Live data from Hacker News

Jensen: 'We've done our country a great disservice' by offshoring

barchart.com

111–120 of 527 posts

Re: Jensen: 'We've done our country a great disservice' by offshoring

#111
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s true that American companies have benefited from sending jobs overseas. Instead of trying to stop them, perhaps we could explore ways to share this money more fairly across the country.

Everyone in business seems allergic to "pay domestic workers living wages and provide flexible working arrangements with good work life balance" so we will only arrive there through politics, unions, and structural labor shortages as the prime working age population cohort continues to shrink, imho. Honorable mention to Senator Bernie Moreno of Ohio for introducing legislation to tax outsource payment flows. The HIRE…

> Everyone in business seems allergic to "pay domestic workers living wages and provide flexible working arrangements with good work life balance" so we will only arrive there through politics, unions, and structural labor shortages as the prime working age population cohort continues to shrink, imho.

I think its because I suppose we can either talk about small businesses who can be very cost cutting because their overall profits are very thin (you really can't blame them that much I think)

And the medium to large corporations either take Venture funding and want to cost cut to show more growth or maximizing share holder profit

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Co.

(taking an short summary from ddg AI)

The case you're referring to is Dodge v. Ford Motor Co., decided in 1919, where the Michigan Supreme Court ruled that a corporation must operate primarily for the profit of its shareholders, rather than for the benefit of employees or customers. This case is often cited as a foundational example of "shareholder primacy" in corporate law.

This is the root cause of the issue.

Do you know that there is a solution to it

They are called social enterprises and there are legal frameworks to do that. You might've seen some labels given by independent parties to show that as well

So they exist, but nobody creates them, why?

Because, its insanely hard to raise funding in them compared to the average structure. I looked up into it and the system of funding is just created such way where it rewards any and every cost cutting

I think that just like non profits get good value from doing good. A middle way where a company's purpose becomes some aspect of social good and not entirely profits. This might help but we need govts supporting them (similar to perhaps even non profits)

I have a hypothesis that if you provide easy access to lower interest loans with less collateral overall (perhaps even none?, provide micro-grants perhaps) at a federal level/banking level might be the best way to really start up some new innovation whose idea is social mission

Most people have an idea of enough, I think that academically inclined people who create companies would really appreciate this and this could even include the creation of things like google etc. which really just turned evil from dont be evil because of the wiki link/case that happened imo

Taxation as you say in the 25% tax won't really work that well imo as we saw recently in the tax scandal recently in America where billions were lost.

Although so much of US especially its politics is so much lobbied etc. that I find the idea of this change just stopping because it could prove a real threat to the completely capitalist corporations which will fire 1000's of people in an instant

Also whenever you position something as tax, the capitalist forces would find ways to evade it anyway, here let me give some ideas on top of my head

What would happen if people paid outsourcing companies via stablecoin crypto, how would you tax that?

What if things like this can count as gig work and laws related to that?

What if an outsourcer creates their own mini company and such creates an invoice, I am not sure but this would be considered a service so how would that work, is there a service tax if so how much %?

Suppose somebody got a consultancy company to work on a project and then just created the project end to end and deployed it and just tweaked it enough where its a mini saas designed just for that company, the company/consultancy can argue its a saas, so how would the taxation work for saas. Are we gonna reach a point where even things like saas could be highly taxed?

The easiest way seems to me crypto for (bootstrappable outsourcing?) but depending upon the size of the outsourcing, they can employ multiple methods as I gave.

How would the govt approach the multiple loopholes as such?

The whole issue stems from a pure capitalist system where it sometimes rewards to do malicious things so long term, countries need to find ways of supporting social entreprises/funding them.

Re: Jensen: 'We've done our country a great disservice' by offshoring

#112

Ross Perot in 1992 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRr60nmDyu4 We have shipped millions of jobs overseas, and ... a strange situation, we have a process in Washington where after you serve for a while, you can cash in, become a foreign lobbyist. We have got to stop sending jobs overseas. You're paying 12, 13, 14 an hour for factory workers and you can move your factory South of the Border, pay a dollar an hour for yo…

One of my main arguments for a universal health care scheme in the united states is how horrendously expensive, for employers, health care is. Lets totally ignore efficacy, moral arguments, expense for the patient, etc. If you are a company in the US a large percentage of the effective compensation of employees is healthcare. A moderately good PPO is like ~$10k+ a year per employee. You can pay workers in some other…

It's like every other compliance cost. It hurts the little guys more than the big guys. Too much of the US economy is big players so the status quo persists.

Re: Jensen: 'We've done our country a great disservice' by offshoring

#113
post #94
post #36

There are so many underlying changes to the established relationship between Labor and Capital in the US that would be a necessary part of keeping jobs here that it would effectively make us a completely different country. For example -- suppose one could snap one's fingers and "bring back" millions of manufacturing jobs. What would lead one to conclude those would be the kind of "good jobs" everyone is envisioning?…

> What would lead one to conclude those would be the kind of "good jobs" everyone is envisioning Your entire political statement aside manufacturing was always a good job. I’m not sure if you realize what kind of skilled labor went into manufacturing: 1. Machining 2. Tool and Die 3. Welding 4. Etc Hell when I was working in construction I was making 20 dollars an hour at 18. That’s good money, and at the time if I wo…

"The United States provides over 40% of the world's humanitarian aid, and spends around 1% of its budget on foreign aid, including military aid. Surveys suggest that Americans believe 20% of the federal budget is spent on foreign aid, and that 59% of Americans believe the government spends too much on foreign aid"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_14169

Re: Jensen: 'We've done our country a great disservice' by offshoring

#114
post #94
post #36

There are so many underlying changes to the established relationship between Labor and Capital in the US that would be a necessary part of keeping jobs here that it would effectively make us a completely different country. For example -- suppose one could snap one's fingers and "bring back" millions of manufacturing jobs. What would lead one to conclude those would be the kind of "good jobs" everyone is envisioning?…

> What would lead one to conclude those would be the kind of "good jobs" everyone is envisioning Your entire political statement aside manufacturing was always a good job. I’m not sure if you realize what kind of skilled labor went into manufacturing: 1. Machining 2. Tool and Die 3. Welding 4. Etc Hell when I was working in construction I was making 20 dollars an hour at 18. That’s good money, and at the time if I wo…

> But the party who supports raising wages also supports near limitless spending on the less fortunate countries. You cannot have both.

Do they? Who advocates near limitless spending? Last I checked foreign aid was less than 1% of the federal budget.

Re: Jensen: 'We've done our country a great disservice' by offshoring

#115

Ross Perot in 1992 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRr60nmDyu4 We have shipped millions of jobs overseas, and ... a strange situation, we have a process in Washington where after you serve for a while, you can cash in, become a foreign lobbyist. We have got to stop sending jobs overseas. You're paying 12, 13, 14 an hour for factory workers and you can move your factory South of the Border, pay a dollar an hour for yo…

If we had some tariffs that somehow just canceled out the exploitation (of people and the environment), that could be interesting. “Stop sending jobs overseas” is too blunt, create a fair international market and let winners win. But, I don’t think anyone is naive enough to propose such a thing seriously. It is impossible to believe that some administration wouldn’t use it for political favors.

> create a fair international market and let winners win.

Why? It's selfish, but since the US and EU sent jobs out to India and China. India and China, have created protections that make getting those jobs back nearly impossible short of stopping payments. At the same time, these countries have huge trading imbalances (see FR complaining that their CN trade imbalance is untenable) and have become the defacto for cheap labor.

Re: Jensen: 'We've done our country a great disservice' by offshoring

#116
The counter point here is that the US and EU have benefited with a lot of economic growth in the past few decades. The fact that this growth effect has now run its course just means that things may need to change again and that old assumptions may need to re-evaluated. Which might include looking at strategies to re-shore.

Not because off shoring was a mistake 40-50 years ago; but because technology now enables automating a lot of the type of jobs that we off shored. I'm referring to robotics and and other innovations in manufacturing and assembly that reduces the amount of cheap labor needed and calls for higher skilled labor that the west can still provide.

The higher cost of skilled labor can be offset against the also substantial cost of shipping. A typical car from China costs between 1-2K $ to transport. And that's of course before tariffs. Also shipping is slow and building locally means faster delivery of custom orders, which is another thing enabled by modern manufacturing technology. There are many valid reasons to re-shore and re-thinking supply chains.

The Chinese are moving ahead applying the same kind of technologies in e.g. automotive than many other manufacturers with the exception of maybe relatively new companies like Tesla and Rivian that have embraced a software intensive approach to cars already. And that includes spinning up BYD plants on different continents. Compared to a BYD factory, GM and Ford look like they have a bit of catching up to do. Their lack of competitiveness on the international market has a lot to do with the fact that they failed to modernize their businesses. Also, they seem to be repeating their mistake of the nineteen eighties when the Japanese kicked their behinds with better cars and more modern manufacturing. Their reflex to blame the Japanese, Koreans, Chinese (or whomever) for their own failings is not a great one. It's going to yield the same result unless they change.

Re: Jensen: 'We've done our country a great disservice' by offshoring

#118
post #36

There are so many underlying changes to the established relationship between Labor and Capital in the US that would be a necessary part of keeping jobs here that it would effectively make us a completely different country. For example -- suppose one could snap one's fingers and "bring back" millions of manufacturing jobs. What would lead one to conclude those would be the kind of "good jobs" everyone is envisioning?…

Manufacturing jobs bring the entire supply chain of the manufacturer with them.

The area where I live, Greenville, SC used to be the textile capital of the world and then became essentially destitute when the entire industry offshored.

BMW and Michelin locating their US HQ here essentially rebuilt this entire corner of the state with jobs and associated supply chains. Now, Greenville is booming with a more diverse economy but all that manufacturing is the root system of prosperity here.

Re: Jensen: 'We've done our country a great disservice' by offshoring

#119

the us is 16% of global manufacturing by value with 4% of the population, i dont know how this fact isn't brought up more. on a population weighted basis the us manufactures more by value than china. A bunch of people salivating for a world where the us was 52% of world gdp, not because it was great, but because the rest of the world was ash.

Also US unemployment has been low. The idea that Americans need more jobs just doesn't fit the numbers. There are plenty of good paying non-backbreaking jobs for Americans but they just don't seem to believe it.

Re: Jensen: 'We've done our country a great disservice' by offshoring

#120

Ross Perot in 1992 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRr60nmDyu4 We have shipped millions of jobs overseas, and ... a strange situation, we have a process in Washington where after you serve for a while, you can cash in, become a foreign lobbyist. We have got to stop sending jobs overseas. You're paying 12, 13, 14 an hour for factory workers and you can move your factory South of the Border, pay a dollar an hour for yo…

One of my main arguments for a universal health care scheme in the united states is how horrendously expensive, for employers, health care is. Lets totally ignore efficacy, moral arguments, expense for the patient, etc. If you are a company in the US a large percentage of the effective compensation of employees is healthcare. A moderately good PPO is like ~$10k+ a year per employee. You can pay workers in some other…

"how horrendously expensive, for employers, health care is."

So why aren't they pushing for abolishing employer-based health insurance? They had no problems getting rid of pensions but for some reason nobody really lobbies for employers to get out of the health care business. The same for 401k. Why do companies have to manage those instead of just contributing some money and let the employees find the right package on the open market?

It's really weird.

Post reply on HN