What do you think about outsourcing?

>Do you know better than them?

No. I wouldn't tell a person with a Physics PhD that I understand physics better than him. Why would I do that with professional economists?

>>33062043
Just because it will result in a world wide increase in GDP doesn't mean it will result in an increase of quality of life for the nations which pursue such options. Find me an economist who makes this particular claim- that outsourcing *always* has a positive effect on the quality of life for a nation which chooses to do it.

>>33062096
because you're a liberal/commie and neoclassical economics is a kike conspiracy to enslave the world

There's nothing wrong with outsourcing.
The problem is that western governments are making conditions unfavourable for businesses to produce goods domestically.
Minimum wage, endless fees and tariffs, property taxes, etc. make setting up a factory in the west much less profitable than in, say, China.

>>33062195
The study just asks them if they support it overall. Why do you think they have considered GDP but stopped at that?

no, i don't disagree

but i also think organized labor should create international federations to counterbalance the power of capital

It would certainly make the rich richer. Why have workers that want $10 an hour when you can get a third worlder to do it for 50 cents and a bowl of lukewarm rice a week?

>>33062390
as long as they are voluntary that's okay

unlike modern unions

>>33062459
It would make the poor richer too. Outsourcing has pretty much halved worldwide extreme poverty in the last decade.

See also Paul Krugman's "In Praise of Cheap Labor".

>>33062043
We need to make things ourselves. It would be one of the best fixes to the econemy.

Be like Germany.

TL;DR outsourcing is good for internationalist and their bottom line. the american manufacturing sector be damned

for all the idiocy about cheaper prices, let me tell you this. i would pay 5x the amount for an american made product because i know it wouldn't fall apart in a month and i'd be keeping american money in american hands

File: 1405224374990.jpg (61KB, 500x373px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 500x373px

>>33062043
You never said WHY they don't want it. Now we have to assume. I will assume your are speaking of a strictly profit-driven viewpoint, and I would counter your economists with that profits should not be sole consideration while making these claims. It's very easy to appeal to authority by saying "Whelp 90% of these fags love cocks, so I should too."

You forget that 90% of economists probably don't have everyones best interests in mind. Nor do their statements accurately reflect an interest in having such. Outsourcing takes from something to give to something else. Who is on the losing side of this bargain? If me, then I am against it.

>>33062625
>tfw you don't comparative advantage

Outsourcing is largely a function of retarded statists making it nearly impossible to run a successful business in their location (see: California).

Although most people hate outsourcing for retarded reasons like thinking autarcky is a preferable condition to the division of labor and free trade (which is why the "solution" is protectionism).

Just outsource every single American job overseas. Locals don't need to work.

>>33062685
Economists consider other factors you idiot. If you read the source 65% want more energy taxes in the US. Is that also to increase company profits?

The fact that it is actually profitable for major firms to put a large part of their manufacturing process to the other side of the globe and back speaks to how fucked up the market is by the state.

>>33062549
not same anon, but this is also destroying the middle class, you are giving poor people the means to exist, while making the rich richer, fucking the middle class right in the assl, I don't know about you but I prefer a world with three economic classes instead of two.

Thread music.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msEYGql0drc

>>33062460
>unlike modern unions

This is the issue with organized labor.
Nobody can stand it these days, and tries to limit it.

God created economists to make astrology look accurate and used car salesmen appear honest.

They're the globalists favorite pets.

>>33062862
>I failed econ 101

Krugman: "If there were an Economist’s Creed, it would surely contain the affirmations 'I understand the Principle of Comparative Advantage' and 'I advocate Free Trade'."

>>33062222
Dem quads.

The way of the free market, make your people a retarded suicidal collective if you don't want to lose in competition to China.

I don't give a fuck if some 3rd worlder becomes better off. International trade, immigration, and outsourcing all has winners and losers. The winners are the extreme poorfags who go from making nothing to making a dollar a month, and the international businesses who profit enormously from it. Everyone else loses. We see the effects today as the gini coefficients are plummeting in modern societies.

>>33062938
>how it`s fucked by state

How come? Single reason for outsourcing is greater profit margins.
You would need to lower wages to 3rd world levels in order to compete successfully. That just would mean that workers can`t simply sustain themselves in 1st world.

>>33063157
>causation correlation

>>33063076
When you get passed econ 101 and move into international micro/macro let me know.

File: 1401736706274.gif (623KB, 400x463px) Image search: [Google]

623KB, 400x463px

>>33062916
Ah, an ad hominem attack. Your argument is falling apart before your eyes. This "source" you provided, a "just google it you dumb fuck," turned up as a blogspot post. Delving further I was presented with:

>Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

So here's what we have:

>No readily available source provided
>Appeal to authority stance
>Ad hominem attacks

Thanks, but come back when you have something more substantial other than your errant feelings. Take care.

>>33063161
Maybe 1st world workers can demand higher wages due to higher productivity due to capital from the market process? Something that will arrive in the 3rd world over time.

Ponder that, will you?

>>33063223
Hope Krugman will go beyond Econ 101 soon.

Guys everybody wins! Wages and price levels aren't sticky and people can learn new skills right away!

I only hate outsourcing for customer service. It ruins my day when I have to call a company like my ISP and I get some turka durka person that mixes two words into one.

>>33063313
Yes they can demand them, but that does not equate that companies would magically stop outsourcing. Lower wages or just accept fact of outsourcing, there is no legislative way to stop it(corporations can re-locate fairly easily).

>>33063259
You don't even know what ad hominem is. I didn't discredit your argument on the basis of you being an idiot, I just called you one.

First result is Greg Mankiw's blog. He is an economics professor at Harvard University.

Oh boy I can't wait to become a future slave

>>33062043
Typical neo-lib "libertarian" bullshit. I guess /pol/s idea to solve the problems would be to remove what little government regulation there is and just let them export ALL the jobs.

>>33063397
You can demand higher wages. There is still some limit how high you can go.

>>33063538
Exactly, but that does not seemingly stop how much living expanses can rise and keep raising.

>>33063519
90% of PhD economists are libertarian shills now?

>>33063519
Yeah the State is totally whats protecting all the jobs. That's why California is gaining all these new industries.

>>33063313

1st world production will never be at parity because while 1st world technologies like plant and equipment can be exported to 3rd world countries, costs like health and safety requirements, healthcare and education costs are not.

>tfw just graduated debt free and got a legit paying job that isn't likely to be autotomized or outsourced any time soon
>didn't even have to apply, the company sought me out from a database
>tfw all these /pol/ job threads don't mean anything to me anymore because I got mine

>>33062757

how is it an advantage for us when we buy more than we produce? how is it an advantage when it's displaced millions of jobs? how do we benefit from buying cheap junk with no quality, that you have to turn around and buy again because the quality was so shitty?

i'd rather buy something once and have it forever, than buying the same thing over and over again at a cheap price

if you notice any good outdoor clothing manufacturers sell their stuff for a lot more than a jacket you can buy out of sears or walmart or whatever. thats because they use quality materials and craftmanship. and they also come with lifetime warranties.

you spend a little more but you get a better product that will last a lifetime instead of buying 30 jackets over the course of your life and you end up spending more money in the long run anyway

>>33063599
neo-libertarians make majority of economists. Also their school of thought beated kenysians out of practically all economics on 70`s so...

>>33063739
Nothing about what you said implied you had any idea what comparative advantage is.

>>33063764
Why do almost 40% of PhD economists want to increase the minimum wage if they are all libertarian shills?

Modern macro is heavily influenced by Keynesianism.

>>33063970
I would like to see on what country does 40% of them support such decision.

File: 1378774392068.png (16KB, 807x595px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 807x595px

>>33063471
>economics professor at Harvard University.

>>33064095
US. Found in the source in the OP.

>>33063857
Then why don't you explain it Schlomo

>>33064184
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage

>>33063857
what advantage besides cheaper prices are we getting out of the deal? i really want to know, because personally i don't think wrecking a nations manufacturing capacity has any benefits or is worth a cheaper price

File: 1390006800489.jpg (33KB, 403x415px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 403x415px

>>33064111
there are better pics

>implying economists of today aren't as brainwashed as people studying at universities ''women's studies'' and ''feminist queer mongoloif wasd123 theory'' and whatever.

>>33062247
Can't find the exact question, verbatim, so I couldn't comment, however it could be that the question doesn't specifically ask about quality of life, but rather, economic productivity, or it may be ambiguous, in which case economists will give the answer they've been trained to give- one with regards to economics, not quality of life.

>>33063857
>comparative advantage

US worker produces 100lbs of baby formula an hour at a production cost of $2/lbs. Formula meets strict regulations, factory meets strict regulations, worker receives healthcare and benefits.

Chinese worker produces 100lbs of baby formula at $1/lbs. Baby formula is produced in substandard factory and is 10% melamine. Worker receives no benefits or healthcare and dies of lead poisoning at the age of 13 from licking the labels to stick on the can. 10 US babies die a year from acute melamine poisoning.

B-but my comparative advantage says its a win win situation! This is why economics is not a real science.

>>33064245
>For example, if, using machinery, a worker in one country can produce both shoes and shirts at 6 per hour, and a worker in a country with less machinery can produce either 2 shoes or 4 shirts in an hour, each country can gain from trade because their internal trade-offs between shoes and shirts are different. The less-efficient country has a comparative advantage in shirts, so it finds it more efficient to produce shirts and trade them to the more-efficient country for shoes. Without trade, its opportunity cost per shoe was 2 shirts; by trading, its cost per shoe can reduce to as low as 1 shirt depending on how much trade occurs (since the more-efficient country has a 1:1 trade-off). The more-efficient country has a comparative advantage in shoes, so it can gain in efficiency by moving some workers from shirt-production to shoe-production and trading some shoes for shirts. Without trade, its cost to make a shirt was 1 shoe; by trading, its cost per shirt can go as low as 1/2 shoe depending on how much trade occurs.


so how could these asian countries be more efficient at making things than us, before we literally sent our whole manufacturing industry to them?

they aren't more efficient, they just have less rules on how you can treat their workers so it benefits the owners of the companies because they don't have to spend any money on safety stuff and can pay their workers pennies

if you actually think we are gaining something by buying everything from someone else you are a top level retard

>>33062043
Economists are out of touch with reality, especially the brilliant ones.

>>33064567
They are more efficient due to fewer rules. Yes.

See Paul Krugman's "In Praise of Cheap Labor" for an explanation why this is good for them as well.

>>33062043

I favor protectionist legislature with high tariffs on imported goods. You want to keep a highly paid staff in your country if you ask me. It works better when you have these resources close at hand, not to mention the economic factor of the manufacture and sale of goods instead of merely a support position between one of those two roles.

>>33064882
Your belief is very fringe among economists.

File: 1388897787765.png (20KB, 183x232px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 183x232px

>>33064535
Oy vey! The goyim know.
SHUT IT DOWN AND SLIDE IT

captcha: mullets anyojob

>>33064838
you didn't answer why its a benefit for us. not including muh prices

>>33062043
>90% of economists don't want any restrictions on the outsourcing of labor to foreign countries (source: Google "The Consensus of Economists Mankiw" because I can't directly link because 4chan has a faggot spam filter).
>Do you know better than them?
Are you implying we don't?
Economists working for governments don't have the same goals the common man does. They want their state to appear great when there is another fact in light. The state is not great and the outsourching of labor and production has such huge transport costs that it is impoverishing the earth.

>>33062043
But if we outsource labour to foreign countries, what happens to our own manufacturing sector?

File: 1406382208520.jpg (288KB, 974x717px) Image search: [Google]

288KB, 974x717px

>>33064245
Reading the anyone can edit jew

>>33064936
It only works for very large and diversified economies like the United States circa 1950-60s.

>>33064936
It also happens to be what turned America into an economic superpower. America was protectionist for most of its history, and incidentally government mainly ran on tariffs rather than taxes.

Of course kikes think that making more money at the expense of others is a good thing.
The oven dodgers on this board support it 111,000%

>>33065148
Babby boomers just wanted more and more that's all

>>33065067
We get cheaper goods. How is that not an advantage?

Americans are much more educated than your average Chinese factory worker. Why should we have them do simple unskilled work?

We can have the Chinese do this while the Americans do things that require actual skills. Not every American is capable of a skilled job, but as we all gain due to comparative advantage more skilled Americans can afford e.g. hiring unskilled Americans to clean their houses. Maybe they can afford eating out more, and thus more unskilled Americans can work to serve food.

>>33065087
It goes away. People who spent a lifetime learning those skills are shit out of luck. Those who did not have those jobs now get slightly cheaper goods.

>>33064936
>economists; the new age priesthood who predict what the invisible hand of markets demands and wants

File: 1378313496279.jpg (161KB, 960x686px) Image search: [Google]

161KB, 960x686px

>>33065087
No need for those pesky little questions goy

>>33062043
i think its on a par with capitalist multiculturism (its capitalist), it only serves to bring the higher ups of the company more money.

>>33065087
Why do we need a manufacturing sector? Let the Chinese do what they do well and Americans do what they do well.

>>33062043
economists will endorse slavery if they're being honest and without conscience.

the headaches america has explaining 2% of it's southern states' labor practices 150 years ago are going to seem miniscule when it's trying to explain it's present relationship with china 100 years from now.

>>33062043

Necessary to control prices

BUT companies don't use it to control prices, and simply use it to lower costs without passing on the savings to customers.

>>33062549
>It would make the poor richer too.

Yeah, in the countries where the labor is outsourced too.

>>33065337
>wat is competition?

>>33065284
Manufacturing is what Americans have always done well. It's what helped turn them into a global power. Also, outsourced Chinese products are far less in quality than American-made goods.

The reason for outsourcing is because these Chinese will work for pennies, and have zero safety/health code policies

>>33065284
But without a manufacturing sector what exactly do we have left? How does this benefit the common man?

>>33065400
Are Apple's products of low quality?

Even if America once did manufacturing well they may very well be beyond that now.

>>33065235
because like i stated in one of my previous posts is we end up paying more for junk, having to buy it 5 times, instead of just paying a little bit more one time

i remember i bought a pair of boots from walmart for work once, thinking hey, i'm just going to beat these up so i don't care if they're cheap

they lasted me literally 4 months and the soles started separating. i've never bought a pair of cheap boots again, i actually have the same pair of boots i got from LL bean like 5 years ago.

i paid a little more for them, but they lasted 10x longer and i would have ended up paying more money if i were to just keep buying cheap shitty boots from walmart

you can keep your low prices because that's just a gimmick

>>33065413
People designing the products, for instance. Service jobs, too. America still has natural resources.

Lower prices benefit everyone.

>>33065464
yes they are. Compare it to similar products of the same price.

>>33065464
Yes. Apple products are low quality.

>>33065547
Not the millions who lost their manufacturing jobs. Skills are not completely transferable to other industries.

>do you know better than a capitalism?

Is this a trick question?

>>33065326
>trying to explain it's present relationship with china 100 years from now.

Good thing all whites will be dead by then. The controlling Jews can tell their mulatto slaves, er employees how evil whitey was and no one will be the wiser.

>>33065532
Are Apple products extremely low quality?

Does Made in USA automatically mean high quality? Does Made I'm China automatically mean low quality? Is it the other way around when shopping in China, considering the American products would be the foreign ones?

>>33065464
yes, apple is shit, and china make shitty products

america has always been known for making high quality goods. are you a teenager or a foreigner or something? how do you not know this?

>>33065702
>Are Apple products extremely low quality?
Yes. Do a comparison between similar priced goods within the same market. Apple products are terrible for what they are.

>Does Made in USA automatically mean high quality? Does Made I'm China automatically mean low quality?
In most cases, yes to both.

>Is it the other way around when shopping in China, considering the American products would be the foreign ones?
No. It's the same if you were an American shopping for machine parts and came across some manufactured in Germany. You'd except high quality for that alone.

>>33065547
you do realize that there aren't many people relatively that can actually design anything? and who are we going to be designing all these products for?

>>33065801
>'Murican $400 HP laptop. Amazing quality!!1!1

File: 1378582247384.png (20KB, 486x576px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 486x576px

>>33065235
>cheaper = better
GTFO JEW

>>33065801
Were ThinkPads circa T61 shit quality? Generally seen as one of the best models in the line and made in China.

outsourcing means cheaper goods at home, and that's a good thing.

>>33065702
>Are Apple products extremely low quality?
Will you quit posting this, shitskin?
At some point the job charity we're sending you is going to dry up. Microsoft won't be able to lay off 18,000 workers and still claim muh shortage

>>33065874
You do realize that was only one example?

>>33064567
They don't have to be more efficient. If you look at the quoted example one of the dudes is better at making both shirts and shoes.

That's where 'comparative' comes in. One of the parties is better at making shoes than shirts, the other isn't. Even though he's better at making both shoes and shirts, they still benefit from trade (that is, reach an amount of goods impossible without trade).

>>33065965
stop grasping. china overall makes shitty products

just like generally germany makes high quality machinery

>>33065967
No, cheapness should be shunned, not sought after
How did cheap get turned into a good thing

>>33062043
>Do you know better than them?

What do you mean by "better"? They have specifically profit oriented goals and the rest of us have societal and cultural oriented goals

Outsourcing is fine unless your a statist that doesnt want corporations to have the freedom to hire who they want.

So tell me anon are you against the free market?

>>33066063
Made in Japan used to mean low quality. They make much high quality shit today. I don't think you should generalize shit by nation anyway. Americans can create shit products and the Chinese can make good products and vice versa.

>>33066020
ok so we'll have an economy made up of a few designers and hoards of paper pushers. sounds sustainable

also you people aren't taking into account how dependent this makes us on other countries when we don't have to be.

hypothetically what would happen if we were to go to war with china? we've sent our whole manufacturing sector over there. we couldn't even make our own clothes. i think this is very dangerous

>>33066135
>So tell me anon are you against the free market?
No, just your shitposts

>>33066178

Why do you hate the free market anon? Why do you think the governments should decide which workers is best for a company?

>>33066128
> specifically profit oriented goals
Economists? That isn't the case from what i've seen (BS in joint math/econ). Why do you think that?

>>33066029
but why do we need to trade? we used to make everything here. the only thing we imported was bananas and tea.

the only "benefit" you can come up with is muh prices

>>33065547
>Lower prices benefit everyone.
Not when your wages plummet due to devaluation of labour. Lower prices in that context only benefit a few people.

Moreover these "lower prices" are for cheap foreign junk that breaks repeatedly and has to be continually replaced, so you actually pay the same money overall without having the same job to provide that money.

>>33065967
>cheap is good
>quality is for suckers

>>33066135
i am. free trade is what has run us into the ground

>>33066237
Why don't you make everything yourself in your own home?

Fuck trade.

>>33066279
I said nothing about lower quality did I?

>>33066237
Because we get more stuff. Do you understand the comparative advantage example?

>>33066334
These cheap goods are cheaper because they're poorly made chink garbage, so yeah, you did.

>>33066237

Because people like a modern life not the 1800's.

You couldnt afford shit today if you had to pay for US workers wages.

>>33062043
Another tool in a globalists shack, while it racks up money for the employers, it takes away jobs from the people in your country.

>>33066334
Oooh, you got us Sanjay!

>>33066279

Who cares about quality if you can just pay to replace the goods more often?

>>33062043
People who work with money for a living want cheap labor? Shocking, OP. Truly shocking.

Is it better for profit? Of course. Is it better for the well being of a nation? No, because living expenses don't get cheaper with the drop in wages.

>>33065326
"Slavery is wrong!"

Sent from Aimee's iPhone

>>33066285
because i'm one man in a house, not comparable to a country of 300,000,000 with vast resources

like i said, we used to make everything here. your comparison is completely retarded

>>33065391
Competition is only meaningful if it produces good products. In the case of outsourcing, it's just a race to bottom of making shit-tier products at the lowest cost possible.

>>33066352
>we got more junk!!

It makes the rich richer at the expense of their countrymen. Past generations could support a family on a factory job but now everything has gone to the Asians or to the wetbacks. Anyone that supports this bullshit is just a myopic trust fund kiddy.

>>33066497
Why do you buy from Chinese manufacturers? Did you prefer their offerings? Did your fellow Americans?

>>33063519
And that would work the company's would go crazy at first. Yeah we can pay people shit for their jobs and make a huge profit. Soon there profits would plummet because they got rid of all their consumers their buisness would go bankrupt and they would go well maybe paying people is a good thing because it keeps our consumers alive. As long as the government doesn't bail them out and allows them to fail then they will learn this lesson the hard way.

Just like buisness now should learn the hard way that paying your employes like shit creates a frugal society and kills the consumer society they worked so hard to create.

>>33066563
because the manufacturers moved over seas and that's basically all i can buy now

>>33065801

quality is bad for the bottom line. shit needs to totalky breakdown at 18-22 months.

>>33066539
Ayy lmao

>>33062043
Globalism is a parasite. Parasites on my land go in the oven.

>>33064838
Less safety is not beneficial for a worker.

>>33066615
I don't think all of them did at once.

Why did they do it if it makes their products suckier? Wouldn't people start buying their competitor's products?

>>33065702
>Are Apple products extremely low quality?
Usually, yes.

>>33066683
>didn't read article

>>33066685
it's called planned obsolescence. ever heard of it?

>>33062685

No it doesn't "take" anything. YOU get cheaper products.

>>33066685
It doesn't. Apple has factories in China because it's all just putting things together and they just need dumb automatons. There isn't that much value added, all the value added stuff (r&d, design, etc) is done in California.

>>33062043
Daily reminder that outsourcing is the free market at work and there is nothing wrong with that.

>>33066616
Just after "product insurance" becomes void, preferably.

>>33066666
>quints of truth

>>33066777
i guess the manufacturing jobs just grew legs amirite?

>>33066557
American factory worker here. Even here, this is true. Half of my coworkers are asian.

Time Travelling Degeneracy.

Jesus would of considered this akin to the Money Changers!

>>33062549
meh nuking africa reduces worldwide poverty by a lot more than 50%. I guess economists are in favor of nuking africa.

>>33066731
>genuinely thinks less safety for a factory worker is beneficial for them
Good job on your troll thread, though.

>>33066790
you do know milton friedman basically told pat buchanan that he was completely wrong on the whole free trade scheme right before he died right?

>>33066880
he might not be trolling. some people actually believe this shit

>>33065235
cheaper goods. Yeah they're definately cheaper alright.

File: download.jpg (13KB, 194x259px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 194x259px

>>33062043

Because of the destruction of our tariff system and trade protectionism, exploitaion can now be exported world wide, with no government oversight or accountability in puppet governments, banana republics or crony capitalist states.

Thanks, Free market!

Ireland here, while doing a Msc, an Indian student tried to outsource his thesis on one of them outsourcing sites.

He was offering Rupees, so he was trying to outsource back to India.

Imagine trying to work your arse off next to people like that, plagiarists and cheats are awful.

>>33066875
They would be if it wouldn't make them universally hated. You haven't heard globalists mention world depopulation before?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3NqG2lAojNQ

All you need to know.

>>33066685
The baby boomers really didn't give a shit. They were some of the most shortsighted and selfish pieces of shit to ever exist: happy to screw over their own children's future while they buy crappy chinese knickknacks and destroy America's industry.

It takes a special kind of hate to deliberately fuck over your own children.

>>33066991
fucking disgusting

Big names in politics/government are not interested in outsourcing for the sake of a fairer economy or humanitarian reasons, they do it because outside of western society they can exploit their workers more.

>>33067061
top rated comment by OMG6319:

Oswald Mosley was one of the good guys, who unlike Churchill didn't intend to sell our country to the Jewish bankers, and a little research will reveal this... you won’t get the truth from uni libraries because what we are told about WW2 today in schools is utter rubbish, unless you believe in santa, the tooth fairy or the holocaust. The British have been made to suck the dicks of their greatest enemies and most of them they are so backward they hunt down and jail people who tell the truth, whilst glorifying vermin like Churchill. Our people are being destroyed by the communist euroCUNTS who are deliberately flooding Britain with non-whites in order to divide us even more, until one day we will be choking on our last breath for survival...

if you don't believe what I say ...then go ask the mentally deranged Jews, Marxists, Communists, traitors and hypocrites that run the parliament.

>>33066991
Plenty of people do that - whites and indians alike.

>>33067150
this, it really boggles the mind.

>>33067418
Just because you did/do it, doesn't mean everyone does. I didn't for instance(white guy).

>>33062043
I would regard outsourcing as betrayal of your own counterymen...and I am saying this as an entrepeneur.

>>33067418
So along with
cheaper = better
we have
cheating = resourcefulness

This thread proves nothing but how capitalistfags are absolutelly fucking deluded about real life and real people, all they see is numbers and theories...

>>33067655
Yea well not my problem the gooberment wants to tax the shit out of everything, which then makes it cheaper to outsource, plus shipping it back. Reduce the expenses here, and jobs come back faggot.

>>33062222
Quads confirm.

>>33066080
>How did cheap get turned into a good thing

American culture
American capitalism.
American entrepreneurship.
American globalism.

File: 700b.jpg (36KB, 500x258px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 500x258px

>>33067721
Yes, people who cheat are thought of as being skilled. How's that for decline for ya.

Of course economists don't have a problem with outsourcing

Their job can't be outsourced

>>33062222
>>33067870
When our(US) economy colapses, the silver lining will be that the free ride is over for you merchants

>>33068040
Bulls don't care what it is they're doing, as long as its churning out $$$ at the other side of the process.

> MONEY = GOOD
> MONEY & DEGENERACY = GOOD
> MONEY & CORRUPTION = GOOD
> MONEY & MORAL DECAY = GOOD
> DEGENERACY = BAD
> CORRUPTION = BAD
> MORAL DECAY = BAD

File: 1403797951184.jpg (21KB, 456x800px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 456x800px

>>33062043

no, but outsourcing labor and outsourcing capital and two entirely different things

Faggots who whine "dey tuk urrr jerbs" are insufferable but allowing capital flight is terrible. The region of Canada I live in is economically depressed because of cronyism and allowing international corporate colonialism take over.

But giving shit jobs to foreigners for cheaper is not a problem at all.

>>33068328
0/10
>Canada I live
big givaway

>>33068328
>But giving shit jobs to foreigners for cheaper is not a problem at all.
Only if there are enough jobs within the country for you and your neighbor. Otherwise, it'll just be a handful of Canadians running a bunch of factories elsewhere while you are busy lying in the gutter being homeless. Unless you want to move to China and become a modern day slave.

>>33068328
>But giving shit jobs to foreigners for cheaper is not a problem at all.
Yes, because they're working class and don't interfere with society, apparently? That is an awful premise to import people.

>>33062043

>90% of economists don't want any restrictions on the outsourcing . . .

Economists are more often sympathetic to statistical figures like GDP, corporate profits and percentage growth than they are about actual people.

Economics is essentially gambling.

For all the models and formulas they develop, they seem to always be wrong about most everything and then you have a gigantic clusterfuck that comes along eventually.

Hell, there are some schools of economic thought that outright discount all attempts at study or modeling, and they are actually considered just as credible as the others because every fucking economist is a snake oil salesman at their core.

I mean hell, just look at what happened in 2008. Everyone fucking assumed that the financial industry would self-regulate and play nice and all that bullshit because according to the charts and models it was in their best interest to do so. Well it turns out that they failed the most basic prisoner's dilemma situation imaginable; I wonder why all these financial giants with their array of top paid talent and money market geniuses completely shit the world economy bed.

Well surely some model out there had a misplaced decimal or something, the study of economics cannot fail it can only be failed. Now please take us seriously again.

In most fields when people fuck up so spectacularly that they destroy trillions worth of wealth heads usually roll. Strangely, nary a soul has spent a picosecond inside a jail cell for the chicanery that occurred.

Outsourcing is good to make the rich richer.

What economists fail to comprehend is sociology comes into play when iniquity becomes too gross. Since nobody likes rich parasitic kikes when they're hogging the whole damn economic pie, civil unrest is the natural outcome of their economic policies. Argue how it's good for GDP when the mob shows up with torches and pitchforks, greasy economist jews.

>>33062460
>unlike modern unions
LOL "modern unions" are highly undermined, toothless and either gone or mostly voluntary.

People who hate outsourcing need to check their privilege. You're not entitled to a job. You're not entitled to a first world living standard. People in poorer countries deserve opportunity and capitalists value these people in that they actually value them more than your expensive ass. Shit, your first world living standard is thanks to businesses moving production abroad and bringing cheaper products for your consumption. You'll all bitch and moan about capitalists exploiting workers but you'll partake in it if it saves you money. You'll project your greed on to muh corporations and shriek about them even though they're just enablers to your own material gluttony.

>>33070617

You mean private sector unions. The public sector unions are still raping us.

>>33062222
I agree, we should have shitty sweatshops here in America

File: 1382851573960.gif (2MB, 450x363px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 450x363px

All immigration should be illegal. Outsourcing should be illegal. Companies based in tax havens should not be allowed to sell their products here.
GAS THE GLOBALISTS
ECONOMIC WAR NOW

There's literally nothing wrong with taking American jobs overseas and completely wrecking our manufacturing industry.

>>33063209
Fuck off fallacy-fedora

>>33071864

[your pic]

I remember when that was a prime time show. Thought it was awesome. Pretty cheezy stuff by today's standards.

>>33065235
I'd rather be able to have a factory job and be able to move out of my parent's house than be an unemployed college graduate

>>33072066
What's it from? I just saved it because it was funny

File: 190.jpg (38KB, 604x157px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 604x157px

>>33071950

Ross Perot was absolutely dead-on right when he ran against GHWBush and Clinton in 1992. The only thing he accomplished, however, was a Clinton first term.

>>33072304

That was a mid to late seventies show called "The Incredible Hulk."

File: Sixmilliondollar1.jpg (16KB, 314x246px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 314x246px

>>33072434

It was contemporary with shows like "Charlie's Angles" and "The Six Million Dollar Man"

What are those economists taking for an "end-goal"? That everyone around the world has a certain standard of living 200 years from now?

Well, sorry for being so selfish, but I'm alive now, this shit is wrecking the world I live in now, and I don't see how it's a good thing that my standard of living is getting destroyed so a family of chinks goes from absolutely miserable to just miserable and then to my current standard of living in 3 more generations. Thanks, but no thanks. I didn't put their country in the shitter, and I don't want it to be taken out of the shitter at the cost of my livelihood.

The economists can go get fucked.

>>33062043
Political and social instability does not have an entry in the accounts so they are not considered by these people.

The 'creative accounting' that goes on in large modern corporations is absolutely disgusting. If a cost can be hidden or manoeuvred off the books it is not a real cost.

Meanwhile those of us that live in the real world as opposed to managerial/accounting fantasy land have to pick up the pieces.

Competition is a sin and as long as this is true such a phenomenon will exist. It seems pretty clear yet most of you complain like a woman on their period....

Bitching isn't going to change it so go watch some tv and shut the hell up.

>>33062043
different goals have different methods.

it's not that other people's methods are ineffective at reaching their goals.

it's that those people have awful goals which don't benefit as much of society as other goals might.

Well if theyre gonna be the next burgerland...pretty sure they need to actually be manufacturing stuff!

The burgers are too slow and busy with their entertainment to notice...oh well...

Build It and Tear It down...

No borders. No races. Communication between all for the good of the corporation....

Im ok with it :)

File: 1405325008098.jpg (145KB, 401x486px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 401x486px

>>33062043
Everyone loves cheap labor until it comes to take their job.

File: tyler durden did nothing wrong.png (260KB, 1342x1548px) Image search: [Google]

260KB, 1342x1548px

>>33062043
>90% of economists don't want any restrictions on the outsourcing of labor to foreign countries

That's because those economists are fucking stupid. We just had a thread similar to this yesterday. Swear to God it's a been Groundhog Day around here.

its not bad at all