I will stop right here before I display my fluency with colorful vocabulary!!!
I will add this much: There were two triggers for this post. One, I heard a faculty colleague ask another, "do you really want the corporations to outsource everything?" And then, this meme that was shared on Facebook by a friend:
The following is my op-ed that was published four years ago in The Register-Guard, August 13, 2012, during the previous presidential election cycle:
The sudden populism over outsourcing
reminds me of a Chinese saying that I recently came across: “If we don’t
change the direction in which we are headed, we will end up where we
are going.”
Twelve years ago, when I taught at
California State University, Bakersfield, I assigned a class of about 35
students the task of figuring out, through rough calculations, whether
Bakersfield could compete against Bangalore, India, when it came to call
centers that the local leaders were pursuing as a growth strategy.
At that time, outsourcing hadn’t entered the everyday political and cultural vocabulary, and Bangalore was unknown to most in the United States — after all, Thomas Friedman had yet to publicize these through his best-seller, “The World is Flat.”
Working in teams, the students
independently arrived at the same conclusion: Bangalore will beat
Bakersfield any day! My hope was that most of the class would have
understood through this exercise how their economic futures could become
increasingly dependent on developments in other parts of the world.
Well, we have now almost ended up where we
were going — economic activities that might have generated many middle
income jobs in the past have migrated to other countries that are
equally, or more, interested in their development. Therefore,
unemployment rates in the United States do not seem to be coming down
despite all our attempts. And, yes, “outsourcing” is now a part of our
lexicon and for which politicians have suddenly developed a fondness.
Yet we are not talking about outsourcing in
a constructive manner. Outsourcing is being used to portray China or
India as bad actors, when, in reality, they are far from any real
competition to us. The average Indian earns barely 5 percent of the per
capita income here in the United States. The average Chinese is in a
much better position than the average Indian, but the per capita income
there is only a tenth of that in the United States.
India and China are not our competitors,
but they are much poorer countries where people are eager to improve
their economic conditions.
Outsourcing economic activities to India or
China, or any number of other countries, has made possible goods and
services at remarkably low prices. From T-shirts to smart phones to
customer support, we would have to pay a lot more than we currently do
if there were no outsourcing at all.
It is not China’s or India’s problem that
we failed to change our own direction over the years when we enjoyed the
abundance of goods and services at affordable prices. Obsessed by the
Internet bubble, the events of Sept. 11, 2001, and the wars that
followed, and then the housing bubble, we continued to keep going
without even attempting to alter our course, seemingly oblivious to how
the economic structures all around the world were rapidly changing.
Should we then be surprised that it has
become extremely difficult to generate gainful employment that will keep
alive the American Dream for the middle class?
Obama beats up on outsourcing in order to
imply that the Chinese and Indians are taking away “our” jobs, which is a
highly screwed-up interpretation. And Romney doesn’t seem to recognize
that outsourcing and the globalization of the economy have not
translated to real economic betterment for the middle class.
Since the Great Recession, I have increased
the intensity with which I try to make students understand that any job
that can be sent to a different country will be sent, and that any job
that can be automated will be automated. Unfortunately, a captive
audience does not always mean an attentive audience.
I suppose we seem to be bent on making sure we will end up where we are going.
3 comments:
A familiar theme, but I want to pick up on the popular misconception that outsourcing has hurt the middle class in the US. Balderdarsh. The price of everything you buy (and the middle class buys things too in case that has been forgotten) will go up 50% if you make everything in the US. The middle class in the US is actually better off thanks to outsourcing. Yes not a pleasant message to somebody who has lost his job, but that's the real position.
"A captive audience does not always mean an attentive audience"? You are worrying me about the paper I turned in on Tuesday about free trade!
;)
Post a Comment