You're right. A lot of these things are the result of economic processes over which we have little control, and some probably are for the best in the long run, even though in the short run they may cause great hardship locally.
After all, if the Chinese or the Indians can build widgets or answer phones cheaper than we can, not only will we get cheaper widgets and customer service, but they will get jobs and develop their industry which may be better for the entire world over time, even though it may cause short term local dislocation. It's better to offer people jobs than to offer them a handout, or to rip off their natural resources.
In the past, nations sought to defend themselves from these ill effects by arbitrary rules and regulations, like tariffs. However, these rarely worked the way they were intended, had unforeseen side-effects, or they were manipulated by unscrupulous businesses or governments so they benefited small groups or power centers at the expense of everybody else. Other times nations just went to war to protect their economic interests.
I always believe there is a middle way, that even though free trade is certainly the best way to go, sometimes nations will need to hammer out economic agreements and trade treaties to minimize friction, or to ease the inevitable clashes of sudden economic change brought about by new technologies and markets.
What I think we must never do is to allow individual organizations, people, or countries to dominate this process for their own self-interest, or to take advantage of the new arrangements to enslave others.
For example, I am opposed to illegal immigration not just because it takes jobs from Americans, or creates crime in our streets, or overloads the welfare system, or any of those other very valid reasons. I also oppose it because it allows innocent, desperate people to be exploited and abused for the profit and benefit of a few, while the rest of us have to help pay for it. Or to put it another way, I like my cheap running shoes, but I don't like them enough to have some SOB getting rich by forcing kids into 14-hour days in an Asian sweatshops to make them for me.
There are other concerns besides labor and money, too; like the environmental consequences of some of these new technologies. Protecting the environment and conserving resources may be expensive in the short run, but in the long run, its good for business.
Current Events » in reply to Outsourcing in reverse? (n/t)
Re: I don't think we can go back.
The whole thread (38 posts)
- Britain plans to decentralize health care
- "correlation"
- Not over there.
- ...so would it be a logical conclusion...
- I am keeping it in mind...
- And keep in mind...
- You have it backwards.
- We already subsidize food.
- It's not sticking with me, either.
- Isn't that how it is with anything?
- More news from the NHS
- That's not really a fair conclusion, Eri...
- Have they?
- Health insurers' profits have gone up.
- Not downward. Outward.
- Love in wartime
- The doctors will have to hire more staff.
