I'd like to talk to DU about offshoring and outsourcing

[mdmc]

DU, I am a firm believer in a world economy and of interconnectivity. We are all humans here on earth. We are all part of one world community.

I support outsourcing and offshoring as tools to help American business to compete on the world market. I think that these tools can be used to make us more competitive. I do not think that monopolies should be allowed for the record.

My friends, we get the economy that we deserve. Wal Mart didn't destroy the mall, the mall didn't destroy Main Street, Main Street didn't destroy the Mom and Pop stores of yore. The consumer is responsible for all of these changes. How we shop, how we spend money, determines how business operate. In short, Mom and Pop stores would still be around if people wanted to shop at them. Wal Mart is so successful because people want to shop there.

I have thought a great deal about how to strengthen working families in America. I have developed this five point plan.
1. Shop at labor friendly locations. Within every industry, there are firms that are most supportive of the working class. They deserve our loyalty. Always support organized labor, especially within government. Organized labor is worth the extra cost.
2. Shop locally. A regional economy cannot be offshored.
3. Buy blue. Some businesses are better community partners then others. Shop with the firm that best represents your core beliefs.
4. Demand that importers protect America by securing their cargo. 9-11-2001 would never have happened if our airlines and airports valued security over profit. We must insist that our industries are safe. Industries that are unsafe should be shut down.
5. Take it to the street. Sing it from the mountain. Everyone at DU is an activist in one way or another. Each of us can change the world. Tell the world how you shop and why.

This is my 5 point plan to strengthen working families and curb outsourcing and offshoring.

[silverlib]

1. Are you my husband?

You are supposed to be working!

I'll have to save this for him. He's been saying this in so many words for so many years.

Well put!

[mdmc]

36. Thanks silverlib :-)

Hey! How come you don't have a DU journal? I think you should make one up! Peace and low stress...

[HughBeaumont]

2. That's Reaganite bullshit.

Sorry. The offshoring of jobs has decimated my profession. I've talked to people who's lives and careers were ruined because of this practice. Offshoring is nothing more than destroying one middle class to lift another. You can't compete against people who work for peanuts. Our cost of living is never going to decrease, but over time, our wages are expected to.

[Deja Q]

4. And the way the other is being lifted only compounds energy usage and

global warming problems...

Oh, and if those countries turn on the US right now, it'll put us in a bad spot.

And the quality of the goods being made? If that tank (or helicopter), made in Korea or China, was built as poorly as that Dell PC, the US will be in very bad shape indeed.

Whoops.

[enfield collector]

5. actually it's destroying our middle class to benefit our elitist class.

I don't think the Indian middle class is doing that well out of it with the wages they get for doing our jobs.

[HughBeaumont]

9. Oh, they aren't.

They still live in shitty conditions and deal with 24/7 stress. I don't see them being lifted that much despite what's being reported. And there's still the issue of professions being decimated over here.

[lastliberalintexas]

10. In the short term the Indian and Chinese middle classes

are actually doing quite well while also helping the world elite. While the wages that they are being paid seem small in comaprison to US/European standards, they are well above what is typically expected in those countries. And that of course is why outsourcing works so "well".

[HughBeaumont]

12. How did the other team feel?

That is, the American middle class who wind up being the losers in the race to the bottom?

[lastliberalintexas]

13. Oh, Corporate America could care less about them

And they'll care even less for the Indian and Chinese middle classes when they decide that those jobs can be outsourced from those countries into places where the wages are even lower. Like maybe Kenya and Cambodia.

All in the name of profi- er, progress, my friend.

[HughBeaumont]

17. The ideal wage for corporations is FREE.

Wait until automation is perfected. That could potentially replace 50% of ALL jobs. What THEN, everyone?

[Nederland]

39. Not really

If there were no wages there would be no one with money to buy the stuff corporations make. Henry Ford realized that decades ago--sad that modern day execs didn't learn the same lesson.

[HughBeaumont]

46. Modern day execs care about no one except Numero Uno.

Granted, labor cannot be free. Doesn't mean they still like paying us. They see it as a necessary evil.

[mdmc]

59. good point nederland

folk need cash to buy shit...

[Strelnikov_]

57. . .Wages Are Lower . . " Like The US After Another 10 Years Of

globalization.

The jobs will come back, once our living standard is that of a Cambodian villager.

[mdmc]

14. I dislike Ray-gun more then any other President,

including flight suit boy.

Both outsourcing and offshoring are ruthless business tools. We need to keep them in check as much as we possibly can. With all due respect, do you think that President Gore, President Hillary Clinton, or President McCain will back away from international trade?

What would be a better way to help working families? What more would you like to see done? I submit that my five point plan offers an excellent strategy for fighting outsourcing and offshoring.

[HughBeaumont]

22. All three you mentioned are tools of big business.

Especially Hillary, who supports offshoring hand over fist, which is the reason I DON'T want her as president.

There's a great set of solutions in the book Outsourcing America by the Hira brothers, both of whom address the losers of this issue (the American middle class) in this great book and are also both of Indian descent:

Hira commented on this cover story, saying that without some smart new policy responses, the U.S. will not prosper by losing high skill/high wage jobs.

"The current policy response is to do nothing, which means we will not prosper," Hira said. "The policy responses proposed by industry organizations, like the Council on Competitiveness' National Innovation Initiative is to boost R&D funding and improve K-12 math and science education. These are both good ideas but don't address the job destruction caused by offshoring.

Even in the short run, we are losing as a nation," Hira added. "Hopefully, we will begin creating jobs again and those displaced workers can go to other jobs. But robust job creation hasn't happened since 2000."

Big business needs to address the problem and someone, government or otherwise, needs to provide a better safety net for displaced workers. Capitalism and people's lives simply cannot be put on hold for 4-6 years (and for industry, 2-3 decades to come up with new solid professions) because rich men are not rich enough. Better wages = bigger revenue for business.

[mdmc]

24. My OP is about action

You and I have very little control over our national economy, or who will be the next President of the USA. If I could choose the next President, Bernie Saunders would be President and Dennis Kucinich would be veep.

You are correct that Gore, Clinton, and McCain are not going to back away from free trade. I think that perhaps all three could find my five points worthy of consideration.

My OP gives DU'ers 5 actions that we all can do in order to assist working families and offset offshoring and outsourcing.

[mattclearing]

31. It's not clear from your post that you read the whole OP.

No way what mdmc said is reaganite bullshit. Once you get past the globalization justification, it's clearly a road map to responsible consumerism.

[HughBeaumont]

44. I'm all for the second part.

As I am for National Health care. That should be a human right.

It's the whole "supporting job offshoring for the purpose of competition" that I can't get behind.

[mdmc]

48. down thread I concede that I don't know much about finance

My support for those things (offshoring and outsourcing) is not based in deep intellectual grounds.

[Nederland]

38. Sadly

That is the nature of globalization. It transfers money from the rich to the poor. Countries, that is.

[bobbieinok]

43. AND from poor people to rich people??????????

I don't really understand your point. Could you elaborate a bit please.

I think what you said is similar to what was claimed about the textile industry moving from the North US to the South US: the move improved the US southern economy.

[Nederland]

49. Probably both

Having relatives in Southeast Asia, there is no doubt in my mind that many of the countries (and their people) over there have benefited enormously from globalization. People here love to talk about workers in a Nike factory make only a few dollars a day, but they neglect to mention that that wage is probably twice what they were making before Nike came in to "exploit" them.

[Terra Terra]

50. They're just doing the jobs that American's won't do

Americans won't work on a garment factory assembly line, nor will they work in a factory making the same piece of plastic, day in and day out, for years on end. And don't even mention the tediousness of writing computer code for 12 hours a day, squinting at a monitor all day long. Outsourcing: doing the jobs that Americans won't do, but not having to emigrate in order to do them.

[Nobody]

53. The jobs that Americans won't do?

Did you catch Senator McCain featured on CNN and other news sources in an appearance with a bunch of blue collar workers. He used that same phrase: the jobs that Americans won't do, and then offered $50/hr picking lettuce for a season. He got lots of takers and then insulted them all by telling them they couldn't handle the job.

It's not that Americans won't do the job. Pay us a living wage and we'll do any job we can get.

There are a lot of American workers who were doing the jobs you mention that Americans "won't do". Some have been put in the unenviable position of having to train their replacements. Some have been laid off only to be replaced by someone else doing the SAME JOB for pennies a day.

It's a race to the bottom, and it's destroying the middle class. What jobs can we get that we can retire from? What can we do that won't get outsourced away from us? All we ask is a wage we can live on and have enough left over to save for our retirement.

[Terra Terra]

55. Oh, I'm sorry, I must've forgotten....

to denote the post as sarcasm :) This is the same logic used by those who favor illegal immigration. Doing jobs Americans won't do, simply because they themselves would not do those jobs. Put in the right context it shows how truly ludicrous that line of thought is.

[Nobody]

56. No problem

Written language doesn't portray expression very well.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

54. Jobs that Americans won't do?

As Michael Moore noted in "The Big One," those are jobs that Americans "won't do" for $5.00 a day.

Millions of Americans used to do those jobs and gladly, because they got good pay and benefits, far more than blue collar people get now cleaning offices or running the cash register at a convenience store.

I grew up in an industrial town in the 1950s (two industrial companies headquartered there), and most of my elementary school classmates were the children of factory workers. Their mothers didn't have paying jobs, but their fathers earned enough to buy a house and a car.

And what were these jobs? What these workers did was "work on a garment factory assembly line, ...they work in a factory making the same piece of plastic, day in and day out, for years on end."

I ran plastic moulding machines as a summer job between college and graduate school. It was considered a good job for a person who wasn't going to college, but the company moved to Mexico about twenty years ago.

[Deja Q]

3. Don't rationalize.

Big business does it for one reason only; the results of their actions are obvious.

Smaller actions follow suit because, for cost reasons, they have no other choice.

And the smallest ones are either bought out or stamped on.

It's a vicious circle.

A dog that eats its own.

That's life, as big business chooses it to be.

I see the positive sides to it. I also see the negative sides.

Borders and Barnes and Noble are "blue". Yet they are big chains that have buried small businesses.

I choose to shop at walmart because my low paying job due to globalization keeps me from buying from those more expensive mom'n'pop businesses. And if that's choice, then I don't know what is.

Organized labor means nothing when cost is a concern.

The world runs on cost and finding ways to reduce cost. This has been the modus operandi for decades now.

With the cost of housing and education rising, it becomes harder to learn. The amount of jobs needed to remain afloat makes the time to GET an education harder.

And it's all due to offshoring; driving costs down. We're dismantling ourselves with it.

And if we're helping the world, giving jobs to China and India with their 90/74% piracy rates is a real laugh. And their usage for big-ass SUVs isn't helping either. Especially for global warming.

In short, I don't know anymore. Except humanity has conditioned itself to money and costs. It's only business, nothing personal. And that is one of the worst sins in the Christian Bible. "For the love of money is the root of all evil" being one of numerous passages the minsters will never parrot to the pulpits. (hence, many Libertarians who love outshoring yet heavily dislike how the job market is dwindling and their pay shrinking also admit to being agnostics... because they know religion states greed is a sin.)

[mdmc]

18. There are very few things that you and I can control, Hypnotoad

I came up with this strategy after reading your OP. Big business is against us. Washington is against us. We need to stand with those that are for us. They are so far and few between that it is essential to support them, when we can.

Poor people shop where they are able and purchase what they can afford. I in no way stress those in poverty doing whatever it takes to survive, including shopping at walmart.

That being said, is there something else that DU'ers could do to limit the effect of outsourcing and offshoring?

[acmejack]

21. Michael Dell still makes his Billions!

Most of us work for pittances now, but under the mdmc plan, I guess we are glad we can do OUR part for the global good. Thank you Michael for sending our jobs to India, Taiwan and wherever else you decided to help the local people out of their previous hopeless situations.

Who knew he was moved by such an altruistic spirit? I thought he was just a greedy SOB!

[mdmc]

25. well, there are still a few bugs in the system

What are the alternative to the mdmc plan?

1) Fair trade as opposed to free trade. <-no need to outsource, as it would be revenue neutral. I am down with it. The DLC and the GOP are not.
2) tariffs. <-CEO's still get a little bang from offshoring, but it will sting the working class less. Again, I'm down. The ruling class is not.
3) isolationism. <-another option.

This OP was based action and belief that every DU'er could support in order to strengthen working families. These five points might be able to get past the ruling class. (wishful thinking?:shrug:)

[acmejack]

30. Due credit given- an imperfect plan is better than no plan!

You are obviously a member of Thom Hartman's audience as well.

[mdmc]

32. Thanks Bro! Peace and low stress!

I actually listen to NPR (www.wamc.org), but I have heard of Thom Hartman here on DU. I checked out his home page, psychology and politics... pretty darn cool. I have a psy BA. He sure has written a interesting bunch of books.

[acmejack]

58. "What would Jefferson do?" is superb!

He actually read all of Jefferson's letters before he wrote it. The man is just brilliant and indefatigable to boot, he regularly does six hours of radio a day and often does nine.

btw, If you haven't read it and budgetary constraints will prevent you from doing so, pm me with your mailing address and I will be happy to send you my copy. It is a great read!

[mdmc]

78. thanks for the additional info

peace and low stress

[elehhhhna]

6. UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE's the tool Amer. Biz needs to compete..l.

Unless we want to a race to the bottom to compete with the 3rd world.

[Deja Q]

11. That's what they want.

We're just tools. Costs. Disposable items. To those people. Not human beings like themselves.

[elehhhhna]

15. Too bad. We could compete with Europe, but noooooo.

The decision is made in the healthcare arena. Biz & citizens NEED UHC.

[mdmc]

19. Very true!

If not "universal health care" (which I am all down with, for the record), at least a strong unionized workforce could bargain for good healthcare.

I would love to see all American workers guaranteed health coverage.

[Deja Q]

7. K&R

The responses to your discussion are as Recommended-worthy as the topic itself.

But best of all, "a regional economy cannot be offshored". That is a contradiction...

BTW: Pacifism only works when everybody believes in it. That's why offshoring, like pacifism, fails. You can either side with the winners, or die with the losers. And we're seeing who the winners are.

You'll have to ask if I will ultimately become a loser...

[mdmc]

20. I wondered about that quote in your sig line.

And you are the farthest thing from a loser. Gandhi once said that throughout history, all tyrants that have ever ruled, ultimately failed. Think of it... always. The Nazis went down in under a decade. The Romans went down over a couple hundred years.

Eventually, something will "eat up" the multinationals, just like Wal-Mart ate the Mall, and the Mall ate Main Street. If I had my way, American working families would insist on free health care and education, and secure / regulated economies. This five point plan is the only way that I can see these issues being resolved in our favor.

[mdmc]

90. but a regional economy cannot be offshored

[Warpy]

8. 1, 2, and 3 are becoming less and less practical

Sure, we all would rather patronize local businesses that treat the help well and contribute to Democrats, but that's not always possible. Most of us have limited ability to do this because of accessability.

My program is a little different from yours. I believe in tariffs. Every country we offshore to belives in tariffs. The US worker is at a double disadvantage: no protection from his government in the form of tariffs and a currency that still trades more strongly than currencies in countries we offshore to. This is unfair.

We have offshored entire strategic industries. You won't realize just how important they were until we have the next big war and run out of shoes, out of cloth, out of most of the things we use in daily life. It's going to come as quite a shock to a whole lot of global trade true believers.

We can't keep offshoring the paychecks and importing the bills. It simply can't go on this way.

My program is a combination of tariffs assessed according to the percentage of business a multinational that has offshored jobs intends to do in the US. A company like QWest or many financial institutions that have offshored all office jobs and expect to make 100% of their profit in the US would find themselves hit with punitive tariffs. Making the kind of offshoring we've seen over the past 30 years inconvenient and unprofitable should be the aim.

Industries that restart within the US would get tax benefits for doing so. We need to make industry convenient and profitable within US borders as we make offshoring it the opposite.

What we have now, a system wherein the US worker is expected to compete on a head to head basis with workers protected by tariffs and paid in disadvantaged currencies is unsustainable. We can't go on like this, no matter how much blather about the information age we're hearing. US workers are the best trained and most efficient in the world and it's high time they were rediscovered in their own country.

[lastliberalintexas]

16. I'm not too certain how I feel about tariffs these days

But I'd certainly like to see these companies that essentially relocate to 3rd world countries be treated a foreign corporations. No nice tax consequences/breaks, no government contracts, no protection under US laws (as in no corporate personhood for foreign entities).

And I'm not saying I disagree with you about tariffs, just that I don't know enough about how they would impact the economy to know whether I'm in favor or not.

[mdmc]

26. I can support tariffs, but I doubt elected officials ever would

Ideally, we could do a whole lot better then the current set up. Very sad, but true.

[mdmc]

23. I hear you warpy

I do not agree with tariffs myself as they are artificial economic borders. However, I see no reason that cargo should not be scrutinized at its point of entry into the USA. In effect, a complete search to ensure the security of our cargo would be in effect a "security tariff" due to the cost of such an operation.

You and I have very limited control of our country's economy. I doubt that President Gore, President Hillary Clinton, or President McCain would support tariffs. They may buy in to protecting our ports.

[clar8130]

27. I'm not convinced it's consumers' fault

You state: In short, Mom and Pop stores would still be around if people wanted to shop at them. Wal Mart is so successful because people want to shop there.

People shop at WalMart because prices are lower (so is quality, but that's another post). Why are prices lower? Because WalMart can dictate the price it will pay for inventory. Mom & Pop used to ask the wholesaler: "How much for these widgets?" and the wholesaler would reply "$1.29." WalMart doesn't ask. It tells the wholesaler: "I'll pay you $1.09 per widget, and if you don't like it, I'll find it elsewhere."

Mom and Pop CANNOT compete with that.

[HughBeaumont]

29. And there it is.

Behemoth corporations squish M&P from the get-go. My question is, how in the new environment can M&P even start up?

[mdmc]

34. start with a product or service that consumers want

then work toward providing that service.

Lets face it, Walmart is an awful place to purchase a romantic gift. There are niches that walmart cannot fill. customer service is a prime on.

The use of the internet and regionalism (the idea of supporting the area in which you live) can also be effective.

Sometimes, there is little that can be done to stop walmart. However, there are things that can be done.

Locally, we have two grocery stores, Stop and Shop and Shoprite, that are organized by the teamsters. I would suggest that people buy their food at Shoprite or Stop and Shop instead of at Walmart. The union affiliation makes shopping at these places much better for working families. This small step will make a difference.

[clar8130]

40. start with a product with a huge PROFIT MARGIN

You'll need it, if you want to open a Mom & Pop retail business.

Rent, taxes, insurance, utilities, advertising (yellow pages ads are NOT cheap, never mind radio or TV), an employee or two (IF you want a day off now & then), employer taxes...

I think M&D stores are a thing of the past. I'm all for patronizing the ones that are left, but we're not likely to see a resurgence anytime soon.

[mdmc]

45. but we are going to see more mom and pop stores, just in a different way

There won't be more brick and mortar mom and pop stores, but all of us have the ability to make llc, cafepress shops, ebay stores, blogs, et all.

I am a believer that all things are cyclical. Just as "the purity of efficiency" (as DU'er Armistad called it above) has destroyed the mom and pop stores, something (the internet?) will come and destroy walmart and the "purity of efficiency".

Main Street got destroyed by the Mall. The Mall got destroyed by big box stores. Something will be coming for the big box stores. I would love for it to be the mdmc 5 point plan stated in the OP.

Welcome to DU and thank you for your post / input. :patriot:

[JHB]

79. Break up Walmart...

...and restore limits on media ownership per market.

[mdmc]

33. people must be willing to pay more. Consumers must pay more

but it will be worth it.

I am a big government liberal.

What I am suggesting is that the cheapest, most convenient shopping experience is not always the best choice of the consumer. In my city we are trying to make a conscience effort to shop in the inner city and not at the box stores in the suburbs. It cost more, and the quality is less. We have thrift stores and a freecycle (swap / trade forum).

We will never be able to support and defend working families unless we agree on collective security. Regionalism, organized workplaces, health care, and free education. This all costs more then lazzie-faire, but it will be worth it.

Mom and Pop shops can't fight walmart. Mom and Pop shops + dedicated consumers looking to keep Mom and Pop in business, even if it costs more then shopping at walmart, CAN fight walmart.

This is the only way that I can think of fighting the lowest common denominator.

[clar8130]

41. I really agree, but

with the rising costs of gas, health care, property taxes , how long can I afford the higher prices to keep M&P in business?

I hate the megastores (Bed, Bath & Beyond is my most detested), but my dwindling purchase power as I approach retirement has me scared to death.

[mdmc]

47. Just do your part clar8130. Some people have it too hard to fight

the good fight. I live in a city with 38% of the population live under the poverty line (38% :wow:!). They need to shop where they can get the best bang for their bucks. You can only do what you can do...

I am currently unemployed. I will shop my conscience when I can. I will survive and shop at Walmart if I have to. Some things, such as shopping at an unionized grocery store instead of a "right to work" grocery store, will not cost you anything. It will not cost anything to help other grocery store shoppers understand why shopping at the unionized store is important. Tell your friends and family (if you are lucky enough to have them, not everyone does :(). Spreading the word won't cost us a thing.

(Sometimes I choose a store / restaurant based on how they run their business. I buy my pizza from Cracolici's because they donate food to the Newburgh Boat Club and to the Democratic Party. I won't eat at Dominoes because they are right wing bigots). Sometimes you need to do some research to keep up the good fight.

[alarimer]

63. the Walmarts of the world also engage in predatory practices

They pay their employees so little they have to go on food stamps. Their employees cannot afford the health insurance Walmart offers. They force their suppliers to cut their prices, thus having to lowere the wages for THEIR employees. Etc, Etc.

[Armstead]

28. Good Post -- But it isn't that simple

I do agree with you thatv we are getting the economy we deserve -- to an extent.

Our buying habits and what we condone are within our control. However, there is a dilemma that what may be most "efficient" in ruthless terms is not necessarily the best for society. Slavery is probably the most efficient form of labor -- but we don't allow that in the US for obvious moral reasons.

Likewise the "economies of scale" work against the interests of society. Centralizing and consolidating the means of production and distribution is more efficient, in terms of raw costs. They are more economically efficient -- hence Wal Mart. But in the process they do a lot of damage to society and create monopolies.

That's basically why liberal and progressive politics exists. It is the humanistic counterbalance to pure efficiency.

For decades, the Gospel of Pure Efficiency has crowdwd all other messages in the public consciousness.

The message that we somehow have to break through is that what may seem best on one level can be bad on other levels. It has to be made automatic that when peopel think of a product to buy, for example, that they will consider where and how it is made, as a matter of course.

[mdmc]

35. I conceded in the OP that I do not support monopolies

what more do you want? :)

The way that you name this system that we have now, "pure efficiency", is great. What my OP was trying to get across was that this pure efficiency model was NOT in the best interest of the working class, and that our direct participation would be necessary in order to counter it. My OP was trying to set up a system that all DU'ers could act upon in order to fight the power. In the short term, paying a little extra for a unionized cashier to check you out of the grocery store might be perceived as inefficient (cause you pay more), but in the long run, it is the best course of action in regards to helping working families to earn a living.


Thanks for your post!

[Zorra]

37. I am a firm believer in ending globalization and protecting my

nation and people from transnational corporate globalists. With all due respect, I believe that some of the ideas expressed in your post are logically sound, and ethically commendable (I try to do these things personally) - but that your understanding of the nature of globalization may be somewhat naive.

Subcomandante Marcos wrote this treatise on globalization some time ago. To my mind, not only was this work accurate at the time, it was also almost prophetic. I think anyone that wishes to gain more accurate insight into the true nature of the globalization phenomenon may benefit by reading this.

The Seven Loose Pieces of the Global Jigsaw Puzzle
(Neoliberalism as a puzzle: the useless global unity which fragments and destroys nations)
snip---
The global power of the financial centers is so great, that they can afford not to worry about the political tendency of those who hold power in a nation, if the economic program (in other words, the role that nation has in the global economic megaprogram) remains unaltered. The financial disciplines impose themselves upon the different colors of the world political spectrum in regards to the government of any nation. The great world power can tolerate a leftist government in any part of the world, as long as the government does not take measures that go against the needs of the world financial centers. But in no way will it tolerate that an alternative economic, political and social organization consolidate. For the megapolitics, the national politics are dwarfed and submit to the dict ates of the financial centers. It will be this way until the dwarfs rebel . .

http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/mexico/ezln/1997/jigsaw.html

[mdmc]

42. thanks for the post and the link

As far as my understanding of globalization being naive, allow me to retort. I am not that smart. I love politics, and everything that I know about politics I have learned from cartoons (peanuts, doonesbury, bloom county, simpsons, boondocks) and dead kennedy lyrics. In short, I know nothing about business or finance.

I do know that if you or me (or Bernie Saunders or Dennis Kucinich) were calling the shots, we would be far better off. I understand that need and attraction of "having the dwarfs rebel". I guess that I would like my OP to be a starting point for this rebellion.

I'm gonna go check out that link that you provided for us. Peace and low stress. :)

[Neil Lisst]

51. Patronize Mom and Pop businesses. I do.

When you spend your money, you are voting your choices. I want my votes going to Americans (or delightful immigrants) who are running a business they own. I'll stop at the little Pakistani store instead of 7/11 every time. I'll stop at the unique family restaurant, not the chain.

If I can buy from people who live in my community, I do that, even when it costs more than getting the same goods at Walmart.

I strongly believe in supporting local entrepreneurs.

[mdmc]

52. cool-i-o

peace and low stress!

[Blue_Tires]

60. ttt n/t

[mdmc]

61. t

[Vidar]

62. The first company that pulled this should have had assets seized

and corporate officers jailed. Obviously it's too late now, government in America being nothing more than the whore of industry.

[mdmc]

64. yeah, that really ain't an option.

peace

[crispini]

65. About the choices people make when shopping.

Your argument about Wal Mart is shallow at best. You write:

My friends, we get the economy that we deserve. Wal Mart didn't destroy the mall, the mall didn't destroy Main Street, Main Street didn't destroy the Mom and Pop stores of yore. The consumer is responsible for all of these changes. How we shop, how we spend money, determines how business operate. In short, Mom and Pop stores would still be around if people wanted to shop at them. Wal Mart is so successful because people want to shop there.

It's not that people wanted to shop at Wal Mart -- Wal Mart offered them lower prices than the Mom and Pop shops. If you as an individual are making a very limited income and you can make some choices that will save you $50 or $100 a month, you will very likely do that, despite the fact that you know and like the Mom and Pop shop and would have preferred to shop there at the same price.

Now. Why does Wal Mart offer such lower prices? First, economies of scale. They are huge and able to buy in bulk and drive prices down. Second, arm-twisting tactics. Wal Mart is infamous for using their massive purchasing power to force their suppliers to lower their prices to them. Third, offshore buying. Wal Mart is infamous for buying cheap shit from China instead of buying American. Fourth, not paying their employees living wages.

Your call to improve the situation simply by changing where people shop is shallow and a bit naive. Have you ever worked in a job where you made ten dollars an hour and had to support two kids? I have a friend who did that. She shops at Wal Mart, and I never say a thing to her, because to her, the money she saves means she can buy another pair of shoes for one of her children.

The only way we will improve the situation is through some judicious legislation (I don't know what that is, exactly). The economies of scale involved mean that individual businesses are not, and can never be, on the same playing field as Wal Mart.

[mdmc]

68. Poor people have very limited means to change the society that

they live in.

With all due respect, I have stated that people should shop their conscience, within their limits. I would never disrespect someone shopping at Walmart out of need.

In my neck of the woods, Newburgh, there are a lot of poor people. They can actually get most stuff cheaper at other retail stores, but they shop at Walmart because it is necessary due to transportation / convenience.

I respectfully disagree with your assumption that one must shop at the place with the lowest price. There are many other factors that also come in to play.

Lastly, my OP is about action, direct action that most DU'ers could take part in to change the world that they live in. A small effort is better then nothing.

I agree that a political progressive movement in America would take care of all of this. Unfortunately (2008 candidates), Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry, John McCain, and Condi Rice have no interest in curbing free trade. Without a pure socialist movement in America, the working class will continue to get crushed. We need to act. As Jerry Garcia once said, "Someone needed to do something. It is fuckin pathetic that it had to be us." It has to be us, bro.

Percent Living Below the Poverty Level

[Ksec]

66. Capitalist economies will always go to the cheapest labor source.

Today, its China and India. Tomorrow its a different country thats "maturing"

Its a race to the bottom with a few winners who are owners and CEOs. We led the World in technology, manufacturing and productivity. The reward for that is to be punished. We lose all these things we made into powerhouses ,which in turn made the middle class into a powerhouse. So now these multinationals have become greedy, because of stockholders, and look for ways to make more money for those stockholders. The easiest way is to cut the labor costs, and that means outsourcing .

So once China demands to be paid fairly, the multinationals will have to find a new source of cheap labor. The cycle downward continues , and eventually they may even come back to those who made them. The US. By that time we will be living like third world countries , willing to accept any type of business that pays any wage, no matter how small.

It aint pretty, but thats Capitalism. It cant maintain itself unless it keeps people weak and desperate.

[mdmc]

70. I agree... It sure ain't pretty

[area51]

67. "I support outsourcing and offshoring...."

Boy, you certainly are brainwashed to be supporting offshoring, etc., & be unemployed. :eyes: All this country needs is more traitors who support offshoring/inshoring. Look, I don't care if you want to remain unemployed (which you obviously do by supporting offshoring), but I want to work. Don't deny me & millions of others the opportunity to work just b/c you're short-sighted in supporting offshoring/inshoring. :mad:

[mdmc]

69. How do you stop offshoring / outsourcing?

My OP is about action. These are things that we can do to curb offshoring and outsourcing.

[Jamison]

71. Kick!

gOOD POST.

[mdmc]

73. do you have any suggestions on how we can fight offshoring?

:shrug:

[mdmc]

75. how do we stop offshoring?

do you have any ideas?

[msgadget]

72. Very astute

Thing is, American corporations are already successfully competing in the global economy and could do so better with more balanced trade policies and universal health care. I understand trade but it gets a disproportionate amount of attention from politicians. WE have to adjust even though the major benefit of it is an end to longterm job security and - perversely - our reliance on labor squashing entities like Wally World.

And, y'know, I don't think we get the economy we deserve. We vote for politicians we hope will make good policy but, well, obviously that doesn't always work out for us. Perhaps it's one of those 'which came first' arguments but we were shepharded to where we are today. Granted, many became unwitting supporters of the very mechanisms that keep downward pressure on their wages but where we are is exactly where corporations want us - in debt and with little bargaining power. When we are weak, they are that much stronger.

The very worker they disregard is the consumer buying most of their goods. Why doesn't it occur to anyone that the more labor earns, the more labor spends. Overall, I think we may agree more than we disagree...I think. :)

:thumbsup: for a plan.

[mdmc]

74. I was talkin to my (lazzie-faire) sister about this,

and she feels that outsourcing / offshoring is a great economic tool. I was trying to convince her otherwise, but she did not buy any of it.

I want to end outsourcing in America. Simply opposing it will not work. We need action. We need hope.

[msgadget]

76. A great economic tool for CEOs,

What kind of action could we take? The undocumented workers are having an action on May 1 but what would it take for masses of Americans to do something similar? I try to keep it active as a topic but... got any ideas?

[mdmc]

77. I think that the solution is a marketing one, not a political one.

I think that we need to convince the American consumer that there is something more important then simply the lowest price. My sister thinks that the only way to stop outsourcing is to make it illegal. She is a liberal, and kinda hates the Democrats because they would never support such and action (making free trade into fair trade). She feels that at least the GOP will fuck you right to your face, whereas the dems pretend to care, then act just like the GOP.

In my sister's view, the Dems need to stand up and outlaw outsourcing. Since they will never do that, the American people will need to come up with another solution to outsourcing (retraining, earning less, etc).

My sister does not feel that anything justifies paying a higher price - I am afraid that Americans agree with her. I disagree. I don't know how to put it into motion.

ps- Thank you so much for your posts here and your OP's regarding outsourcing. I think that the Dems would be able TO RULE THE WORLD if they would just stand up for a progressive, liberal vision of America. As long as they run from those stances, they will always be gop-lite Rat worms.

[msgadget]

80. I like your sister,

she's a realist! Most of us can only live relatively well with lower prices - our money doesn't go as far as it used to. And, big industry is so spoiled and gluttonous the only way they'd learn how to compete (without undocumented workers) from here would be if they had no alternative. You damn betcha we'd have universal healthcare and long term care by now. It's not gonna happen.

We've only got the two parties to choose from and someone posted a great opinion here that we shouldn't worry so much about elections (blasphemy!) but in forcing ALL politicians in office to do what we want. I think he's right but as long as voters are invested in the whole partisan, majority/minority thing politicians don't even have to promise much. As long as they can muster up empathy on the stump and do a worthy thing from time to time they're pretty much guaranteed desperate fans willing to forgive way too much.

www.2SecondCommute.com has a newsletter for telecommuters that lists customer service, programming, etc. jobs that can be done from the home via the 'net. The advent of the 'net is what has facilitated our jobs going to other countries though... Lots of companies have tried this and continue to do so but not to a great enough extent, imo. The rates of pay are lower as companies take advantage of desperation, imo, but it might beat the hell outa Micky D's or unemployment! If you consider the amount of resources that go into developing the plans to offshore you can only conclude those businesses felt they had to, not just to 'compete', but because labor here is too great a force. Think about how much money some spend for PR (like Coke and big pharma - billions) and advertising to prove they're not evil but they won't put that money toward their workforce...

I don't think outsourcing should be outlawed but I think it should be balanced. They can outsource but they can't lay off to do it. And, no offshore division can develop patenable intellectual property or be larger than a company's smallest US based division. They should outlaw our confidential information being sent out of the country. If it's so easy for someone in India to safely do my tax return, why not some guy sitting in his bathrobe in Kansas? If CAT scans can so easily be read from out of the country, why not some doctor at home on maternity leave here? And, if the cost of labor's rights - pensions and healthcare - inhibit competition, then, DUH...! But you and I know it's about more than need, it's about getting out from under a strong workforce that's cumbersome to manage, it's about international relations, and most galling - cutting expenses so a good balance sheet bolsters share price enough for some old millionaire to retire with 10 more million bucks in his package.

I'm not so selfish I don't want other countries to catch up and prosper but, honestly, I don't think it's a matter of taking turns, know what I mean? Like, it's India's turn to prosper and grow it's middle class, our turn has come and gone.

Gee, thank you for the compliment, it means a lot. Hell, I feel like I'm talkin' to myself most times. :)

Edit to ask: does your sister still vote?

[mdmc]

81. Damn that realism!

:)
My sis still votes. I think that by enforcing import security is the best way to regulate outsourcing.

[msgadget]

82. Enforcing port security...

Could you explain, please?

[mdmc]

83. sure.

Outsourcing is allowed...encouraged...
but
All cargo that is shipped in to America must be checked and verified as safe. All cargo must be throughly checked prior to making it in to the country.

Outsourcing would need to take in to consideration the security risk implied with doing business outside of America. All foriegn trade would be required to secure their products and ensure the safety of the American people.

The profits that would result in offshoring would be relocated into port, airport, and border secuirty.

In the end, it would be a little cheaper to manufacture overseas. It would help to curb the profit driven drive to outsource.

[msgadget]

84. So you're saying the cost of those inspections

would be added to the cost of imports, making them more expensive and less attractive? And, we'd create more jobs in the process while securing our borders? That's one benefit and but they'd also catch more illegal knock-offs before they enter the country. But, do we own any of our ports anymore?

[mdmc]

87. we wouldn't need to own the ports if the coast guard did the security

[On the Road]

85. Unfortunately,

I don't any of those five are likely to be effective. It requires changes in government policy.

The low umemployment rate shows that there are plenty of jobs in the economy, many of them are just not well compensated. Some steps towards helping American to gain from globalization would be doubling the minimum wage, requiring certain benefits like health care, instituting wage insurance, and funding higher education costs. As Asians take on less skilled jobs, the whole pie grows and there are more skilled functions that can stay in the US.

Republicans are not interested in the average worker, and most Democrats don't seem to have the vision to build a choerent policy. I think it's very important for the next presidential candidate to have a clear plan.

Defeating globalization is not only difficult, it probably does not help ordinary Americans in the long run any more than obstructing industrialization or automation would have helped. Change is so rapid nowdays that the federal government can lay gneneral ground rules but not manage individual products or industries effectively. Japan has done a reasonably good job of keeping higher-tech or higher-level functions in-house and farming out the less skilled function to other countries. Even though their economic growth has stalled, the average lifestyle is still good. I think some of what Europe is doing is wrongheaded and will come back to haunt them in terms of higher unemployment and lower growth.

As Bill Clinton said about NAFTA, "we have to make it better." And the party has to do more than give lip service to that idea (which is pretty much what Clinton did).

[mdmc]

89. we have to make it better for sure

what did europe do that you think is not helpful?

[Nimrod2005]

86. Recommended your post because you are trying to have this discussion, but

It is not that easy...These are extremely complex issues, here are a couple of them:

1) I own stock in these companies, we all do in a way, I think 401K participation is at 70% of the population, and guess what? it is our retirement, it is our security blanket for the future, my company (almost all companies) does not have a pension anymore - and I need to save money for healthcare costs, which many companies don't offer anymore - Stocks are the only way to secure a future, so in a way, you are a consumer of these companies' products as an investor

2) The cheaper the product they make, the more secure we feel in our ability to go about our daily lives, we can consume more (consume things we need), live a better quality of life, less stress...etc. So we are addicted to exremely cheap THINGS!!! I refuse to pay more than $29.99 for a dress shirt, and more than $69.99 for a brand name dress shoes...etc. These same items are $90.00 in Sweden, and $140.00 in Japan...etc. We are a nation addicted to cheap, it is a way of life for us now...

I can go on about the lack of healthcare, diminished sense of security at our workplace...etc. but this is an already deep downward spiral, frankly I hope I am not around when we hit bottom!

[mdmc]

88. your post scares the heck out of me

thanks for posting it. peace...