Busy — Sat, 23 Oct 2004 23:06:40 +0000

Abhishek Reddy wrote: Busy, there is a difference between import/export and international outsourcing, particularly en masse. The boat example doesn't relate to the design example, imo. The boat engine is a material good, whereas the deisgn job is... a job, it's labour, paid by wage, subject to different taxation.

A logo, banner, database ... is not a material thing ? you say it's labour, hmm to build a motor requires labour to make the parts, assemble the motor and test it, to make a logo for example requires time and effort (and ideas) which is labour to create the basic idea, its need to be created in a graphics program, sometimes compressed, resized ... come invoicing time, most of this fee is 'labour'. without labour you cannot have an hourly rate or base price.

While the topic I think should really be pointed towards skilled an unskilled outsourcing.

I believe the "Made in America, stay in America." has it's value it's not entirely in America's best interests. NZ for example has started the trend in many fields, IT, medicine, automotive, space, electronic equipment ... allsorts. If we kept what we invented/created in NZ, places like USA wouldn't be where they are today.
The Indian "sweat shops" I agree with to a point for tech support, no long ago I had to contact tech support and found myself talking to an Indian speaking person with really bad English, I ended up hanging up and writing a nasty email to the web host, the reply was in very good English and very apologetic.

So everyone would rather pay $100 for something when they could get the very same thing down the road for $10 ? How many of you only buy products made in your own country? next time you go and buy food,cloth or a vechicle/part take a look on the side of the box and see where it's all made.
I find it funny that the Harley Davidson - American classic is now being made in China. (parts and assembly differ) People still buy/ride them.

brady.k — Sat, 23 Oct 2004 22:35:05 +0000

Americans are losing jobs in the tech sector because they are being outsourced to India and China, and the unemployment rate is going up. Much of the world is effected by the rise and fall of the US economy, so I believe it is in the best interest of not only the US, but the world, to keep the tech positions in-house; however, most companies are outsourcing.

Call Dell's tech support, and 9 times out of 10, you get the call center in India...which creates two problems. #1- their english is terrible and unintelligible for the most part. #2- these people are reading pre-typed instructions on a computer, and they have no knowledge of the technical aspects of a computer (generalization...doesn't happen in every case however).

These problems don't just occur with Dell, they occur with many of the companies outsourcing. This creates a HUGE problem for American consumers who become frustrated at unintelligble support...not to mention the racial bias that exists thanks to 9/11 creating angst.

Outsource the manufacting of textiles...fine. Most of us won't care.
Outsource the customer support or technical jobs...most of America cares.

Corporations should follow the opinions of their customers and stop outsourcing, resulting in higher rates of satisfaction, and a lower unemployment.

banners4pennies — Sat, 23 Oct 2004 15:50:21 +0000

unfortunately, outsourcing has nothing to do with skill-level and everything to do with cheap labor. why are american businesses going to hire someone for an IT position, and pay them wages and benefits, when they could get someone in india to do the same for pennies. it's not about america being on top, it's about making jobs available to americans. if jobs aren't available, that means those people aren't making money or contributing to the economy. i know there are a lot of people out there that would just love to see america's economy, superpower status fail. but that will bring consequences to nearly all the free countries in the world. heck, japan's economy affects everyone...

Dragon of Ice — Sat, 23 Oct 2004 15:23:19 +0000

Who-ever's on top is going to get the most money, and that's good for a country's economy.

Renegade — Sat, 23 Oct 2004 14:34:13 +0000

My question is: Why does America or any other country need to stay on top?

Abhishek Reddy — Sat, 23 Oct 2004 14:09:39 +0000

Busy, there is a difference between import/export and international outsourcing, particularly en masse. The boat example doesn't relate to the design example, imo. The boat engine is a material good, whereas the deisgn job is... a job, it's labour, paid by wage, subject to different taxation.

In the same vein, though, I think Kyle is wrong in generalising with "everything else is import/export". Outsourcing of both skilled an unskilled jobs are mostly the same. In the context of America, the only real difference is the effect it has on the labour market. I have read arguments attempting to prove that the effect on US jobs as a direct result of outsourcing tech jobs is really very little, as well as arguments claiming the opposite.. As far as I can tell, the economic consequences are unclear. One would be rash to say "outsourcing is for wimps" -- dicto simpliciter.

There are several problems with this idea of preserving secrets (I'm assuming only 'trade secrets') to "stay on top" of things. Firstly, the US intellectual property system is riddled with absurd inefficiencies and loopholes. I say this not because I know the laws in text, but rather because of the surreal results we've witnessed in recent times. Amazon patenting "one-click shopping", Microsoft patenting or attempting to patent several mundane routines and structures (and not just in the US), and so on. This is just a special case of the problem of trying to keep what is called 'common knowledge' secret. Busy referred to this with the bread analogy. Another example would be scientific knowledge -- which is something that really ought not be kept secret, and has historically remained open. (As a sidenote, the internet was conceived on a scientific basis, and grew in university environments, which is probably why there is a pervading sense of information freedom on the web today.) Anyhow, all this leaves us with, at best, a shaky idea of what a 'secret' is, whether it is really worth keeping it secret, or if it's even ethical.

Kyle says that these secrets are stolen when outsourced. I don't see this as a general trend. In fact, I think these are likely isolated incidents -- I've never heard of it before. I don't see a reason why this would happen, really... outsourcing to India is creating a huge boost to the Indian tech sector. Stealing information would be severely detrimental to that, and I don't expect that any thieves would have avoided the consequences of being discovered. Why break something that's working?

Yet I don't see how stealing secrets in India, China, Zimbabwe or Estonia could have any more of an effect than similar stealing in the US itself. Don't tell me that doesn't happen. And I don't expect that the fact that the stolen knowledge will remain within the US economy will somehow neutralise its negative effect. Really, it's a hazard induced by making something a secret in the first place.

I've probably gone off on a few tangents by this point, but what I'm trying to get at is that information is free, and there's not much one can do to keep it from flowing. IP and trade secret laws are designed not to give the inventor wholesale, lifetime ownership of his knowledge, but to give him a head start in the market with a monopoly. Eventually, that knowledge will spread, feeding competition. I think that's why fluid information is an ideal of the free market.

My final question is what keeping secrets and/or jobs has to do with the US staying on top of technology. I don't understand the relationship. Or rather the point of it. What has technological progress got to do with national interests? With the spread of knowledge (scientific, common knowledge, whatever) to developing countries, and the growth of high-tech industries and institutes -- independent of outsourcing -- means there's a global spread of knowledge-power. For the US or any country to stay competitive without hindering overall human progress, the country's tech sector has to innovate, not withhold knowledge. And we are seeing innovation on a wider scale, with all kinds of developments surfacing internationally.

It might be worth mentioning here that the majority of the work sent to, say, India, is not high-level research stuff. Not anything that needs innovation or a great deal of creativity. One review I read in the past referred to it as "grunt work". The innovative, creative, developmental field is quite untouched. I don't see why the US would struggle to stay (nearly) on top in that sense.

Still, the worst that mass outsourcing does for the US is reduce cashflow, cut the working population in that sector, and create the illusion that it is a failing sector. In my uneducated economic opinion, I think it's the flipside of the global free market returning to bite the US in the rear. You said unskilled labour can be shipped overseas... since you can't hold back knowledge, what's to stop the skill level from growing?

brady.k — Sat, 23 Oct 2004 13:27:48 +0000

I'm not talking about HELP, I'm talking about DOING. Outsouring your entire IT or Customer Service department is rediculous. Made in America, stay in America.

Busy — Sat, 23 Oct 2004 10:27:37 +0000

ElementallyMetal, so if you ask for help in here and I help in some way, then you are a wimp because you have outsourced your problem? I am in New Zealand.

Renegade — Sat, 23 Oct 2004 08:42:01 +0000

I agree with Busy on this one. Outsourcing and Importing seem to be the same thing.

Try to look at outsourcing as getting help. In school (or sometime during your life) did you ever have to ask a friend for help? Did you ever have to come onto TWF to look for help?

brady.k — Sat, 23 Oct 2004 03:33:19 +0000

I define outsourcing as from one country (this case...USA) to another (China/Japan/India) for technological purposes.

Everything else is import/export.