4 ms·
Why should it be illegal for American companies to operate abroad when they have international revenue streams?
by seanmcdirmid 2y ago
Why should it be illegal for American companies to operate abroad when they have international revenue streams?
- w4ffl35 2y ago[flagged]
- nickff 2y agoThere are a lot of companies; Americans have a spectrum of views, as do corporations. In addition, both individuals and corporations are capable of talking out of both sides of their mouth (or just plain lying).
- w4ffl35 2y agoYes there are a lot of companies, and yes people and companies can lie. I'm not really sure how this negates what I said or my view on the matter. Globalization is the antithesis of the America First movement.
- nickff 2y agoSome industries do face shortages in short term skilled labor supply; they might be able to get more people trained up in 5-10 years, with enough investment, but you can’t get a journeyman ready in three months. Others just want more supply, to reduce labor costs and make domestic production cost-competitive with foreign equivalents. Neither of those groups is lying.
- w4ffl35 2y agoThen let them go through the immigration system, get a green card and start working in the US. The original thread here is me saying that it should be illegal / there should be penalties for hiring abroad when there are plenty of skilled American workers who are being turned down for the jobs which are going to cheap foreign labor.
- maeil 2y agoRight, then go get out of all those juicy international markets and see the majority of revenue evaporate.
- seanmcdirmid 2y agoBut they make a lot (most) of their money outside of the USA, so why restrict them to doing the work only in the USA? That will not only start a trade war, but give an unfair advantage to foreign companies (like SAP) who can open up R&D offices in the USA, Germany, or wherever they want. America First is as old as the Great Depression years ago. They always fizzle out in the face of economic realities.
- layer8 2y agoThere is a shortage of American workers willing to work for internationally competitive salaries. This is similar in Europe, by the way. Industry associations claim that there is a shortage of skilled workers, whereas in reality there is only a shortage of skilled workers willing to work for low-ish salaries. On the other hand, paying everyone higher salaries across the board would have its own economic consequences.
- throwaway48476 2y agoThe economic consequences would be an increased percent of the economy going to wages instead of returned as dividends and stock buyback. Wage income also has a higher velocity of money increasing economic activity.
- layer8 2y agoWage increases also drive inflation. And given the uncertainties of the present times, people might opt to save more of their earnings rather than spending it all.
- throwaway48476 2y agoThis is why people should index wages as a percentage of the total enocomy. Because 'inflation' only means anything when compared to something else. Just saying inflation is meaningless by itself.
- layer8 2y agoI agree with binding salaries to an index. However, if the index is accurate (which is a whole other can of worms), then it implies that the buying power would stay the same, and you would need extra justification to add a pay raise on top. Of course, in reality different products/services have substantially different price developments relative to inflation, and it’s difficult to predict whether essential costs of living will be relatively more or less affected by inflation.
- layer8 2y agoNot sure what TOS you are referring to, but regarding downvotes maybe you should read the top comment on: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36673613 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36673613
- nuancebydefault 2y agoAmerica will be a lot poorer if the foreigners would not do so much of the work. This claim is in the same ballpark as saying we should not be allowed to use machines. I am really astonished that there are many people who obviously are able to read and write, but somehow don't understand economics 101.