Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The Outsourcing Tragedy

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
CrisisPapers Donating Member (271 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-05-08 10:44 AM
Original message
The Outsourcing Tragedy
| Ernest Partridge |

My computer and I have been through a bad spell these past couple of weeks.

First, my router/modem developed a terminal malfunction, and then my new anti-virus software failed to install. Thankfully, three very capable and patient gentlemen at various technical support facilities found solutions.

These three gentlemen were, respectively, from India, the Philippines, and once again, India.

If you or someone in your family is about to graduate with a degree in computer science, don't expect to find a job in the U.S. any time soon.

Amidst my computer worries, I bought a dozen or so electrical supplies from the local hardware: a surge protector, extension cords, a phone, that sort of thing. Glancing at the labels, I found that each and every one was made in China. And a new hard drive? From Malaysia.

No need to go on with this, you know about it already. It's called "outsourcing."

Damned greedy capitalists are dismantling our manufacturing base and shipping it overseas!

Were it as simple as that, it would be a waste of my effort writing about it, and of your time reading yet another complaint about that which is painfully familiar.

But outsourcing, and the consequent loss of millions of American manufacturing and service jobs, is not the plain and simple result of corporate greed. It is, instead, an inevitable result of a combination of factors, including:
  • the successful enactment of the right-wing dogmas of "the invisible hand" and "trickle down," namely the conviction that individual entrepreneurs and corporations will, by seeking only their own economic gain, obtain the best results for society at large. These are "dogmas" because they are "proven," not by historical evidence or practical experience, but rather through repetition.

  • the corollary libertarian dogma that government has no justification whatever in interfering with the economic activities of private individuals and corporations. In the words of Milton Friedman, "There is nothing wrong with the United States that a dose of smaller and less intrusive government would not cure."

  • fiduciary responsibility: the legal requirement that the primary responsibility of the corporation is to its stockholders, not the public.
Thus the necessity of outsourcing is beyond the control of any single corporation's executives or board of directors. It is a thus a tragedy, in the sense defined by the philosopher Alfred North Whitehead: a consequence of "the remorseless working of things." (See Garrett Hardin's "The Tragedy of the Commons."). As long as these conditions obtain, jobs will gravitate toward the individuals accepting the lowest wages, i.e., those abroad, and the middle class will wither as wealth flows from those who create the nation's wealth to those who own and control the wealth. These are conditions that are destined to ruin the economy of the United States.

"As long as these conditions obtain..." The obvious solution, then, is to change "these conditions."

The Problem of Fiduciary Responsibility

So why don't corporate executives simply behave like good Americans, and keep those jobs stateside?

Because, quite frankly, if they were to do so, they would be taken to court by the stockholders and sued. And they would lose.

Near the close of the Nineteenth Century, railroad tycoon William Vanderbilt famously said, "The public be damned, I work for my stockholders." And in 1970, The New York Times Magazine published an article by Milton Friedman, "The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits." The title says it all.

The knee-jerk liberal response is that these quotations are expressions of plain lousy attitudes. Sadly, it's much worse than that.

It's the law!

The fiduciary responsibility of corporations, first and foremost to their stockholders, has been articulated in numerous court decisions, and in the statutes of several states. And so, as Daniel Brook writes in the Huffington Post.

"Corporations have a fiduciary responsibility to maximize profits even if it means betraying the nation, trashing the environment, or fomenting unconscionable levels of inequality. Nothing is unconscionable for a corporation because they don't have consciences; they're not really people, whatever the courts may say."

Accordingly, my internet service provider and the company that makes my anti-virus software simply had no choice: they had to hire tech support workers in India and the Philippines and to fire their American technicians. Had they not done so, they would have been put at an insurmountable competitive disadvantage with their rivals who have no qualms about outsourcing. The profits and stock value of the "socially responsible" corporations would drop, causing losses to their stockholders – i.e., those to whom they owed "fiduciary responsibility."

And then the company would find itself in court, facing a winning suit by the stockholders.

Obviously, corporate activity affects more than managers, employees and stockholders. Corporations also involve customers who are entitled to be protected from fraud and from defective products. Civil courts exist to reimburse customers for damages from corporate abuses, and few if any libertarians would object, in principle, to the exercise and enforcement of civil law. Because civil suits can be costly and impact upon the corporate bottom line, corporations have a fiduciary responsibility not to engage in fraud or to sell defective products. (Unfortunately, as the recent Supreme Court decision on the Exxon Valdez suit reminds us, corporate-friendly courts can reduce civil settlements to trivial sums that fail to deter corporate malfeasance).

In addition to injured customers, there are unconsenting third parties, "stakeholders," who are affected by corporate activities. These include persons residing downwind and downstream from industrial polluters, teen-agers "hooked" on cigarettes leading to a shortened life of addiction, taxpayers who pay for the public health costs of smoking, ecosystems damaged by pesticides, citizens whose government is corrupted by corporate lobbying and campaign contributions, and humanity at large the future of which is imperiled by global climate change.

Add to this, American workers who lose their jobs to outsourcing; victims of "collateral damage" resulting from the fiduciary responsibility of corporations to reduce labor costs and thus to increase profits and the return on the investments of the stockholders.

Who Speaks For The "Stakeholders"?

Who else, but the government?

Many, and perhaps most, corporate executives, when confronted by the economic and social devastation brought on by outsourcing, might reply: "Yes, it's horrible! But what can I do about it? If I insist on hiring American workers at American wages, my firm will go broke or, before that happens, the Board of Directors will fire me. I'm helpless!"

Sad to say, they are right.

Alternatively, one might bring together the CEOs of all the competitors, and try to persuade them to agree not to outsource. Problem is, that might be collusion, which is illegal. Or if not, there would be no sanctions against violating the agreement, and enormous advantages would be gained by any renegade firm that did so. It's a paradigm case of the prisoner's dilemma: that which is good for all is bad for each. Without the enforcement of sanctions there is an irresistible temptation to defect from the agreement.

In any case, missing from that assembly would be delegates representing those unconsenting but seriously affected third parties, the "stakeholders." Their claims against the corporations would exact costs that would adversely affect "the bottom line:" profits and returns on investments. And the corporations, by law, have that fiduciary responsibility to maximize the bottom line.

Leave it to the unregulated free market, the profit motive, and fiduciary responsibility, and the stakeholders, which is to say the general public, is screwed. Given these conditions, there is no escape from this "remorseless working of things." It is a tragedy.

So the solution is compelling: abolish the conditions that bring about the tragedy.

The stakeholders must be given a place at the table that determines corporate policy.

And there is one and only one institution qualified to represent the stakeholding general public. That would be a representative government, such as that established by the founders of our republic.

"To secure these rights, governments are established among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."

"We the people of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

How strange and sad it is that we have allowed the right-wing dogmas of market absolutism, libertarianism, "the invisible hand" and "trickle down" to cause us to forget the founding principles of our republic, and to forget the lessons learned from a difficult history since that founding.

We've tried laissez faire capitalism, and each time it has failed all but a very few wealthy and privileged individuals, and eventually those too when the economy collapses.

We learned from the crash of 1929 and the depression that followed, that corporate greed, unconstrained and unregulated, can lead to a ruined economy. Then we recovered, not by abolishing capitalism, but by reforming it and regulating it with agencies of government acting in behalf of "we the people," i.e. the stakeholders.

Through tax incentives, tariffs, and other laws and regulations, the government can end and reverse the outflow of jobs from the United States. Goodness knows there's abundant work to be done within our borders. The physical infrastructure of the U.S. is in an advanced state of decay, and only government appropriations can repair it, with jobs that by their nature can not be outsourced. Like it or not, the petroleum age is on its way out, opening the necessity for the development and implementation of alternative and sustainable energy sources. Here is a compelling opportunity to re-establish our dismantled manufacturing base. And be assured that if we don't take the lead in ushering in the solar age, some other country will do it and we will be left behind.

The lessons of history notwithstanding, we have tried market absolutism and minimal government once again, and they are failing once again. The United States of America is near bankruptcy, our currency is in decline, we are massively in debt to our rivals, our manufacturing base has been dismantled, and we are despised the world over.

"When you are in a hole, the first thing to do is stop digging."

Time to stop digging and to start climbing out.

-- EP

For a further and more extensive elaboration of these issues, see my "The Scorpion, The Frog, and The Corporation," (The Crisis Papers, September 12, 2006 ), and "Market Failure: The Back of the Invisible Hand" (The Crisis Papers, June 19, 2007).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
proud2BlibKansan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-05-08 10:50 AM
Response to Original message
1. I just hung up on Time Warner
Internet has been acting up for a week. Went to the TW office yesterday and picked up a new modem. It went out this morning. So I called TW and was put through a "virtual check" where a recording took me through a trouble shooting exercise. I had already done everything the virtual voice asked me to do so as soon as I was asked if I wanted a live person I said yes and was on hold for 25 more minutes. My phone battery was about to go so I hung up.

Meanwhile, internet came back on.

Now I get to decide if I want to drive all the way to their office once again and try to schedule a service call.

Last time I called I got a tech in India. I would rather have that than a virtual voice. That really sucked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-05-08 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #1
6. I had a fight with the Tech from India the last time I called.
I wasn't even looking for a fight. All I wanted to know was if the cable was out in my area. That's all. I already knew what I had to do if the answer was no. Well, the Tech spoke with impeccable English, but that was a tip-off that she wasn't on American soil. It was that perfectly annunciated English accent that you hear from international news reporters. Okay, probably over-educated for the job, but all I wanted to know was if there was a power outage...in my area. Can you believe that this conversation went straight down the chute because she wanted to take me through her checklist and I kept interrupting her because all I wanted to know was, IS THERE A CABLE OUTAGE IN MY AREA!

It got so bad that I finally said, "You're not local are you?" And then she really got defensive. She started spouting off that there would be a charge if they came down and found out the problem was in my house. So I ask, "Are you overseas?" And that REALLY pisses her off some more. And then, her tone changes and she has the sound of someone who thinks they've got you by the balls, "May I have permission to access your private information?" she says. She has to say it three times because, my mind is reeling, trying to figure out what private information she wants to access or even needs to access. Finally I settle on the obvious and I say, "If you're looking at my account, then you already have my address and could easily know what State and what city I'm calling from and tell me if I have an outage in my area." She takes a few seconds then triumphantly says, "There is no power outage in your area and if we have to come down and check it will cost..." Thank you, I replied. That won't be necessary. Click. Five minutes of frustration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
angrycarpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-05-08 10:52 AM
Response to Original message
2. Milton Freedman
After seeing what his "reforms" did to Chile under Pinochet and then continuing to push them here makes him the most damaging traitor this country has ever seen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MonteLukast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-05-08 11:00 AM
Response to Original message
3. That's what people seem to forget... companies are REQUIRED to be like this.
The knee-jerk liberal response is that these quotations are expressions of plain lousy attitudes. Sadly, it's much worse than that.

It's the law!

...

Accordingly, my internet service provider and the company that makes my anti-virus software simply had no choice: they had to hire tech support workers in India and the Philippines and to fire their American technicians. Had they not done so, they would have been put at an insurmountable competitive disadvantage with their rivals who have no qualms about outsourcing.
...

Many, and perhaps most, corporate executives, when confronted by the economic and social devastation brought on by outsourcing, might reply: "Yes, it's horrible! But what can I do about it? If I insist on hiring American workers at American wages, my firm will go broke or, before that happens, the Board of Directors will fire me. I'm helpless!"

Sad to say, they are right.



This is perhaps the worst legacy of the Bush years... where in order to make a living you have no choice but to throw away your conscience, your sense of responsibility, and your realism. Living unsustainably has become a job requirement.

It's evolution in action, with "survival of the fittest" being the companies that can act the worst. The system rewards the wrong qualities for our long-term social and political health.

Did this start with Reagan? What year did "corporate personhood" become law?

Is it the shareholder who bears ultimate responsibility, with their demands for continually increasing profit?

It's telling that at the end of the day, what they fear most is being sued. Every time I think I've seen the extent of how far someone will go to avoid being sued, I see something else.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unblock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-05-08 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. corporate personhood goes back to a supreme court case in 1886.
look up Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company <118 U.S. 394 (1886)>.

there's more to the story than just one case, of course, but this case was a major event in the origins of corporate personhood.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-05-08 12:15 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. That is just not true. Watch "Down Size This" by Michael Moore
Edited on Tue Aug-05-08 12:16 PM by truedelphi
These companies say they HAVE TO be competitive or they will go broke.

It is not true!

Simply not true.

They were not paying the service people in this country thirty bucks an hour. They were paying like 7 to 10 bucks.

And almost every company that has gone offshore recorded Billions of dollars of profit. Billions. Long before they made their move. See Moore's movie.


Do you really think that the head of Time Warner, or AT & T would only have one summer home if the companies were not running their service area out of Pakistan??

If we can make laws saying that I have to invest in an expensive car seat just to transport my neighbor's toddler 4 blocks to the store, we ought to make laws that say that before any corporation offers any American's cable TV or internet service , that their customer service providers are here in the USA.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrreowwr_kittty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-05-08 10:09 PM
Response to Reply #7
14. And corporations can't be profitable if they have no customers.
Once the entire world is turned into a sweatshop/debtor's prison, no one will be able to buy anything.

Henry Ford paid his employees a living wage, and enough to buy his own products. I'm sure his stockholders were pretty happy about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Chi Minh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-05-08 02:53 PM
Response to Reply #3
11. No,. It's the government who are responsible for regulating business.
Edited on Tue Aug-05-08 02:58 PM by KCabotDullesMarxIII
Let them fully focus on what they are good at. And let the Government fully focus on what IT is SUPPOSED to be good at.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-05-08 11:01 AM
Response to Original message
4. It isn't just our jobs that have been outsourced.
It's also the nation's tax base -- remember, income taxes make up most of our tax revenue. And capital gains are taxed at a very low rate if at all.

It's also our democracy in a very direct way. The treaties our president with merely the consent of Congress (and often merely the consent of Congress to permit the president to freely promise whatever he wishes) supersede local law in many cases. You may require license plates on trucks in California, but if, by treaty, the U.S. agrees to allow the truckers of another nation to enter in trucks without license plates, the state law is superseded. That is my understanding at any rate.

Environmental laws are particularly vulnerable to fiat by treaty.

The answer is to impose taxes on imports and even on foreign consultants and labor. If they earn their income in the U.S., they should pay our taxes.

In the early days of our nation, government revenue was derived from taxes on international trade. We need to return to that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
desktop Donating Member (263 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-05-08 12:16 PM
Response to Original message
8. Outsourcing and InSourcing taking American Jobs
I just lost an information technology contract to an In sourced Indian worker. Why? Because information technology companies have flooded our shores with foreign workers for one reason and one reason only, cheap labor. Of course the myth that is perpetuated by Information companies and their political corporate lackeys is that there not enough qualified Americans for these jobs. This is total crap. Some information technology shops on American soil are staffed almost 100% by Indian workers. Americans are ignored in hiring at these places because they won't fit into the environment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MonteLukast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-05-08 12:35 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Ah, yes. The good old "good fit" response.
:puke: :puke: :puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OhioChick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-05-08 10:27 PM
Response to Reply #8
15. You got it. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bertman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-05-08 01:53 PM
Response to Original message
10. Ernest Partridge you've done a great service here. Thanks for posting this.
I understand the fiduciary responsibility part but I am wondering how all of these "environmentally-responsible" and "socially-responsible" corporations are able to operate without being hauled off to court by some asshole stockholder who doesn't agree with their mission of putting people and the environment before profits. Can they state in their corporate charter/bylaws that they are not operating on the "highest-profits-at-any-cost" model?

Many small, closely-held corporations have mission statements that enumerate their priorities and goals. The highest possible profit may not even be one of the stated goals. I have seen them where the profit part of the mission is something like "to make a fair profit while minimizing damage to the environment, humans and other living creatures". Very crunchy for sure, but certainly something we'd love to see most corporations strive for.

Also, I remember in one of Robert Perkins' corporate hit-man books he commented on international corporations that were changing their business models to be more socially and environmentally responsible. They were doing it to be better stewards of the planet but also because it enhanced their appeal to investors and it helped to insulate them from costly liability lawsuits for doing "bad things".

Sounds to me like they have adopted the Stop Digging philosophy, at least for the time being.

Maybe there's some hope.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OneBlueSky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-06-08 08:56 AM
Response to Reply #10
16. I'd like to echo that sentiment, and add that I always find your essays informative . . .
and insightful . . . I can only imagine how much work you put into researching and reporting on issues of importance to all of us, and I for one would like to thank you sincerely for your time, your effort, and your commitment to opening minds and hearts . . .
keep up the good work . . . :yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mnhtnbb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-05-08 03:47 PM
Response to Original message
12. But an Indian Company is bringing 500 jobs to NC! Whoopee!
RALEIGH - An Indian company said Monday that it will create 513 jobs in Wake County, boosting the area's sluggish economy and highlighting a burgeoning trend in North Carolina.

The U.S. subsidiary of HCL Technologies, a consulting firm in India that employs more than 50,000 worldwide, said it will expand in the Triangle during the next five years and add jobs with average pay of $46,660 a year.



http://www.newsobserver.com/print/tuesday/city_state/story/1165397.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OhioChick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-05-08 06:29 PM
Response to Original message
13. K&R
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Doctor_J Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-06-08 09:51 AM
Response to Original message
17. "It's the law" - health care disaster boils down to the same thing
UHC is required by law to reject as many claims as possible, because their primary responsibility is to their shareholders, and their secondary is to their policy holders.

There should be certain things that are more important than profit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
treestar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-07-08 01:12 AM
Response to Original message
18. Start a company here and advertise it as having all American employees
Convince the customers to pay the higher prices that way.

We are not dependent on these corporations for our existence. If they go to India, ignore them and don't buy their products. Pay the higher prices for the same products because they are being made here.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 07th 2024, 01:13 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC