10 ms·
Cheaper, duh. As a corporation, you want all of your corporate inputs to have multiple suppliers and heavy competition to supply you. That gives you low price
by jellicle 10y ago
Cheaper, duh. As a corporation, you want all of your corporate inputs to have multiple suppliers and heavy competition to supply you. That gives you low prices for your inputs. You want your outgoing product to be a monopoly, or nearly so - that gives you high prices for your outputs.
It has long been understood in the U.S. that pulling workers from remote areas strongly depresses local wages. You don't want any tightness in labor supply. You also don't want your workers to organize, since again, this causes tightness in labor supply. The transcontinental railroads brought in Chinese workers, not because they were superlative workers or in any way superior at driving track spikes than the Irish were, but only to drive down the wages demanded by the Irish. Today farms prefer Mexican workers, not because locals can't pick apples, but only because it drives down the wages demanded. This cycle repeats throughout history.
And this is why wages for programmers, etc., haven't gone up at all in the last 15 years (and probably never will again). The supply of programmer labor is being managed to always exceed the local demand, keeping wages flat.