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.
First of all, most people who have been paying attention for the past two decades will recognize that this is not a left/right problem. The floodgates were opened way, way before Obama (remember the "giant sucking sound" of jobs going away to the Yucatan?). This "liberal/conservative" dichotomy has been deliberately set up for suckers to fall into, arguing with each other while the real culprits - you and I may recognize them collectively as Corporate America - do their dirty deeds.
To the OP's original question, is offshoring a good thing, or should US citizens be first in line to be hired, the answer depends entirely on one's perspective. From the standpoint of short term corporate profits (remember, Wall St is quarterly driven), it is definitely in the interests of the corporation and it's shareholders to offshore as much as possible, get away with paying as little as possible in wages, eliminate as many benefits as possible and disregard safety standards as often and in as egregious a manner as possible. If you doubt this logic, then you must stand in strong protest of Apple and boycott the next i-product.
Who is going to do that?
From the standpoint of the country's economy, it is incumbent upon every American organization to hire "locals", and by that I mean US citizens/legal residents, and pay them as much as possible, give them great benefits, long vacations, free health care and generous pensions. Why? Because the more money people have the more they spend, etc etc.
The question then is, which side are you on? If you say liberal or conservative, you are one of those suckers I mentioned earlier.
1. I called customer service yesterday. They were in DE. I always get someone from the US when I call Comcast. If your cable company has staff in Mexico and you still use them, it must not bother you all that much.
2. Perhaps you should read what the original post said: "2) If outsourcing is right or wrong is a philosophical question and the answer is up to the citizens of this country." They didn't say anything about offshoring. You outsource just as much as anyone else.
3. I don't study illegal immigrants. Do you know?
1- Cable Co is by chosen by the apt complex - not I.
2- Each company has the right to choose thier workers off shore or not, but the USA is hurting for jobs.
3- I am aware of illegal hires,
If an American company has job openings, do they owe it to Americans to hire US Citizens into these jobs? Or should they just hire the best person who will work for the least amount that will make their company stronger and more profitable? Please take my poll!
YES, that's what other countries do. Hire their own. Should be a crime to hire foreigners if an American can do that job.
YES, that's what other countries do. Hire their own. Should be a crime to hire foreigners if an American can do that job.
Technically, it is illegal to hire a person without a work permit if a legal resident/US citizen is available to do the job, so your requirement has already been met. Quite apart from whether the law is enforced, it doesn't apply if the job is exported, ie offshored. This way, no broken laws, cheap labor, etc etc etc.
The more relevant question is, should corporations value their quarterly profits more than the country of their origin? I think we know the answer to that!
In the current immigration debate, companies like AT&T are pushing for more H1- B visas. Why? So they can hire from overseas and fill the jobs rather than paying Americans. They would be contract workers, not employees. Different labor,laws, different salary levels.
Government tends to upset the balance of anything they get into in the name of helping the poor and then the middle class can not afford it.
Agree with your statement about the Government upsetting things, the balance of markets and every industry they get involved in but the middle class is being subsidized by the paychecks that that they receive as employees in fields that are involving "helping" the poor through Government programs. The poor really does not benefit in the long run, they are essentially a means to others gaining wealth. The poor will continue to live in subpar housing, in dangerous neighborhoods, children will still attend schools that are failing and the employees who are there to help will still get paid top dollar with a good pension in the end.
A business is a business. People open businesses for profit, not out of altruism or patriotism. Best person at most cost efficient reimbursement takes the place.
Somewhat draconian wording, but I agree -- the best "fit" is almost always the best hire. As long as someone is legally eligible to work at the job location - regardless of where it is - citizenship simply isn't a factor.
they should hire the best available. That should force the Americans to up their game, adapt or die. It's not the employer's fault if the locals can't compete.
All I know is that when I go to the store wearing my U.S. Border Patrol hat, I never have to wait in line.
Unfortunately I wore it to go get my mail one day and my neighbors' landscapers didn't come back for a week.
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.
Absolutely.
