What is up with corporate america and foreign outsourcing?!

http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104_2-5051575.html

Excerpt:

At software company Manugistics, for example, the use of about 100 developers in India has corresponded with a cut in the number of U.S. developers from roughly 450 to about 275, CEO Greg Owens told the conference audience. Owens said more cuts are planned for the U.S. work force. Owens' advice to U.S. tech workers is to improve skills, such as learning the latest technology. "I still think it's a good profession," he said.


Yeah, but what's the fucking point of learning the latest technologies if the jobs are not in the US where they damn well belong?!

How many other industries will shove sticks up the asses of American workers just so the CEOs can make more profit by exploiting foreign countries unfairly? America, land of ourcourcing companies where all the domestic workers have no jobs to support the economy... I almost hope America's infrastructure, if this is what it is, implodes in on itself.

How long before the revolution, fellas?

All business exists to make profit.
Regulations and wage floors hurt profits.
America has regulations and wage floors.
India doesn't.

I've read that they have lots of regulations and governmental red tape. Or am I in error?

There's still red tape, but much less than there was before.

Those on HB1's who can't get work here, go back to India (which they want to do in the first place) and make $20.00 per hour developing software for the US who screwed them over.

Win-win for Indians
Lose-lose for 'Muricans

Labor creates products. If business doesn't want to respect U.S. labor, the business can permanently get the hell out of the country and take its products with them.

If we don't stand up for ourselves, nobody else will and nobody will stand up for the millions of workers around the world who keep getting shit on by these corporations. Those workers come and kill US when they're pissed. Maybe it's time people start speaking up about the real lesson of 9/11.

And not just corporate America - why does so much of our political structure do everything possible to encourage it?

We talk about a $455 Billion dollar deficit - what on Earth is going to happen as we export all the jobs and let all the corporations go offshore?

"if the jobs are not in the US where they damn well belong?!"

should not be able to export jobs/ production to other countries. They do it to screw over American workers and unions and to exploit workers in other countries. Let them move the entire company, executives and all, to India if they think that's a better place for their business to be located.

American companies should also not be able to hide their profits in offshore accounts.

If these companies can get tax credits for hiring disabled people or Vietnam era vets, why can't they be penalized for sending jobs out of the country? (and don't say offshore, a boat in Lake Superior is offshore).

They'll move.

they move, they get less US business. But they practices which are leading to a distinagration of the middle class is going to result, in the long term, for less US business anyway, as when we are all working two service industry jobs we just won't, collectively, be able to keep buying all of their products.

and avoid American taxes.

Nor should they be able to do that and then get huge contracts from the Feds. That way, we get laid off and we have to pay for their contracts.

exactly?

we should start charging them for the infrastructure wear and tear that their actual headquarters use. Figure out a system to figure out how much their execs and others use the highways and give 'em a fee; how much freight the ship on rails, barges, and roads, and charge them a users fee; how much additional policing the community has to provide to serve their complese, and charge them a user fee.

Republicans are so quick to say that taxes shouldn't be income based but user based (as in user fees) - so, let them devise a system that uses a "user fee" system related to use of US tax payer funded infrastructure for those parts of the companies that remain in the US. They move out of the US but still ship products in - same thing applies (the user fee for the privelege to sell here).

Not yet practical (haven't put any real policy thought to the idea) just kinda spouting off of the top of my head. Make it cost them to do business here if they become a foreign entity as it does to be taxed here as a US entity. Given an equal cost choice - I bet they would stay where the market for their business exists, and the amenities for their execs are desirable.

Watch them and ALL their jobs, AND taxes....wave bye-bye to you.

smell of ideologically driven but completely blind eye to the realities of what "free trade and globalization" has morphed into in the past 10 years.

Elsewhere you assert that this process is good for local (off shore) economies. At one time that was true, because there was a natural process in which over a relatively short amount of time there was some labor organizing that occured, some basic rights and wage levels became recognized by the corporations, and quickly sparked by the manufacturing, the entire standard of living began to rise. This was seen in Japan, South Korea and Taiwan (and Hong Kong?).

But then businesses got smart, tipped the scale, we won't open our plant (and bribe your officials to let us do so) unless we get something like covenants in place (and later the assistance of the WTO) that will allow us to not comply to local labor laws, will state that our workers will never organize, and will allow us to be exempt from local safety and environmental laws.

Guess what.. they cycle of benefit to the larger society that was realized in Japan, SK and Taiwan... hasn't followed. Surprise. See the magic isn't capitalism alone, it is development that includes some balance on the labor side. Indeed the work conditions, it has been reported, are more akin to the old "company shop" days in our dear appalachia - where the workers had to pay the company for rent, supplies needed for work etc, with those costs being deducted from wages. This often keeps people indebt rather than earning. Our modern version of institutional servitude.

Lets talk about another change in the last twenty years that has changed the equation such that "globalization" often does NOT bring the benefits that are promised - and that at one point in time did seem to often be realized... monetary policies by the IMF/WorldBank that push the privatization of natural resources, taking any little control of those natural resources that could be used by the peoples of the country and being forced to sell them to private companies - but since most of the companies with the capacity to take these resources over are not home grown - this puts local natural resources into the control of foreign companies. If these are vital resources, such as water (big move in that area in developing countries) this can be exceptionally dangerous to the well being of the citizens of the country as the resources can be manipulated, expropriated (and thus not available to the country), and squandered. I believe that in the case of privatized water, in many cases the country loses control, the promised benefits never materialize (Enron was big in makng promises of investing in the infrastructure and instead of building infrastructure, failing to maintain existing infrastructure so that services and sanitary conditions declined) but the costs to citizens (remember: monopolies are NOT good for a competitive market) rose.

Woohoo. Ain't it all grand.

This is why many do not adhere to unfettered (government subsidized/supported such to give the competitive advantage to the largest of corporations) "free" trade - and laisez fairre globalization. It does not serve other countries well. It does not serve the US well. It does not serve many mid sized and small companies well. But for the big, big dogs - its a gold mine.

What was once an issue of "Free Trade (70s early 80s) as a means for international development is now known as the Fair Trade movement.

anything about the process and change-over involving fairness, sweetness and light, or angelsong.

I just said it's happening, and it will continue to happen whether people approve or not.

You either ride the wave of change, or you get crushed beneath it.

Trite...but true.

and that people have no power, then you are correct.

I still believe that governments, democracies, and people can exert power to bring balance back into this process. So perhaps now it is I that is the idealist.

it is going to have huge negative implications for nearly everyone. Except for the few remaining at the top in the end - this will crush us all. Think of the economic disparities in some of the south american countries... with a small professional class, an even smaller ruling class that controls all of the wealth and a HUGE poor (dare I say peasant) class. Coming soon, to a country/continent (globe) near you. In the long haul - economically it is not a sound model. Not enough consumers to sustain it when the consumers don't earn enough to buy. Then on a global level a small number of individuals market solely to a small wealthy clientel. And that will somehow employ the rest of us in the "service-to-the-wealthy" economy. Not a real sound economic system by a long shot. Folks have consumed far too much Milton Freedman and Ayn Rand to the point that the myths have been bought as truths, even when there is existing evidence that disproves said figures pushed theories in their pure forms.

All your bases are belong to us.

you see by outsourcing, they can save tons of money that they would normally use to pay selfish greedy Merikans with, but now they can take all that saved money, and give it to themselves as bonuses! Then they can buy that new yacht they've been after, which gives a job to the yacht salesman! :bounce:

and even better: The recently laid-off workers can now get jobs at Wal Mart, for $7.50 an hour, selling the same junk that they used to make domestically, but now it's imported. At least they only work part-time, so they have more time to spend with their family, right?

don't you know that living wages, workplace safety, health benefits, are un-American? And we ALL know that a child is better off with a parent who works 20 hours a week for $7.50 with no benefits, than to make $30k a year working 40 hours with insurance....

:eyes:



I DARE any freeper to tell me that outsourcing is good for Merika

*sound of crickets*

it's all love and brotherhood and singing Kumbyah until the wogs actually start getting some decent jobs hmmmm?

Are you telling me you think it's okay for American companies to export their jobs overseas at the expense of American workers? I don't give a shit what color skin the people have.

Well you didn't worry when it was other people's jobs...just your own.

America first...is always the motto hmmm?

At least when it finally hits YOU.

PS...it's called globalization. Get used to it.

Let's see how you "get used to it" when it's YOUR job that packs up and goes. Now, if you are interested in trying to have a REAL discussion instead of just lobbing "clever" bon mots, why don't you try to think up some solutions to improve worker conditions and salaries in places like India so we CAN compete on a level playing field?

ON EDIT: How the fuck do you know whether I was worrying about it when it was "my job instead of someone else's?" You don't know shit about me or my stand on free trade and globalization.

is to have a job that doesn't 'pack up and go'.

Where were you when they said you'd have 5 different careers during your lifetime?

You want a level playing field? Drop the trade barriers, borders and subsidies.

"wogs" they employ in India. Their whole deal is exploiting workers. Employers no longer value their employees, no longer want to pay good salaries, give good benefits, or otherwise encourage employees to do a good job. Their sole interest is in getting the job done for the least amount of money. When they find labor cheaper somewhere else, they'll leave India without saying good-bye.

Well if the 'wogs' like it...too bad for you.

"Their sole interest is in getting the job done for the least amount of money"....yes indeedy. It's called business. And reality.

equality, not about individual jobs.

For the record, wise guy, this doesn't affect me directly as I'm now too disabled to work. Not to mention that faculty positions can't be exported to other countries unless the entire college relocates. But, hey, thanks for your lack of concern. Presumably you don't give a shit about all the people who have lost jobs because of globalization, either. That's NOT a progressive attitude.

I'm talking reality...in the here and now.

Concern and a couple of bucks will ....buy you a coffee.

and they don't even have to leave their homes as so many did for Y2K.

You would not believe me if I told you the money they get, you would think it very low but its quite good pay for there.

The only hope is is enough projects go so bad as to make the papers and effect bottom lines. The companies like the improvement in development costs enough to overlook the re-work costs for poorly delivered product but sooner or later there will be something big enough to hit the radar.

The Indians will learn more and more and the American tech sector will grow smaller and smaller.

There is NO way an American programmer can compete with an Indian programmer in India. The cost of living is too high in America compared to India.

In the long run, it's bye bye to American ingenuity. Hello to mega corporations (no longer U.S.-based) ruling the world. Also bye bye to democracy, hello to corporate feudalism.

built on a barge and it could be moved to wherever in the world the cheapest labor was.

I think we should outsource the corporate executive positions. We can get well educated, experienced, globally knowledgeable CEOs from other countries, and they're much cheaper than ours.

says they will screw up majorly sooner or later...and SharonAnn then wants to import their CEOs?

India is actually the perfect country for greedy corporations. There are a BILLION people so they will never run out of workers. The Brahmins are extremely well educated and speak English fluently. There is no learning curve as far as language goes. The primary difficulty for many of them is the accent but according to some articles I have read, customer service reps are given dialect classes so they can sound as American as possible. They are even encouraged to take "American" sounding names. In one office they have a map of the US as well as corporate logos so they know what the American callers are talking about.

I say that if it is such a good thing they why are the Indians forced to learn an American accent and take on American names and dupe people? Obviously even corporate execs realize this is not a good thing for American workers or else they would be more above board about outsourcing many relatively good paying jobs. Customer Service isn't my cup of tea but in the insurance industry it pays much more than dealing with the public at McDonalds that's for sure.

Another thing about the educational system in India...it is very good. Competitive but good. There was a report on 60 Minutes a few weeks ago about the India Institute of Technology. Many programmers have graduated from that university.

MJ

I DARE any freeper to tell me that outsourcing is good for Merika

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/918070/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/922002/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/k-outsourcing/browse
Yes I spy on freepers. It's funny as hell watching a bunch of libertarians getting attacked by people that have just lost thier jobs. They used to say "A conservative is a liberal that's been mugged." I've got a new one:

A progressive is a conservative that lost his job.

If we're nice and reach out to them, we may just get a bunch of converts, leaving the nuts isolated. A little homework project: go out find one moderate conservative listen to his beliefs, understand them. Then get him to do the same for you. Not everyone that voted for Bush is some theocratic supply sider with a love for enviromental distruction.

otherwise support American workers, rather than shipping their jobs overseas. He pledges that in his presidency, the White House will be the Workers' House.

Nor will he be the Democratic candidate.

How do you know what DK will or won't or can or can't do?

BTW since the thread is about outsourcing U.S. jobs--not Kucinich and what Maple thinks of him--I'll chip in that I think companies that want the benefits of being "American" need to hire a certain percentage of American workers and pay taxes (not hide money in off-shore accounts).


edit for excess verbiage

it's only one country.

But if you want to put the US into a massive economic tailspin you'll never recover from...pulling out of such things is certainly the way to go about it.

certainly isn't helping put money into the hands of our consumer society is it?

from other countries send jobs to America.

Works both ways.

that cancelling WTO and NAFTA would destroy our economy, but have a nation with a population of burger flippers and grocey checkout people is the answer to our economic problems.

but the burger-flipper stuff is union propaganda outdated by about 15 years.

what is a 50 year old computer programer who is no longer employable in his/her career field to do for a living? It's not to easy to just switch over and become a lawyer or a doctor when you've been a keyboard jockey your whole life. And many of these people aren't in the best shape financially as is. What would you have these people do when all of their jobs are in India or Bangladesh? Go back to college?

And yes, life-long learning is the new way of life.

Get used to it.

so according to the new Microsoft/Enron/IBM guide to life all we have to look forward to is endless layoffs, 're-education', re-climbing the ladder, layoff, repeat? Where's the time for life? Oh that's right, ejoying things like family, friends, the world, doesn't fit in with the religion of the almighty dollar. If that's the kind of world we have in store for us all I can say is bring on Armageddon because that world doesn't deserve to exist.

'fuck that' all you want, but it doesn't change reality.

We are moving to globalization...it's a massive planet-wide movement and you as an individual are simply one of 6 billion.

The displacement that occurs during the transition may or may not hurt you....that's largely up to you.

We are sorry that planet wide events occasionally disturb your peaceful life. Your complaint has been noted and filed.

there's quite a few others out there saying 'fuck that' as well. and seeing how some are so intent on enslaving 90% of humanity for the benfit of the 10% and the 90% being tired of it, Armegeddon may be just what we get.

and you and your buddies and your ideology can have a fine time saying that on the unemployment line.

And to wish Armageddon on the world because you are cross over what is normal in Life is insanity.

You figured a life time guarantee of happiness without effort, came with your birth certificate, or what??

I said no such thing. What I see of this is a lifetime of endless toil, the only reward being more toil. What's the good a life if it's spent constantly slaving away to put barely enough food on your table and 6 more zero's at the end of some bastards bank account? That's not life to me that's slavery, you can have it if you want, but don't expect me to accept it with open arms. I don't know about you, but I don't think human beings were put on this earth to serve at the whim of business, the market, or any other new age bullshit.

what....exactly?

work with other people who want no part of this dollar worshipers wet dream to remove profit margin from the end all be all of lifes lifes goals. Granted it's no definite thing but nothing in life is. The only definite in this is world of shit we'll all be in if this is allowed to continue unchecked.

Get a new one!

come the revolution.....and other fairy tales.

given that your vision projected on this thread reads (at least to these eyes) like a warped Grimms Fairy tale. Oh wait - it is actually the real world implications that are grim, the fairy tale is the supposed economics behind it.

Or just flippant comments?

The top 0.25 owns more wealth than the other 99 3/4 percent combined.

The higher one goes up the income scale, the greater the rate of capital accumulation. Economist Paul Krugman notes that not only have the top 20 percent grown more affluent compared with everyone below, the top 5 percent have grown richer compared with the next 15 percent. The top one percent have become richer compared with the next 4 percent. And the top 0.25 percent have grown richer than the next 0.75 percent. That top 0.25 owns more wealth than the other 99 3/4 percent combined. It has been estimated that if children's play blocks represented $1000 each, over 98 percent of us would have incomes represented by piles of blocks that went not more than a few yards off the ground, while the top one percent would stack many times higher than the Eiffel Tower.

<http://www.commondreams.org/views02/1227-06.htm>

I'm just one of 6 billion people. Who gives a flying rip if I lose my job.

I'm just one of 6 billion people, so I'm not worthy of consideration.

I'm just one of 6 billion people, so my "fuck that" can safely be ignored.

I'm just one of 6 billion people. I'm nobody.

But the good news is, you are just as much a nobody as I am.

that sees a sparrow fall to you?

Do I look like Counsellor Troy??

I'm not discussing your feelings here...I'm talking economics.

This is a pep talk, not therapy.

But you seem to revel in that there are 6 billion people on this planet and you seem to take great joy in reminding us that we're just one person and therefore of no consequence. When you lose your job I will do my best not to gloat.

Just because life is unfair doesn't mean you have to lie down and take it.

Life is unfair but it doesn't have to stay that way.

The displacement that occurs during the transition may or may not hurt you....that's largely up to you.

this is an ignorant statement.

the larger economy of an area directly affects the smaller economy. lets take a look at an example that hits very close to home.

im from the northwest part of indiana. gary all the way through hegwisch use to be home for the steel mills. now the steel mills are closing, laying off hundreds of workers. working in the mills use to be a place where someone could make a career and have economic stability. that is all gone. the loss of manufacturing jobs, especially where they use to thrive, can economically kill an area.

just a few weeks ago the local bookstore in valporaiso of 16 years closed. it survived during Bush One and the early 90s. now it is gone. why? because the area was feeling the pressure of the steel mills closing. someone's employment, paycheck, life dream is now GONE. the general economy sucks. and, due to the lovely affects of globalisation and monopolisation of the market, a barnes and noble opened up (the closest chain book store previously was in merriville, a 20 minute drive.)

so to say that one can simply rise above and not be affected by surrounding economic turmoil is just assinine.

and also lets look at those folk who are being asked to "transition." these are folks like my father who should not, at 54, be hoping he can fine another job (and not get discriminated against for his age, as a friend and fellow former co-worker is currently suing my father's employer for.) job security, or even worse, a job itself, should not be something that large corporations should be dangling over workers just to see who will dance.

You can look at chaos and see devastation or opportunity. It is all your choice. Yes, these events are traumatic and I feel it too. But that doesn't change the fact that these events are happening.

We just need to change the laws to protect workers and the environment.

Globalization in itself isnt bad....if we have one world UNION of all workers then globalization would be quite effective :)

Unionize the Planet!

Unionize India.
Unionize China.
Unionize Indonesia.
Unionize Everywhere.

It won't be easy, in fact, it will be very dangerous.

But the alternative is for 90% of humanity to be set against each other for the benefit of the remaining 10%.

Tariffs and protectionism are short term solutions. If capital is global, labor must be global as well. There is no other long term solution given our current global economic system.

http://iww.org/iu560/

particularly overseas

I'm not talking about labor laws and the labor movement in the US.

I'm saying that there is absolutely nothing to prevent global capital (meaning multinational corporations) from forcing the world's workers into a bidding war that will only go down.

Workers in the US will be underbid by workers in Mexico. Workers in Mexico will be underbid by workers in Indonesia. Workers in Indonesia will be underbid by workers in China, and so on.

What is ever going to prevent this but a labor movement on a global scale that can say, our workers in Indonesia WON'T work for less than workers in Mexico, or the United States? Governments can't stop this. Not unless they all get together as one and try to pass some benevolent guidelines and somehow enforce them.

And that's no more likely than all of the world's labor getting together into one big union.

it's not going to happen, those who start getting the jobs are damn glad to get it.

we're in a world-wide race to the bottom, as far as wages and quality of life are concerned.

You see (just like when the US finally blew up at Papa Bush and his ecnomy), right now we haven't reached that most critical of stages; but are getting there. Already WHITE collar jobs are leaving the county. Once the big hit comes on the yuppies (as it did decaded ago with lowly, who cares if they suffer, blue collars) the fucking lid will go off this country. They turned on Papa because the blue collar recession became a white collar depression. When yuppies face living like (oh, gawd no) blue collars, watch the votes in this nation. Watch who comes to power and watch (for good or bad) the policies that will follow.

Did their almighty "market is God" philosophy ever think of that? And what about what the Republican messiah, two bit actor, Ronald Reagan said about a "rising tide lifting all ships"? Does that only count for tax cuts on the rich?

The short term greed and long term stupidity of the right is underwhelming.

6 billion people plus, in the world.

And most of them want consumer goods.

most of the 1 billion that live in India will be lining up around the block to buy the latest IBM computers, and the 1.5 billion that live in Africa, I bet they're clamoring for Windows 2029 or whatever. Face it, yes there are 6 billion people in the world. But of that 6 billion, about 750 million are 'consumers' that actually buy the shit. The rest are breeders and serfs according to the anything goes if it serves the market philosophy.

India and Africa...although there is a large middle class with money in both places. Africa is bigger than North America.

However, there is also Russia, Japan, China and numerous other places...all with new entrepreneurial classes...with money and computers.

Breeders and serfs???? Tsk, tsk. Such an outdated, not to say racist view of the world.

Until it was their jobs on the line. Nobody cares while somebody else is being hurt.

When blue collar jobs disappeared it was tough luck.

Now the 'special people'...the IT types... are being hit, and suddenly it's the end of the world.

The market is a stupid beast that will gorge itself til it dies. We need to mandate trade only with companies that pay a living wage, fair taxes and respect the environment. No matter where they are based.

The Europeans must hate us.

and when you figure out how to do all that....you let us know.

Whyever would Europeans hate you?

They have a better quality of life than you do.

6 weeks vacation for starters.

A good start would be to listen to what Dennis Kucinich is saying about fair trade. And how hard would it be to tariff products and companies that don't follow OUR rules? We blackmailed China on respecting our patents on products that the right favors. We as the largest, most powerful economic nation in the world can do a lot more than cater to the multinationals. You act as if we are at thier mercy when in reality they are deathly afraid of what a more progessively social body politic could do to their "power".

And, as far as the Europeans comment, we are actively trying to drive THEIR wages down with our 'world is our sweatshop' ideas of "free trade".

Are we still a democracy, or not?

Kucinich has zip chance of being elected.

Are you a democracy? Gweeeeeelll. No.

But you think you are. Image is very important.

Why is it that you think that those who provide the jobs have the power and those who supply them do not?

A partnership of labor, political representation and consumer wealth all working together is the everpresent threat that the right wing fears. Why do you think they spend so much on media manipulation? There are so few of them. Also, their program is fatally flawed.

Labor and progressive causes won major concessions 70-80 years ago and the corportatists are in for another round of giving back. The liberal backlash cometh.

The pendulum swings both ways.

The truth of the matter is, wealth is not a zero sum game and the larger the middle class is the better off everyone is. Including the wealthy. Only they are too gluttonous to see that.

...where "Maple" expressed those "they give us our jobs" ideas as you claim?

What right wing rock did you your "they give us our jobs" ideas crawl from under?

I read some of the preceding posts by her and didn't see it.

I have been arguing the same damn point elsewhere and it spilled over into this. Sorry Maple.

lives on $1 dollar a day, and most of them live in Africa, and Asia. Yes these areas have their better offs, but they are very few and very far between.

And yes the idea of breeders and serfs is quite out dated, although race has nothing to do with it. But unfortunately the capitalism conquers all crew love this ideology with all their hearts, though they mask it with nice sounding words like free-markets and globalization. These corporations care nothing about lifting the poor of these developing countries out of poverty. All they care about is who can provide the cheapest labor. What better place for them to look than countries where people are straving so they don't care if the place where they work might expose them to chemicals that will cause them to have two-headed babies.

Your worldview is sadly out of date.

By about half a century.

Rant all you want...feel free...just don't mistake it for reality.

please enlighten me. I'm so eager to know what my world view is.

what you yourself wrote?

Do you often post without knowing that?

hardly constitutes as an entire world view, so once again, according to the omniscient Maple, what is my world view?

*

I just named the attitude of the dude who said the jobs should be kept in the US 'where they damn well belong'.

It positively screamed 'uppity wogs', how dare they?!'

Nations are constituted to provide for the safety and well-being of their citizens. Corporations are constituted for profit.

The relationship of corporations to nations is either symbiotic or parasitic depending ENTIRELY on the nation's legislation and enforcement.

It is the obligation of every nation to protect itself from parasitic corporations.

Allowing a corporate entity to leach mineral wealth, siphon off money, pollute the nation's air, sicken and maim a nation's people, and poison the water and land is not in the interest of any nation. A corporation that declares a profit that debits any nation in health or clean up costs is a luxury no nation can long afford. A corporation that manipulates hard-earned pensions that leave its employees dependent on the nation for survival, is simply a criminal enterprise that needs to be declared criminal and prosecuted.

Is a corporation that refuses to employ the citizens of its nation treasonous? What is the obligation of a corporation to a nation?

Globalization is an unavoidable reality because a plane in Hong Kong can bring plague to New York in a day. We must all cooperate with each other and work together, now that we are so closely linked. But allowing any corporation to impoverish a nation by its rampant, selfish greed is not in the interest of any nation, even an enemy nation.

A nation is NOT a business. It cannot and should not be run as one. Nor should it look the other way and allow corporations to glom on and suck the life out of one nation and then move on to another.

No corporation should be allowed that cannot prove its benefit to the nation, not the other way around.

global.

Including corporations.

And if you don't want them...others will take them happily.

the rest of the world is going to join us. If the US can't buy the shit the rest of the world produces, where does that leave the rest of the world?

Gloat it up. Just don't come whining to the U.S. when overpopulated India starts feeding upon itself and Pakistan as it begins to starve. BOOM!

the rest of the world will move on.

Because to the rest of the 6 billion...a few 300M or so is neither here nor there.

The world managed just fine before the US existed, and will manage just fine without it.

YOU however might want to consider that high horse you're on.

just like Europe was able to "move on" after the Roman Empire fell.

And...if you think America will just wallow in misery while it holds the largest, most sophisticated military in history, you are going to be sadly mistaken.

I don't approve of it, but its reality. I could care less about being an Empire or #1, but the fact is that the US is an empire whose collapse will cause major problems around the world....all thanks to your precious globalization.

so the Romans leaving didn't hurt it one bit.

And don't threaten me with your military. It's not doing too well now, much less during a major disaster.

The US is NOT an empire...it just thinks it is.

So did the Romans...but life went on.

You sound like King Canute trying to hold back the tide.

You'll have as much success as he did.

LOL...get a towel.

You're a bit delusional. US not an empire? Umm....sure. Ok. Yea..we're just a small little country over on this side of the Atlantic minding our own business, often cowed by the might of the Canucks. Are you now trying to dispute that the Roman Empire was an empire, or that its break-up caused much anarchy and chaos within Europe and the middle east?

The U.S. military is just fine. Bush might lose his job, but the military is going to be okey-ka-dokey. My best friend has top secret clearance with the U.S. military, so I'll take his word over your internet-jockey-ass anyday of the week.

and doesn't depend on sheep and the church for a living. Even the 'rate of change' has speeded up.

So it won't take us nearly that long to recover.

Hey...tell me how well things are going in Afghanistan and Iraq eh, oh mighty empire?

Or how well all your military worked to protect you on 9-11.

Democrats aren't much different than Freepers when it comes to chest-beating for the flag hmmmm?

Politically (for Bush), bad. Militarily, just fine. Economically, bad and getting worse. Culturally, horrible.

If the US military wasn't around, do you honestly think that countries wouldn't take advantage of the power vacuum? You live in a fantasy land that doesn't consider Power. It also seems you haven't studied more history. You are one of these fools that thinks everything is magically different now - regardless of what the past has shown us to be true over and over and over again. You've lived in a golden age (materialistically anyway) and haven't studied beyond it.

I'm an American before I'm a Democrat. You see, I realize that when the shit hits the fan (which will happen in my lifetime), you have to have to embrace your fellow Americans as brothers - regardless of political affiliation.

And for the record, I'm not necessarily a democrat, nor a republican. I don't fit into cookie cutter labels, because I actually have a set of principles based on truths beyond the shit propaganda spewed forth in the media -- but I am an American.

for thousands of years without the US.

I'm sure we'll do fine.

Missed you in WWI and II...or were you those guys that showed up late?

Sorry...Americans aren't my brothers.

One world, one race. No favorites.

But if I had to choose someone to hug, there's lots of others to choose from.

Isn't that just the fantasy-land view? Until you get a world government with a world military and world police force with world currency, a world language, and a world religion....your little fantasy is bullshit. And to think, you were shouting out the call of "reality" in other posts in this thread.

Here's a ball-breaker for you: The energy supply is going to run out..probably in the next 100 years, and I seriously doubt an alternative will be able to meet the massive demands of a globalized world. Without cheap energy, globalization is a joke. Try stopping that tide.

Our military is not supposed to do that kind of work in our cities. We have POLICE for that. 9/11 was a police matter that was bungled by idiot George who saw a handy excuse for the wars and legislation he wanted. The FBI is a police organization, not a military one.

Our military is adequate for a sane government. But no military would be adequate for George because he would simply keep expanding his military adventurism as a cover for failing domestic policies.

We allowed a fascist coup to take over our government. We cowered in the face of it. You are perfectly entitled to sneer and call us ugly names over that. We deserve them. Our Democratic leaders certainly deserve them. Have a good time. We earned it.

But maybe there's more than a little terror in your taunting. I mean, if it could happen here, why not Canada?

Do get your mythology straight. And your history, my god, your history.

Doing well includes 30 year wars and 100 year wars and plague and World War I and II and, oh, yes, when the US stock market tanked, the worldwide global Great Depression. At least, in my world history book. Yours, I take it, is still dealing with the world being created five thousand years ago as Bishop Usher said.

Argh, I forgot! MOST of the "doing well" of Europe consisted of raping the Americas and hauling off as much of its wealth as would fit in the tall ships. And India. Britain did it to India. And Greece.

Yeah. Doing well. We're not even gonna deal with the mass graves involved with all that doing well.

What is a nation to you, dear? A paper entity? What's its point? Why have nations at all when we can have lovely corporations?

Be specific.

Because whether he wanted to or not...he didn't.

The 'bottom line' as they say is that he took a soaking.

Yes, there are wars and all kinds of mischief in history.

You keep thinking you're still living in the Garden of Eden for some reason.

Did i say it was a bed of roses? No.

It's still about survival...and anyone who forgets that...doesn't survive.

I'm not God. I'm simply a 'reporter' here if you will.

People sabotage themselves with no end of foolishness allatime.

Much like you're doing now...ranting ideology, instead of doing something practical.

So that when YOUR tide comes in...you won't know what hit you.

Give up the bromide...wake up and smell the coffee as your Ann Landers used to say.

The US is not sacred. It has no more guarantee of survival than any other country ever did.

And all the boasting and military hardware won't protect you.

It didn't protect Rome either.

I personally don't have an ideological bone in my body. I'm entirely pragmatic.

YOUR pragmatism is a bit, I don't know, defeatist? You seem to think that corporations are our masters. You are very well brain-washed.

But your history sucks. It does. And you seem to think that labor can organize without the help of legislation. Oh, sweetie. Well, sure it can. Lots of people are willing to be martyred for such a cause.

BTW, whoever espoused it, one great union is as bad an idea as one religion.

BTW again, the Romans allowed mercenaries to do their fighting, just as we have begun to do. BAD idea. Bad.

ack..totally messed up.

that Canadians are assholes because you're afraid too many of us will try to emigrate to Canada to excape the Bush* regime.

Your complete lack of concern about anyone else, and your insistence that such an attitude is "reality" are certainly off-putting.

nor am I trying to prevent immigration to Canada.

I'm talking economics and globalizaton...a reality.

One that will happen whether I weep all over you or not.

The only thing VALUED in US of A is the almight DOLLAR. So therefore corporations only value their bottom lines, maximizing profit etc. These corporate honchos are only the ultimate expression of this all mighty value.

Until there is a REAL CHANGE is this overriding American Value this will continue. People must finally demand their right to a decent life which included health care, family time and the right not to slave away for ever. In America we value work and money not family and leisure and not community. Oh sure there are a few of us out here crying in the wilderness but our voices are drowned out.

We can keep jobs here. We can demand that jobs going to foreign countries pay at a comparable level (living wage for that country) and not pollute the environment at the risk of losing tax breaks etc.

We as a nation and a world community could do a lot to help all the workers of the world. But we don't. We need to repair our own house first and then tackle the problem as best we can in other countries.

...except Unions.

And that's what is out of whack.

With worldwide labor organization, wages all over the world will ultimately rise to relatively equal levels. At least as equal as they are in any one country today.

What citizens of countries with representative governments should do, is push their governments to enact treaties that require that workers be allowed to unionize in each country.

IN FACT, one could probably make the case to the WTO if one wished, that since nations that prohibit unionization have an unfair economic advantage in attracting foreign investment, that all countries MUST allow unions to provide a level playing field.

Alright, so maybe I'm using the WTO 'backwards' there, but if people force their governments to do this, since it's in ALL of our interests (except the 10% who don't give a damn about the rest of us), it will happen.

As I've said elsewhere, the alternative is serfdom.

As our multinational corporations are doing to us.

It will raise from poverty, to a relative level of affluence, a sliver of almost every "nation" then eventually seek out replacement workers and in the end flatten nearly the whole of humanity.

Only those in the top 10 to 20% will be comfy and secure (to a certain degree. As this become more apparent to the average American worker resentment will grow. Duck?!) and a "Plutocracy" will govern over even that glittery "middle" class.

The unholy irony is that American/Western Capitalism will do what Stalinism attempted, and eventually failed at(Notice I said "Stalinism".), by creating a "Vanguard Capitalizm" where crazed monopolies (their owners), and their subsidiaries, will rule over all Humanity.

What we have here is a very slick Fuedalism...

Wecome to a brave new (old) world.

Enjoy!

no labor laws to contend with.

I hate to wax Marxist here, but that is their goal.

They want us all to work for nothing, desperate for cash and willing to do anything to get crumbs they throw us.

That's why they want abortion illegal (people aren't going to stop having sex - and they will then be under the barrel)

That's why they want no safety net (welfare costs a state next to NOTHING. They want us all desperate)

...from taking their jobs. That's when all this evil "change" thing really started. :eyes:

It is extremely unfortunate that in USA the change often results in personal tragedies because of the totally inadequate social safety net and education systems, but IMNSHO the proper way to fix the situation would be to fix those problems and not cry "close the borders, don't let anything change!".

precisley the reason it will not get the discussion it derverves from our politicians...because they rarely will talk about the issues that are important.

* social security
* health care
* corporatism and it's affect on govt.

The last being untouchable becuase it is the "system"...a dark side we know little about. Sure we know about politicians being bought. But I dare say...what we are going through today is becuase of corporatism...greed and power. $4B a month...somebody makes out...not us.

It's hard because you can see things getting worse...and quite frankly I'm not sure when/how it will change.

Yes, that's it exactly.

The one sure thing we can count on in life is change, as odd as it sounds.

And all we can do is try to manage it as best as possible. Soften the blows as much as possible.

And to use yet another cliche/slogan/motto tonight....the best way to predict the future is to make it.

And none of us can do that if we try to stop change, and flash freeze the past or present.

A fascinating discussion....thank you all for the exercise. Adieu.

Why should we bother to protect the environment? The corporations will just move to places that let them dump chemicals into our water and toxic fumes into the air.

Why have child labor laws? The African kids will just take our jobs.

Why abolish slavery?

At least the slaves are fed and watered on a routine basis. Hell. We're all going to die anyway, why not just commit suicide and be done with it? Life IS pointless.

I don't understand it. Do you disagree with something I wrote? What? This?

"It is extremely unfortunate that in USA the change often results in personal tragedies because of the totally inadequate social safety net and education systems"

Huh?

"Too bad The Hunter-Gatherers' Union couldn't stop agriculture
...from taking their jobs. That's when all this evil "change" thing really started"

Or did I miss something? The "Hunter Gatherer's" not being able to stop "agriculture" comment is implying that you think labor unions and labor negotiotating with management is somehow standing in the way of progress. Sounds pretty right wing to me.

Personally I think labor has far more value than capital. Of course, there has been a fairly large propoganda and political campaign trying to prove otherwise. Listening to some of the things you are saying make it sound like it may be working.

Or did I miss something?

You missed this:

It is extremely unfortunate that in USA the change often results in personal tragedies because of the totally inadequate social safety net and education systems, but IMNSHO the proper way to fix the situation would be to fix those problems and not cry "close the borders, don't let anything change!".

I predict that you will continue to miss it in your eagerness to play little Stalin and pass sentence on Class Enemies. :evilgrin:

implying that you think labor unions and labor negotiotating with management is somehow standing in the way of progress.

False. Labor unions and labor negotiotating with management is not standing in the way of progress. Next straw man, please...

Labor unions trying to e.g. prohibit investments in higher level industries in developing countries certainly are standing in the way of progress at least in those countries. Duh.

"Play Stalin"? "Class Enemies"? "Straw man"? What in the world are you talking about?

Why don't you subsitute patent/copywrite protection with "close the borders, don't let anything change!"?

You and I are probably really only arguing matters of percentage points. Or maybe not. Class warfare accusations are a hoot.

I have no problem with investing in developing nations if it is to bring up their standard of living, environment and quality of life through added wealth and education. I do have a problem if it is done to drive down wages and environmental standards here.

"Play Stalin"? "Class Enemies"? "Straw man"? What in the world are you talking about?

I'm talking about this declaring me right winger based on your stretched "interpretation", the meticulous ignoring of anything that clearly contradicts it and declaring further that "some" unspecified things I'm saying mean what you claim they mean:

Or did I miss something? The "Hunter Gatherer's" not being able to stop "agriculture" comment is implying that you think labor unions and labor negotiotating with management is somehow standing in the way of progress. Sounds pretty right wing to me.

Personally I think labor has far more value than capital. Of course, there has been a fairly large propoganda and political campaign trying to prove otherwise. Listening to some of the things you are saying make it sound like it may be working.

You'd have done great as a prosecutor/judge in Stalin's show trials. BTW, this seems to be a pretty common practice among Kucinich supporters here at DU. I don't believe for a second that Kucinich himself would fantasize about sentencing all who disagree about something as Class Enemies but it doesn't give a very good impression that his supporters do...

I have no idea what you are talking about with the class enemies thing.

I wasn't talking about you. I was strictly talking about that single commentwhere you sarcastically smirked the "hunter gathers union". It sounded right wing to me. Still does. What exactly does that statement mean?

are trying to stop trade and globalization to protect existing jobs rather than what they should have done years ago which was A) Globalize themselves and B) use their political chips to ENCOURAGE trade and create of redistribute jobs.

A modest example would be that manufacturing could take place where resources are cheaper or more readily available but assembly could take place elsewhere.

What unions did ( which was protectionist and ultimately resulted in sinking membership numbers) was resist any negotiation when they had the numbers and the chance to force a balance without stopping the progress of glbalization.

I have mixed feelings due to the way capital concentrated upwards with mergers and the like because the control of capital at such a concentrated level is the anti-thesis of democracy but the point being unions resisted and lost.

They had some political capital and squandered it. Now they are left with a shrinking membership and diminishing pull.

To build an analogy, unions, like Pat Buchanan, had power chose to be protectionist and like Pat Buchanan can now make noise but have no real pull.

"are trying to stop trade and globalization to protect existing jobs rather than what they should have done years ago which was A) Globalize themselves and B) use their political chips to ENCOURAGE trade and create of redistribute jobs."

Were they really in position to globalize? Am I wrong or are you maybe(just a little) blaming the victim?

Another couple of honest questions from a political layman: 1) I grew up in the rust belt- before and after. IIRC, we lost most of our blue collar, middle-class union jobs pretty much in response to the Gas Crisis of the 1970's. Had Reagan chose to help our auto/steel/rubber industries (Lord knows he wasn't shy about corporate bailouts) would we now be having this conversation?

2) Why did labor bend over and put mom to work for Reagan so easily?

Had Reagan chose to help our auto/steel/rubber industries (Lord knows he wasn't shy about corporate bailouts) would we now be having this conversation?

HOW should Reagan have helped our auto/steel/rubber industries?

How did they "help" the Savings and Loans? The airlines? Big Pharm? Agribusiness? The defense industry? Big Energy?

As I've said before, my mind reading skills are practically nonexistent... is there something wrong with giving a straight answer?

How did they "help" the Savings and Loans? The airlines? Big Pharm? Agribusiness? The defense industry? Big Energy?

That seems to say that the measures should have been just giving them money and protecting them from foreign competition, e.g. banning imports of smaller, more economical German or Japanese cars or at least making them much more expensive with tariffs. Is that it?

when he threatened the tariffs. The issue with Japan was upside down trade, and yes, Reagan could have helped to make the auto industry more competitve in other nations markets as he COULD have done the same with electronics such as TV's. I seem to recall Zenith developing some technology, can't quite remember and the technology being sold to Japan as Zenith didn't have the money to develop it by that time...sorry for the rusty recall.

The fact is their leadershipe was more bent on influence peddling with fear tactics rather than brains. I am PRO UNION, btw

By allowing our visa laws to be abused for short-term corporate interests we are training replacements for all of America's jobs. There would be no discussion of economics but for this abuse. Quite simply, our Republican-led government is selling out Americans on behalf of the corporations who make the campaign contributions and dish out the consulting jobs.

IT is at the heart of most white collar work. Where IT goes, so will go all white collar business work. The IT person training his/her replacement is a microcosm of what L-1 and H-1B visa abuse is doing to America itself. The programs began under Clinton, the massive abuse under Bush. Thanks to the Bush Republicans and their owners, America is training replacements for America.

The American government must think of Americans first. Can Americans tolerate anything less? If I wanted my kids to live in India, we would move. The Republicans want to move India here.

If Corporate America send jobs over seas too increase profit margins, won't they (eventually) have to sell products overseas because no Americans will have jobs (and thus money) to buy their cheaper products?

I'm not an economist so someone help me out.

Perhaps Maple would care to enlighten us some more?
:eyes:

I think Maple is being given a hard time for telling the unpalatable truth.

Which has the bigger potential market, the U.S or the rest of the world? It's really that simple. It's unpleasant, but this is what unfettered capitalism does.

Unfortunately, it looks like corporations are going to make the leap before governments or unions. In this case environmental and safety regs will be ignored and workers will be exploited.

DOES NOT mean that we have to LIKE it or that we don't fight for jobs for American workers. Sheesh!
If other countries do not have the same kind of workplace regulations as the United States, then it's not fair trade. I'm all for improving living standards everywhere else in the world...I'm willing to sacrifice a certain amount of my standard of living to do so. However, I will NOT accept the wholesale moving of jobs by American companies entirely to countries that do not have to play by the same rules of the workplace as we do. If the companies moving their jobs to other countries cut their prices enough to be comparable to places like India then I will happily work at a job for an equivalent wage of an Indian worker.

Look, I'm going to lose my job in three months time because my company has decide that outsourcing my job to India is the way forward. Do I like it? Of course I don't. However, I saw the writing on the wall a few years ago. As the U.K primary and secondary industries have been gutted now it's the turn of the tertiary stuff. Unfortunately, I can't see the next sector that will absorb the jobs. Perhaps we'll all be massaging each other 7 hrs a day.

Do you think the shirt (probably) you are wearing was made somewhere with U.S style labour laws? Very unlikely. People only seem to get het up when "good" jobs are threatened.

You're entirely right of course, this is not fair trade. But that is not what globalisation promises. Corporations will go where labour is cheapest. Whilst Governments are in the pockets of big business nothing will be done.

I applaud your efforts to fight this trend but without global orgaisation I'm afraid it is forlorn. Good luck though.

And you are right that it will take global organization to fight it. What bugs me, and I didn't get this from you but from Maple, is the attitude that seems to infer that it is a good thing. It's not a good thing for US and it's not a good thing for workers who are exploited without adequate labor protection laws. Progress is not always for the good and inevitability doesn't mean we have to like it.

...FYI, sweatshops pay much more than agriculture and give better conditions even without labor laws - and that's without mentioning IT jobs, which are yet better (and no, I don't have a link). So, please, don't tell me that protectionism benefits third-world workers.

Neither is a good thing.

...given purchasing power differences between first-world and third-world nation, even if the employer pays an Indian 1/5th of the salary he pays an American, the Indian can enjoy the same quality of life and an extremely higher quality of life compared to the average Indian.

and you are just fine and dandy with YOUR job being eliminated for someone else, I assume?

...do you think that American workers are more important than Indian workers that they deserve special protection? They aren't, and they don't.

I'M SAYING THAT, FOR EXAMPLE, INDIANS SHOULD HAVE THE SAME WORKER PROTECTIONS AND REGULATIONS THAT WE DO! IF THEY DON'T THEN WE ARE FUCKED AND THEY ARE EXPLOITED! DO YOU UNDERSTAND? CAN I MAKE IT ANY CLEARER FOR YOU?

...the more I know I am right.

And just FYI, without jobs first going into India and Indonesia, there ain't a chance in hell that either is going to get labor protections. The progress I foresee goes much the same way it did in the USA and Europe, only far more quickly: an agricultural society turning into a one of unfettered capitalism, which creates backlash in the form of labor protection. It's impossible to create the industrial base that a modern society requires without having corporations do that job, which they won't unless they have a profit motive to do so. Forcing the Indian government to enforce minimum wage laws is one thing; equalizing conditions is a completely different thing that ignores several differences between India and the USA, including the purchasing power of a dollar, GDP per capita, current state of progress and standard of living, and so on.

But ethically claiming that due to a lower standard of living labour conditions can be compromised kind of sucks.

After "creates backlash in the form of labor protection." India will be dropped like a stone and it'll be off to Cambodia or Vietnam or Africa or anywhere else.

So that someone in a "third-world" nation could do the same job for a fraction of your salary?

So that a black person in the South (let's assume you're a white NYer of Californian for a second) will get it for a fraction of your salary?

to answer your stupid strawman rebuttal.

...so you're color-blin about your job, I take it? I am, too. I am also nation-blind; in other words, I wouldn't be willing to give up a good job for anyone, American or not. However, I consider the Indian's wishes to get a job as strong as the American's wishes to get the same job.

Of course the Indian wants a job just as bad as I do. I'm not willing to starve so he or she can have it, though.

Part of the reason industry thrived in the U.S was due to its infrastructure. Workers past and present are paying for this to be built and maintained.

Companies relocating are essentially stealing the advantages given to them by their original host nations.