Is offshoring a necessary evil? An important part of a global economy? The only way for some industries to remain competitive?
Why I am Against Offshoring
I am basically against offshoring. I know that it has been sold to America as inevitable, but I do not buy that rhetoric and never have. Every time I make a call for customer service on my computer or my microwave, I have the same experience. I sit and wait for anywhere from five to thirty minutes as I think about how extraordinary this country has become over the last ten years or so. When I finally get a person, nine chances out of ten I will not be able to understand him or her. But, alas, it is just what has happened to us. We were bamboozled somewhere along the line. I believe that offshoring is just one more government/corporate betrayal against the American people.
In order to discuss the injury that offshoring is inflicting upon American labor, it is necessary to discuss it in terms of it being part of what has become a cumulative effect upon the American people. In other words, there have been other insults placed upon our heads already, which when added to offshoring, has all but drowned the American dream, and its dreams of a hopeful future for its posterity.
Part I: Self-Determination/Sovereignty
I must begin my thoughts about offshoring by stating that the American people have lost the majority their self-determination and state sovereignty. Most of us can agree that much of this was instigated right after the Civil War, of course. (For the life of me, I do not know why Lincoln could not have said “Hey, keep your states’ rights, but slavery is illegal within your states.” Why was this not done? Some will say that that would have been unconstitutional. My response to that is, “So is federalism.”) In any case, I believe was the first big blow to the American people of both their sovereignty, self-determination, and hope for bright future.
I believe that governments work better when they are small enough to be controlled by the people as opposed to the other way around. I also believe that any government or economic model (capitalism, socialism, etc…) works much better when the governed location is no bigger than the size of France or Texas. When the geography gets larger than that, the ruling government becomes dangerously distant.
Think of France, for instance. First, they have seven parties. Second, everything happens out of Paris… so the people feel empowered enough to stay informed, and bold enough to take to the streets whenever one of their 30 or so paid religious holidays is threatened. Granted, they got their independence at the edge of a guillotine, so their government has been afraid of them for quite a while. Maybe that is why we are taught to hate them. In any case, the European Union will fix the French and the rest of Europe soon enough; France can then, like us, peer in sad wineful confusion upon the memory of her sovereignty and self-determination, and wonder “Qu’est-ce que c’est?”
Now, think of larger governments like Russia, China, or the US. When everything gets run from one central place (and most of the nation is 500 miles away or further from the capital) a couple problems tend to arise: people start to believe that their vote does not matter because they are so small in a nation so big; and the government is seen as corrupt self-interested because the normal citizenry is too far away to see what goes on.
Part II: Unions
It is easy to dismiss American labor for getting so fat, dumb, and greedy that corporations were left with no choice but to leave for second and third-world countries. But were corporations have really been so altruistic? And were the “poor corporations” in such a fix that all they could do was leave?
Let’s consider Detroit thirty years ago. Union-run GM was rife with stories of workers being AWOL for a month and not getting fired, drunk for six months and not getting fired, hiring whores on night-shift and not getting fired, and selling hard drugs on the shop floor and not getting fired.
Then there is the teacher’s union. We all know that currently troublesome teachers cannot get fired. Instead, they get sent to some separate location where they sit for up to two years getting paid as they await their “trial.”
Do you really think that any honest union leadership insisted on those terms? Ever? It seems obvious that that top .01% of the industry got together with the top .01% of the union, and they cut a deal…and created the conditions that made unions rot from within. Let’s face it, the public can fight any direct fight against a large organization and win every time. What they cannot do is win in the court of public opinion when the rights they are fighting for have lost all credibility. It is my opinion that back in the 1930s when unionism was being taken seriously and FDR got the White House, the corporation-heads realized that they had indeed lost. The only way to win was with back-door operations that would take decades. And it appears that they have finally won.
They won with those reverse operations, but also with buying the White House. Could it not have happened like this?
Now, back to Detroit. The day that the unions were dissolved and the cooperate-heads told the workers that much of the company was going elsewhere, I am sure that they did not have any real sit-down and say, “Look, we want to keep jobs here in this town, but look at the numbers. Look at your collective work history. We can go elsewhere and do it for these dollars. So, let’s make a deal that cuts your income and benefits by this much. If not, we leave and you have nothing. Think on it.” I cannot guarantee that conversation did not happen, but I truly doubt it. Instead it was probably just, “Buh-bye!”
Part III: Offshoring
So, why do I go on and on about the America’s loss of rights, when the subject of the OP is offshoring? The answer to this is that if you appreciate our loss of rights in 1865, you might also appreciate the loss of rights we absorbed in 1913 with the advent of the Federal Reserve system. And if you value that, then you might also find Reagan’s Wall Street deregulations as well as the 1999 repealing of Glass-Steagall to be a travesty as well. If you can agree with me this far, maybe you can also see that the trend of corporate offshoring in the US has dealt a blow that the American people may never recover from. In other words, the future of the American people is indeed dark when they are left on their own with no representation from government or businesses…whether they are an employee or a customer.
I remember when all of the telephone customer service went to India, Philippines, and elsewhere. And as I remember it, we were all being told how great it would be to not have to deal with telemarketers anymore. Wasn’t all that together in the same package? I could be wrong, but this is how I remember it. Then, suddenly, all these jobs were gone. Silence. Then, it was what it is now. Customer service warfare.
“But we are doing great things for the world, having them do the jobs we do not want to do! We are bringing up their economies so they will one day want to buy our stuff.” Ok, fine. What stuff? Wal-Mart is Chinese crap. Good versions of the equivalent items are often German or Japanese, or Korean. Hmm. Are all these countries outsourcing their manufacturing like we are? I don’t think so. There may be some, but not like us.
A strong economy needs the diversity of services AND goods. There are several reasons for this, but one good one is that not everyone in this country can perform service-based jobs. They need to be able to work with their hands because that is their only marketable capacity. If they cannot find career goods-producing work, we will all pay for it in (among other things) welfare, crime, unemployment, and apathy.
But that is what the military is for, right? A bleed-valve. This is part of why we are addicted to war. And if Iraq II does not convince, nothing will. But, let’s face it; we care just that much about other people’s kids. The draft might just do them a favor. At least there would be some real opposition for once in the last forty years.
“But wooden matches are still “American Made.” How appropriate.
It is interesting. Oftentimes the same people who are crying against entitlements such as public education are the same people who think that offshoring is a good thing. They all admit that “the children our future,” but they also believe that teachers should live in poverty. Tell me, where are the uneducated lower classes of younger folks going to find a way to save for retirement when they are living at poverty levels and cannot find employers who will hire them at a living wage? Wal-Mart, Starbucks? Furthermore, where is the age 60-68 year-old people going to work to sustain themselves without entitlements? Wal-Mart, Starbucks? Well, this scenario is a good petri-dish for a crime-ridden society. And those of us who do not currently fit the category of uneducated lower classes do not live in a bubble. The problem will be on your streets, and your kid’s streets. Read your history. It will.
In conclusion, outsourcing eventually just begs for a one-world government, does it not? If all countries are in other countries and married financially and fascist-ly, how can this not become the case? If this becomes our future, how safe are notions like sovereignty, self-determination, and the vote? If corporate relationships are all that matters, where does the family and the individual sit in economic, legal, social, and cultural terms. And adding to that, do not corporations in this country owe the people of the US something back? “We the people” go to war to insure that this nation is a safe and successful place for such organizations to thrive. “We the people” are often the initial customers (and employees) that make it possible for certain small and medium-sized companies to eventually become large corporations.

“Offshoring” is merely acceptance of the reality of a global economy. It represents a division of labor wherein in a free market products and/or services are freely chosen by those seeking best value, In the end, it works out best for everyone. At least, in theory…
in REALITY, we hardly have a “Free Market” World Economy. IMO, our leaders, both in Government and Corporate America, have sold the American public out for the proverbial “mess of pottage”. To whit: NAFTA seems to work far more for the benefit of Mexico than the USA. Their markets are still NOT fully open to the US, nor are the rights of US citizens, not to mention their safety upheld even in proximity to the border while still on US soil. Simply put, if the rest of the world expects free access to our markets, they must reciprocate and respect our laws, else be polity rebuffed. And US leaders that serve foreign interests rather than US ought to be regarded as traitors and dealt with accordingly.
Douglas,
I agree with your “mess of pottage ” bit. Sorry about my glaring typos. Thanks for soldiering through it anyway.
Re GlassCeiling-
Very interesting post. I must confess I don’t fully understand all the points you’re trying to make. Maybe I’m too unlearned in history/economics to fully appreciate all you wrote.
Having said that, I did note a dearth of any proposed solution in the OP. Could you perhaps elaborate on what you see as the solution to said problems?
You worry about your FEW typos, and I’ll worry about my many….
Solution? They still lie largely in the private sector, but we must not be politically naive either. To whit: When I buy a product, I do check for manufacture location. I’ve every right to direct my hard-earn dollars wheresoever I see fit. And I don’t deal with off-shore call centers, especially if financial information is involved. If I called my bank and someone with a heavily Punjabi accent answered, I’d IMMEDIATELY ask for their location. Anywhere but the U-S-of-A, and I’m taking my banking elsewhere pronto! That’s not just American chauvinism, that’s a pragmatic safety measure as I’m dubious of the ability and willingness of companies that off-shore services to protect us from identity theft.
I’m NOT for protectionism, though. Having the Federal Government “protect” industries has been shown to harm the American consumer. And if folks are concerned about Americans having jobs in order to buy either domestic or imported goods, so are foreign suppliers. It’s not in their best interests to bankrupt their customers. Fortunately the cultural paradigm in most of the emerging economies and/or the Asian sector is more long-term thinking than we Americans employ, so I have confidence that they understand the principle of not killing the goose laying the golden eggs.
Jmb,
I agree with everything Douglas said on #4.
As far as other solutions:
1. Quit Walmart and their ilk,
2. Try to keep a finger on what products are American made…and if they are good, use them (and tell your friends.)
3. Keep abreast of where our national deficit and debt is going. Consider some of Ron Paul’s claims ideas as initiatives worth taking up . Even if he had no chance for electability, his ideas should not die in 2012. For instance, getting out of the wars we are in and closing a good many military bases throughout the planet. If we clear away some of our fiscal commitments, we might actually find more room for capital investment.
“Ron Paul’s claims and ideas…
Well, I’m already a Ron Paul fan, so no problems there.
Glass,
This article is typical of most liberal complaints – full of misinformation and a step removed from reality. First of all, the United States is the largest manufacturer in the world – China is close on our heels, but we still lead the world. This includes the largest manufacturer in the world, Exxon-Mobil. It also includes some great companies that provide exports the world over – Ford, Cat, Eli Lilly, Coke, Microsoft, Apple and on and on and on. What’s more, we still have the largest companies in the world with 6 of the top 10 and about 1,200 of the top 2,000 companies. Petro China is a close second to Exxon, but it is effectively a state run entity controlling most of the oil in China. When you add Chevron and the rest of the oil producers in the US, we have enormous energy production.
In terms of reality, you cannot change basic fundamental economic principles. The law of supply and demand for instance is an eternal law that cannot be changed by a government entity, or anyone else for that matter. Many have tried, but none have succeeded. Just like you and I in our personal budgets, companies will gravitate to the best price in order to stay alive financially.
The real problem is with spending. We generate more revenue than any nation in the world, but quite a ways. Our tax burdens are extremely high, except for the lower class. The issue is we spend 1.7 Trillion more than we bring in every year. This is more than the TOTAL revenue from of other country, with the sole exception of Japan. Unless we balance our budget, which will mean HUGE cuts in entitlements, military spending, education and so forth we will end up like Italy, Spain and Greece. And following this march to socialism will break us. Socialism, in general, has a record of failure so blatant that only an ivy-league intellectual could ignore or evade it.
Will,
So, you are defending our Walmart lifestyle? Defending our current relationship with China?
Btw, appealing to Ron Paul’s claims of our war addiction is hardly utilizing “typical liberal complaints- full of misinformation.” The misinformation parties were the party of GW Bush and company…as well as the party of Obama…also known as the parties of banker interests. Isn’t that fairly obvious by now?
Glass,
I am defending the free market. In this telestial sphere full of thorns and thistles and noxious weeds it is the best system we have.
Your article is all over the place and doesn’t really lead to and firm conclusion. Nor does it provide any concrete solutions. Our government, or any government for that matter, can no more pass laws to effectively change free market principles than they can pass laws to change the law of gravity.
The reality is we live in a telestial world, with greed and corruption and people trying to take advantage of one another. The North Korea’s of the world have tried to isolate themselves with some type of social utopia and it has resulted in total disaster – just as it has for any other nation that has tried this approach. The reality is we have to learn how to compete and make ourselves the best at what we do in this global economy. This is solution to the problem, not isolationism, protectionism and sure as hell not socialism.
Will,
You are correct about my article. I am not altogether pleased with it…probably because I have yet to figure the answers to the problems. All I do know at this point is that I am suspicious of all the conventional explanations as to how we arrived here. I do not trust the media, the government, corporations, or banks.
In response to your telestial rhetoric, I give you “enough and to spare.” We disqualify eachother, so let’s stop using scripture with matters of complete subjectivity and prejudice. We both know we are dealing with secret combinations and have been for decades. The question is, what are we going to do about it?
Furthermore, we are being destroyed by these secret combinations.
I’m curious what the “Buy American” consort thinks would happen to those overseas workers if US companies stopped off-shoring or buying foreign-made products? Would their salaries, benefits, and living conditions go up or down?
What right do we have to tell workers in China (or India, or Sri Lanka) you don’t deserve American dollars to help improve your abject poverty. American workers deserve them, so we can maintain our first-world lifestyle at your expense.
Which is the more moral choice, then: keeping Americans rich and the third-world poor by being isolationist, or helping bridge the gap through embracing globalization — helping poor countries trend up at the expense of American wages trending down?
Will,
Why is America responsible for developing countries? The American people would have burned Wall Street if this sort of thing was going on fifty years ago. So why is it suddenly ok now?
Many adults today were raised by parents who worked in such jobs that are now elsewhere in the world and have not been replaced.
Besides, if it is so important for us to help struggling countries,why aren’t we creating jobs in the country we just destroyed,Iraq?
That last one was for JMB, not Will. Sorry.
Glass,
This is a religious web-site that explores the scriptures, so I find it totally justifiable to use them in discussion. After all, the site is Wheat and Tares after the Savior’s parable. Along these lines, I would be glad to counter your scripture in the D&C which indicates he is an adequate provider and has given us all we need to succeed. If anything, I think it further illustrates my point.
I am saying that the law of consecration or the misguided counterfeit of socialism cannot work in a telestial world. You have too many leeches, too many greedy people, too much selfishness; and, most of all too many corrupt leaders to successfully pull off a centralized government.
I tend to agree with Will that you can’t stop offshoring any more than you can stop the tides in the ocean. We are moving toward a global economy, whether people want to lie down and kick their heels about it or not. A temper tantrum won’t stop it.
Our relationship with China is multi-faceted. Unfair trade practices should be our one and only real beef there, not their buying up of T-bills. As for India, this is the real genius of the British colonization practices of previous generations: we now have access to English speakers around the globe of all socio-economic strata.
The grandpas and grandmas of the world can sit on the porch and shake their canes as the world goes by. Heck, we all like to do that. But it doesn’t mean the world will stop and take notice.
Hawk,
You are probably right. I just wish there was an umbrella to protect the typical American individual against the many onslaughts that rain against her/him in this “new democracy.”
The one thing that seems to be lost in the discussion is that in America, though our freedoms HAVE been eroded, it’s still one of the best, if not THE best, place in the world for an individual to chart his own course and better himself. Is it perfect? Certainment pas! To the extent we leave it to the individual to make his/her own choices regarding employment, investment, and consumption, we ensure the maximum prosperity and freedom simply because people act in their own best interests as they know how. All we need from Government is internal peace, external security, and the rule of law. But when we turn to Government to gain a result or benefit we haven’t earned, it must be something taken from someone else. It’s the endless game of American Federal politics of take and not give, rights and not responsibilities, that has led to corruption and the “secret combinations” previously mentioned.
The globalization of the economy does tend to ensure peace, though. Why should we fear Red China? Not only could we wipe the floor with them militarily, despite their bluster they’ve no incentive to make war with their best customer! Same with Japan…think of the embargoes and tariffs of the 1930’s that drove Japan to set up their “Greater Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere” and ultimately to a desperate gamble at Pearl Harbor. Would the Japanese spent even one Yen on any offensive military capability that’d be directed at us? And jeopardise their sales of Sony, Panasonic, Honda, and Toyota products? Whereas North Korea, isolated from the world economy and virtually starving, is one of the great threats now. Don’t kid yourselves that they don’t look jealously across the 38th parallel at the land of Hyundai and Samsung. Imagine if South Korea could freely trade with North Korea…then we’d only worry about preserving the three-mile wide nature preserve that is the DMZ!
What made off-shoring possible was the Global Telecommunications network and the Internet (an American invention. Virtual connections are now possible in about 99% of the world.
With that, our good friend Corporate greed took over. And, Americans brainwashed to believe that lower prices are always better for them.
Globalization is a quite the misnomer really. Large multinational have always had local workforces to sell and support their products to international customers. Customers like to speak their local language and deal, for the most part, with folks who are like them.
But, the off-shoring of American jobs has gone well beyond just servicing local customers and extending markets. Corporations took reasonably well paying service-oriented jobs and moved them to lower cost geographies.
First it was near-shoring, US jobs to Canada and Mexico and then Central America with high levels of English speaking peoples. Western European jobs went to Eastern Europe or North Africa. Now, American jobs go to India, mainly where they speak English, for the most part.
There was one and only one reason. COST. Indian employees cost 15% of an American worker. Chinese workers cost about 25%. Even if it takes 5 foreign workers to do one American’s job, it is still cheaper.
Yes, there may be an upside to our exports if Chinese and Indians can now buy US goods, but the loss of jobs here and the movement of US manufacturing job cannot possible offset the loss of American buying power.
Thus we see a huge reason for our financial problems. the American economy is solely dependent on the consumer spending to grow and thrive.
And with as many people out of work or under-employeed, the problem is obivious.
Jeff,
That was well said. You should have written the OP. I was unprepared for it. All heart and fury… and I hadn’t organized my thoughts enough.
And now that we have the real OP, any takers?
Testing? 🙂