Outsourcing - Overhyped?

[Glirk Dient]

According to this article outsourcing is overhyped. Here are a few quotes taken from the article.

Should Americans be concerned about the economic effects of outsourcing? Not particularly. Most of the numbers thrown around are vague, overhyped estimates. What hard data exist suggest that gross job losses due to offshore outsourcing have been minimal when compared to the size of the entire U.S. economy.

Most jobs will remain unaffected altogether: close to 90 percent of jobs in the United States require geographic proximity.

The parts of production that are more complex, interactive, or innovative -- including, but not limited to, marketing, research, and development -- are much more difficult to shift abroad. As an International Data Corporation analysis on trends in IT services concluded, "the activities that will migrate offshore are predominantly those that can be viewed as requiring low skill since process and repeatability are key underpinnings of the work. Innovation and deep business expertise will continue to be delivered predominantly onshore.

The Forrester prediction of 3.3 million lost jobs, for example, is spread across 15 years. That would mean 220,000 jobs displaced per year by offshore outsourcing -- a number that sounds impressive until one considers that total employment in the United States is roughly 130 million, and that about 22 million new jobs are expected to be added between now and 2010. Annually, outsourcing would affect less than .2 percent of employed Americans.

less than 20 percent of workers affected by outsourcing lose their jobs; the rest are repositioned within the firm.

Offshore outsourcing is not the bogeyman that critics say it is.

 

[Mechagodzilla]

Seems sensible to me. The whole outsourcing thing is definitely overblown.

 

[Yuri]

You obviously don't have a job that is being taken over by outsourcing, like I will and many people I know already do. As in, my family.

It's not overhyped. Outsourcing is a terrible thing, not just for Americans who lose their jobs, but to the foreign country citizens who end up being just slave labor.

Bush recently stated that outsourcing is "the future" of the US. Which I place as being quite treasonous, and one of the worst things that asshole has ever said.

You must not have jobs that are being replaced. You also must not actually know exactly what outsourcing is and what it does.

I'm confused, too, how is the "20% of worker affected by outsourcing losing their jobs" a good thing? That's a lot of people. One out of every 5 people will lose their jobs to overseas slave labor. The other 4 will be reposititioned in a different, probably less-paying job. 20% is a lot.

I dunno where you got the article, but outsourcing is very real, and not overhyped.

 

[Glirk Dient]

You obviously don't have a job that is being taken over by outsourcing, like I will and many people I know already do. As in, my family.

It's not overhyped. Outsourcing is a terrible thing, not just for Americans who lose their jobs, but to the foreign country citizens who end up being just slave labor.

Bush recently stated that outsourcing is "the future" of the US. Which I place as being quite treasonous, and one of the worst things that asshole has ever said.

You must not have jobs that are being replaced. You also must not actually know exactly what outsourcing is and what it does.

I'm confused, too, how is the "20% of worker affected by outsourcing losing their jobs" a good thing? That's a lot of people. One out of every 5 people will lose their jobs to overseas slave labor. The other 4 will be reposititioned in a different, probably less-paying job. 20% is a lot.

I dunno where you got the article, but outsourcing is very real, and not overhyped.

The article explains a lot...read it.

Outsourcing isn't ruining the economy and tranfering all jobs out of the U.S. as many people fear. Read the article all the way through.

 

[Yuri]

It doesn't matter if it affects two people here. Its still wrong.

And it doesn't affect two people. It affects millions.

It is ruining the economy. It is making the economy dependant on slave labor overseas. It's slave labor. And its transferring jobs.

I read the article, and a lot of it seems like its written by a right-wing conservative big business owner who only really cares about the immediate benefits, and is pulling numbers out of his butt to make it seem like it "ain't so bad."

I promote a self-sufficient economy which does not rely on employing people who aren't considered Americans, so American working laws can be ignored.

 

[Glirk Dient]

It doesn't matter if it affects two people here. Its still wrong.

And it doesn't affect two people. It affects millions.

It is ruining the economy. It is making the economy dependant on slave labor overseas. It's slave labor. And its transferring jobs.

I read the article, and a lot of it seems like its written by a right-wing conservative big business owner who only really cares about the immediate benefits, and is pulling numbers out of his butt to make it seem like it "ain't so bad."

Did you read the quotes?

The Forrester prediction of 3.3 million lost jobs, for example, is spread across 15 years. That would mean 220,000 jobs displaced per year by offshore outsourcing -- a number that sounds impressive until one considers that total employment in the United States is roughly 130 million, and that about 22 million new jobs are expected to be added between now and 2010. Annually, outsourcing would affect less than .2 percent of employed Americans.

Notice the amount of new jobs being created...

With the outsourcing making few areas of a business cost less they have more money to hire domestic workers in other areas, which is why when someones job is outsourced they are often moved within the company.

 

[Yuri]

Dude, I tend not to trust one article on one website.

I tend to trust things that are directly influencing my life right now. Things that have been affecting me ever since I was born. Extra jobs in other areas has nothing to do with other people losing their jobs to outsourcing. We could not outsource, and yet at the same time, have new, extra jobs for all of the unemployed.

Actually, sorry, I didn't mean to ignore that last line. You're right. But this leads to the next part of my post:

You're ignoring the second, maybe even more important part of my point:

It is EVIL! You can say that "oh we give teh jobs to teh peoplez in teh foriegn places LOL!" But if we just left them alone, they would work things out by themselves, and there would be no depending on each other. We don't need to shove our big fat asses into other countres with these fancy new "jobs" (read: slave work) so we can profit off of their misery. It isn't neccessary, only so some asshole who is already filthy rich can get even more filthy rich.

We have humanitarian working laws here, like minimum wage and overtime, for a reason. Allowing dirty assholes to go to other countries so they can ignore these laws makes no sense.





Also, Glirk, its quite funny that no one posts in this thread while the WTC and Abortion threads get a bazillion posts. I sincerely doubt that most people even know what outsourcing is, which is quite a frightening thought.

 

[Revisedsoul]

asiains, being treated better than black slaves, but just barly

 

[Yuri]

He's right.

Anyone else?

 

[Mechagodzilla]

It is overblown, but that doesn't mean it is good.

All in all, it's no different from all those walmart-esque jerks giving immigrants shit wages.
Folks hate that, but love outsourcing. I don't get it.

 

[Yuri]

I hate both. A real, real lot. I mean, they are pretty much the same thing. No one, not even non-citizens, should not qualify for the current working laws. It just doesn't make sense in a humanitarian standpoint. Only in a greedy, self-centered, profiteering, stereotypical American one.

Whatchu mean "overblown?"

 

[Stigmata]

The Forrester prediction of 3.3 million lost jobs, for example, is spread across 15 years. That would mean 220,000 jobs displaced per year by offshore outsourcing -- a number that sounds impressive until one considers that total employment in the United States is roughly 130 million, and that about 22 million new jobs are expected to be added between now and 2010. Annually, outsourcing would affect less than .2 percent of employed Americans.

.2 percent of employed Americans is "only" .2 percent from a percentile perspective. Convert that to absolute values, and this affects over 250 000 Americans. No, that's not a "huge" chunk of the population, but that's two hundred and fifty thousand people who are going to be affected by this.

Regardless of this, outsourcing isn't entirely moral. Erestheux did a pretty good job of explaining that.

 

[Glirk Dient]

Yep...250k which as I pointed out those people that are affected will most likely be moved elsewhere within the company and look at how many jobs are being created each year.

As for the outsourcing...it isn't like the people oversease are getting paid pennies on the hour with someone driving them with a whip. The money we pay them goes further over there so it is good pay even though it is less by our standards. To them it is nice, I know plenty of people who have moved to another country to do the same job because they will get 10x more since the money goes farther.

 

[Captain M4d]

Honestly, when I first saw this, I thought it had to do with the Source engine. Sorry. Just being blunt.

 

[Yuri]

Thanks, Stig.

Yep...250k which as I pointed out those people that are affected will most likely be moved elsewhere within the company and look at how many jobs are being created each year.

Who says that these jobs are better? Who says that these people want to change their jobs because they are being replaced by foriegn slaves? I don't think that outsourcing will lead to unemployment across the US. I think that the US will be too dependant on foreign workforces, and that it is completely unneccesary to outsource. And this dependance will lead to something worse. And, the immediate results of the replacement aren't so great.

As for the outsourcing...it isn't like the people oversease are getting paid pennies on the hour with someone driving them with a whip. The money we pay them goes further over there so it is good pay even though it is less by our standards. To them it is nice, I know plenty of people who have moved to another country to do the same job because they will get 10x more since the money goes farther.

I don't mean to be offensive.. but you are wrong. They are being paid pennies. The same jobs in India will get 1/10 of what the workers would get here. The sort of slave labor that isn't technically slavery... but practically is. All so some big company can make more money for its CEOs instead of just being economically balanced and independant.




Hehe, Captain. That made me smirk.

But seriously, no one knows what outsourcing is so no one can really try to stop it...

 

[Pajari]

Thanks, Stig.
Who says that these jobs are better? Who says that these people want to change their jobs because they are being replaced by foriegn slaves?

You seem to have an extremely loose definition of slavery. According to you, a programmer working for a US company is a slave, because he's getting paid a decent wage for his experience and skills and making a far better living than he would otherwise. Also, who says the jobs are better? No one. No one said they were worse, either. No one can prove a damn thing.

I don't think that outsourcing will lead to unemployment across the US. I think that the US will be too dependant on foreign workforces, and that it is completely unneccesary to outsource. And this dependance will lead to something worse. And, the immediate results of the replacement aren't so great.

Here's a small hint. The US has been dependent on foreign workforces for about twenty years, ever since China, Indonesia, and other third-world countries started spitting out consumer goods by the ton. If you wanted to make economic nationalism a talking point, you're about two decades too late.

I don't mean to be offensive.. but you are wrong. They are being paid pennies. The same jobs in India will get 1/10 of what the workers would get here. The sort of slave labor that isn't technically slavery... but practically is. All so some big company can make more money for its CEOs instead of just being economically balanced and independant.

Everything is relative, and I guarantee you that 1/10 of the wage here is easily triple the median wage of a Indian worker. You're comparing dollars to rupees. Its not slave labor when its among the most lucrative jobs in the entire country.

Also, I'm confused by your "independent" comment. By "independent", you really mean "not international", which is absoloutely out of the question for nearly every company in the US. We need cheap foreign labor, and unless you're willing to give up cheap, quality goods and place yourself at the mercy of unions, then I suggest you not fear the reaper.

And economically balanced? What does that mean? A company is going to pursue the most profits and the least cost, not restrict itself to save someone's job. Its capitalism, and however dirty and distasteful it is, it's far better than the alternative.

 

[Yuri]

You seem to have an extremely loose definition of slavery. According to you, a programmer working for a US company is a slave, because he's getting paid a decent wage for his experience and skills and making a far better living than he would otherwise. Also, who says the jobs are better? No one. No one said they were worse, either. No one can prove a damn thing.

When did I say that was a slave? I'm generalizing here-- but when you are paid so little that the only thing you can do is buy food and go to work some more, that's slave labor. Of course, not ever outsourced job will do that. But Nike will. And so will all kinds of other companies.

It's not just the slave labor that is wrong, but the whole point of outsourcing. Screwing over foriegn people because you can't do it to domestic people. And in the process, losing American jobs.

Point taken about the new jobs.

Here's a small hint. The US has been dependent on foreign workforces for about twenty years, ever since China, Indonesia, and other third-world countries started spitting out consumer goods by the ton. If you wanted to make economic nationalism a talking point, you're about two decades too late.

Why are you talking to me in a demeaning manner? I have not done that at all in this thread, and was specifically trying to avoid it. Its not welcome.

And so I guess its okay to dig yourself deeper in the pit then, instead of standing still or perhaps trying to get yourself out?

Everything is relative, and I guarantee you that 1/10 of the wage here is easily triple the median wage of a Indian worker. You're comparing dollars to rupees. Its not slave labor when its among the most lucrative jobs in the entire country

That doesn't matter. It isn't our country. Making them depend on our low-paying jobs ain't that great. They are getting screwed because we are putting our dirty little hands in there.

Also, I'm confused by your "independent" comment. By "independent", you really mean "not international", which is absoloutely out of the question for nearly every company in the US. We need cheap foreign labor, and unless you're willing to give up cheap, quality goods and place yourself at the mercy of unions, then I suggest you not fear the reaper.

So we are better than foreign countries, which gives us the right to use them? I actually believe in an ideal society which is not reliant on using people who aren't protected by labor laws for the rich's benefit. Obviously this isn't going to happen, but hey, I can still bitch.

And economically balanced? What does that mean? A company is going to pursue the most profits and the least cost, not restrict itself to save someone's job. Its capitalism, and however dirty and distasteful it is, it's far better than the alternative.

Obviously, a company is going to do whatever the hell gets the most money. But the government shouldn't allow something that will eventually lead to the loss of American jobs and also promote overseas slave labor. At least, my ideal government. Realistically, I would at least hope that the government didn't promote it...

 

[Pajari]

When did I say that was a slave? I'm generalizing here-- but when you are paid so little that the only thing you can do is buy food and go to work some more, that's slave labor. Of course, not ever outsourced job will do that. But Nike will. And so will all kinds of other companies.

I'd venture a guess that to someone with no job and no future, even an entry-level position with a crappy American wage is a godsend. China started out exactly like you described, and its now got a thriving middle class and prosperity to spare. And of course, for the skilled jobs we outsource, people can do a lot more with the wage than just buy food.

It's not just the slave labor that is wrong, but the whole point of outsourcing. Screwing over foriegn people because you can't do it to domestic people. And in the process, losing American jobs.

Point taken about the new jobs.

Like I said, a better job for a foreigner isn't really screwing them over so much a giving them a leg up. If Nike was a crappy place to work relative to the rest of the options, then people wouldn't work there. The company scales its wages and benefits to the labor market, is all.

And to be honest, it never stays that way for long. Economic growth, if allowed to continue, leads to a far better quality of life for everyone, and the first stage of that is the low-wage jobs.

Why are you talking to me in a demeaning manner? I have not done that at all in this thread, and was specifically trying to avoid it. Its not welcome.

Sorry, I got a bit ahead of myself. Politics will do that to me .

That doesn't matter. It isn't our country. Making them depend on our low-paying jobs ain't that great. They are getting screwed because we are putting our dirty little hands in there.

I'd argue that a crappy job is better than no job, and, again, a low paying job here is a high paying one overseas (or people wouldn't take the jobs overseas). Yeah, its a sleazy move, but its capitalism, and it's worked for billions of people around the world. See South Korea or China for examples of how low-paying jobs can lead very quickly to huge amounts of prosperity, and, even better, political freedom. No one is getting screwed here, except the US workers that temporarily lose their jobs. But to be honest, there is always room for a hardworking, skilled worker in our economy.

So we are better than foreign countries, which gives us the right to use them? I actually believe in an ideal society which is not reliant on using people who aren't protected by labor laws for the rich's benefit. Obviously this isn't going to happen, but hey, I can still bitch.

I only said we were more economically stable, draw from that what you wish. And we don't have any 'right' to employ people, but if we set up shop and they want to work for us, then things begin to move along. No one is putting a gun to their head- the conditions may be horrible and this may be the only way to earn money, but it is still a free choice.

And I could easily argue that when people become more prosperous they are protected by labor laws and protected from exploitation. The only way to make them more prosperous is to build up the economy, and that starts with jobs, however crappy.

[quote
Obviously, a company is going to do whatever the hell gets the most money. But the government shouldn't allow something that will eventually lead to the loss of American jobs and also promote overseas slave labor. At least, my ideal government. Realistically, I would at least hope that the government didn't promote it...[/QUOTE]

There's that slave labor thing again. I already adressed it.

The government shouldn't meddle in a company's affairs (not promote or doscourage outsourcing), especially since its the government of the country where the outsourcing is occuring that should be deciding what to do. I'd rather leave it up to Indonesia or India if they want US jobs or not. If they find them to be slavery, let them kick Nike or Addidas out.

 

[Yuri]

I'd venture a guess that to someone with no job and no future, even an entry-level position with a crappy American wage is a godsend. China started out exactly like you described, and its now got a thriving middle class and prosperity to spare. And of course, for the skilled jobs we outsource, people can do a lot more with the wage than just buy food.

Pfft. You just said that we are taking the course of China! China has some of the worst poverty problems like, evar.

Even if they can buy more than just food (maybe some clothes, too), they are still being screwed by being paid 1/10 of what they have earned, only because their country doesn't protect them from evil corporations.

Like I said, a better job for a foreigner isn't really screwing them over so much a giving them a leg up. If Nike was a crappy place to work relative to the rest of the options, then people wouldn't work there. The company scales its wages and benefits to the labor market, is all.

And to be honest, it never stays that way for long. Economic growth, if allowed to continue, leads to a far better quality of life for everyone, and the first stage of that is the low-wage jobs.

It's giving them a temporary leg-up, but that's all. If they didn't have us in their countries disrupting their economy and stealing their profits... they would prosper on their own. If India didn't have us there, then they would try to make their own companies to compete instead of getting paid pennies for a job that deserves much more.

You are underestimating the sweat shops, too. You can't leave Nike sweatshops. They are essentially slave shops without the physical chains. You are born into these shops, you are paid only with food and housing in some circumstances... if you leave, you will starve. There are no other jobs to get.

You also keep saying that these are low-paid jobs, when outsourcing certainly isn't limited to factory work. Programmers and phone service people and stuff like that, which are not quite low-paid jobs are being replaced too. Although, I guess you can say that these are low-paid jobs once you make the foreign, since they are completely underpaid.

Sorry, I got a bit ahead of myself. Politics will do that to me .

It's okay, I can't say that the same doesn't happen to me. Even in this thread. No worries

I'd argue that a crappy job is better than no job, and, again, a low paying job here is a high paying one overseas (or people wouldn't take the jobs overseas). Yeah, its a sleazy move, but its capitalism, and it's worked for billions of people around the world. See South Korea or China for examples of how low-paying jobs can lead very quickly to huge amounts of prosperity, and, even better, political freedom. No one is getting screwed here, except the US workers that temporarily lose their jobs. But to be honest, there is always room for a hardworking, skilled worker in our economy.

People take the jobs overseas because, obviously, their own countries are poor or they are unemployed. There are certain areas of the US that other countries could come to and employ happily for crazy hours and little pay, but we don't allow that, do we?

Political freedom in China and Korea? First of all-- which Korea? Second of all-- China has terrible political freedom. What are you talking about? China steps all over its low-class to have a tiny middle-class "prosper," and at the same time has no political freedoms... You sure do like China for some reason.

I only said we were more economically stable, draw from that what you wish. And we don't have any 'right' to employ people, but if we set up shop and they want to work for us, then things begin to move along. No one is putting a gun to their head- the conditions may be horrible and this may be the only way to earn money, but it is still a free choice.

And I could easily argue that when people become more prosperous they are protected by labor laws and protected from exploitation. The only way to make them more prosperous is to build up the economy, and that starts with jobs, however crappy.

In some cases, it really isn't their own free choice... since they are stuck in our system. In other cases... obviously they will take any job they can get if they won't have a job either way. But we are still exploiting them.

There's that slave labor thing again. I already adressed it.

The government shouldn't meddle in a company's affairs (not promote or doscourage outsourcing), especially since its the government of the country where the outsourcing is occuring that should be deciding what to do. I'd rather leave it up to Indonesia or India if they want US jobs or not. If they find them to be slavery, let them kick Nike or Addidas out.

Bush promoted outsourcing, stating that it was America's "future." You sound like a Social Darwinist while I sound like a... I dunno the term. Somebody who wants a government which meddles with company affairs. I don't think we will ever agree.

You have a point, though... but then again, these countries we are using are in the same boat. They will take any little economic help they can get, even if this temporary help doesn't help in the long run. They won't kick away a huge employer if they have to, even if it means that it screws them.



One last thing-- what is your opinion on hiring non-citizen immigrants inside the US for less money and more hours, unprotected against our labor laws? Is it okay that they are replacing American workers and are basically being screwed since its for a better cause, or is it bad?




I don't really know what else to say about this, I'm quite sure we can go on forever arguing since our opinions are quite differed. I respect your opinion and you obviously know what you're talking about-- but I seem to be on the opposite side of the spectrum in economic ideals. Who knows if we can ever understand each other, heh

My opinion in a nutshell:
-Outsourcing screws American workers out of their jobs, only so companies can get more unneccesary profit
-Outsourcing screws foriegners out of pay they deserve- the only reason they take these jobs is because they are poor and have no choice
-Some outsourcing is borderline slave labor, since the workers have no real choice (Nike)
-Outsourcing leads to way too much dependance on other countries which may ruin us someday
-Outsourcing is easily preventable, but is a quick fix for some fast cash. It is unneccesary and could be avoided