Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

"I Was a Director at Amex When They Started Replacing Us with $30K Workers" [video]

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 80 posts

Re: "I Was a Director at Amex When They Started Replacing Us with $30K Workers" [video]

#71

Post by disgruntledphd2 »

quacked wrote: post #53
yongjik wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay, I'm really talking out of my ass, but my very uninformed take is: Protectionism is "working" for China because it's still a poor country, it was much poorer only a generation ago, and when you have no industry, it's easier to deliberately keep people poor for a little longer in exchange for more jobs. Once the pipeline is built, it's just societal inertia. But I have to wonder how much it working out for China…

That's a critical question that isn't being asked enough. Americans aren't allowed to compete like that; there are too many labor and environmental protections in place to experience "Chinese working conditions" even if they wanted to. We legally can't work Chinese hours or affect the environment like the Chinese. So while it's true that Americans aren't really willing to work hard enough to compete on price with the…

> I would be curious what would happen if in order to sell to American workers, you had to meet American environmental and labor conditions. I think that's a total non-starter, but it's a hypothetical that may cause the ponderer to address the huge gap in how competitive other countries are allowed to be to sell to Americans, vs. how Americans aren't really allowed to compete with them.

This plus capital controls would reduce a lot of economic inequality between countries. It would be super, super rough in the short-term but probably globally beneficial in the long term. I believe Bernie Sanders was proposing this back in 2016.

Re: "I Was a Director at Amex When They Started Replacing Us with $30K Workers" [video]

#72

Post by epolanski »

sumedh wrote: post #69
epolanski wrote: post #5

That's how capitalism works, eventually everything gets moved where it's more efficient. Obviously, time and time again has proven that outsourcing is not always more efficient.

By that definition companies should just employ children because they are cheap.

Which is what happens indeed in various parts of the world sadly.

Re: "I Was a Director at Amex When They Started Replacing Us with $30K Workers" [video]

#73

Post by dd8601fn »

sumedh wrote: post #69
epolanski wrote: post #5

That's how capitalism works, eventually everything gets moved where it's more efficient. Obviously, time and time again has proven that outsourcing is not always more efficient.

By that definition companies should just employ children because they are cheap.

They did. So we installed a guardrail to prohibit it.

Now that’s called “burdensome regulation”, and we’re tearing all those guardrails down at an alarming pace.

Re: "I Was a Director at Amex When They Started Replacing Us with $30K Workers" [video]

#75

Post by iririririr »

jst1fthsdys wrote: post #49
llmslave wrote: post #25

I worked there a long time ago. Indian VPs were taking kickbacks from consulting firms to hire their devs, it was an open secret. Whole divisions of the company are 95% Indian. I wont expose the group here, but there's a broad network of technology directors from Amex, that have all been hiring and promoting eachother for 20 years. Very tight nit networks of nepotism, in some cases, brother and sister working togethe…

This happened to the company I worked for also. Blatant corruption. One Indian guy gets appointed to VP, then almost immediately all their reporting chain is Indian. Managers are told they can only hire from some obscure Indian staffing company (that the VP has a stake in or gets bribed to use). Quality is garbage cause no self respecting Indian dev would work for them. Zero pushback from exec level, zero acknowledgm…

This happens everywhere. The bigger difference here is that most in this board identify with white anglosaxan, so when they bring in their peers you build the false illusion that if you work hard you will join the club. heh. you won't.

Re: "I Was a Director at Amex When They Started Replacing Us with $30K Workers" [video]

#77

Post by quacked »

donkeybeer wrote: post #70
quacked wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, of course, I agree with you. That's why I said I don't think it would happen. I personally wouldn't mind a world where consumer goods were much, much more expensive and difficult to acquire, even though it would mean that my life would feel harder and less wealthy than it does now. What I don't understand is whether or not there's any path to take besides watching the country gently sail along the sunset path i…

That's very nice but to people middle class and lower, it's not about paying a higher price, it's being able to buy what is needed to live at all. I still don't see what is wrong with capitalism. It did show that many self proclaimed advocates of capitalism were liars and changed to hardcore communist economics and became sore losers when they felt "someone else" is "winning".

What are you talking about? I haven't said anything against capitalism. If anything, the problem with the current scenario is that there's not _enough_ capitalism.

How do you propose to compete with foreign workers when the government prevents you from matching their employment conditions within your own company?

Re: "I Was a Director at Amex When They Started Replacing Us with $30K Workers" [video]

#78

Post by silexia »

bigyabai wrote: post #76
silexia wrote: post #74

We need high tariffs immediately or there will be no jobs left just like there is no manufacturing in America.

Tariffs are what encourage this style of offshoring. See: automotive manufacturing.

This reply is nonsensical. Provide a better explanation to support your opinion.

Re: "I Was a Director at Amex When They Started Replacing Us with $30K Workers" [video]

#79

Post by donkeybeer »

quacked wrote: post #77
donkeybeer wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's very nice but to people middle class and lower, it's not about paying a higher price, it's being able to buy what is needed to live at all. I still don't see what is wrong with capitalism. It did show that many self proclaimed advocates of capitalism were liars and changed to hardcore communist economics and became sore losers when they felt "someone else" is "winning".

What are you talking about? I haven't said anything against capitalism. If anything, the problem with the current scenario is that there's not _enough_ capitalism. How do you propose to compete with foreign workers when the government prevents you from matching their employment conditions within your own company?

You said you'd be happier with much more expensive goods which is what happens with protectionism and were sad to compete with foreign goods.

Re: "I Was a Director at Amex When They Started Replacing Us with $30K Workers" [video]

#80

Post by quacked »

donkeybeer wrote: post #79
quacked wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you talking about? I haven't said anything against capitalism. If anything, the problem with the current scenario is that there's not _enough_ capitalism. How do you propose to compete with foreign workers when the government prevents you from matching their employment conditions within your own company?

You said you'd be happier with much more expensive goods which is what happens with protectionism and were sad to compete with foreign goods.

I'd be fine with either:

- The massive regulatory burdens on American businesses are dissolved in order to permit genuine competition with the globe

- Economic protectionism is applied so that the heavily regulated American business can compete on price with less-regulated foreign businesses

In both cases, the prices of goods would increase--in the first case, less than the second. But both would be better than the current status quo, in my opinion.

I don't want to live in a country where I have to pay American prices for goods and services, but the owner class only has to pay foreign prices for labor and supply. I have no desire to be outcompeted by foreigners while my hands are tied by local laws.

Post reply on HN