4 ms·
He's saying that what's good for IBM -- a long-term plan to outsource work and replace Americans with foreign workers -- is bad for the US and bad for US worker
by dkarl 17y ago
He's saying that what's good for IBM -- a long-term plan to outsource work and replace Americans with foreign workers -- is bad for the US and bad for US workers. So the problem for companies is short-term thinking, and the problem for US workers is that intelligent long-term corporate planning leads to some combination of outsourcing and importing foreign workers.
- biohacker42 17y agoOK that makes more sense then what I thought he meant. But it doesn't make that much sense when you consider that the ultimate end is economic collapse. If corporations just put up with what ever conditions we force on them, in the short therm great, but in the long term we're screwed.
- rubinelli 17y agoThe ultimate end is more likely a new equilibrium, in which the difference between the cost of living in the BRIC is closer to the industrialized Western world than it is now. Also, don't forget productivity gains are fueled by new technologies, and the US are still way ahead of the competition in research.
- krakensden 17y agoI don't understand your point. There's not a huge barrier to new discoveries in the US being utilized in other countries, and our only advantage in conducting research is infrastructure for distributing money. Over the next ten years, that could be closed by a cash-rich nation that wanted to (China).
- biohacker42 17y agoBut as they close the gap over the next 10 years, their standard of living and their wages are also going to keep rising. And at some point the gap is small enough that the extra cost of shipping it from China to the US isn't worth it.