The first time this term came to mind was back in Nov 2004 when I got my AS in IT. I was hoping that with this degree with enable me to get a better salary. At that time, I've been hearing people talk about IT jobs moving to India. It affected me in a personal way because I really want to get out of the "hourly" situation.

I was upset about it at first. Now, I see "outsourcing" as an opportunity. Here's how my view is changed in a positive way... About 3 weeks ago, I came across a book called "The 4 Hour Workweek" by Timothy Ferriss. It opened my mind to globalization. I realized that there are many shifting patterns happening at the moment and I feel that I have to be flexible in where I want to go. On a positive note, I value my degree very much. I love the fact that I built my own computer after graduation. Here's my question for you guys.....


How do you feel about "outsourcing" in general? Has it affected you or someone you know? Do you think that giving others permission to handle sensitive company information/strategy leaves US companies in danger of terrorism...etc...(I thought about this one.)? If you do feel that "outsourcing" has potential benefits...what do you think would be the best way to take advantage of it and become more prosperous? Would you limit certain activities with your outsourcing(meaning trust issues and what to delegate.)?

Well, this is how I view it in general.

1) There are limited resources in the World Economy. Every nation can't come up to U.S. Standards and be rich, because we would need seven earths to sustain it. Therefore, for other countries to rise, there is only one place for the U.S. to go, down.

2) You can't have your cake and eat it too. I think the common misconception is that by taking advantage of the more affordable options granted to us by foreign countries that we are raising our standard of living because our dollar is stretching further. However, as more and more jobs get outsourced the American economy will start to suffer. Starting with a rise in Unemployment that leads to a decline in real wages and then investments.. You can already see this at work in a regional level here in the United States. Especially if you look at the Rust Belt in the North Eastern states and compare those to those Southern States where the Sunbelt Phenomenea is occuring. When jobs move out of an area, so does it's money.

3) The environmental/humanist angle. Developing Countries are exampt from many international environmental pacts, such as those banning the use of chlorophlorocarbons (the reason we have a hole in the ozone layer). I know it's somewhat hypocritical to use this argument given the fact that the U.S. did rise to it's position of prominence by exploiting it's environment and natural resources, however I'd like to believe we are a bit smarter now. Developing Countries have learned that the way to get ahead is by allowing their environment to be exploited, things that the U.S. is hindered to do by both international and intranational environmental protection laws. This is the main reason the United States did not enter in the Kyoto Protocol. It would place the U.S. at an economic disadvantage to China, who was exempt from the restrictions, despite being a major polluter.

There are advantages. Violence is always highest where economic stratification is the most extreme, by raising the economies of developing nations to be closer to if not on par with the U.S. and other major economies we lower the threat of war and violence.

And of course, there is the possibilitly of future technology that allows the U.S. to maintain it's standard of living and the world to raise theirs as well.

I think that we haven't yet experienced a decline in our GDP because of the transfer to service industry jobs. But I don't think it's sustainable, we need to base our economy on real wealth and production. We've experienced the incline in our standard of living due to the availability of cheaper, foreign produced products, despite the total of our imports exceeding that of our exports.

So it depends on what you want to acheive with globalization. If you want to bring the standard of living of the world up, the standard of living for the wealthiest nations will have to fall. There is opportunity in the short run for money to be made, but it will all evently even out. You will also have to accept environmental damage and turn a blind eye to sweatshop work conditions. I think the old addage remains true. "Pay me now, or pay me later, but you're going to pay me."

__________________

MG brought up some very good points. I am of the same mind.

__________________
ProAzn.com on Youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/ProAznCommunity

Wiki-ABOUT US
http://www.aboutus.org/Proazn.com

Mango Girl, that was a really good response. I tried to add to your rep but it said I must spread my love around some before going back to you lol

To the OP, may I also suggest that you read "The World Is Flat"? It has a lot of great points covered in detail.

__________________
Go Bears!

MG, looks like those econ courses are helpful after all... *wink*

Well said.

.

Here's my take on this. Read the following "Phd" answer on globalization.




Question: What is the truest definition of Globalization?

Answer: Princess Diana's death.

Question: How come?

Answer: An English princess with an Egyptian boyfriend crashes in a French tunnel, driving a German car with a Dutch engine, driven by a Belgian who was drunk on Scottish whisky, (check the bottle before you change the spelling) followed closely by Italian Paparazzi, on Japanese motorcycles; treated by an American doctor, using Brazilian medicines. This is sent to you by an British Man, using Bill Gates's technology, and you're probably reading this on your computer, that use Taiwanese chips, and a Korean monitor, assembled by Bangladeshi workers in a Singapore plant, transported by Indian lorry-drivers, hijacked by Indonesians, unloaded by Sicilian longshoremen, and trucked to you by Mexican illegals.

That, my friends, is Globalization!!

.

Personally I don't know what to feel. I know when there is a issue with a online shopping order or my computer that these CS and IT people elsewhere just quote from books on standard FAQ. Many of them arent even trained to deal with the many issues and problems that can arise and dont know how to wing it when the issue isnt in a book somewhere. Call and Email centers here in the US have a standard of politeness where elsewhere they can be condisending. Walmart outsources their CSR to turkey and romania and let me tell you they do not know their A$$ from their elbow when it comes to order issues at all. Dell is also really aweful and then they ask you a questionare. Ebay is also pretty bad..

I think many of these people have this attitude of what is the customer going to do??? they are in the US.

So it sorta makes me angry cause with this cheaper workforce there is no quality in the work. And their workforce is a dime a dozen (almost litterally) so if someone is fired there are 20 people to take his/her place.

Actually, manning the call centers that have been outsourced to India is not a job on par as it is here. Here bored housewives and students would man the phones. In India, it's a coveted job for people with college educations. It pays about $2,000 a year, which is a good wage there. These aren't the jobs that are really in demand here in the U.S. tho. It is one example where outsourcing is working.

__________________

Morgan Spurlock did a show on it where he went to India and worked at a call center on his show 30 days on the FX network.

On a somewhat related note, medical doctors are being lured to India too.