Originally Posted By HRM Maybe someone can enlighten me on this subject: it seems many are quick to blame capitalism on "shipping U.S. jobs oversees" or government on "regulating and taxing" businesses increasing costs. I don't think it's a black or white, right or wrong, capitalism or socialist simple issue... both sides have contributed to the loss of jobs overseas and high costs of business. Even the fact that Unions demand a high wage for hourly wages, yet workers as consumers will pay for the lowest price on products made overseas with cheap labor. Seriously, how popular would the i-phone be if it "was made in America" with Union Labor, and sold accordingly...?
Originally Posted By andyll <<Even the fact that Unions demand a high wage for hourly wages,>> Union workers no longer get a 'high' wage' I personally like what GM did. Wages are pretty average but if the company make a lot of profit the workers get a piece of it. <<Seriously, how popular would the i-phone be if it "was made in America" with Union Labor, and sold accordingly...?>> Apple had over 100 Billion in cash at the end of last year. Perhaps they could take a little less profit, charge a little more ( apple users will pay it) and move some of their manufacturing back to the USA.
Originally Posted By andyll <<it seems many are quick to blame capitalism>> BTW... we don't blame 'capitalism' for jobs being shipped overseas. We had 'capitalism' before the global market. We blame greed... the drive to squeeze every penny of profit out of the company at the expense of their workers and the country. Then as the real wage of our workers decreases and they can't afford to buy our products instead of increasing wages they blame the government and insist on lower taxes and less government services which hurts the workers and country even more. When they can no longer squeeze money out of the american worker they'll flee to other ( socialist ) countries and live off the profits they've stashed offshore.
Originally Posted By mrkthompsn Democrats complaining against offshoring exposes their truth. They don't care about the little people. They just care about themselves. Those jobs shipped to China help thousands of Chinese families who would otherwise be half-slaves in rice paddies. Offshoring helps those extreme-poor populations uplift themselves. Same for offshoring to places like Africa. I'm wearing a shirt today that reads "Made in Ethiopia". I have another that reads "Made in Bangladesh" The ~true~ poor people of the world live outside of the US, and offshoring can support them. Isn't that the humane thing to do? But Democrats don't care about that. They just don't care at all. They just try to "show" that they care - in exchange for votes.
Originally Posted By mrkthompsn If you want Democrats to stand true to the prevention of offshoring, then ask why we are importing oil from the Middle East during this administration.
Originally Posted By tiggertoo I could probably write for hours on this topic given the numerous elements. But I’ll try to be brief. Capitalism IS largely to blame for the offshoring of jobs. Like corn, soy beans, and wheat, labor is a market commodity. If it's cheaper to hire Vietnamese at a buck an hour, they'll do it. The remedy this in the global market, the US needs to implement disincentives (make it less profitable) for corporations to offshore industries while operating in the US. Or, wait until the global cost of living reaches equilibrium. Taxation as a cause is negligible, although one might not think so listening to some pundits: 1) most countries have business taxes; 2) the US already has one of the lowest corporate tax rates in the world; 3) the top corporate tax rate is nearly 20% lower than it was in the prosperous 1950s, and 11% lower than during the Reagan years. If businesses prospered during relative boom years despite higher tax rate, it’s hard to make the argument that the current tax rate is an imposition. Regulations do give an incentive to offshore as it often costs a great deal to retrofit or make the requisite changes. However, it’s ironic that the very business owners who benefit from regulates, are the same folks denouncing them. It’s sort of the nimby effect vis-a-vis corporations: to a business owner who resides in the US, regulations that ensure clean air and that structures and products are safe for consumers are great---unless it’s their business being regulated.
Originally Posted By tiggertoo <<Those jobs shipped to China help thousands of Chinese families who would otherwise be half-slaves in rice paddies.>> That's the equilibrium I was referring to. However, once Chinese wages rise, they'll move to Vietnam or Bangladeshi or Nigeria. Most likely though, it will pull our standard of living down rather than raise 3rd world nations'.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>Those jobs shipped to China help thousands of Chinese families who would otherwise be half-slaves in rice paddies.<< The money by and large goes to the Chinese government, not the workers, who are paid pennies. They're half-slaves now in electronics, not rice paddies. Don't kid yourself that your not made in America products are building a thriving middle class in these places -- it's going mostly to corrupt governments who don't share most of our interests.
Originally Posted By ecdc Re: Post 4. That's an interesting perspective I hadn't personally considered before - that offshoring of U.S. jobs helps the genuinely poor. I think it's a worthwhile factor to consider. That said, there's two very serious problems with that post. First, it seems to imply that Republicans outsource for this reason, or do care about the extreme poverty in China, Africa, etc. To which I respond, bwahahahahahaha! Republicans support outsourcing because of greed, pure and simple. It makes it easier for big companies to make money. I follow political talking points fairly closely, and until I read this post, I had never, ever heard the argument from Republicans/Conservatives that outsourcing is a good idea because it helps diminish poverty in foreign countries. Can you fathom how well THAT message would go over with their base? "Hey, it's good that companies ship jobs overseas because we want Chinese people to have better jobs." Second, it ignores the abuses of outsourcing well-documented all over the world. Romney's currently taking heat for outsourcing the 2002 Olympic uniforms to Burma, well known for child labor where the kids aren't paid anything. (In fairness, I haven't read enough about this to know if this is a reasonable charge to lay at Romney's feet.) Wal-Mart takes grief for their Chinese factories, where employees work such long hours, they actually live in dorms on-site at the company. So a portrayal of outsourced jobs as just helping the poor in other countries is oversimplistic at best. Clearly a lot of American companies make billions at the expense of abuse of workers in other nations.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>Perhaps they could take a little less profit, charge a little more ( apple users will pay it) and move some of their manufacturing back to the USA.<< Don't be silly! That's unAmerican!
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <BTW... we don't blame 'capitalism' for jobs being shipped overseas. We had 'capitalism' before the global market. We blame greed... the drive to squeeze every penny of profit out of the company at the expense of their workers and the country.> Exactly right. Something changed in the mindset of US/multi-national corporations. Consider the 50's; US companies manufactured their goods here, by and large. China wasn't open, but it certainly would have been cheaper to manufacture in Mexico, or elsewhere in Latin America, or Thailand, or India... but they didn't. They manufactured here. And note that this was the period with by far the greatest percentage of unionized workers, before or since, so US labor compared to elsewhere had probably a GREATER discrepancy then. One union paycheck (not two paychecks, as with most families now) afforded a solid middle-class lifestyle, and allowed the average American to BUY all these things that were begin built. That was always sort of the unspoken social contract US companies had with US workers. That's gone now. Now most just chase the cheapest labor they can find, actually incentivized to do so by policies that offer favorable tax rates to companies that DO offshore, rather than those that don't. (A Democratic proposal to partially remedy this was just blocked by the GOP, by the way, and not for the first time.)
Originally Posted By mrkthompsn "Republicans support outsourcing because of greed, pure and simple" I'm Republican. I dictate points of manufacturing in my job. I'm not doing it for greed. It's not pure and simple, and it's not fair to lay that on a party. One point of blame is the US consumer. We're not willing to spend what it would take to produce items over here as well as paying workers their expected wages and benefits. Consider this: <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesleadershipforum/2012/01/25/the-real-reason-the-u-s-doesnt-make-iphones-we-wouldnt-want-to/" target="_blank">http://www.forbes.com/sites/fo...want-to/</a>
Originally Posted By ecdc >>I'm not doing it for greed. It's not pure and simple, and it's not fair to lay that on a party.<< Then where are all the Republican talking points trumpeting outsourcing as a way to help end poverty in third-world nations? I mean, if that's the point, why aren't they talking about it?
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <We're not willing to spend what it would take to produce items over here as well as paying workers their expected wages and benefits.> We used to (see #11). It was one of those feedback loops Nick Hanauer talked about. American workers were paid a decent wage and were thus able to afford the made-in-America products that, yes, cost most than they would have if they'd been made in Mexico. But US workers were generally well paid, so they could (and did) buy all those American goods. The idea goes back to Henry Ford, at least. In more recent years, though, there's been a race to the bottom for labor costs. And as US wages stagnate or decline, the desire for cheaper goods goes up. It's kind of a chicken-and-egg thing.
Originally Posted By dshyates But you guys are forgetting that that was when the corps needed a strong American middle class because we were the only HUGE country with a notable middle class of consumers to sell to. Now that places like China and India have huge numbers of middle class individuals they can sell their products to, they have given the American people that made them who they are the big middle finger.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>Now that places like China and India have huge numbers of middle class individuals they can sell their products to<< Keep in mind that the "middle class" in those countries do not have the buying power that our middle class does. Case in point: I have relatives in Mexico who are college educated and who earn the princely sum of $1500 USD per month at their white collar jobs. Many still live with their parents, even though they are in their late 30's and 40's.
Originally Posted By dshyates The percentage of their population that has the level of buying power Americans have is low but even the low percentage dwarf's American's buying power because of the sheer size of their populations. The US auto industry sold more cars in China this year than the US.
Originally Posted By mrkthompsn A little side note of offshoring: Brazil has closed their borders to imports in spirit of "increasing their jobs". Brazil requires all products sold in Brazil to be made in Brazil. To enforce this, there an enormous tariff on imported products. There's a Foxconn factory in Sau Paulo. Apple could make iPhones there, but they select not to. If they did, they'd be much more expensive than maing them in Shenzhen, China. Apple has selected to ship the phones from China and accept the tariff. Even with the tariff, Brazil customers experience a cheaper price than if phones were manufacturered in Brazil. The result: less jobs in Sau Paulo, and these prices: <a href="http://9to5mac.com/2011/12/16/why-does-iphone-4s-cost-2000-in-brazil-and-what-does-apple-plan-to-do-about-it/" target="_blank">http://9to5mac.com/2011/12/16/...bout-it/</a>
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Did you not even see this from your link: "Once the iPhones “Made in Brazil” begin to ship, Brazilians should see those sky-high price points drop." (snip) "the first iPhones reportedly rolled from the assembly line in November. The Brazilian prices even beat those in India"
Originally Posted By tiggertoo <<BTW... we don't blame 'capitalism' for jobs being shipped overseas..>> I do. It's just a Machiavellian form of capitalism (seriously, his ‘virtues’ would fit in perfectly on Wall Street). But it's still capitalism. The problem is that there are intrinsic pressures within the system that sort of morphs into a kind of Darwinian contest. Even Adam Smith understood the inherent dangers of his system. That’s why he framed it within a social contract. It seems modern capitalists have tossed aside the contract portion, and decided to plod on employing just the mechanisms for maximizing profit----hence, offshoring.
