Author Topic: Boycott US Companies that Out-source to India (Read 2637 times)

Midnight · « **Reply #60 on:** December 21, 2005, 03:52:26 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Ripsnort
I wonder how many Hangtimes there were at the turn of the century bashing the guys that worked on mechanical machines, rather than relying on humans or horses? "MISINFORMED"....its not a beauty pageant queen, fellas...

I'm sorry, but this is a very different thing. Changing technology did not outsource the jobs to a whole other country. People who used to take care of horses could learn to fix cars or up their horse care rates as the amount of caretakers went down over time.

Sure, IT workers can find a different job now, but wat about in five years? If all the manufacturing and customer service jobs are overseas, what will go next? Will it be accountants? How about middle-management. If all the workers are overseas, the managers won't be needed here.

Construction in the US won't be paying much either, because companies won't be building anything here.

------

Also, don't forget how greedy corporate America wasn't worried about pollution and toxic wastes not so long ago. It was cheeper to just dump waste into the rivers and oceans rather than investing in the proper equipment. I believe the corprate explaination was that the rivers and oceans would always be able to carry away all the pollutants and it wouldn't matter... Well.. Superfund.

BTW... don't try to put me over on the "Left Wing" with your BS political view. I'll give you plenty of my thoughts and views that will have bleeding heart Liberals crying in their boots.

Ripsnort · « **Reply #61 on:** December 21, 2005, 04:02:43 PM »

Midnight. Just read the figures yourself. Non-farm payrolls up 215,000 jobs in NOVEMBER ALONE!

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

Economies are not static, they fluctuate. So do jobs and job markets. Trust me, someone 100 years ago was saying the same thing about these new fangled machines taking over jobs just as you are outsourcing, and whether you like it or not, it is the same.

Meanwhile, I'm happy to say that I've asked for (and received) additional resources to complete our testing, both offshore and within the U.S. By relying on offshore help, we've helped to keep jobs, and add a few more...thats all I have to say on this subject because its evident from the posts that most of you haven't a clue (except Stringer and BigGun) about outsourcing.

GtoRA2 · « **Reply #62 on:** December 21, 2005, 04:06:10 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by BigGun
It is the shareholders that own the company. Without shareholders, there would be no company, no jobs to be outsourced. Why do you think people are shareholders of a company? For the benefit of society as a whole? To be good samaritan & to help people maintain high standards of living? Don't be naive. People buy stock & risk their capital in order to earn returns. Pure & simple, stock holders are looking to make money. Nothing wrong with that. Without their capital there is no company or jobs. Increased earnings are a driver in stock returns & profits.

Right, there is nothing wrong with that, but sometimes when those investors push for changes to get more money out of their stock right now, and do not worry about the value in 6 months they cause problems for the company and the customer.

Profit should not get in the way of product quality within reason.

(if they did it right, or let the company be run the right way instead of trying to strangle every cent out for profit this quarter, they might even make more money in the long run.)

An example of this would be.

You have a software product. It is not ready to ship. You ship it anyway because if you do not get it in the channel for Xmas, you won't make your goals this quarter and the board will go for people’s heads.

You ship, you make some money. But lose many customers pissed about your product having issues.

If the company waited until they had a solid product, they would have picked up more customers and made more money.

(There is more to it then that of course, you have to look at the whole development cycle to see how you got there in the first place. But my whole point is companies make stupid decisions based on making money in the short term to please there investors. In the long run it cost them money in return and lost customers)

It used to be said the customer is always right, well thats not true anymore if making it right for the customer cost investors of few cents on their stock.

Taking ownership in something should mean you want it to be good at what it does, not get every pennie you can strangle from it and move on.

Lye-El · « **Reply #63 on:** December 21, 2005, 04:26:21 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by BigGun
Pure & simple, stock holders are looking to make money. Nothing wrong with that.

Those in the lower strata want money too. If they get it they are called overpaid. If those in the upper strata get it, they are deserving.

I was reading about one of the airlines wants it unions to take pay cuts because of bankruptcy. At the same time it wants to give increases to its corporate people because "we don't want them to jump ship". That would be the same people that ran them into bankruptcy to begin with. In effect, telling the pilots and maintainance guys it's their fault and they should be penalized while the fat cats get a bonus for being inefficient.

That's the American way. I got mine, screw you.

BigGun · « **Reply #64 on:** December 21, 2005, 05:11:55 PM »

Gator..good points...and I agree, good corporation is focused on long term profitability. From your example I see how short term goals can conflict with long term goals.

GtoRA2 · « **Reply #65 on:** December 21, 2005, 05:24:06 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by BigGun
Gator..good points...and I agree, good corporation is focused on long term profitability. From your example I see how short term goals can conflict with long term goals.

Exactly. I my experiance it has been that way more often then not. Some worse then others though. Some didn't even make noise about caring about the customer lol.

I dont think investing in a company should be looked at as a short term thing. I think many do and thats part of the greater problem.

BTW · « **Reply #66 on:** December 21, 2005, 06:37:10 PM »

I agree with the first post of this thread - just boycott the company if possible and encourage your friends to do the same. I really don't care if the business has to lay off workers or go out of business because they can't utilize slavery (or just about) in other countries. Let them move their corporate offices to India and let India's government and military protect their interest instead of MY tax dollars. It seems any business decision is ok if it makes money, regardless if its unpatriotic or not. Just move your your corporation to India and get out of here ok? If I feel the need for an Indian ISP, I'll call you. But stop the deception and stop laying on the leg of United States protection when you don't support its economy. Basically, you're (editorial "you're" meaning outsourcing "American" companies) a leech.

Elfie · « **Reply #67 on:** December 22, 2005, 01:33:28 AM »

We switched ISP's simply because Earthlink outsourced their tech support to India. If I have a computer problem and need to call tech support, the tech support might as well be non-existent if I can't understand that thick Indian accent.

Keep in mind that Earthlink lost a customer they had had for 6 years simply because they effectively no longer had tech support.

Sixpence · « **Reply #68 on:** December 22, 2005, 02:43:42 AM »

Well, the moral of the story: educate yourself into a job that can't be outsourced

Eagler · « **Reply #69 on:** December 22, 2005, 06:50:58 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sixpence
Well, the moral of the story: educate yourself into a job that can't be outsourced

and the other story of the moral is the fact that those jobs are dwindlin as tech advances allow everything to be done from somewhere else - cheaper when the locals at those locations work for peanuts er a bowl of rice... I guess there will always be the need for garbage men and bag boys, hard to outsource those positions...today

Urchin · « **Reply #70 on:** December 22, 2005, 06:56:35 AM »

I'd imagine that is where most of BG's vaunted "job growth" in the past 5 years has been.

Midnight · « **Reply #71 on:** December 22, 2005, 08:29:51 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Ripsnort
Midnight. Just read the figures yourself. Non-farm payrolls up 215,000 jobs in NOVEMBER ALONE!

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

I Laugh at those kind of figures and I call you a fool for even bringing them into this thread by just showing the 215,000 number and mentioning the rest of the same sentence. That is typical for a statistics manipulator and spin doctor. Let me just post the full sentence.

Quote

Nonfarm payroll employment grew by 215,000 in November, and the unemployment rate was unchanged at 5.0 percent, the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor reported today.

What that tells me is that farm workers got laid off after harvest season and some new jobs were probably created in construction down south after the hurricanes and retail stores are doing their temporary hires for the X-mass season. So don't try to spew your cream covered view of the job situation with that half-truth statement.

Very good of you to say that the people who don't agree with you here don't know anything, and those that do agree must know.

Big Gun's explaination is such a perfect example of corporate greed and my previous post about them looking down their noses at us. All they care about is how much money THEY can make for THEMSELVES and do whatever they can do to NOT let anyone else make money, especially the AMERICAN workers that helped to build most of these companies to put those greedy executives in thier lofty positions.

Stop trying to convince the general public that you are trying to compete in the global economy by outsourcing all of our labor and manufacturing to other countries with the lowest bid. America has a huge trade deficit that is growing every day, so as far as I can see, we are not competing with anyone.

BigGun · « **Reply #72 on:** December 22, 2005, 10:01:10 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Midnight
Big Gun's explaination is such a perfect example of corporate greed and my previous post about them looking down their noses at us. All they care about is how much money THEY can make for THEMSELVES and do whatever they can do to NOT let anyone else make money, especially the AMERICAN workers that helped to build most of these companies to put those greedy executives in thier lofty positions.

Stop trying to convince the general public that you are trying to compete in the global economy by outsourcing all of our labor and manufacturing to other countries with the lowest bid. America has a huge trade deficit that is growing every day, so as far as I can see, we are not competing with anyone.

I am just stating how I view it & feel it is fairly accurate. And to some degree, corporations have an ethical obligation to its owners, shareholders, to maximize long-term earnings. It is their capital that makes the business run, without it there is no company. Also as a shareholder comes the right to vote proxies & give direction to the company. We vote hundreds of proxies every year, and increased corporate governance is at the top of the list along with making executive compensation tied to performance.

As an investor, we invest to earn a return, the higher the better. If a company is not competitive, earnings are weak & our chance to earn return is diminished, we will simply sell that stock driving down the price and buy the stock of a healthy company. Investors put their capital at risk & deserve a return. To invest in companies which you thought didn't maximize chance to earn the highest return would be simply foolish. I sure would have my job long if that was the case. Would be hard to defend to say, well we know they aren't competitive in global market and aren't focused on maximizing return to shareholders, but they sure do provide a high level of compensation to employees & high benefits to employees even though the returns suck.

Do you own stocks? how about mutual funds that invest in stock? If you do then you are providing capital to the very companies you are complaining about. Best way to make change is to own stocks & vote proxies, or sell the stock/mutual funds that invest in stocks. Also good way is to vote with your pocket book, even if it means you are paying more.

If you are someone that is working at a low level manufacturing job where it is probable the same thing will be produced in tiawan at a lower costs, highly likely it is because you made decisions some point in your life that got you to where you are. Maybe it is you chose not to go to college, maybe you screwed around in high school & got bad grades. Could be a multitude of reasons. However, in most situations, a person ends up with a job because of choices they made at some point in their life, good or bad. It is called personal responsiblity. Failure to pay attention the the global environment, and re-tool your skills, attain more education & insure you have a skillset that is view as valuable in the job market is just plain foolish. You will more than likely end up with what you deserve.

Also, 5% unemployment is pretty darn close to be considered "full employment" by any economist that knows anything. Compare it to other developed economies around the world, it is actual quite good.

Lye-El · « **Reply #73 on:** December 22, 2005, 10:31:50 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Eagler
I guess there will always be the need for garbage men and bag boys, hard to outsource those positions...today

Save-A-Lot stores don't have bagboys. You have to bag them yourself.

Sandman · « **Reply #74 on:** December 22, 2005, 10:59:19 AM »

It gets even worse. I understand that some Indian companies are outsourcing these same jobs to China. They're simply the middle man.