FRIHOST ē FORUMS ē SEARCH ē FAQ ē TOS ē BLOGS ē COMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


do u agree with obama decision?





sriducati
obama has told that he gonna stop outsourcing after he become precident ..what do u guyz tell about this?
liljp617
Haven't heard specifically what he's said on the subject, but I can't see any argument against cutting outsourcing down. I don't think he can completely eliminate it.
ocalhoun
liljp617 wrote:
but I can't see any argument against cutting outsourcing down.

1- makes American companies more profitable, bringing more business to the US rather than other countries.
2- benefits developing countries by supplying jobs and a flow of money into the country
3- makes products Americans buy cheaper
liljp617
ocalhoun wrote:
liljp617 wrote:
but I can't see any argument against cutting outsourcing down.

1- makes American companies more profitable, bringing more business to the US rather than other countries.
2- benefits developing countries by supplying jobs and a flow of money into the country
3- makes products Americans buy cheaper


Why is there such a negative attitude toward outsourcing? (I'd rather not make this about party politics...that's what everything in this forum section seems to boil down to, but let's have at least one discussion without it Razz)
ocalhoun
liljp617 wrote:


Why is there such a negative attitude toward outsourcing?

Because it supposedly takes away American jobs and gives them to foreigners.

That is really the only downside though, and because it increases overall prosperity here, it will create a few more jobs here to at least partially make up for the ones lost overseas.

Suppose outsourcing was banned:
American companies start moving their headquarters to other countries to avoid such restrictive laws. (taking more jobs with them)
The ones that tough it out and stay are run out of business by cheaper-run competition overseas. (meaning more jobs lost)
No more American companies. (no new jobs available)
USA ceases to be a central hub of the world's economy (US economy crash: finding a job becomes impossible)
OpposableThumbs
Outsourcing is good when it creates safe and well-paying jobs in other countries. When it increases the standard of living in India, for example, it's a good thing. When outsourcing is a way of paying Indonesian children pennies an hour, or encourages people to work in unsafe environments, or increases the level of pollution, then it's a bad thing.
ocalhoun
OpposableThumbs wrote:
Outsourcing is good when it creates safe and well-paying jobs in other countries. When it increases the standard of living in India, for example, it's a good thing. When outsourcing is a way of paying Indonesian children pennies an hour, or encourages people to work in unsafe environments, or increases the level of pollution, then it's a bad thing.

True, but remember that people work in those kinds of places by choice. Despite how bad it is, it is apparently better than the alternatives available to them.
deanhills
I like the idea for all of the reasons already given, but also for environmental reasons. There seems to be much more environmental controls in place in the United States, than in the developing countries where companies who are outsourcing their products can get away with less restrictions.

Great negative of course will be increased prices to consumers. Also some companies will have to go out of business, or completely redesign how they manufacture their products. Hopefully it will be the latter. Takes me back to a Friedman column in the New York Times that someone in another thread brought up that changes need to be made fundamentally from the bottom up, and this may mean that companies will need to completely redesign all of their practices.
ocalhoun
^So are we to go into economic isolationism? That's suicide! Much of the world's economy revolves around the USA, but it doesn't have to. Cutting off foreign ties and reversing globalization would kill the already fragile economy.
deanhills
ocalhoun wrote:
^So are we to go into economic isolationism? That's suicide! Much of the world's economy revolves around the USA, but it doesn't have to. Cutting off foreign ties and reversing globalization would kill the already fragile economy.


Would curbing outsourcing be equal to economic isolationism? USA was not isolated before outsourcing started. Think outsourcing was a way for big companies to make their operations more economical and as far as I can see, to sidestep a number of obstacles regarding USA employment costs and practices and perhaps taxes. China is not economically isolated, yet it is manufacturing all of its products in China. Cheaply. And exporting it everywhere aggressively.
ocalhoun
deanhills wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
^So are we to go into economic isolationism? That's suicide! Much of the world's economy revolves around the USA, but it doesn't have to. Cutting off foreign ties and reversing globalization would kill the already fragile economy.


Would curbing outsourcing be equal to economic isolationism? USA was not isolated before outsourcing started. Think outsourcing was a way for big companies to make their operations more economical and as far as I can see, to sidestep a number of obstacles regarding USA employment costs and practices and perhaps taxes. China is not economically isolated, yet it is manufacturing all of its products in China. Cheaply. And exporting it everywhere aggressively.


OpposableThumbs wrote:
paying Indonesian children pennies an hour, or encourages people to work in unsafe environments, or increases the level of pollution, then it's a bad thing.


Of course, if we make things the same here as they are in China, there will be no reason to outsource to China.

Also, if we stop outsourcing, US companies become much less competitive in the global market. Instead of US companies hiring Chinese workers to make their products, Chinese companies will hire Chinese workers to make their products, and US companies will go bankrupt.

I'm not so worried about what's good for the US economy anyway. What's best for the world economy?

(That, and come to think of it, I'm against most government restrictions on actions of its subjects...)
jwellsy
Barry Hussein made a decision? That's a viscous rumor.
lyndonray
jwellsy wrote:
Barry Hussein made a decision? That's a viscous rumor.

I see that you still have some of that anger left over from the campaign! Don't worry you will eventually be alright!

As for outsourcing, it is simple economics:produce your products in the most cost effective and efficient way. If americans aren't efficient and cost effective then others will step in! Simple as that. Now there is no way that Obama can singlehandedly control economics! Not gonna happen. All he can do set the policy and hope that influences things enough. But as for stopping outsourcing: Not gonna happen!!
OpposableThumbs
ocalhoun wrote:
True, but remember that people work in those kinds of places by choice. Despite how bad it is, it is apparently better than the alternatives available to them.


Respectfully: people do not choose to live on starvation wages. This is a misperception held mainly by people living in rich countries in which the job options are better. East European women do not choose to be sold into prostitution when they are promised jobs as maids or au pairs in wealthier countries. Similarly, people do not take jobs in sweatshops because they have better options. If your farmland is destroyed to make way for a factory, or your artisanal craft is made redundant by European manufacturing, then working in a factory for pennies a day is not really a choice, is it, except the choice to live rather than die. Not quite the same as choosing whether to be a fireman or a doctor.
deanhills
OpposableThumbs wrote:
This is a misperception held mainly by people living in rich countries in which the job options are better.


Perhaps there is a misconception here too? There are very poor people living in "rich" countries. People who struggle to find jobs, and are equally forced to take on jobs that they do not like. Prostitution is also something that happens to young people who are promised modelling positions in the big cities, and then find they do not have choices. Now more than ever people are struggling to make ends meet. Perhaps things aren't as green as they seem to be on the other side of the mountain, from both sides? Capitalism comes at a huge price in a million ways.
ocalhoun
OpposableThumbs wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
True, but remember that people work in those kinds of places by choice. Despite how bad it is, it is apparently better than the alternatives available to them.


Respectfully: people do not choose to live on starvation wages. This is a misperception held mainly by people living in rich countries in which the job options are better. East European women do not choose to be sold into prostitution when they are promised jobs as maids or au pairs in wealthier countries. Similarly, people do not take jobs in sweatshops because they have better options. If your farmland is destroyed to make way for a factory, or your artisanal craft is made redundant by European manufacturing, then working in a factory for pennies a day is not really a choice, is it, except the choice to live rather than die. Not quite the same as choosing whether to be a fireman or a doctor.

Okay, so now the same thing happens, but this time, there is no factory to work at for pennies a day because outsourcing is eradicated... what does that person do now?
goniagara
sriducati wrote:
obama has told that he gonna stop outsourcing after he become precident ..what do u guyz tell about this?


First, It's tough to tell what Obama is going to do. If you listen carefully, he at time stated conflicting positions depending on who he was speaking to. Listening to any one of his stump speeches, he made so many promises to so many different groups of people, that it would be impossible to meet them all.

Re: outsourcing, I currently work at a consultant where we have work outsourced to us. In a previous job, we used outsourced labor, so I've seen both sides of it. My sister is a federal employee who has to use outsourced services in her daily work activity. From what she says on the topic, if outsourcing is eliminated in the federal government, it would be a good thing. The feds have so many rules and regulations to it, that it actually lowers productivity.
vineeth
Outsourcing of customer care jobs, software projects, service sector like health insurance etc. was a proven cost cutter for many developed countries including US. When we are comparing the wages in US and countries like India, companies can earn a huge margin by employing people from countries like India and make them work from India itself.

But at this tough time of economic recession, number of jobless people are increasing in US too. It is the duty of the Govt. of any country to ensure adequate employment opportunities for their citizens and if Mr. Obama takes a decision against outsourcing, it can be views from this angle only.

Earlier,outsourcing was helping US companies by cutting operational costs and taxes but now, situations are changing.

Many of my friends in India work for US firms, mainly in software business. Losing jobs for them is, of course, is a bad news...
ocalhoun
vineeth wrote:
It is the duty of the Govt. of any country to ensure adequate employment opportunities for their citizens

Is it? Is it really? Perhaps its just my libertarian side coming out, but I don't think it should be the government's business.
If you don't have enough opportunity (and the government allows you sufficient freedom) you make your own opportunity instead of complaining that the opportunity you used to have was stolen by others or demanding that it be given back. Start your own business, mow people's lawns for money, whatever you can think of.
Xanatos
The biggest problem I see with outsourcing is that eventually America will not have any tradeable goods. I wonder what kind of problems that will cause in this country?
LumberJack
Good luck. It will just make US goods less competitive. Are you going to start import tariffs again? <shakes head>
actionuns
what about thinking about the ecologic context ? I mean shipping so many products has an energetic cost that is often not calculated. We should save the planet !
Xanatos
actionuns wrote:
what about thinking about the ecologic context ? I mean shipping so many products has an energetic cost that is often not calculated. We should save the planet !


If you really want to talk about ecological context...
The places we outsource factories to have far less regulations on pollution than we do. If we moved all of those factories back here it would be cleaner overall.
ocalhoun
Xanatos wrote:
If we moved all of those factories back here it would be cleaner overall.

If we moved the factories back here, they would go bankrupt and be abandoned, while new factories were built overseas.
Xanatos
ocalhoun wrote:
Xanatos wrote:
If we moved all of those factories back here it would be cleaner overall.

If we moved the factories back here, they would go bankrupt and be abandoned, while new factories were built overseas.


Well I didn't say it would be clean forever...
amfriendsforever153
I like the idea of obama & i hope he will help to solve the problem of terrerisum.
deanhills
ocalhoun wrote:
Xanatos wrote:
If we moved all of those factories back here it would be cleaner overall.

If we moved the factories back here, they would go bankrupt and be abandoned, while new factories were built overseas.

Good point. I have a feeling that the factories will stay as and where they are, only the paperwork will change. As always things will be papered over. Lawyers and accountants are probably already working on something creative. Smile
sajeebr
I think stopping outsourcing is going to be a challenge for him. It is just not possible. Do americans are ready to work for $200 a month. Indians are working for that amount of money. I nepal it is more cheaper than that, It is around $100-$150. They are working good.
Outsourcing can me minimized but can't be stopped.
deanhills
sajeebr wrote:
Outsourcing can me minimized but can't be stopped.
True. It is just "popular" talk. I doubt it will happen, unless it is what industry wants to happen.
00hamster
I don't think he could manage to do that, but then again he is a black president and I thought that would never happen Embarassed
deanhills
00hamster wrote:
I don't think he could manage to do that, but then again he is a black president and I thought that would never happen Embarassed
Why did you think that? Smile
sondosia
Outsourcing is market forces at work. If you try to ban outsourcing, then we'll no longer have a free market.

Time to see if Americans value freedom over equality.

But then again, if they elected Obama, chances are they don't.
deanhills
sondosia wrote:
Outsourcing is market forces at work.
So do you think that slavery was also market forces at work? In the old days they brought slaves from overseas and that was quite a responsibility and hard work, not to mention slavery was banned after a while. So someone in modern day got a bright idea and then thought it would be much cheaper to take the factories and export them to countries with cheap labour, so they in effect took the work place to slaves in "cheap" countries. At the time when they started it there was also the wonderful freedom of absence of rules and regulations especially surrounding employment of child labour, environmental regulations and limitations, and taxes. But now these countries are in the process of catching up, and since this grand "outsourcing" (wow does that ever sound like major economics) actually was about exploitation of the poor countries, it is probably going to come back to the "outsourcers" and bite them in the pockets. China is already talking about making those "outsourcers" responsible for cleaning up the environment. Times are changing. Twisted Evil
ocalhoun
deanhills wrote:
Times are changing. Twisted Evil

Well yes, those 'cheap' countries are getting prosperous enough to enact labor laws and environmental protection laws because of all the money they've been getting from outsourcing.
In the long run, it benefits everybody.
deanhills
ocalhoun wrote:
Well yes, those 'cheap' countries are getting prosperous enough to enact labor laws and environmental protection laws because of all the money they've been getting from outsourcing. In the long run, it benefits everybody.
Right, but soon outsourcing will no longer be profitable any longer or perhaps they would need to outsource to a different country. Agreed totally that the country where the outsourcing happened did benefit, however the company who was outsourcing probably benefitted the most, as obviously it would not have been there if that had not been the case.
ocalhoun
deanhills wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
Well yes, those 'cheap' countries are getting prosperous enough to enact labor laws and environmental protection laws because of all the money they've been getting from outsourcing. In the long run, it benefits everybody.
Right, but soon outsourcing will no longer be profitable any longer or perhaps they would need to outsource to a different country. Agreed totally that the country where the outsourcing happened did benefit, however the company who was outsourcing probably benefitted the most, as obviously it would not have been there if that had not been the case.

True, the company itself benefits the most, but there aren't really any losers. Even the people in the US who lose jobs to the foreign market now have more chance of working at a meaningful job, rather than menial labor.
deanhills
ocalhoun wrote:
True, the company itself benefits the most, but there aren't really any losers. Even the people in the US who lose jobs to the foreign market now have more chance of working at a meaningful job, rather than menial labor.
Totally agreed, not to mention helping the environment in the United States, as it would be a number of factories less spewing pollution and responsible for toxic waste. Do you know whether they have been outsourcing to South America? I'm not aware of any products manufactured in South America, and thinking about it, it is a little strange, although, maybe political stability must have been a priority for outsourcing and South American countries have not had a good track record with that?
ocalhoun
^There's plenty of outsourcing to Mexico, for example, most chevy's are assembled there...

Don't think there's very much in South America though. My guess as to why: Mexico is just as cheap, and closer for shipping. If Mexico enacted enough labor laws, minimum wage laws, and environmental laws, then the outsourcing would probably move further south (or elsewhere entirely).
deanhills
ocalhoun wrote:
^There's plenty of outsourcing to Mexico, for example, most chevy's are assembled there...

Don't think there's very much in South America though. My guess as to why: Mexico is just as cheap, and closer for shipping. If Mexico enacted enough labor laws, minimum wage laws, and environmental laws, then the outsourcing would probably move further south (or elsewhere entirely).
I'd forgotten Mexico. Still want to visit the country as well as I believe it has some beautiful beaches, nice music and a happy atmosphere. Have a feeling though that I probably will get to South America first. Smile
silverdown
I think he can do thing, like he said it going to get rough before it gets better. At the moment he is fixing things the way he see they should go to fix the actual problem.. We might no agree with it but I hope his decisions do not backfire on the US
deanhills
silverdown wrote:
I think he can do thing, like he said it going to get rough before it gets better. At the moment he is fixing things the way he see they should go to fix the actual problem.. We might no agree with it but I hope his decisions do not backfire on the US
Why is this so much of an ego thing? Obama this, Obama that, Obama the other? Usually something like that would belong to an autocrat? Surely Obama is not operating on his own and he is part of the Democratic Party with a whole cabinet of formally appointed Government officials with specific briefs? So credits for good or bad need to be spread a little wider than Obama?
ocalhoun
deanhills wrote:
So credits for good or bad need to be spread a little wider than Obama?

Ah, but we've grown so accustomed to crediting (or blaming) everything that happened on Bush, it is natural to continue doing so with the next president.
deanhills
ocalhoun wrote:
deanhills wrote:
So credits for good or bad need to be spread a little wider than Obama?

Ah, but we've grown so accustomed to crediting (or blaming) everything that happened on Bush, it is natural to continue doing so with the next president.
Exactly. Almost as though democracy and responsibility of the people stop after the election process.
tony
It sounds like an impossible claim. How can you completely cut out such a huge part of the US economy? What is the schedule he is talking about? 1 year? 10 years?
deanhills
tony wrote:
It sounds like an impossible claim. How can you completely cut out such a huge part of the US economy? What is the schedule he is talking about? 1 year? 10 years?
Not sure what claim you are referring to. Can you be a bit more explicit and quote it? Smile
ocalhoun
deanhills wrote:
tony wrote:
It sounds like an impossible claim. How can you completely cut out such a huge part of the US economy? What is the schedule he is talking about? 1 year? 10 years?
Not sure what claim you are referring to. Can you be a bit more explicit and quote it? Smile

Pretty sure he's talking about the original topic of the discussion.
deanhills
ocalhoun wrote:
Pretty sure he's talking about the original topic of the discussion.
Thanks. Looks as though we have gone off topic so much so that I had to refresh what it was all about in the first place. Smile

tony wrote:
It sounds like an impossible claim. How can you completely cut out such a huge part of the US economy? What is the schedule he is talking about? 1 year? 10 years?
Probably a very good question to ask whether it will be 1 to 10 years, but wonder whether it will actually happen in that controlled way as I cannot see Obama actually prescribing to US corporations in this way. That would really be major interference in the US economy.
ortie10
I think it's more complex than just sasying if it's a good or bad decission in the grand scheme of things. Only time will tell and changes had to be made. If it helps the economy more power to him, if it doesn't then he needs to rethink his plan out.
deanhills
ortie10 wrote:
I think it's more complex than just sasying if it's a good or bad decission in the grand scheme of things. Only time will tell and changes had to be made. If it helps the economy more power to him, if it doesn't then he needs to rethink his plan out.
I don't understand how anyone can say it is his decision to make? Surely this is not an autocratic country, it is a democracy and since business is conducted along capitalist lines, it will be big business who will decide what is in their own best interests? Politicians like Obama will continue to make statements like these, but it may not mean anything more than coming from a politician.
ortie10
deanhills wrote:
ortie10 wrote:
I think it's more complex than just sasying if it's a good or bad decission in the grand scheme of things. Only time will tell and changes had to be made. If it helps the economy more power to him, if it doesn't then he needs to rethink his plan out.
I don't understand how anyone can say it is his decision to make? Surely this is not an autocratic country, it is a democracy and since business is conducted along capitalist lines, it will be big business who will decide what is in their own best interests? Politicians like Obama will continue to make statements like these, but it may not mean anything more than coming from a politician.

Like I said complex! His plan wasnít put together single handedly of course but ultimately his hand had more weight in the end. This is democracy at its highest level. Now the question is who are the politicians that want to continue to decay this country with greed and corruption. I donít see any personal self interest in the decision to stop outsourcing. My opinion is, the reality of the matter is we need to straighten out our country first and foremost Question
ocalhoun
ortie10 wrote:
I donít see any personal self interest in the decision to stop outsourcing.

Well, there's always the reelection value of trying to be seen as someone who is really doing things about problems and bringing about change.

It doesn't matter if it's just misguided isolationism... As long as the majority of the public supports it, it'll boost election results.
deanhills
ocalhoun wrote:
ortie10 wrote:
I donít see any personal self interest in the decision to stop outsourcing.

Well, there's always the reelection value of trying to be seen as someone who is really doing things about problems and bringing about change.

It doesn't matter if it's just misguided isolationism... As long as the majority of the public supports it, it'll boost election results.
This so absolutely true, and well said Ocalhoun. It's not what really happens that counts, but the perception of looking good especially with a gift of the gab. Think that was the essence of why the bail-out package succeeded. People are hung on words, they cannot think further than that. Which is a pretty sad situation.
ocalhoun
I was just thinking...
Was the USA a 'victim' of European outsourcing earlier in history?
There were times in the past when huge corporations ruled, working their employees hard, treating them badly, and paid them little... I was wondering... Could this have been in order to provide cheap products to Europe? And if so, did the USA really gain or loose in the long term from being outsourced to?
deanhills
ocalhoun wrote:
I was just thinking...
Was the USA a 'victim' of European outsourcing earlier in history?
There were times in the past when huge corporations ruled, working their employees hard, treating them badly, and paid them little... I was wondering... Could this have been in order to provide cheap products to Europe? And if so, did the USA really gain or loose in the long term from being outsourced to?
Possibly up to the point of the Declaration of Independence from the UK I would imagine this to have been true. Interesting history to explore. I would think the farming of cotton could be something that was outsourced. Slavery was also outsourced, i.e. saying slavery is unacceptable for the UK, but allowing it in the colonies anyway.
ocalhoun
deanhills wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
I was just thinking...
Was the USA a 'victim' of European outsourcing earlier in history?
There were times in the past when huge corporations ruled, working their employees hard, treating them badly, and paid them little... I was wondering... Could this have been in order to provide cheap products to Europe? And if so, did the USA really gain or loose in the long term from being outsourced to?
Possibly up to the point of the Declaration of Independence from the UK I would imagine this to have been true. Interesting history to explore. I would think the farming of cotton could be something that was outsourced. Slavery was also outsourced, i.e. saying slavery is unacceptable for the UK, but allowing it in the colonies anyway.

True, there was definitely something of the type going on then, and perhaps outsourcing is just the modern descendant of colonialism.
The time period I was thinking of was between the late 1800's to the 1930's or so, though.
deanhills
ocalhoun wrote:
The time period I was thinking of was between the late 1800's to the 1930's or so, though.
I can't think of outsourcing to the United States at that time. The UK and France were quite busy at that time still, especially along colonial lines. Would World War II count? The United States would have manufactured quite a bit of supplies and armaments for the West.
ocalhoun
deanhills wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
The time period I was thinking of was between the late 1800's to the 1930's or so, though.
I can't think of outsourcing to the United States at that time. The UK and France were quite busy at that time still, especially along colonial lines. Would World War II count? The United States would have manufactured quite a bit of supplies and armaments for the West.

Well, I was thinking of the time just before the war, and before the depression.
(And yes, the USA did make a lot of money off of the war, at least before it joined... Europeans were buying US weapons and supplies with money that they borrowed from US banks ^.^)
deanhills
ocalhoun wrote:
deanhills wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
The time period I was thinking of was between the late 1800's to the 1930's or so, though.
I can't think of outsourcing to the United States at that time. The UK and France were quite busy at that time still, especially along colonial lines. Would World War II count? The United States would have manufactured quite a bit of supplies and armaments for the West.

Well, I was thinking of the time just before the war, and before the depression.
(And yes, the USA did make a lot of money off of the war, at least before it joined... Europeans were buying US weapons and supplies with money that they borrowed from US banks ^.^)
I did some searches on "History of Outsourcing" and the closest dates I could get to were 1950s 60s. Perhaps outsourcing as we know it today only started then?
ortie10
deanhills wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
ortie10 wrote:
I donít see any personal self interest in the decision to stop outsourcing.

Well, there's always the reelection value of trying to be seen as someone who is really doing things about problems and bringing about change.

It doesn't matter if it's just misguided isolationism... As long as the majority of the public supports it, it'll boost election results.
This so absolutely true, and well said Ocalhoun. It's not what really happens that counts, but the perception of looking good especially with a gift of the gab. Think that was the essence of why the bail-out package succeeded. People are hung on words, they cannot think further than that. Which is a pretty sad situation.


As much as I dislike dabbling in politics, I guess it makes a good debate. I have to say though; I'm unclear on your perspective on how the president is handling the current economic situation. I'll be as stubborn as a politician on my views on the facts. There were some pretty bad financial decisions made, and it seems that our good old elected decision makers in the cabinet where all getting a piece of the action. Point being: Our democracy is not sovereign as it was intended to be in its realization. The entire nation is now feeling the effects of a system that has been carrying on as if this were the norm for too long. Iím a strong believer that you can make a bad situation into a good one though, and if we can make these bad decision makers a part of yesterday, then we have hope.
ortie10
deanhills wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
deanhills wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
The time period I was thinking of was between the late 1800's to the 1930's or so, though.
I can't think of outsourcing to the United States at that time. The UK and France were quite busy at that time still, especially along colonial lines. Would World War II count? The United States would have manufactured quite a bit of supplies and armaments for the West.

Well, I was thinking of the time just before the war, and before the depression.
(And yes, the USA did make a lot of money off of the war, at least before it joined... Europeans were buying US weapons and supplies with money that they borrowed from US banks ^.^)
I did some searches on "History of Outsourcing" and the closest dates I could get to were 1950s 60s. Perhaps outsourcing as we know it today only started then?


Try googling Romans outsourcing, it might shed a little light on things. Werenít they the ones that started this whole democracy thing also? No, I think it was the Athenians.
deanhills
ortie10 wrote:
deanhills wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
deanhills wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
The time period I was thinking of was between the late 1800's to the 1930's or so, though.
I can't think of outsourcing to the United States at that time. The UK and France were quite busy at that time still, especially along colonial lines. Would World War II count? The United States would have manufactured quite a bit of supplies and armaments for the West.

Well, I was thinking of the time just before the war, and before the depression.
(And yes, the USA did make a lot of money off of the war, at least before it joined... Europeans were buying US weapons and supplies with money that they borrowed from US banks ^.^)
I did some searches on "History of Outsourcing" and the closest dates I could get to were 1950s 60s. Perhaps outsourcing as we know it today only started then?


Try googling Romans outsourcing, it might shed a little light on things. Werenít they the ones that started this whole democracy thing also? No, I think it was the Athenians.
Good point! Forgotten about the good old Romans and the Gauls Smile Enjoyed your previous posting as well. Am just concerned that the current decision makers are going into the direction of more Government, more regulations, more taxes, which in effect may run counter to your hopes for getting back to a democratic system. Something needs to be changed radically, perhaps starting with the election process?
kghai3
i believe that its completely dependent on which side you are.
if you are like me from india then probably you would'nt like this decision cause after all its our jobs that will be taken away but then again if you are from US then you would love obama for this decision.
Ofcourse he's done a great job for his country by taking such a step.
ocalhoun
kghai3 wrote:
if you are from US then you would love obama for this decision.

Except that you'll be paying more for everything, while businesses fail all around you and the economy falls into shambles.
Quote:

Ofcourse he's done a great job for his country by taking such a step.

Again, not if it ruins whats left of the economy, while alienating the rest of the world at the same time.
wanshi
sriducati wrote:
obama has told that he gonna stop outsourcing after he become precident ..what do u guyz tell about this?


What is outsourcing?
deanhills
wanshi wrote:
sriducati wrote:
obama has told that he gonna stop outsourcing after he become precident ..what do u guyz tell about this?


What is outsourcing?
Like New Balance running shoes being manufactured in a factory in China instead of the United States. New Balance outsources the production of its shoes to off-shore countries with lower costs. Obama wants these factories to be in the United States instead of off-shore countries so that there can be more work available for US citizens.
ortie10
kghai3 wrote:
i believe that its completely dependent on which side you are.
if you are like me from india then probably you would'nt like this decision cause after all its our jobs that will be taken away but then again if you are from US then you would love obama for this decision.
Ofcourse he's done a great job for his country by taking such a step.
Obama hasn't stoped outsourcing he's just changed the tax laws a bit. India isn't effected by this change to much, if anything India is benefiting from it. Here's an article that sheds a little light on the matter: http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/blog/eyeonasia/archives/2009/05/obama_vs_outsou.html
deanhills
ortie10 wrote:
kghai3 wrote:
i believe that its completely dependent on which side you are.
if you are like me from india then probably you would'nt like this decision cause after all its our jobs that will be taken away but then again if you are from US then you would love obama for this decision.
Ofcourse he's done a great job for his country by taking such a step.
Obama hasn't stoped outsourcing he's just changed the tax laws a bit. India isn't effected by this change to much, if anything India is benefiting from it. Here's an article that sheds a little light on the matter: http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/blog/eyeonasia/archives/2009/05/obama_vs_outsou.html
Think people are beginning to get the message that the only changes that have come about since Obama took over are cosmetic and spending lots of money. Everything is the same as it has been before. Since there is 1.2-trillion bail-out for banks, the banks can keep on loaning money to wealthy people as they did before, and Obama can tax wealthy people as he intends to do. Nothing has changed. Twisted Evil
Related topics
Very nice host
Me Thinks....
Getting page could not be displayed
Wallace and Gromit
Web2Messenger INVITES FOR SALE
Inzamam's run out
Looking for link exchange partners
Man smokes cigarette, dies instantly
FREE LINK EXCHANGE!
Link exchange with my new site!
Seven Serial Blasts Rock Mumbai, Over 300 Feared Dead
Forumer must know!!!
Who is your favorite Golfer?
Obama decision - build up in Afghanistan?
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Politics

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.