)

pammon (831694) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844233)

I remember during one of the Bush / Kerry debates, the question was posed "What do you say to someone who lost his job due to offshoring?" Bush's answer was "We're going to give you a scholarship to send you to a community college, so you can get an education." What a terrible answer - as if the problem with these people is that they don't have enough education! That really drove home the point for me. Bush doesn't understand this problem at all.

(Kerry, FWIW, talked about eliminating some of the tax incentives that encourage companies to offshore. At least he understood the problem and had an appropriate, if timid, response.)

Ya' know, I'm starting to think... (4, Insightful)

swelke (252267) | more than 8 years ago | (#14844235)

Ya' know, I'm starting to think that Bush finally figured out that he no longer has to worry about getting reelected. When controversial stuff like the Dubai port deal and Indian nuclear power come out on the news, he hardly even defends his position any more. He just does whatever he feels like.

The mask is off. Now we get to meet the real Dubya.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...