havesealwilltravel
Structural
The original thread was becoming too long. Let's continue the discussion here.
Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations JAE on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Engineering is Going Overseas - Goodbye Jobs II 27
- Thread starter havesealwilltravel
- Start date
- Status
-
2
- #2
-
2
- #3
Jobs will continue to be outsourced until the rest of the world catches up with the other developed nations. The economy of this country was built by protecting itself against competition for decades. During that time, our standard of living increased. We put greater value on human life, environment, employment, health, education, etc.... As a result, we have one of the best standards of living in the world. We enjoy safe working conditions, unemployment protection, pension benefits, long lives... things most other countries do not have. However, each of those things comes at a price which weights in on the problem.
In order to stop the hemorraging of jobs oversea, we have to put the reins on our standard of living until the rest of the world catches up. In a world economy, all player must be playing by the same rules, problem is, we can not impose our rules on another nation. Take a hard look at what makes this country a hard place to do business compared to others, then make a decision... would you rather have that entitlement, or a job.
The standard of living that we have driven up over the decades has now started to collapse under it's own weight. It is time to let other countries enjoy the benefits we have enjoyed for so long. Only then will we be able to bring/keep jobs here in the US.
Just my two cents... but are they US, Canadian, Russian, or Chinese... each has their own value....
Regards,
jetmaker
In order to stop the hemorraging of jobs oversea, we have to put the reins on our standard of living until the rest of the world catches up. In a world economy, all player must be playing by the same rules, problem is, we can not impose our rules on another nation. Take a hard look at what makes this country a hard place to do business compared to others, then make a decision... would you rather have that entitlement, or a job.
The standard of living that we have driven up over the decades has now started to collapse under it's own weight. It is time to let other countries enjoy the benefits we have enjoyed for so long. Only then will we be able to bring/keep jobs here in the US.
Just my two cents... but are they US, Canadian, Russian, or Chinese... each has their own value....
Regards,
jetmaker
-
1
- #4
arunmroa
re: your post in the last thread on this subject about new legislation regulating outsourcing to India.
Where did you read about this? I would be very interested in reading the article or even better the text of the legislative documents. Does it effect only India or are other countries mentioned?
I would suspect this has something to do with the upcoming elections -- primarily to appease the American public. I hope I am wrong and it truly encourages growth in the American economy. Lets see if Pres. Bush actually signs this into law.
I also suspect that it won't have too much impact on India since companies will probably still outsource and pay whatever fees/penalties are required --- and still show a profit better than they would by bringing the jobs back to the U.S.
ietech
re: your post in the last thread on this subject about new legislation regulating outsourcing to India.
Where did you read about this? I would be very interested in reading the article or even better the text of the legislative documents. Does it effect only India or are other countries mentioned?
I would suspect this has something to do with the upcoming elections -- primarily to appease the American public. I hope I am wrong and it truly encourages growth in the American economy. Lets see if Pres. Bush actually signs this into law.
I also suspect that it won't have too much impact on India since companies will probably still outsource and pay whatever fees/penalties are required --- and still show a profit better than they would by bringing the jobs back to the U.S.
ietech
-
4
- #5
Thank you dannym and arunmrao for getting this new thread going. I enjoy the discussions. Perhaps this will be the thread that would not die?
If George W. truly is intent on preventing job loss to India (and I would like to see that link as well), how will he square that with backing off of steel tarriffs and granting amnesty to 6-12 million Mexican illegals? I think W has lost his mind.
It would make more sense, IMO, to simply buy Mexico. I wonder what the procedure would be? Maybe we could look into acquiring Cuba at the same time. The we could dispense with all of the border security problems and economic embargos. We bought Alaska. Why not?![[wink]](/data/assets/smilies/wink.gif "[wink] [wink]")
Think of all the engineering jobs (and others) created by overhauling the infrastructures. The booming tourism industry would create many new jobs as well.
I'm only slightly kidding. This idea is not any loonier than many currently proposed and considerably more rational than manned trips to Mars from a space base on the moon.
If George W. truly is intent on preventing job loss to India (and I would like to see that link as well), how will he square that with backing off of steel tarriffs and granting amnesty to 6-12 million Mexican illegals? I think W has lost his mind.
It would make more sense, IMO, to simply buy Mexico. I wonder what the procedure would be? Maybe we could look into acquiring Cuba at the same time. The we could dispense with all of the border security problems and economic embargos. We bought Alaska. Why not?
Think of all the engineering jobs (and others) created by overhauling the infrastructures. The booming tourism industry would create many new jobs as well.I'm only slightly kidding. This idea is not any loonier than many currently proposed and considerably more rational than manned trips to Mars from a space base on the moon.
OK, here’s a link to the India outsourcing story. I haven’t read it yet. Maybe later.
Actually, a Google search with the terms “India senate outsourcing bill” gave many, many results with quite a few involving state governments. The link I listed I think is the story Arunmrao referred to…
Actually, a Google search with the terms “India senate outsourcing bill” gave many, many results with quite a few involving state governments. The link I listed I think is the story Arunmrao referred to…
-
2
- #7
Well, there are lots of llinks extolling the virtues of offshore outsourcing, primarily to India and saying that the huge investment in India is leading to a lot of cutthroat pricing. However, all is not well within the Indian market as the articles at these links show, including a number of recognised companies bringing call centres back.
What is evident is the impact of callcentre offshore outsourcing is the impact on the local jobs market. Jobs, it would seem, taht are hard to keep filled onshore with staff turnover at 90% compared to staff turnovers of 25% in India.
This link suggests a similar Government disquiet in the UK:
What is evident is the impact of callcentre offshore outsourcing is the impact on the local jobs market. Jobs, it would seem, taht are hard to keep filled onshore with staff turnover at 90% compared to staff turnovers of 25% in India.
This link suggests a similar Government disquiet in the UK:
jetmaker: do you think the rest of the world will ever catch up to our standard of living? We (good ol' USA) have 15% of the world's population and yet we use 85% of the energy -- I have always believed that the standard of living was a funtion of energy use
do think the world could physically survive if the rest of the world used the same amount of energy propotionately as we currently do? [The rain forests would be stripped in less than a year...]
It is my supposition that yes, the rest of the world will use more energy and will, to some effect, increase their standard of living (some people more than others, some countries more than others) but the result will be less and more expensive for us and that means only one thing -- our standard of living won't be put on hold: for the majority of Americans, especially those in the middle class, will see their standard decline and decline significantly... (and more jobs going oversees)
do think the world could physically survive if the rest of the world used the same amount of energy propotionately as we currently do? [The rain forests would be stripped in less than a year...]
It is my supposition that yes, the rest of the world will use more energy and will, to some effect, increase their standard of living (some people more than others, some countries more than others) but the result will be less and more expensive for us and that means only one thing -- our standard of living won't be put on hold: for the majority of Americans, especially those in the middle class, will see their standard decline and decline significantly... (and more jobs going oversees)
As a backlash to the US legislation,there is a call from few political parties to ban US companies in India. Now this can become serious if it grows into a large scale movement. For, the government is the biggest buyer in India. Unlike in your country where the private enterprise is the bigger one.
The big American companies will take care to see that it does not affect them.(Bribe the politicians and bureaucrats)We are a 56 year old democracy and still carry the colonial attitude.
I look forward to a free and fair society for all and the interests of socially/economically weak sections protected.
The big American companies will take care to see that it does not affect them.(Bribe the politicians and bureaucrats)We are a 56 year old democracy and still carry the colonial attitude.
I look forward to a free and fair society for all and the interests of socially/economically weak sections protected.
I personally would welcome the banishment of American companies from India and all other countries.
This would definitely encourage American companies to support their own country and the employees past and present who made these companies profitable from their beginnings.
I have, in the past, stated that I am a borderline isolationist and still believe this to be the best route for America to pursue.
I do not mean this disrespectfully to India or others. I only believe that the first responsibility of any person is to their home, homeland and family all else is insignificant; and the first responsibility of any government is to the citizenry that it represents.
Respectfully,
ietech
This would definitely encourage American companies to support their own country and the employees past and present who made these companies profitable from their beginnings.
I have, in the past, stated that I am a borderline isolationist and still believe this to be the best route for America to pursue.
I do not mean this disrespectfully to India or others. I only believe that the first responsibility of any person is to their home, homeland and family all else is insignificant; and the first responsibility of any government is to the citizenry that it represents.
Respectfully,
ietech
CajunCenturion
Computer
Although the jury it still out for a couple of reasons, (not yet signed into law, and I have no experience with the Press Trust of India), the following may be worth watching:
To get back to a level playing field, don't let us think US protectionism, or European, is a one way street. As the markets in third world countries developed, one of the problems for western companies wanting to do business is the legal necessity to be partenered with indigenous companies. Bidding projects to these countries from the west also involves "local content" which often means shipping key components and having fabrication in that country. In some countries, western manufacturers can end up with very little actual value.
If we agree to having a level playing field we would have to insist of the same policies applying to all countries.
If you want an example of protectionism at its best, look no further than the Japanese car/auto market and how effectivelyu they have kept US and European car makers out while flooding those countries with Japanese cars. Of course, this has endured for decades and no government ever resolved this problem.
If we agree to having a level playing field we would have to insist of the same policies applying to all countries.
If you want an example of protectionism at its best, look no further than the Japanese car/auto market and how effectivelyu they have kept US and European car makers out while flooding those countries with Japanese cars. Of course, this has endured for decades and no government ever resolved this problem.
-
1
- #13
EngineerDave
Bioengineer
FYI guys, my copy of Wired came in the mail last week and it prominently features outsourcing to India.
To all, I would like all of you to ask yourself the following questions:
What can I do to ensure that the standard of living for myself and my family remains high?
What do I need for a quality standard of living?
How can I create additional sources of income that can provide for myself and my family and also potentially create jobs for others?
These are the questions I ask myself on a regular basis.
To all, I would like all of you to ask yourself the following questions:
What can I do to ensure that the standard of living for myself and my family remains high?
What do I need for a quality standard of living?
How can I create additional sources of income that can provide for myself and my family and also potentially create jobs for others?
These are the questions I ask myself on a regular basis.
pablo02,
Your observations are very good ones. In fact, what you suggested is exactly what I believe must somewhat happen. In order for some of these other countries to enjoy a better standard of living, that of developed nations, in particular the US, will have to fall. I did not mention that here as it is not a very popular sentiment, as true as it may be. Nobody likes the idea of taking a drop in pay, education levels, health, etc... while the price of goods and seervices remains fixed.
The truth appears to be all around us... spiraling healthcare costs, increasing older population putting strains on underfunded pension plans, employers requiring College educations to perform tasks that highschool dropouts use to do. It looks like a system that is poised to collapse on itself as the underlying structure can not longer support it. It is my fear that if we do not put some restraint into our standard of living, it will be imposed on us by a global economy. Only the weathly will come out of this unharmed.
Pablo02, what we must remember is that as unemployment rises, people will be willing to work for less, and hence stop the hemorraging of jobs oversea. It is the imbalance in the standard of living between nations which is driving the flow of jobs. I am not saying to abandon all hope, just that we need to make a decision on what is more important... a job to live with now... or a fat pension to live by later. The way I see it.. if you do not have the first, the second will never follow. It is all a matter of priorities.
Regards,
jetmaker
Your observations are very good ones. In fact, what you suggested is exactly what I believe must somewhat happen. In order for some of these other countries to enjoy a better standard of living, that of developed nations, in particular the US, will have to fall. I did not mention that here as it is not a very popular sentiment, as true as it may be. Nobody likes the idea of taking a drop in pay, education levels, health, etc... while the price of goods and seervices remains fixed.
The truth appears to be all around us... spiraling healthcare costs, increasing older population putting strains on underfunded pension plans, employers requiring College educations to perform tasks that highschool dropouts use to do. It looks like a system that is poised to collapse on itself as the underlying structure can not longer support it. It is my fear that if we do not put some restraint into our standard of living, it will be imposed on us by a global economy. Only the weathly will come out of this unharmed.
Pablo02, what we must remember is that as unemployment rises, people will be willing to work for less, and hence stop the hemorraging of jobs oversea. It is the imbalance in the standard of living between nations which is driving the flow of jobs. I am not saying to abandon all hope, just that we need to make a decision on what is more important... a job to live with now... or a fat pension to live by later. The way I see it.. if you do not have the first, the second will never follow. It is all a matter of priorities.
Regards,
jetmaker
jetmaker,
Many good points in your post - the only one I disagree with is that the wealthy will not be effected. They are the folks who are destroying their own feeding ground, the U.S. and European marketplace.
Where there are no jobs there is no money to purchase goods --thus no slop in the trough for the wealthy to fatten themselves on. The wealthy's reaction to this type of thing was well documented during the "Great Depression" Look out below!!!
Yes, when our economy finally implodes, and it will the wealthy will be impacted severly. I give it fifteen/twenty years before it distructs. So make hay while the sun is still shining.
I really don't think China or India can support their own productivity either. Who will purchase all of the goods and services they produce?
Many good points in your post - the only one I disagree with is that the wealthy will not be effected. They are the folks who are destroying their own feeding ground, the U.S. and European marketplace.
Where there are no jobs there is no money to purchase goods --thus no slop in the trough for the wealthy to fatten themselves on. The wealthy's reaction to this type of thing was well documented during the "Great Depression" Look out below!!!
Yes, when our economy finally implodes, and it will the wealthy will be impacted severly. I give it fifteen/twenty years before it distructs. So make hay while the sun is still shining.
I really don't think China or India can support their own productivity either. Who will purchase all of the goods and services they produce?
jetmaker -- I wasn't trying chastise you; I have had this same discussion 5 years ago with those I went to High School with (baby-boomers reaching their mid-fifties) and I was laughed off the bulletin board -- I'm glad you agree with me and yes, it is not a popular sentiment, but I think it is one that needs to be brought up, if nothing else, to wake up those of us here that think it'll be rosy in our retirements...
The US will remain a place where many can achieve greatness, material wealth, etc... it just won't be reality for the masses... [I am not abandoning all hope, either. We need to look reality in the face and then decide what we are going to do...]
You are right, many of our jobs will stop hemorraging when the wages and benefits drop -- the question is how far?
I spent close to 30 years at one company, forced into early retirement -- my (ever increasingly costly to me) health benefits basically cease at 65; the former CEO with 4 years of service was ran off due to dragging the company down -- he gets "FREE medical for life for him and his dependents" (emphasis mine)... how's them apples?
The US will remain a place where many can achieve greatness, material wealth, etc... it just won't be reality for the masses... [I am not abandoning all hope, either. We need to look reality in the face and then decide what we are going to do...]
You are right, many of our jobs will stop hemorraging when the wages and benefits drop -- the question is how far?
I spent close to 30 years at one company, forced into early retirement -- my (ever increasingly costly to me) health benefits basically cease at 65; the former CEO with 4 years of service was ran off due to dragging the company down -- he gets "FREE medical for life for him and his dependents" (emphasis mine)... how's them apples?
If the leaders of the outsourcing/offshoring movement really believe that its a good thing for the USA in the long run, then maybe they should give generous severence packages to the affected workers, until the short term effects of outsourcing/offshoring subside. I heard somewhere that when container ships were introduced, the companies had to pay off the affected longshoremen.
New York State recently introduced continuing education requirements in order for engineers to keep their PE licenses. However, the state engineers (unionized) are exempt from the requirements, since they demanded that the state pay for the classes. See what can be achieved when people band together?
Unions are definately a benefit in the current environment. After all, what I may say or think as an individual will go unheard by policy makers.
Some say that voting is how to express our views. Yes, the vote is a wonderful right to have but it obviously is not causing our representatives to take care of their average people. They seem to cater to only special interests and the wealthy.
When people band together and pool their efforts and money, all of the sudden they can have some impact on policy.
ietech
Some say that voting is how to express our views. Yes, the vote is a wonderful right to have but it obviously is not causing our representatives to take care of their average people. They seem to cater to only special interests and the wealthy.
When people band together and pool their efforts and money, all of the sudden they can have some impact on policy.
ietech
ietech,
I have not read the publication which you reference. However, the wealthy will fair much better than the poor. My understanding of the Great Depression was that the wealthy were hit hard because they had money invested in stocks... not assets. When the markets tanked, most lost their shirts... partly because they were borrowing money they did not have to invest in stocks. Today's economy is much more global, the wealthy have diversified themselves so as to minimize localized recession. Middle class people will suffer the most as their jobs disappear, along with their small investments and pension funds.
Another point is the unions. For once, I have to admit that unions do serve a beneficial purpose. And that is that they act as a group and put pressure on the politicians. However, I also feel that a good chunk of the blame belongs on unions for being so ornary and responsible for letting things get so far out of control.
Just my 2 cents worth.
Thanks all,
jetmaker
I have not read the publication which you reference. However, the wealthy will fair much better than the poor. My understanding of the Great Depression was that the wealthy were hit hard because they had money invested in stocks... not assets. When the markets tanked, most lost their shirts... partly because they were borrowing money they did not have to invest in stocks. Today's economy is much more global, the wealthy have diversified themselves so as to minimize localized recession. Middle class people will suffer the most as their jobs disappear, along with their small investments and pension funds.
Another point is the unions. For once, I have to admit that unions do serve a beneficial purpose. And that is that they act as a group and put pressure on the politicians. However, I also feel that a good chunk of the blame belongs on unions for being so ornary and responsible for letting things get so far out of control.
Just my 2 cents worth.
Thanks all,
jetmaker
Hi jetmaker,
I wasn't referencing any publications --- just my 2 cents (IMHO).
You are correct about the Great Depression and the wealthy being heavily overextended in stocks. I am not too sure that isn't the case again; and to stave off severe losses many are awaiting a significant economic recovery before bailing out. As far as physical assets -- I cannot express an opinion since I don't have any insight into the asset holdings of the wealthy in America.
You are also correct when you state that the middle class will be the hardest hit in the future. It is a shame that the backbone of America (the middle-class) can be broken and is totally incapable of defense.
Yes, unions are quite a dichotomy aren't they. On one hand the are our only hope of being represented as a group --- on the other hand many times go too far in their efforts, almost to the point of self destruction.
Respectfully,
ietech
I wasn't referencing any publications --- just my 2 cents (IMHO).
You are correct about the Great Depression and the wealthy being heavily overextended in stocks. I am not too sure that isn't the case again; and to stave off severe losses many are awaiting a significant economic recovery before bailing out. As far as physical assets -- I cannot express an opinion since I don't have any insight into the asset holdings of the wealthy in America.
You are also correct when you state that the middle class will be the hardest hit in the future. It is a shame that the backbone of America (the middle-class) can be broken and is totally incapable of defense.
Yes, unions are quite a dichotomy aren't they. On one hand the are our only hope of being represented as a group --- on the other hand many times go too far in their efforts, almost to the point of self destruction.
Respectfully,
ietech
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Article
- Locked
- Question