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.
FINALLY some one has put 2 and 2 together and figure out our corporations are totally disloyal to those that built them - disloyal and traitorous to their nations of origin...and for all intent and purpose- destroyed AMERICA as we knew it - all for a few more bucks that they did not need------------CONGRATS TO THIS POSTER...you nailed it.
Explain to me how outsourcing is efficient when I buy something from China that breaks down quicker that I have to keep replacing than the things we used to make in America?
Oh, you mean efficient for more profits.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJBest
Outsourcing is the solution. We've mastered it for business services. We need to take it over to manufacturing. Outsourcing creates efficient efficient and competitive streams of business.
Explain to me how outsourcing is efficient when I buy something from China that breaks down quicker that I have to keep replacing than the things we used to make in America?
Oh, you mean efficient for more profits.
Outsourcing is efficient when a communist regime subsidizes it's manufacturing base, thus removing the need for profit. The state will ensure their viability, even if not economically practical, thus allowing companies to sell product below market value. Currency will also be manipulated in a fashion to promote export growth. Hence, the ultimate competitive edge on the global scale, along with the ultimate global parasite.
Explain to me how outsourcing is efficient when I buy something from China that breaks down quicker that I have to keep replacing than the things we used to make in America?
Oh, you mean efficient for more profits.
Take a look at FedEx. They outsource their delivery to independent companies and drivers. The truck drivers are not employed by FedEx. Compare FedEx and those independent companies to UPS's unionized insourced structure.
You're trying to take one scenario of where a product is offshored and use that to say outsourcing is bad. Consider all the successful outsourcing that does not involve offshoring. For example, when you hire a plumber to fix your toilet. Does the fact that you outsourced your plumbing work hurt the nation? No. In fact it creates a market where these plumbers must stay on top of things.
And, no, it's not only efficient for profits. It's efficient for training, customer satisfaction, and employee retention. It's a win/win scenario.
Other good examples of outsourcing:
- The comcast technicians that visit your home.
- The Anesthesiologist that delivers gas at a dental office.
- Small businesses that outsource printing services to Kinkos or Staples
- Dropbox outsources hosting services to Amazon
Jobs are a zero-sum game. Take jobs from bucket A (America) and put them in bucket I (India) and bucket C (China) and you have net loss of jobs and the money that goes with them.
If I have a plant in Ohio with 100 factory workers and 20 office staff producing widgets, but by moving the production to China lost 100 factory workers but greatly grew the business and now have 200 office staff there is a net gain in jobs and the money that goes with them. Conversely if a company finds itself losing money because their competitors have offshored production but stubbornly clings to domestic production until they go out of business, there is a net loss of jobs and money. Outsourcing isn't always about boosting a bottom line, it can be about survival and profitability versus loss.
I'm not saying it is always better to move production overseas, or that it is always worse, but it sure isn't this simplistic zero sum game you speak of.
If I have a plant in Ohio with 100 factory workers and 20 office staff producing widgets, but by moving the production to China lost 100 factory workers but greatly grew the business and now have 200 office staff there is a net gain in jobs and the money that goes with them. Conversely if a company finds itself losing money because their competitors have offshored production but stubbornly clings to domestic production until they go out of business, there is a net loss of jobs and money. Outsourcing isn't always about boosting a bottom line, it can be about survival and profitability versus loss.
I'm not saying it is always better to move production overseas, or that it is always worse, but it sure isn't this simplistic zero sum game you speak of.
True. As a very expensive workforce, there are simply some items on the food chain we have gone past being competitive on. Clinging to a time gone by endangers the future.
Now while encouraged by andywire's WSJ story on tv mfg, I'll be more impressed if it grows manyfold for 5, 10, 20 years..while that would be nice, I'm not overly optimistic.
.... 'insourcing' - and those jobs are as highly paid as American jobs.
Do you really understand insourcing? Its similar to union busting. The large corporations fire an entire department. Then its outsourced to an external company who hires new employees (and some of the older ones) at a lower payrate and places them inside the same location where all the company employees were. Thus now you have a group of people who work at a company location and not for the company itself. The plus for the large company is now that department can now be budgeted as a fixed expense since now the outsouce company pays them their salaries and all benefits. So are they high paying jobs? Depends? but compared to the positions they replaced with new employees, then they are paid less. Also some of the positions are chopped up and given to other employees as extra duties and some are re-outsourced off-site. So to translate some of my past posts. 1400 to 0 to 60 to 18 to 0 to 3 translates as : Company employees to full termination to insource to insource to outsource to insource. A large bulk of the 1400 are in India. All my contacts are all in India, even though the company I'm covering is 30 miles away from my home, I get no benefits from them at all as if I were a temp.
Outsourcing is efficient when a communist regime subsidizes it's manufacturing base, thus removing the need for profit. The state will ensure their viability, even if not economically practical, thus allowing companies to sell product below market value. Currency will also be manipulated in a fashion to promote export growth. Hence, the ultimate competitive edge on the global scale, along with the ultimate global parasite.
Jobs are a zero-sum game. Take jobs from bucket A (America) and put them in bucket I (India) and bucket C (China) and you have net loss of jobs and the money that goes with them. You can mask the problem for a few years with 'quantitative easing', code for massive borrowing from the private 'Fed' bankers, and pretend that new jobs in alternative energy will replace the millions that have already left. The fact is that the jobs are gone and will not return, and we are sinking fast from the gaping hole in our economy. India and China were poor agrarian countries. When you look at them today their cities rival our own.
The problem is that CEOs have all the motivation in the world to cut costs in order to claim the title of 'genius' and give themselves outlandish rewards, and this is exactly what has happened.
Dollars are no longer based on a tangible commodity such as gold, but are used as compensation for work. A dollar is a work unit. Some earn 7 work units an hour while others make 500 work units an hour.
Work units are handed out to many without the benefit to society of any work produced, ie, welfare, food stamps, medicaid, section 8, etc. This results in having those who actually earn the work credits to pay for these in tax dollars.
Those who have the most money seem to be the ones who cry the loudest about the taxes they have to pay. This is in direct correlation to the feelings of 'privilege' they carry with them - that somehow they are in the world to enjoy it and be served by others because they are 'superior' to others.
The results is that the 'middle' is shrinking, while the lower class is growing. The 1% wealthy class is not growing, but is amassing more in terms of dollars. They tend to hoard the money instead of spreading it throughout the economy like the middle do, which creates a drag on the economy. They are not job creators, and many of the wealthy are upper management who are the first in line to outsource in order to boost their bottom line.
FINALLY some one has put 2 and 2 together and figure out our corporations are totally disloyal to those that built them - disloyal and traitorous to their nations of origin...and for all intent and purpose- destroyed AMERICA as we knew it - all for a few more bucks that they did not need------------CONGRATS TO THIS POSTER...you nailed it.
Corporations are amoral. Their only duty is to the stockholder. I am not loyal to my company. Someone comes along with a more attractive package of wages and benefits and I am gone.
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.
