Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well I know for a fact that all manner of white collar jobs can be and have started to be offshore outsourced and thus this thread is not in jest, nor should it be taken lightly. IBM, Accenture and McKinsey (and numerous other business services companies) consult on and sell the methods/processes/best practice information for how to set up outsourcing (and even provide offshore outsourcing services themselves) to clients for: R&D, Financial management/accounting, supply chain management, knowledge management, HR, and any other business area you can think of. No job is safe unless it is directly client-facing.
You are just trying to stop the tide with a broom. Outsourcing is the way to go now...like it or not. Heck, even the more developed asian countries (as an example) have seen jobs transfered to their lesser-developed neighbours..
That's the point...it need not be the way to go as it is the wrong way to go.
If there are penalties for it, as there should be, it will save American jobs and help our economy.
Last edited by sickofnyc; 02-06-2009 at 03:16 PM..
In my opinion outsource penalties should be the BULK of the stimulus bill.
Just some food for thought here.....
How much of an impact do you think it would have on the economy if we used the trillion dollar's we're spending on the stimulus to entice major corporation's back to American soil employing American's?
In my opinion outsource penalties should be the BULK of the stimulus bill.
Just some food for thought here.....
How much of an impact do you think it would have on the economy if we used the trillion dollar's we're spending on the stimulus to entice major corporation's back to American soil employing American's?
Well stated, it would have huge impact for job creation.
Not sure if this is satire but obviously given the current state of the economy I would say its not the way to go.
If you are serious explain why this would be beneficial? Who will be able to afford these products and services?
How would stopping outsourcing of US middle class jobs be beneficial?
a) The US will have more people employed.
b) More US taxes will be collected for use by State & Local & US Federal agencies. Those taxes would go towards providing services to US taxpayers.
c) The US will be able to re-establish itself as industry leader of "something" (or multiple areas) which now it cannot because of the outsourcing movement. The US was once very strong in manufacturing not only cars but various technologies, energy production, many other things. If offshore outsourcing is stopped the US would have the potential to lead in other/new things, perhaps alternative energy technologies for example.
Items might cost a bit more to manufacture or service (the most common argument for outsourcing anything), however as long as imported products from low-cost countries are taxed, and as long as it remains transparent what is made in the USA vs made in *insert low-cost country name* I think things would not get out of hand cost-wise. You have to remember, until recently, everything was manufactured and serviced onshore... and things were ok. We didn't experience ridiculously out of control prices for things. All offshore outsourcing really accomplished the past few years is more money in the pockets of corporations... you can bet no where near 100% of the cost savings has ever been passed on the end product user.
Let's call it the way it really is why don't we; right now in many other countries of the world (including India and China) there are many protectionist laws/practices regarding their imports and exports, and they have worked very well to help lift/grow their own economies. Since the US economy is down right now, and since unemployment is the major issue at hand (as well as food/product safety per things which have occurred the past 2 years), stemming the offshore outsourcing trend seems in order... in fact it seems well past due.
Last edited by belovenow; 02-08-2009 at 11:52 AM..
How would stopping outsourcing of US middle class jobs be beneficial?
a) The US will have more people employed.
b) More US taxes will be collected for use by State & Local & US Federal agencies. Those taxes would go towards providing services to US taxpayers.
c) The US will be able to re-establish itself as industry leader of "something" (or multiple areas) which now it cannot because of the outsourcing movement. The US was once very strong in manufacturing not only cars but various technologies, energy production, many other things. If offshore outsourcing is stopped the US would have the potential to lead in other/new things, perhaps alternative energy technologies for example.
Items might cost a bit more to manufacture or service (the most common argument for outsourcing anything), however as long as imported products from low-cost countries are taxed, and as long as it remains transparent what is made in the USA vs made in *insert low-cost country name* I think things would not get out of hand cost-wise. You have to remember, until recently, everything was manufactured and serviced onshore... and things were ok. We didn't experience ridiculously out of control prices for things. All offshore outsourcing really accomplished the past few years is more money in the pockets of corporations... you can bet no where near 100% of the cost savings has ever been passed on the end product user.
Let's call it the way it really is why don't we; right now in many other countries of the world (including India and China) there are many protectionist laws/practices regarding their imports and exports, and they have worked very well to help lift/grow their own economies. Since the US economy is down right now, and since unemployment is the major issue at hand (as well as food/product safety per things which have occurred the past 2 years), stemming the offshore outsourcing trend seems in order... in fact it seems well past due.
One size doesn't fit all. There are products and services that there is no way we can produce here in the US and still be competitive. On the other hand, there are many things that can be made in the US at the same price, or even cheaper. The reasons for outsourcing are many and not all have to do with lowering costs.
1) For example, a company wants to manufacture expensive artisan objects. Today no contractor in the US can pick up the job, because all of them moved away. In lack of alternatives the company will have to send the job overseas. The infrastructure simply does not exist in the US anymore.
2) Companies that are watched by WS analysts are pushed (by them) to outsource, only because their competitors do it as well. I year ago, when HP acquired another large company the analysts criticized them for having too many US based jobs "unlike their competitors". HP stock fell, massive layoffs started and jobs were send to India. The current atmosphere among analysts and investors favor outsourcing over US employment. Its a fashionable trend.
3) Another small high tech company I know of, outsourced a new project to India. The CA based company told me that they have to invest thousands of hours in managing and repairing the work made in India, which had to be redone several times, in part because of miscommunications. These thousands of hours do not appear on the balance sheets. In this instance the Indian project cost them more then if it was done inshouse in CA.
The reasons for outsourcing are many and not all have to do with lowering costs.
1) For example, a company wants to manufacture expensive artisan objects. Today no contractor in the US can pick up the job, because all of them moved away. In lack of alternatives the company will have to send the job overseas. The infrastructure simply does not exist in the US anymore.
2) Companies that are watched by WS analysts are pushed (by them) to outsource, only because their competitors do it as well. I year ago, when HP acquired another large company the analysts criticized them for having too many US based jobs "unlike their competitors". HP stock fell, massive layoffs started and jobs were send to India. The current atmosphere among analysts and investors favor outsourcing over US employment. Its a fashionable trend.
3) Another small high tech company I know of, outsourced a new project to India. The CA based company told me that they have to invest thousands of hours in managing and repairing the work made in India, which had to be redone several times, in part because of miscommunications. These thousands of hours do not appear on the balance sheets. In this instance the Indian project cost them more then if it was done inshouse in CA.
Numbers 2 and 3 above have to do with lowering costs even if 3 has to do with just "the appearance of lowering costs."
Number 1 is an example I cannot imagine. You use the term artisan, and I think of how many great fine arts universities we have in the US and how some of them are top ranked worldwide. More commonplace I hear arguments about how there is a lack of qualified engineers or programmers in the US to handle particular job functions - but when one looks at the numbers you find out we have no such shortage (yet), we just have a lot of c-level executives who run cost analysis on how the US based employee will cost more than the one in India. Those C-level executives then make broad generalizations about the lack of potential employees onshore, but what they don't state is that they don't find any onshore job applicants willing to work for the peanuts they are offering (because they would rather hire offshore or bring in someone with an H1B VISA for less money and commitment).
I agree. My company made a good sized profit, q 4, and they still decide to ship our jobs oveseas, they need to be penalized, and word will get out to vendors and clients I am sure that clients will drop them, and they will see how profits tank, does anyone know what Obama admin is planning? on taxes to impose.
Numbers 2 and 3 above have to do with lowering costs even if 3 has to do with just "the appearance of lowering costs."
Number 1 is an example I cannot imagine. You use the term artisan, and I think of how many great fine arts universities we have in the US and how some of them are top ranked worldwide.
I'll give you 2 examples:
1) A small enterprise that designs and sells lamps. The lamps are made of exotic materials and run in small batches (20-50 unit each). The designer worked with a few guys in Santa Fe. After a while, these went out of business and she couldn't find another contractor. Now she outsources them to Thailand.
2) A mens apparel designer that wants to expend into high end shoes. Once the US had a huge number of shoemakers. Today, none with the right expertise and experience are left in US (someone who can make a shoe from A-Z by hand), and the company outsources.
Quote:
More commonplace I hear arguments about how there is a lack of qualified engineers or programmers in the US to handle particular job functions - but when one looks at the numbers you find out we have no such shortage (yet), we just have a lot of c-level executives who run cost analysis on how the US based employee will cost more than the one in India. Those C-level executives then make broad generalizations about the lack of potential employees onshore, but what they don't state is that they don't find any onshore job applicants willing to work for the peanuts they are offering (because they would rather hire offshore or bring in someone with an H1B VISA for less money and commitment).
Agreed, but it goes deeper that that. The US has enough engineers for several counties. However, what high tech companies are looking for, is not the "regular US engineer":
1) Sometimes have to relocate the professional and his family. They do not want this expense. They are interested in a single guy with no strings attached. He relocates easily (one small handbag) on his expense and shares room with 3 other "inmates"..
2) Training - once a natural part of the hiring process. Today, the incumbent learns all "new tricks" by himself in the "spare" time and doesn't ask for compensation.
3) Vacation - the potential employee has no life and doesn't need any vacation.
4) Flexibility - the average US engineer has expectations. He was hired for a certain position, but after the second day they reorganize the company (happens twice every week ) They shift the new guy to work as a helping hand in another project. There isn't room for ANY progress in the new position. The H1-B visa guy isn't at all bothered and enthusiastically goes about the new (albeit inferior) job.
5) Income - the incumbent is not bothered by the new "no salary raise" policy (Low ranking guys only. Management get their regular $10M bonus)
As you get from the above list, there indeed aren't enough engineers in the US !
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.
