Dirty Words? GLOBAL OUTSOURCING - Also, is the world flat ?

[poppycat]

That video is awesome Nifty! I'm thoroughly impressed.

 

[Boyd]

How could a food picked unripe across the earth, then flown or shipped to the edge of my continent, then trucked to me and gassed to finish ripening it possibly make sense?

If cost is your basis for quality, agribusiness is ok, but personally, I try to grow my heirloom fruits and veggies ... nothing tastes as good as fresh homegrown tomato's

Great Topic Nifty!

 

[Big Daddy]

Capitalism is set up just for entreupeneurs. They do very well in a capitalistic society as well as closed society that they can find a niche in. The problem is that a lot of people are not good at it. As a matter of fact most people aren't. Those people have to rely on jobs that supply a steady income with benefits. When people outsource those jobs it causes a lot of difficulty. You just took my job and gave it to some guy in India that is probably just as qualified but will do it at a fraction of the cost because they have a much lower cost of living. So you have reduced Indias poverty and raised the US's poverty level.

I guess that in theory it will all level out sometime in the distant future. In reality it wont. However the gap will grow. If you're not born in to wealth or if you're just an ordinary Joe that is happy being a computer programmer or transcribing or something that can be easily outsourced then you better go find a good sturdy cardboard box. There wont be a place for you in America when everything is outsourced and all the entitlement programs are shut down.

 

[Nifty]

Maybe it's because I have a place to live, food, am terribly frugal (most call me cheap), and am not living month to month that I have the perspective that I have, but I'm totally okay with the philosophy that some of the developed countries may need to give up a bit in order to lift up 3rd world countries. I don't think our "poverty level" will really change significantly.

(I also like to be devil's advocate).

The discrepancy between their standards of living and ours is sooo vast, that I doubt 98% of the developed countries, especially the US citizens have a real clue at how bad things are. The poorest of the poor in the US are still quite a bit better off than billions of people in some of these countries.

I really struggle with the "us vs. them" statements. Not to turn this into a religious discussion, but many of the members of the BYC sites have a core belief that we are all children of a supreme being... which would make us all "brothers and sisters". If that is the case, then why wouldn't people who believe that way be more than willing to give up some creature comforts in exchange for other countries to start coming up to our level.

Thomas L. Friedman actually covers the concept of "leveling" (bringing 1st world countries down in an effort to bring 3rd world countries up) and has some good arguments about how this is, in his opinion, a flawed hypothesis.

BTW, did I mention I really enjoyed that book?

 

[Nifty]

I've just been watching this Charlie Rose interview with Tom Friedman.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?d...qAO959yVCQ&q=charlie+rose+world+is+flat&hl=en

I'd love for you guys to watch it from point 45:25 - 48:17 (especially at 47:13)

Two great points:

1) A flat world isn't a zero sum game
2) Prepare your children with rich education

 

[Big Daddy]

Sorry don't have speakers. This world is flat stuff just sounds like a way for people that outsource to justify eliminating American jobs to increase their bottom line. I believe the people getting these job in India tend to be better educated and probably already living at a higher standard than the unwashed masses. As for China it's the unwashed masses doing work for slave wages under bad conditions. Eventually China will have to answer to the world for their human rights violations. Eventually they will get labor unions and will develop a middle class like America did. It seems like India has outsource jobs that are more specialized. Since India is on a caste system it doesn't seem like outsourcing jobs would help their poverty level. In a caste system you are stuck at whatever social level you are born into. It all sounds like a smoke screen to me.

 

[patandchickens]

Capitalism is set up just for entreupeneurs. They do very well in a capitalistic society as well as closed society that they can find a niche in.

I'd say that one of the big problems is how very, very heavily capitalism is weighted towards rewarding entrepreneurship. It maximizes the extent of snake-oil-salesmanship and do-whatever-it-takes advertising, and results in this world we have now, where all of society is built around "buy more, use more, newest thing, do what the ads tell you, be the first on your block, more more more".

I am not anti-capitalism but the above is a catastrophically serious *natural* consequence of giving capitalism free rein and top billing.

So you have reduced Indias poverty and raised the US's poverty level.

It is worth remembering that people living in poverty in the US would still be envied by many people in much of the rest of the world, who are hanging in there with a far *lower* standard of living.

And you know what, you don't even have to believe in the Christian God or any sort of god at all to still believe that people in 'third world countryes' (who often do *not* have enough to survive, or only just barely) are just as deserving as people in the US who may not own a house but generally DO at least have functional shoes, a warm place to go in the winter if they choose, enough food to keep from dying, and usually perks like clean water and access to medical care, not to mention tv and library books and public internet access.

I think American ideas of what the word 'poverty' means would be greatly improved by a bit of eyes-open travel.

(e.t.a. - and to those who say "but I *earned* this money, I am not letting someone else have it" I would point out that most people on the planet had no OPPORTUNITY to earn the sort of money you did, or live the sort of lifestyle you have acquired...)

JMHO,

Pat

 

[me&thegals]

Absolutely, Pat! It's hard to share or think about the world flattening, but it's also hard to consider holding it all in our clenched fists, ignoring those (who are too far away to really "see") who need it much more desperately. It seems like there is generally such a glut of wealth in developed countries that if it were to be spread out a bit more we could all still live really quite well. After all, how many cars, outfits and extra pounds of well-fed weight does everybody really need?

To those who have earned their money (all of us, but those who would argue that), I think it would pay to realize that we are pretty much all in the "There, but for the grace of God, go I" category. We have stable gov't, a healthy economy (although a bit shaky right now--but NOT 5000% inflation), pretty stable weather climate, lots of social supports to fall back on, decent healthcare, decent public education, legal opportunity for all. Stick any of us in parts of Africa, India, China or the middle east, and it would be interesting if we still argued against the flattening of the world.

 

[Nifty]

Good points and a good discussion.

Pat, I agree with your assessment of some of the huge problems with capitalism. The instant gratification mindset is a big part of why we are in the mess we're in now. "I want a house the size my parents have (which took them 20 years to get after being married) and I want it now (even though I'm only 25 and just got married)." We have a tendency to think of it a "those capitalists" vs. "the people"... but those organizations are run by people, owned by people who want them to make money (stock), and patronized by customers who want lower prices. We the people determine how we want things to be. If some of these people disagree with corporations that promote the bad aspects of capitalism, they should now work for, buy stock in (directly or in mutual funds / retirement accounts) or become customers of them.

That said, I think the pro's that come from a free market outweigh the cons of the alternatives, and I try to be optimistic and feel the same way about global markets.

It is sad to see people loose their jobs, and see countries start to loose their identities, but I am hoping that the process of a flattening world will outweigh the cons of the same.

For example: I just love the thought that out of the billions of children in India and China there are hundreds of mind bogglingly brilliant Einsteins, Newtons, Hawkings, Pasteurs, Aristotes, etc. that without a flattening world would continue working in fields without any education or opportunity to blossom and share their gifts with the world. I wouldn't be surprised if one of them finds the cure for cancer or the common cold... heck, there probably already were a few that could have had the opportunity existed, but their brilliance never got exposed because the opportunity didn't exist.

 

[reinbeau]

You can't 'flatten' the world without transferring an awful lot of power to government.....and the idea that this egalitarian society will result is a nice dream, but reality is human nature will get in the way, the powerful will want to remain powerful, there will always be disadvantaged people in the world, and the constant chase of that Utopian ideal will only lead to such a controlled society all of the pleasures of life, of striving, of succeeding, will be bled out. I don't like the thought of people living in squalor, but I also don't like the thought of living under such control that the concept of freedom is gone. I don't know the answer, but I do know that taking from those who succeed to shore up those who don't try isn't the way to go. Now I know everyone's revving up and saying ' not everyone who is unsuccessful hasn't tried!', but there are winners and losers in life, it's the way of nature, always has been, always will be, and there are people who live off the system, due to culture or laziness, same thing, always has been, always will be.