Insourcing Tops OutsourcingFollow

Right wing? Can you explain the following then?

http://www.cato.org/dailys/03-22-04.html

http://www.cato.org/pressroom/headlines/headlines.html

http://www.cato.org/research/articles/barnett-031219.html

http://www.cato.org/research/articles/barnett-031219.html

http://www.cato.org/dailys/10-03-03.html

http://www.cato.org/pubs/legalbriefs/hiibelvsnevada.pdf

http://www.cato.org/pubs/legalbriefs/garnervtexas.pdf

Last time I checked enforcing the Constitution was neither a right wing nor left wing activity. Both Demicans and Republicrats are pretty equal in terms of ignoring it whenever it suits them.

I did indeed. I didn't use that article as proof of that fact however.

Pull the quote and take a look.

Oh wait, that would throw facts into the equation as opposed to just your memory of them where you never make mistakes ever.

Can't have that now, can we?


Wrong again, idiot.

I said that I couldn't wait untill your job was taken by abu in Bangalore so you could have some perspective that finacial sucess in this country is often times a matter of simple timing and not of merit. You countered by arguing that companies wouldn't outsource IT to India saving themselves billions because they wanted someone nearby when the **** hit the fan.

Our economy is going to hell because this administration hasn't the vaguest idea of how to manage it.



Pull the quotes in question or your just talking out of your ***. Your imaginary freinds may all agree that the discussion was exactly that, but unfortunately, the rest of us residing in the real world generaly rely on actual facts. Particularly when they're redily attainable.


No, you didn't.

Gee this is easy. We can both just make stuff up whenever we want without using any facts at all.

Fun.

Then you went on to say how you liked to rape old women with telephone polls while cutting your genitals off a rusty butterknife.

I countered that I didn't think that was such a good idea, based on factual medical data.

You then told me that "doctors don't really exist they're all part of the alien conspiracy to probe my ***" at which point I stopped posting on that topic.




See the problem I have with this post is that you used the classic "make **** up as you go along".


1. Refrence previous discussion without quoting any of it thereby simply creating any imaginary fantasy world you like.


2. In said fantasy world ignore repeated errors, ommisions, contradictions, and lies you posted.


3. Manufacture in summary form what you assumed I was arguing without actually bothering to read or comprehend it.


4. Conclude that you have proven something by saying the effect of "because I said so" without using any facts, quotes, or actuall events.


It's not logic if the "conclusions I made" are imaginary ones you dreamed up mid old woman telephone pole *******.

You see, the basis of logic is fact. By far the most amusing thing about this entire post of yours is that you've made an argument in favor of logic without actually using any.

Ahh, to laugh. Thank you once again for something I can print out and show to freinds.




And then, the good which of debate came and tapped you on the head with a magic wand and said "don't worry, you're right again! You're allways right!" I imagine that happens to you quite a bit, seeing as you're never wrong, never make mistakes, and have succeeded in life much like a Horatio Alger hero through luck, pluck and virtue.


I'll keep that in mind when you're collecting severance pay because Abu took your job. Not that you'd ever in fifty billion years have the werewithall to post that you'd lost it.

Being a massive coward and all.

You know. I think I've finnally figured it out.

Cowardice defines you.

It's taken me quite a while to reach this conclusion, but I've just had the epiffany.

It's not that you're stupid. It's not that you're uneducated. It's not that you're self centered.
I mean don't get me wrong, you're all of thos things, but..

They're not the defining nature of your character. Lots of people are stupid and uneducated and self centered and are still able to have a fairly reasonable discource.

Cowards can't though. Cowards can't ever admit to being wrong. Cowards can't ever actually take a position without qualifying endlessly. Cowards can't ever put themselves on the line by predicting what they expect to happen.

It's you perfectly.

You ignore every time (and they are liegon) you are QED prima facie, inescabily proven to be dead wrong. If it's on a simple factual error you'll continue to post but utterly igore the error pretending it doesn't exist. If it's on a larger topic you'll simply stop posting and pretend the topic never existed.

It must make you insufferable to work with I imagine. Allthough you should see a fair amount of sucess in the buisness world, as lying, taking credit for things you haven't actually done, and never taking responsiblity for anything are highly valued there.

Untill Abu takes you job that is :-)

Good luck sport, you'll need it.

Lol! Um... Sure. Let's look at the quotes. In fact, I'll provide the link to the thread in question so everyone can follow along:


https://everquest.allakhazam.com/forum.html?forum=4&mid=1074100352739489090&page=2


Here's the relevant bits:





I reply:



Note. I did not say "no skilled jobs ever get outsourced to other countries". I said they "tend not to do that". That's not the same thing. It's not even close.

I added (for emphasis) in the same post:



In other words, there are still a heck of a lot of jobs that need to be done inside our country (for any of a number of reasons). We hire tons of folks from other countries to work *in the US*! They get paid just as much as their US counterparts. Um... That would seem to imply that our problem is a lack of the correct skillsets in our US labor pool. Which was the point I was making. It's just not that hard to make some interesting conclusions from that fact alone...

And here's the kicker:




Ok. If that bogus figure and bogus link were not intended to be support for your argument, then what the hell were they? Just random trash pulled out of your butt? C'mon Smash. Claiming that you weren't trying to "prove" something with that garbage is pretty lame really. You just hoped that no one would call you on the facts. I did. You got whacked. Just accept it...

I invite everyone to read the thread from that point to see just how desperately moronic Smash appears as he attempt to defend his position. It's amusing and sad at the same time.





There I have. Again. How on earth can anyone assume you *weren't* using that article as "proof" of what you were saying? I call BS on you Smash.



Once again. My memory is apparently vastly superior to yours.



Um... Sure. You pulled a made up (sky is falling) figure out of your butt, and attempted to imply that based on that figure that I should be scared that my job could be outsourced to India at any moment. I responded with the relatively reasonable assertion that the specifics of my job make it unlikely that that will happen (not impossible, just unlikely). I still stand by that assertion.




Sure. It's all there in that thread. Somewhere near the end, you pull an article out about jobs lost in IBM. Of course, when one actually reads the article, it's jobs that *may be* lost, and it's unconfirmed, and from an unnamed source. But I guess innuendo and "might happens" are more important then actual data, right?


And the rest of your post is just you spouting off. Nice and colorful, but pointless.


EDIT: Just wanted to add something. I did make one mistake. I wrote down 10 million, when you were actually claiming 14 million... My bad.

Oh. One more thing. Upon re-reading the thread, I found this gem:




Heh. So... The WSJ is a legitimate source for information about jobs being outsourced, but is a Republican propoganda source when it mentions that maybe all that oursourcing isn't really as extreme as we thought it was. I don't know about you guys, but I'm incredibly amused by this. We need any more evidence that Smash just kinda makes stuff up as he goes along?

Edited, Mon Mar 22 23:01:51 2004 by gbaji

So you are stating that right wingers want to enforce the Constitution and left wingers don't? Or perhaps you are stating that both sides are for enforcing the Constitution?

The last time I checked the right wing was not opposed to the Patriot Act, the war in Iraq, the war on drugs, the laws in Texas that forbade homosexual sex, the detainees in Cuba, the vigorous methods used by law enforcement that Cato opposes, censorship of media (movies, television & radio), military involvement in domestic law enforcement, etc...

If you want to label Cato then at least be honest and call them libertarian. Funny how that just so happens to be closer politically than either of the two major parties to what most of our founding fathers believed as well.

This is kind of misleading anyway, this is just describing the nature of multi-national professional service organisations. For example a multi-national corporation based out of South American wants to do a global IT implementation. They will likely employ a multi-national IT Consultancy, say IBM/Accenture, and the purchasing of the entire project is most likely to be from the US branch of the consultancy (as the US branch is most able to do things at that scale).

So the revenue for the entire project is recorded in the US at US rates. The US exports this massive global consultancy project which shows up in the figures above. This DOES NOT mean that the majority of the work is done in the US, far from it. In a typical engagement like this, such companies have a core team, probably based in the US, supported by specialist teams in each country they plan to implement. Plus it is becoming more and more the model within the consultancy industry that a large part of the actual work for the above project will occur where it is cheapest to do so (the consultancy leverages it's global reach to make the highest margin), and this really does mean having a team of programmers in Bangalore (or wherever) to take the functional specs and build the functionality.

The money coming in is at US rates. A lot of the work done is at Bangalore rates. So for this project, the export of consultancy from the US >>> than the import of consultancy from Bangalore, purely because of the margin made on the difference in rates. But the majority of the work is done in Bangalore.

I work for an IT consultancy and negotiate and set up such deals. This is exactly how we try to do things, and it is becoming a lot more common. Our own IT support desk is based in Bangalore.

Obviously I still have a job though, and I am not that worried about losing it to this, as there are softer, relationship building skills required to sell work which is my career path. There are many organisations that will not outsource outside of the UK - government organisations for example, or companies that operate mainly in UK, and are not truely multi-national.

However, if I was a techie or programmer, I would be more worried. As a firm we do maintain these skill-sets in the UK, but this is where redundancies are most likely these days.

You know, this would have been a lot easier if you had just stated from the outset that you were a Libertarian whacko. Ok, have it your way. Cato is a whacko Libertarian thinktank who adovocates for total free markets, unlimited weapons ownership by private citizens and the abolishment of welfare, social security and income tax.

In short they are advocates of the perfect philosophy for diseffected internet geeks around the country who long endlessly to share a political ideology that they believe is at once simple and superior to those offered by either prevailing party all the while ignoring the fact that such a philosophy is so grossly unappliable in a modern society that they can only adress certain specefic issues peicemeal to avoid the obvious implication that the whole package if taken together is a radical fantasy not dissimilar from social Darwinism.

That better?

Oh god...

Let's get this straight Smash.



So you're basically arguing a point purely because you can't seem to read in context.

Also. You seem to be completely unaware of what an anticedent is. It's not my grammar that is bad Smash. It's your reading comprehension.


The statement "it's the low or unskilled labor that moves outside the country." is not an absolute. It does not make any statement at all about skilled labor. Get that? It's talking about the fact that low and unskilled labor gets outsourced outside the country. Nothing else. Now there's an assumed comparison in that statement, and most reasonably qualified readers of the English language would be looking for it...

The next statement: "Skilled jobs tend not to do that." refers back to the previous sentence (wow! amazing...). "low and unskilled jobs move outside the country. Skilled jobs tend not to do that". See! Where you are getting the bizare notion that that sentence is talking about whether Abu can do my job is beyond me. A first grader can read and understand that paragraph Smash. You are either a total moron, or you are deliberately misreading that paragraph in an attempt to make a strawman out of the argument (ie: arguing the sematics of your incorrect interpretation of my statement, rather then the obvious and correct one).


And yet, even after reclarifying the statement 50 freaking times, you still argue it. If it makes you feel better, go ahead and insert the word "mostly" in that sentance so it reads:

It is mostly the low and unskilled jobs that move outside the country.


There? are you happy? Look. You may get your jollies off of deliberately misinterpreting other people's statements and arguing them based on that, but it doesn't help you prove any point other then that you are unwilling to actually argue the point. Anyone reading that paragraph ould tell what I was saying. Except you. Why is that Smash? Did you flunk your English classes that badly? Sheesh man. You really need to lay off the strawman bit. It's getting very very old...


Next three quotes and responses deleted because they're just Smash repeating his stupid strawman arguement over and over. Get off this horse Smash. If you misunderstood what I was saying, the dozen times I clarified the statement should have given you a hint...




Um... Ok. Fine. However, my point here isn't whether you corrected yourself, but that you did so *twice* and in each gave ground on your argument until there wasn't anything left.

See. You started by stating 14 million jobs were outsourced to India. Then, only after myself and several others looked through your own quoted source, you corrected it and said 1 million jobs. But wait! It gets better...





Sure. Um... Except that your statement about requireing that I provide a quote and proof was in *this* thread. Not in the other. What I'm pointing out here is a pattern of you making claims with no proof, yet requiring proof from others for every little thing.

Sure. You'll occasionally write that you admit you are wrong. But you never let that change your view. That's what's amazing about you Smash. Here you are months later, arguing the same point again, with apparently no memory of what happend the last time you argued it. Heck. Even to the point of refusing to believe that you'd been proven wrong until I pulled the old thread out again. Even to the point of denying ever making a claim you made in the thread until I pulled it out and proved it to you... again.

You just don't learn from your own mistakes do you? When are you going to accept that the "outsourcing threat" is nothing more then a buch of Dem party rhetoric designed to scare the working folks into voting for them instead of the Reps?



Yes. Twice. It's nice that you at least recognize that. Because later in the same thread, after you "correct yourself" from a 14 million figure to a 1 million figure, once again, myself and others scan through the same article and realize that the 1 million number is wrong as well.

What this does is seriously call into question your ability to read any source and make any reasonable argument based on it. Most people, after being called on a mistake, would actually look really carefully when revising their statement to make sure they aren't making yet another mistake. But you didn't. You pulled out the next big sounding number you could find and insisted that that was the real number of outsourced IT jobs. It turned out to be wrong as well...


And when we pointed that one out, you couldn't actually bring yourself to accept that maybe outsourcing to other countries isn't really as big a threat to the US as you originally though. Oh no! Can't do that... Nope. You then pulled out a new article about IBM employees being outsourced. Um... but now the number shrunk from 14 million, to 1 million, and down to a few thousand. Heh. Of course, those were a few thousand that "might" be oursourced. You still could never actually come up with any actual numbers of jobs that really were outsourced to India. Not once in the entire thread did you do that...




Um... Whatever. So that shows us that apparently, those who write editorials are Republican shills, but those that write the supposedly factual news stories are Democrat shills. Ok. I can accept that logic if you can.




Um... Sure.

However, you don't actually adjust your view when it's pointed out to be false. You very clearly make up your mind first, then pull out facts and pretend they support your view whether they do or not. You count on most folks not actually checking your facts, but when they do, you argue over every little semantic issue. If that fails, you abandon your source (but not your argument) and pull out something else that might support your position.



Big difference Smash.

First. I'm apparently not wrong nearly as often as you are. I know this may be ego brusing to you, but this seems to be a fact. Part of the reason for this is because I actually look up information and look at the real facts and data out there before I start arguing something. Very rarely I'm wrong (the HP-bandage thing for warriors is the only one I can think of right now, and that was 3+ years ago, and I admitted I was wrong in the very next post after verifying the facts). You, on the other hand, seem to be wrong more often then right.


Second. When I'm stating my own opinion, I make it very clear that I'm just stating my opinion. That leaves me quite a bit of breathing room in a debate. You, on the other hand, very rarely say: "My opinion is X, but YYMV". In fact, I don't think I've ever seen you say that. It's usually more like: "Position X is right. It's the only thing that is right. Anyone who disagrees has the brain power of a syphalitic, one armed monkey..". By starting out that way, you now take on the onus of having to be 100% correct. Not just correct most of the time, or in some situations, but all the time, every time. That's why you end up being wrong so often.

Third. When I do use links to data or articles to support my position, I actually *read* them first. I don't assume they support my view because I don't have the Smasharoo overego that assumes that everything I believe is right. I actually read what they say and then make a statement based on the facts. Thus, when people go reading my sources, they always find that they confirm what I'm saying.


Yeah. I know. Apparently, forming your opinions based on the facts and data is just a crazy way of doing things. But when I read your posts on this kind of topic, it becomes abundantly clear that you form your opinions first and just assume all the facts support you. When they don't, you never change your position. For someone who argues vehemently about scientific methods over religious belief, you really do have a lot in common with the religious folks Smash. The only difference is that your religion is not based on God. It's based on the Democratic party. I actually find that even more pathetic then the most crazed christian.

But that's just my opinion you know. YMMV... ;)

Edited, Tue Mar 23 19:19:58 2004 by gbaji

Well sure. There are. And McDonald's is hiring pretty much any day of the week. But that fact alone does not tell me that the local Italian restaraunt is going to go out of business (if you can follow the analogy).

First off, there's a lot of confusion when people talk about outsourcing. The word "outsourcing" just means a company hires people from another company instead of hiring people themselves. The term itself does not presume that jobs are being lost inside the company (although it's often used in that context). A company that is expanding into a new market will often outsource the new division first, perhaps with an option to buy it out later. Again. Looking at numbers of jobs "outsourced" does not have any direct correlation to people losing their jobs.

Furthermore, outsourcing does not assume a foreign nation. It's just an outside company. Nothing more. I gave an example of a friend of mine (cousin actually), who was himself "outsourced" 4 times in a 7ish year period. He never lost his job. He worked at the same location for the entire time. The name of the company he worked for changed several times though. That's outsourcing, but it has nothing to do with those darn "feriners" getting all the jobs that those red blooded American's should have instead...


Yes. There are examples of companies closing out divisions, laying off the employees in those divisions, and hiring an outside company in a foreign nation like India to serve the same purpose. It certainly does happen. But that's not all of outsourcing. It's in fact a very small amount of outsourcing.


Where I get annoyed is that folks will point to the kind I mentioned above and yell and scream about it happening. Then they will grab some statistics that list *total* jobs "outsourced" over a period of time and imply that all the jobs in the US are leaving for other shores. That's incredibly misleading. The fact is that the number of IT (and pretty much all other non-manufacturing field) jobs that are actually outsourced to other nations is not as great as the number of *new* jobs in those same fields generated domestically each year.

In other words, in the rare event that you happen to be that one guy in 10 thousand that loses his job because it was outsourced to India, odds are, there is another job opportunity in your field available for you. You just have to look for it. What we're actually seeing is that as larger corporations expand their businesses globally, they often start out controlling their foreign offices domestically. Over time, they realize that there is no business reason to do so, and they can save on labor costs as well, so they move those parts of their businesses overseas. This is the result of growth into those foreign markets, not just foreign labor taking US jobs away in a vacuum. Meanwhile, domestic markets are still growing, just not as fast as some foreign markets (particularly India which is going through a huge surge right now).


My point is that you are vastly more likely to lose your job because your boss just doesn't like you, or the company's latest product failed and they had to lay folks off, or any of a dozen different reasons, then that your job got outsourced to India. It's just such a non-event really. Does it happen? Sure it does. But folks die in car crashes on the freeways every day too. I still drive a car...

Yeah. Outsourcing has become the hot button issue recently. And it's certainly a potential problems. Honestly though, what we're seeing is the result of the fabled "global economy". We can't really put the genie back in the bottle. Once corporations go multi-national, there is literally nothing that a single nation can do to prevent this. In fact, any method that a nation could come up with to try to stop it will only result in more outsourcing (raising taxes on businesses that outsource for example).

Neither the US nor the UK could possibly afford to subsidize the work that's being outsourced and that's literally the *only* way to prevent it. I have a hunch (this is just a guess by me), that things will balance out in the end though, especially when it comes to high tech work. You can never forget the first tenent of free enterprise: All people are greedy (not necessarily in a bad way). We're already seeing salaries rise in the Bangalore region of India. That's an expected trend. We outsource those high tech jobs to India because it's an emerging power. It's not just hordes of cheap labor that make it attractive. It's a pretty large number of *educated* workers that does. But not surprisingly, those darn Indians want to make the same money that folks in the US/UK do.

I predict that over time, the global economy will serve to balance out a whole lot of things economically (labor costs being the big one). Just as water when poured over holes with different depths will eventually all have the same level of water in them, the value of a specific *type* of labor will eventually be equalized no matter where you live. This is a good thing IMO (but then, I'm a futurist and I think that's where we need to be going). One can actually argue that fighting against this is equivalent to fighting to preserve and exploitive system and the exact have/have-not kind of dynamic that most people think is unfair. But that's just a guess on my part.


Oh. The thing about the number of jobs rising faster the being outsourced was based on some data in one of the links in the earlier thread (might even have been Smash's first one). I commented on it in that thread as well, pointing out that non-manufacturing jobs had grown domestically over the last 2 years (US domestic) while manufacturing jobs had decreased. Those were totals, so we can assume that at least for the group of "non-manufacturing jobs", there was more growth then loss (through outsourcing and all other losses). I honestly don't remember if those same numbers apply to IT jobs (which are part of the aformentioned group). I'm pretty sure they did. So yeah. A gues, but an educated one...

From ReasonOnline http://www.reason.com/hod/tb031904.shtml

Feel insecure much Smash?

I would have to agree with Smash on this Gbaji, he and I share no love, and I am sure that if you were to ask him, he will without a doubt say that he doesnt like me. But, he does however admit when he is wrong or exagerating.

You on the other hand seem to be incapable of that. I have been wrong many times, a few times with Smash, I dont doubt that he was right, or that he is smarter then I am. I will say that like you I dont like to admit when someone is smarter then I am or when they have me on the ropes. You Gbaji are probably smarter then I am as well you certainly can type better then I can, well at least for longer then I can=P and you definately make more then I do. I found one thing to be true in my encounters with Smash sometimes it is better to capitulate then be beat over the head with how wrong you are.

I dont agree with how he as a person treats people, but in his arguments I find him to be hard to disagree with and right most of the time.

My oppinon as Angry Hippo would definately agree is worth ****, as I am one of the least intellectual people who post here.

You on the other hand do have flashes of brillance and defiantely make me think about my own positions, however you do have a weakness. You cannot admit when you are arguing from undefensible position, or when you are wrong, and rather then just say, "lol, Smash(or whoever) you caught me with my pants down on that one," will continue to type pages and pages to say that while he "might" be right on one portion of the arguement that you are right on the whole. Sometimes you have to captiulate, it doesnt prove you are less then someone just that you know when to say when.

I will say that watching you continue to debate Smash has been one of the reasons I have kept reading this forum.