Turn the outsourcing question around, what then?

[RichardRay]

In another thread there are several posters who seem to proclaim outsourcing of jobs a universal evil regardless of the circumstance.

Would people who feel that way about our jobs going overseas maintain the same sense if we were successfully competing with the overseas workers and taking their jobs away and bringing them to this country?

Richard Ray - Jackson Hole, WY

[mhr]

1. Our Country, Our Nation Is The United States Of America

We should protect our citizens first.

Consequently, your comment makes no sense.

Unemployed 4 years in Dallas, TX

See what Bush Has Done To The Texas Economy!

[RichardRay]

2. Jingoism?

My country, it can do no wrong? Our economy, no matter what the cost? Is that what you're saying?

I think the question I asked makes sense. I think your reply reflects the source of the problem, not any part of a solution.

Richard Ray - Jackson Hole, WY

[mhr]

7. How Simple Do I Need To Make It For You - Protect Americans First!

Is that simple enough?

[RichardRay]

9. OK, that's simple enough.

We just disagree. Exporting misery in order to maintain comfort at home is a sure recipe for the collapse of our economy and our culture. Protect America First belongs on the ash heap of history along with Marshal Chauvin, the Know Nothing Party and Remember the Maine.

I think we disagree fairly substantially on this topic.

Richard Ray - Jackson Hole, WY

[mhr]

18. Try Being Unemployed For Four Years As High-Tech Is Decimated

by outsourcing. You just might change your tune!

[LibraLabSoldier]

39. You just need to move to where the jobs are

which is what I keep hearing from the Wingnuts...So, can you learn to speak indian and move to Bali?

[MadProphetMargin]

40. And how do you move if you have no job, and thus no money?

It must be nice for them, living in a dreamworld.

[LibraLabSoldier]

41. Since when have they lived

in the same world as the rest of us? I grew up poor. Government cheese poor. My family thinks I am a success with all the big money I get paid for being in the Army. Why do these people represent me?

THey dont. And they will be surprised this fall. Personally, I hope the margin Bush gets defeated is the same amount of US servicemembers currently fighting.....


Troops For Kerry!

[MadProphetMargin]

38. That's ludicrous. Comparing outsourcing concerns to "remember the Maine"

is patently ridiculous.

You are suggesting that GIVING AWAY our economy is a GOOD thing?

[screembloodymurder]

42. If we're going to give corporations preferential tax treatment,

I don't think it's too much to ask that they spend "our" money to promote jobs at home. Corporations hide behind our borders while sending our children to fight wars half way around the world. What happened to "their" patriotic duty? Does sacrifice only apply to the disadvantaged? If Bush really cared about America, he would have urged tax incentives to produce alternative energy solutions and jobs at home. Instead of shipping jobs overseas we could be eliminating our dependence on foreign oil.

[XanaDUer]

3. Germany outsources more than the USA

they outsource jobs that no longer require skilled labor, BUT, and this is the big difference, they have a social safety net that arranges to pay for retraining citizens for new jobs, healthcare, and money while they are training, and assisting them in moving to new areas where there is employment.

When the USA does this, then perhapes outsourcing will not be the problem it is.

Until then, outsourcing will cause devastation for many people.

America handles outsourcing very badly.

[bryant69]

5. This is it.

The problem isn't the policy, it's how the policy is implemented. I don't know how Republicans go from saying that Corporations have the right to send all jobs over seas to claiming that all poor or laid-off workers are lazy slobs who don't deserve any help.

But that's what they do.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[XanaDUer]

6. And the "free market is good"....

until *real* freemarkets concepts kick in , like purchasing prescription drugs from another country, like Canada.

Then it's bad, very bad.

[wakfs]

4. The outsourcing of jobs...

...is only a universal evil because the higher paying jobs with good benefits are NOT being created here at home at the same time. If those good jobs WERE being created, outsourcing would not be such an issue.

Plus, while I am opposed to outsourcing jobs, I would definitely be in favor of the reverse phenomenon, if it were possible. Why? Because a little nationalism isn't so bad, especially when it counters the increasing power of multinational corporations.

[RichardRay]

11. Agreed, if we can take the jobs we should.

I have no objection to winning on a level playing field. My question goes to folks who seem to feel that there is some moral or ethical problem with moving jobs overseas, but that the sanction doesn't apply to moving them to our own country.

Richard Ray - Jackson Hole, WY

[leesa]

8. But that isn't reality, is it?

We can't possibly compete with them when they don't pay living wages, benefits, etc.

[RichardRay]

10. If we are going to compete for those jobs

then the foreign economies we are competing with clearly have to have effective labor laws, environmental standards, etc. It's clearly not OK for U.S. jobs to move to locations in which people and the environment are exploited in order to keep costs low. I'm asking if, given a level playing field, would it be OK for us to take jobs from overseas?

Richard Ray - Jackson Hole, WY

[sandraj]

44. I don't mind competing in a level playing field.

But given a level playing field there would be no point to sending jobs overseas ~ there'd be no profit in it.

Outsourcing has absolutely nothing to do with corporate altruism, because there is no such thing. The high level execs and the board members of most corporations couldn't care less about your best interests, or mine, or their dollar-a-day employees in India or China. We are commodities to most of them, nothing more.

[Nordic]

12. sounds like you haven't lost your job yet

??

Let me know how it feels when you've been replaced by a chinese or an indian making 5 bucks a day.

Let me know how it feels knowing that 100 years or progress that we've fought for -- child labor, worker's safety, rules to protect our water and air from being poisoned by factories -- have been effectively ignored by our own companies simply going to other countries.

Let me know how it feels next time you pay your fair share of income taxes, knowing that huge American corporations like Ingersol Rand have postoffice boxes in the Cayman Islands so they can avoid paying ANY income tax.

Hmmmm, feels GOOOOOD!

[RichardRay]

14. Instead of just ranting without thought or consideration

why don't you read the freakin' post?

Note that I asked for a level playing field dealing with all the issues you raise!!! I didn't put it in the original question because that wasn't the question I was asking, but it was clarified in a later post. So far no one's bothered to address the original question, and many, like you, just go off on whatever message they usually bloviate when outsourcing comes up. Your ad hominem attack is typical, BTW.

Please note that I am not in favor of exploitation of anyone. What I wanted to know was whether folks who were objecting categorically to outsourcing of our jobs to other countries would object equally if their jobs were being outsourced to us.

As far as my own employment goes - yes, I have last jobs many times over the last 40 years of employment history. They have not been outsourced to India since I do work that literally CANNOT be done remotely. I give up some things for that security, but that's my choice.

If you think you're going to get cradle to grave employment in a capitalist system then go talk to the Japanese salarymen who believed that 10 years ago. If you want a system in which you don't have to worry about the realities of capitalism than stop with the nationalistic BS and start working for a world society in which everyone gets better instead of the zero sum situation whe find outselves in now.

Richard Ray - Jackson Hole, WY

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

21. But you don't make any of those points in your original post

and frankly, if there were a level playing field, there would be no impetus for mfg to go to another country.

Frankly, the most equitable solution is to have mfg in the country of origin and assembly in the communities where the product is consumed, thereby improving the GNP of both nations and empowering the citizens of both communities...it is workable.

[RichardRay]

How does that work?

I've heard it proposed, especially by some very close friends in southern Oregon. My immediate reaction was to ask how it would work in Wyoming where we have few people and little resource expept coal, gas and cows. Do we all have to move to places where there is adequate human and natural resources to sustain the complete process?

It seems to me that it's inevitable that folks in some places are going to be able to do a better job than folks in other places on things that are unique to the place. Maybe that's Wyoming vs New Jersey, maybe it's Florida vs some canton in Switzerland.

What I don't like is the nationalistic tone to some of the objections. Nationalism is a way to keep people with the same interests divided, and we all knows what happens to those who are divided.

Richard Ray - Jackson Hole, WY

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

28. I agree with your last sentence

and it doesn't work to where Wyoming must assemble what gets sold in Wyoming...it's simply a matter of balancing interests...I don't have bookmarks to the actual nuances of it on this computer..but it's been a progressive model for a number of years

[Nordic]

32. What you describe would be called "trade"

what outsourcing is is something completely different altogether.

If we need oil, and we don't get it here, we get it from another country and some worker in that other country gets the paycheck.

If some other country needs our wheat, and we can supply it for him, they get our wheat and an American farmer gets the paycheck.

If some company in, say, France, comes to the United States and sets up shop in Louisiana because some corrupt asshole in Louisiana will let him dump pollution into the Mississippi delta, and they won't allow this in France, well that is simply WRONG.

And that's what outsourcing is all about. It's not about any of the "good" aspects of capitalism, it's about American companies CHEATING the American system.

It's as if you, instead of taking a paycheck from your employer, had money wired to you from a foreign bank account into some other foreign bank account that you controlled, so that you could avoid paying income taxes in the United States.

Don't you think you'd get in trouble for that? Of course you would. But not if you owned the government. Right now, the corporations own our government.

[K-W]

13. People being exploited is evil.

Until you can show me a model of outsourcing that doesnt exploit people, I have to go with yes, outsourcing is evil.

Letting our economy reach its claws into other economies for the sake of corporate profits isnt good in any aspect of global economy.

[annabanana]

15. If the IWW was up and running..... outsourcing ok?

If there was Union protection for all the workers to prevent exploitation... would that change the equation? It might slow down outsourcing.

[K-W]

48. If it was powerful enough to check the global economy, yes.

I am all for a true globalization. The nation state is an arbitrary structure. But only if we setup a global economic and political structure that preserves the rights of individuals against the power of corporations.

[RichardRay]

16. OK, I'll say it to you, too

Pay attention to the quesiton or don't bother posting a response. I asked if it would be OK for other countries to be forced to outsource jobs to us. I said nothing about the exploitation of other countries workers by US or multinational businesses. Indeed, in a later post I clarified that - long before your addtion to the thread.

So let me ask it again - if we were able to provide services that caused companies from other countries to choose to outsource their workers' jobs to us would that be OK? Note that I am NOT suggesting that we give up our hard won protections and rights. Let's propose some technological breakthrough that allowed us to be much more efficient in processing widgets and raise our own workers' standards of living back to where they belong. It would also allow us to out compete workers in, say, Sweden. Would we be right in taking those jobs from those workers?

Richard Ray - Jackson Hole, WY

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

22. But you keep changing the terms of this debate

Rather than slamming people (not all people read the entire thread) perhaps you should have made your first post a bit more clear.

Finally, you are attempting to inject an "all things being equal" equation into this debate where all things are NOT equal, therefore, you are bumping into resistance for that fact.

In short, if Sweden were shipping jobs here to undermine their countries progressive labor laws and IF the US provided SLAVE LABOR to assist Swedish plutocrats in doing so, then I would have the very same issues with OUTSOURCING.

[RichardRay]

24. I should have, you're right

I didn't think I needed to, but you're right, in llight of where the discussion has gone I should have. I tried to go back and edit but got a message that the posting period had expired.

Note that I don't believe that workers in this country are all in great shape, nor that our environmental protections are as strong as they need to be, nor that our health care delivery system is much better than a travesty. But I don't believe that pulling up the drawbridge is the way to fix those problems, either.

So, if we were winning jobs away from Swedish workers due to improved productivity and both Swedish workers and our workers were maintaining good, healthy lives, then that would be OK?

Richard Ray - Jackson Hole, WY

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

27. That's more trade than outsourcing

Other countries have depended on us for years for areas where they are weak. Trade is good...FAIR TRADE is best. I, like you, believe in trade, but I believe in balanced trade and agreements that include parity to foreign labor markets such as honoring international child labor laws....human rights has to be a big part of it.

I don't really think it's possible to have this argument on the terms you present it even with your arguments within the thread, mainly for the reason that you are talking about COUNTRIES/NATIONS doing business...that is not what we have now..what we have are corporations pitting nations and national interests AGAINST one another...I don't favor ANY private interests having that kind of power....I am for international anti-trust to undercut this sort of maneuvering.

As to your last paragraph and question...YES..if all things were, indeed, equal..then fine.

[ulysses]

26. precisely.

In short, if Sweden were shipping jobs here to undermine their countries progressive labor laws and IF the US provided SLAVE LABOR to assist Swedish plutocrats in doing so, then I would have the very same issues with OUTSOURCING.

Right.

[K-W]

47. My post was completely appropriate on this thread, thank you.

You dont get to tell me what I can and cant say on a thread just because you started it.

My point was in line with your topic of whether outsourcing was universally wrong. My point is that it has nothing to do with who is outsourcing where, companies wouldnt outsource if they werent able to exploit labor. Outsourcing is wrong because it is exploitation.

Until workers have the ability to setup controls on the world economy, corporations should stay in the economies that regulate them.

[Dookus]

17. the people

who reflexively call all outsourcing "evil" miss the huge point that if every OTHER country prohibited outsourcing, the US would suffer more than any other country.

In many fields, WE do more work for foreign entities than they do for us. Nobody complains if a California company provides IT services for a British company.

Outsourcing works both ways, and the US has been the beneficiary of that for decades.

[Skidmore]

19. Bottom line is I have to do what is in my interests and in

my family's interests. They needs shelter, food, and clothing. I can't provide these without money and money comes from employment. As a responsible citizen of the world, I can ask that the tax and trade policies endorsed by my goverment be as fair as possible and not punitive to either my family or the laborer in another country.

[Bluzmann57]

20. OK Richard Ray, here's a little propaganda for you

Actually, I consider it truth. Unions helped make America the superpower it is today. No I don't mean the bushco adventurism, etc. I mean that we used to lead the way in manufacturing and technological advancements. Our people were getting paid reasonably well, we had health insurance, we bought houses, cars, and lots of other big ticket items. We were at least trying to introduce a higher standard of living to the rest of the world.We had the best educational system in the world too. But the business leaders who were shortsighted, tried, and are succeeding, to break the Unions by cutting wages, making us do more for less, and finally, outsourcing our jobs. I have been through this crap twice and I swore the last time, never again. A successful corporation that is willing to work with Unions could have many many plants, here in America, as well as overseas. We could all be happy and more productive as a result.

[RichardRay]

23. Total, complete, unalloyed agreement.

I bow in your general direction.

Richard Ray - Jackson Hole, WY

[Nordic]

33. hear hear. Let me share a little story

I once was flat-ass broke and living in Austin TX. I called a temp agency and said I would go on the first job they'd send me out to.

They sent me out to the Dell Computer factory. (this was in 1995). They were paying welfare moms and other basically poor people $5.75 an hour to put computers together so Michael Dell could be a billioniare.

What's wrong with this?

Well it dawned on me that Henry Ford, back when he invented the assembly line, realized that if his own workers could AFFORD one of the cars they were building, it would be a win-win for everybody (especially Henry Ford).

NONE of these workers on the assembly line in Round Rock Texas, at $5.75 an hour, were gonna run out and buy a Dell Computer. They were probably living with their Moms and were driving uninsured cars. I honestly don't know how anybody can live on that kind of salary, much less buy a computer.

And I realized THAT'S what was wrong with this picture.

Oh, and $5.75 an hour is too much. It's better to take the job to China and pay even less. :eyes:

And who's considered the big hero in the eyes of the media? Michael Dell.

[TexasBushwhacker]

25. This already happens to some extent

When we send oil field workers to other countries, it is because those countries don't have people with the skills needed. We aren't really taking jobs away from anyone there, and generally such operations put something back into the local economy. Workers have to eat. They have to sleep somewhere, etc. However, in areas where there is civil unrest, Nigeria for example, there are often attacks by villagers on the camps. The more we send our workers to third world countries, the more this can be a problem.

But this isn't really the situation that you're speaking of, and in the global economy, it's just not a level playing field. Dell outsources their first tier tech support to India because the workers are paid weekly what a person with similar skills here would make PER HOUR. Some of it is because of differences in cost of living, but not enough to account for such a dramatic difference in pay rate. Ideally, we should pay overseas workers enough that there would be a bigger market for American goods. That's just not happening AT ALL. We also have to be concerned about jobs being outsourced to avoid worker safety laws or environmental concerns.

[ulysses]

29. part of your initial problem

is in your definition of "successfully competing". IMO, someone in a developing nation who works 15 hours a day for a couple of bucks with no bathroom breaks, little or no workplace safety regs and no right to organize may indeed have a job, but isn't successfully competing for anything in the world economy. Her bosses certainly are, as are the heads of state who bottom out any worker protections that might have been in place in the name of attracting large multinationals, but the worker is not.

[sweetheart]

30. There are ways to make it fair, but they're not being used.

Firstly, the ugly side of outsourcing is simply taking advantage
of people in nations with no social security as the cost of labour
in such countries is cheaper due to the taxes not paid. Then we
are embraced in a competition with nations that provide no social
services at all, to provide the least to make our labour the
cheapest... its a race to the bottom, not towards civility.

In order to fix the problem, the tax laws should be changed so that
all american companies must report the total outsourcing in gross
dollar terms and in headcount terms. THe latter will invoke a tariff
to accomodate lost FICA and employment tax contributions that are
avoided using the outsourcing model. It is pure tax evasion, and
at least this hole should be plugged to give american labour equal
footing.

By reporting the outsourcing nations, the resulting numbers paid in
taxes will be reflected in a declining gross nationa product, as the
work was not done in the US, and to claim it as US economic muscle is
a deception used today to pretend things are getting better, just
like a new sort of enron bubble in the "jobless recovery recession".

You must accept that the words are "political economy" and that there
is no such thing as economics separated from politics. The system
of empire, global military hegemony, and financial hegemony
instituted through the IMF and the world bank are core to the
outsourcing model. YOUR taxes subsidize the "political" aspect
of political economy, and it is the right of every american to demand
that the two words be viewed in their classical form.

It is the republican ruse to separate "free markets" from political
ends, as if the government has nothing to do with the economy.
The federal reserve and wall street are supporting this asset
stripping, as it is a corrupt way of enriching the CEO and the
financiers at the cost of regular people and economic plurality.
I've not the time to explain, but if you are really interested,
i recommend ( www.wizardsofmoney.org ). THe lessons explain how
the federal reserve and centrallize planning system of the US
economy is really the root problem in this whole mess.

Adam Smith, a core economist behind the theory of mutuual trade for
mutual advantage (fair and free trade), suggests that better people
focus on their core skills and trade for things that are not core.
This only works, however, if the trade is within the bounds of
reason. In 1988, the indian rupee (currency) was trading at 14 per
dollar. Today it is 46 per dollar. This devaluation of the entire
indian wage-economy by 3 times is root to the outsourcing gold rush.
It has nothing to do with labour. It is a form of currency
betting, based on a corrupt international banking system that
has artifically set the rupee too low, and created a vacuum for
"cheap labour" to dump in india. If the rate returned to a more
reasonable level, the whole scam would end overnight. It has nothing
to do with labour competetiveness.

Rather incompetent banks and economists have played paper-tiger
whilst criminal governments have stood on rooting from the sidelines.


THe world trade organization has been used to destroy workers rights
the world over as we dump to the most devalued currency of the day.
This is not fair trade, but "dumping", and the criminals are on
wall street, in the federal reserve and the american treasury where
people with brain cells are not welcome, leaving only an army of
yes-men economists who have rationalized away their own treason
against democracy and the constitution with "free market religion".

Until you return to a reasonable exchange rate system like that
under bretton woods (abandoned by the pukes in '72 to pay for their
criminal war debt in viet nam), the "free market" is nothing more
than a scam to disempower political opposition to those who seek
global military empire.

Some more books:
"sorrows of empire" by chalmers johnson (chapter 10)
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/1859845789/qid=1093305160/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl/202-1153579-6489467
"The world we're in" by will hutton
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0349114714/qid=1093305069/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl/202-1153579-6489467

[Nordic]

34. great post. And yes, a "race to the bottom" it certainly is

[the_outsider]

37. great post and a few thoughts

I am no expert on economics, but a couple of related thoughts.

1) If the current rate of outsourcing of manufacturing and service jobs keeps up, I think Gini (income inequality indicator) coefficient of USA will worsen further. As of now, US Gini is worse than the median Gini of each of the 5 different groups of country(divided into groups by per-capita income).

2) Seems to me if US income distribution becomes more skewed, domestic consumption decreases and "liquid capital" increases. Since the liquid capital/hot money can be traded/invested anywhere in the world, it's not guaranteed to be flowing into US economy. But if it's distributed more fairly by creation of high/living wage jobs, then people with those jobs will spend, buy, consume more. They are not going to trade their surplus capital in hedge funds or currency trades like the top 1% does. Is this too simplistic?

3) The jobs that are outsourced to India do not help India much. Hundreds of thousands of Indians (insignificant in a country of 1 billion people) would earn a little bit more than they otherwise would have earned. But this jump is not big enough to help them consume a lot of American products and services. Also most of these jobs are dead-end with little career upside.They are not developing intellectual properties for India and are not taking part in sustainable productive economic development of their own country. And they can always be discarded when the next cheaper destination is found.

4) US transnational corporations have no regard for labor force in any country. At the same time, the excess wealth they generate by improving bottom-lines is also not committed capital. The profits belong to a very small group of people with no accountability. That money can be pulled in and out of any market in the world with only one goal - short-term returns. It's hard to use that kind of money and mindset for long sustained infrastructure development projects or long-term investments in innovative research & development anywhere in world.

[sweetheart]

43. some thoughts on that

Economic inequality, decides so much of the happenstance of life,
with the poorest filling the prisons, and living shorter for lack
of medical care. When the government fails to provide a social
benchmark and eliminate poverty, the results are destabilizing to
the system as a whole, as we end up with the new american version
of the untouchable outcastes of india.

That said, it seems the republicans believe untouchables make better
workers, and it seems the "compassionate conservatives" would rather
have poor and veterans living on the sidewalks so they can step over
them and feel superior. Spending some time in india certainly
cures on as to the merits of gross physical poverty. Why the pukes
want to import it is really beyond comprehension.

Picture yourself a corporate executive, in a boardroom. You will
lose your job, if profits drop or the share price drops. You have
to invest your capital somewhere to keep these 2 things upwards.
It is not really your job to be concerned with social weflare...
rightly so. Executives are just like dogs. They keep to the
dog run, if the fences are installed right.

The government must look after social welfare, and set a tax system
so that the boardroom rulebook simply cannot screw the public, even
if they wanted, as it would hurt profits/share price, and the dogs
will be put in the kennel.

It begs the question why, if the greatest social need is for clean
water, why doing such things is not a high paying job. Clearly the
demand is there, and the supply/demand theory should have this being
a big deal, yes? Well, this is where the invisible hand of central
planning (soviet style) operates in the US economy, keeping big
profits in aerospace and banking. (aside: the sum total of all
civilian air travel companies since the advent of air travel is
A LOSS). Clearly, the "free market" is distorted to be putting high
pay and focus towards companies and markets that are not profitable,
whilst important markets fail.

The federal reserve system has a committee called "the open markets
committee" that prints money for each business sector. THEY decide
undemocratically, as their founding father, woodrow wilson, the white racist, would have wanted. It is they who create a credit
bubble in civilian airtravel to subsidize it, and cheat clean water.
It is they who bubble petroleum industries, and armaments makers at
the cost of education and such.

In the distorted republican markets, the highest paying jobs are
lawyer, banker, and such because they printed the money to keep those
professions liquid, whilst starving the others. I said that a little
obliquely, but if you research the federal reserve open markets
committee and what it does, you'll see the core virus that rots out
civil society for a fascist manifesto.

[Gwerlain]

31. Turn the outsourcing motivation around, what then?

The question becomes, "would the motivation for outsourcing exist in other countries?"

A second question, "would other countries' governments permit outsourcing?"

My answers:

To your original question: I'd take such a job, but I'd certainly prefer another that was not of this questionable provenance if I had a choice, the money being equal. To answer another way, it would be a negative factor in my decision, but not the only factor.

To answer the new question, IMO it depends on the relative states of the labor markets.

To answer the third question, IMO many if not most would respond to the loss of experts in such fields as computer science with restrictive legislation. That the US does not is a feature of our system of government, and perhaps a feature of the current state of things here.

[rman]

35. probably not, but so what?

You present it as though it must be either them taking our jobs, or us taking their jobs.

Reality is that for many centuries there have been jobs, and no outsourcing.

One often heard argument is that it is egoistic to not want your job to go overseas; that it means you don't want to help poor people in developing nations.
That is as rediculous as saying you don't want to help the poor because you eat the food you eat yourself, instead of sending it to a third world nation. Never mind that you'd starve to death if you'd do that consistently.

Although the arguments for outsourcing usually revolve around the benefit that it brings to foreign workers, outsourcing is primarily to the benefit of the big corporations who do the outsourcing. It isn't that those corporations could not survive without outsourcing, it's just so that they can make even more proffit then they were already making.
They maintain that it is good for the US economy in spite of the fact that it is bad for US workers (which happens to be the majority of the population). As Michael Parenti says: "There are many things that are good for the economy, that are bad for people".

It's a bit much to ask for people who's livelyhood directly depends on the income from their job, to sacrifice their job. This as opposed to CEO's and stockholders, who's livelyhood depends not on their job but on the wealth they have accumulated, and who will accumulate even more wealth then they already have, thanks to the workers who lose what little wealth they had.

[the_outsider]

36. without a difference in playing field

there wouldn't be enough motivation for outsourcing services.

[FlaGranny]

46. Without a difference in the playing field

there would not be any gain in profits. In fact, there would be a net loss in income from outsourcing. It (outsourcing) just wouldn't happen.

Every working person in the world needs a level playing field. Period. The end.

[69KV]

45. I would say yes

Would people who feel that way about our jobs going overseas maintain the same sense if we were successfully competing with the overseas workers and taking their jobs away and bringing them to this country?

I would say yes, that would also not be a good sign, and here's why:

Outsourcing usually happens because corporations are trying to cut labor costs by looking for cheap labor.

If outsourcing to the United States is occuring, that would mean that the U.S. has degenerated to the point of having substandard labor laws and low wages compared to some other countries. No, I would not see that as a good thing. Nobody is doing people a favor by offering them jobs at $4 an hour, 75 cents an hour, or 25 cents a day, no matter where in the world it is happening.

The answer as I see it is to oppose outsourcing across the board, and instead to work for livable wage laws, labor laws protecting workers, policies which promote wage stability and job stability, and independent union representation for workers, in all countries.