3 ms·
That said, a case could be made that these assumptions are correct - what's your argument against them? There are tons of new jobs, and a whole new middle clas
by andreyf 17y ago
That said, a case could be made that these assumptions are correct - what's your argument against them?
There are tons of new jobs, and a whole new middle class - in India and China. Corporations do not share your nationalistic interests - IBM doesn't owe America anything. If Germany were to have won WW2, IBM would now be a great German company. As America's broken system of government slowly bleeds this nation to death, IBM will have no remorse over becoming a company focused on India/China.
- mds 17y agoThat is certainly not an argument that IBM's actions are not "hurting America"
- req2 17y agoBut if IBM doesn't "hurt America", it will "hurt the world".
- gloob 17y agoI would suspect that many Americans would be willing to make such a sacrifice.
- IsaacSchlueter 17y agoThere's a big difference between "hurting America" and "hurting Americans". Maximizing societal value may mean moving industry to places where the government is less of an impediment to efficient value creation. In the long (and usually, short) run, that's good for people. But it may mean that American jobs move to India, and American workers can a) follow their jobs, b) create new jobs by starting a new company in America (and deal with whatever caused their old job to leave), or c) whine and moan until someone gives them a handout. Move, build, or cry about it. Doesn't sound like anyone's really being hurt. It's not like IBM is stabbing their workers, they're just telling them that they can work somewhere else, or get another job. Seems fair enough to me.
- missile 17y ago> "Maximizing societal value may mean moving industry to places where the government is less of an impediment to efficient value creation." Sure. Because after all, China is a paragon of good government.