I'll believe it when I see it. Although, I did see an interesting story the other day about an Indian company that was used as an outsource for an American company. They in turn outsourced their work to an American company.

WTF!

Harrison County Missouri. Barry Fitzgerald and Robert Allen. Google it. They were 20 years ahead of the curve.

You will probably see a lot more of it, especially since the value of the dollar has dropped significantly.

The bursting housing bubble will also mean that housing costs will be brought back in line.

Offshoring IT and other white-collar jobs may work for large companies that can set up a campus and have Americans or American-educated locals on-site to sift through a lot of applicants and manage the work. But between the time delays, cultural differences, and language barriers, offshoring doesn't work so well for smaller business. I've worked on two IT projects with employees in India, and the people were immensely frustrating and not very skilled, although very nice.

But in current American CEO logic, they cost less, so the employer must be getting a good deal. Just like all those Mattel toys made in China.

It would help if these companies added to their promotional literature something like "US-based Customer Service" or "Your Calls Will Be Answered in the USA".

Kevin:

You might want to check out this NY Times article:

"Outsourcing Works So Well, India Is Sending Jobs Abroad"

"In a poetic reflection of outsourcing's new face, Wipro's chairman, Azim Premji, told Wall Street analysts this year that he was considering hubs in Idaho and Virginia, in addition to Georgia, to take advantage of American ''states which are less developed.'' (India's per capita income is less than $1,000 a year.)"

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A03E4D81639F936A1575AC0A9619C8B63

A story in the LA Times says it costs $74k per year for a two-paycheck family of four just to survive in LA as renters. And that's renting in a bad part of town and sending your kids to lousy public schools. No vacations, no college savings, no frills at all.

It's amazing to think that providing jobs for your own people would be considered an innovative concept. I guess we've forgotten some things along the way. I do think this trend will continue. My computer engineering friend in India tells me that wages are going up rapidly in his field. The expanding wages in India should improve the job situation here.

This practice is also referred to as "rural-shoring". Moving jobs to low income, low cost rural communities has been picking up steam in call-center operations and IT fields.

Already been done. Both my grandfathers made carpeting in Amsterdam, NY in the 50's and 60's. The mills moved south, to Georgia, I believe, for cheaper labor in the late 60's, early 70's or so.

It is the shrinking dollar. When the dollar goes back up things will change.

Gosh, what will Wal-Mart do when they're not the only employer in these towns--and they can no longer demand that locals bow down and thank WM for employing them at crappy wages, with lousy benefits and discriminatory hiring and promotion policies?

Yea!!! we can pay them less Yea!!!

I wonder if it would be practical to onshore some of those jobs to depressed urban areas like Cleveland, OH and Gary, IN, where jobs in the steel and auto industries were moved overseas. Surely the costs of doing business (real estate, etc.) would be substantially lower now than they were when big steel & big auto were riding high in the US.

There's a non-technical article in the latest issue of the Communications of the ACM that discusses a related phenomenon, "nearshoring", which the authors define as follows:

Nearshoring: sourcing service work to a foreign, lower-wage country that is relatively close in distance or time zone (or both). The customer expects to benefit from one or moreof the following constructs of proximity: geographic, temporal, cultural, linguistic, economic, political, and historical linkages.

It's more about the perception of why the idea might be attractive than how well it works, though. It turns out that other countries are nearshoring as well: Japan to China and Germany to Belarus and Bulgaria (as well as the U.S. to the Caribbean). Blue America to Red America?

I lived in rural America (northeastern Nebraska ---- 5,000 person town) and the lack of opportunity was astounding. I taught at a little state college and the graduates who wanted to stay in the area literally had no where to go ---- no jobs for people with any level of skill.

So this development, if it expands (and I'm inclined to think that the value of the dollar and the cost of living in cities will make that happen) could be a really good thing. And then - maybe - we could actually pay attention to the land in rural America and stop giving corporations zillions of farm subsidy dollars to pollute the hell out of the place.

Hey, a girl can dream.

The advantages for companies sending work to Red State America are obvious, better language skills, common culture, timezones are compatible etc. What some companies have discovered is that there are also lower real estate costs. Sometimes zero. Since America has a pretty good communications infrastructure, a lot of work, especially call center work, can be done by employees setting in the comfort of their own home offices. All the employer has to do is provide a computer, some software and an occasional visit from headquarters. If memory serves at least one airline that is running all of its ticketing out of home offices in a small Utah town. The Utah families love it. The moms can stay home and work while their kids are at school. Transportation and related costs are dramatically reduced.

I know of several companies here in Missouri doing something similar. I recently talked to a woman who manages a bunch of home office employees. She says the employees find that it is a great way to work, but also said management is tricky. You have to make sure you hire self motivated employees.

For you high end types, did you know it is actually cheaper to run a high end computer software shop in any number of attractive locations from Utah to Florida than it is to do the same work in Silicon Valley, and it isn't hard to find top level software engineers willing to move to nice but less expensive locations for less money?

I guess what I am trying to say is that the very definition of work is changing. Since the rise of cities workers have been tied to buildings. With the new communications infrastructure a lot jobs are no longer tied to cities.

Clearly, American jobs are more valuable to most of you than jobs for foreigners. But how much more valuable?

If you were in a position of deciding between a good job for an American and two good jobs for Indians, which would you choose?

What is the ratio was 1:4, 1:100, or 1:1000?

If you were in a position of deciding between a good job for an American and two good jobs for Indians, which would you choose?

Posted by: DavidS

The answer probably depends on whether "you" are employed or unemployed, no? The larger and more relevant point, however, is that Americans are not in that "position of deciding," are they?

The larger and more relevant point, however, is that Americans are not in that "position of deciding," are they?

Right; I think that most Americans would view onshoring in two ways: Will it improve the job market, in case I or someone I know needs to find a job? and Will it improve a company's products or services when I need to use them?

Of course there will be backflow with the American dollar falling precipitously, and the market slowly working out what works and what does not is part of the process.

In commentary, I find it very amusing the hidden racism of the Left: It's amazing to think that providing jobs for your own people would be considered an innovative concept.

Yes, terrible to provide jobs and opportunities to those nasty brown foreigners, they're so much more authentic and adorable when they're living in enforced poverty behind tariff walls and we can send them pennies in "solidarity" with their quaint poverty.

Yea! we can cheer as more good jobs are exported out of California. What a great idea. Will mine be next?

In the 90's, Lockheed closed their Burbank facility and moved all their engineers to Georgia, forcing them to take pay cuts in the process because "the cost of living was so much lower" Yes, they created a workforce of motivated happy campers (not) and the U.S. taxpayer has reaped the benefits a thousand times over in the form of cost overruns and production delays from that nearly dysfunctional defense behemoth.

I have no grudge against promoting rural red-state areas, aside from the already corrupt political process that encourages it, but to hope that the future work-force in America is cost competitive with the 3rd world means that the average (non CEO) American is going to be pretty screwed....

I think this was a chapter or two in one of Michael Lind's books a decade or so ago: if all you need is a broadband terminal, then why do you need a skyscraper in Chicago?
Now the blockage is wireless coverage. Some genius has to write a plan that covers a county with access AND provides payoffs and jobs to the usual gang of idiots and parasites with connections to a county commissioner.

Leaving aside the pure tribalism and odd American colour reversal on politics, American and other developed world labour forces are cost-competitive frequently with emerging markets labour - merely looking at dollar per hour pay doesn't tell you anything.

Total cost of production per unit will reveal more, and when adding in lower productivity, higher communication costs (direct and indirect), transport, etc, the unhinged fear of the brown people taking away your jobs (as opposed to technology doing so, without more labour inputs) is nothing more than badly disguised nativism.

Interesting comment by The Lounsbury:

In commentary, I find it very amusing the hidden racism of the Left: It's amazing to think that providing jobs for your own people would be considered an innovative concept.

As compared with the explicit racism of the right? Trade policies imposed on the third world that are anti-union and anti-environment because the multi-nationals can stick it to them?

Those jobs didn't go overseas because munificent corporate philanthropists wanted to uplift those poor beknighted foreigners; they did it because it was cheaper and they could avoid all those burdensome regulations about health and safety.

Once upon a time a declining currency was a self-correcting problem to some extent, because theoretically cheaper prices in export markets would boost sales of domestically manufactured goods. Well, we stopped making things in this country, so no goods to export.

We do still have big agricultural exports though, heavily subsidized for benefit of agribusiness. A declining dollar means our food exports will make it even harder for foreign farmers to survive.

the unhinged fear of the brown people taking away your jobs (as opposed to technology doing so, without more labour inputs) is nothing more than badly disguised nativism.

I applaud you for having no objections to this process. It's not often one finds someone with such equanimity and resolve in the face of falling wages and the real problems for workers such a development entails.

We look forward to exanding this program in the community where you currently reside. You of all people will understand when the value of your home plummets, crime increases, and blight takes over as "technology" depletes the local labor force.

I wonder: would you consider being a spokesman for this natural market dynamic on national television? The President, for all his good intentions and focus on this issue, is just not the most talented speaker and is somewhat lacking in the credibility department.

I'm with Lounsbury - really quite striking the way being progressive stops at the US's borders...

Maybe you guys are closer to George - the US shouldn't have act on climate change until developing countries do their bit - Bush than you think...

First, as to the attempt at sarcasm re We look forward to exanding this program in the community where you currently reside.

I work in emerging markets, on the other side of the coin is their farmers and workers being flooded out by pious American "progressives" (I think that's the new rebranding for the Left in the US, right?) policies subsidizing Americans.... dressed up in fine language ('protecting workers' meaning my narrow interest) but nothing more than begger-thy-neighbour mercantilism.

As for "As compared with the explicit racism of the right? Trade policies imposed on the third world that are anti-union and anti-environment because the multi-nationals can stick it to them? - pure Naomi Klein rubbish magical thinking.

Export led growth has pulled South Korea, Taiwan and is pulling south east Asia out of poverty. Not magically, but slowly and surely.

Anit Union, Anti-Environment? Pure spin. Multinationals don't drive lack of respect of environmental issues nor union breaking - quite the contrary. It is local magnates not the bogey man of the "Multinational" that drives that - one merely need look at the Communist China example. Matel behaves and behaved far more honestly than the State firms and local run firms.

Imposed indeed.

As for this bollocks: Those jobs didn't go overseas because munificent corporate philanthropists wanted to uplift those poor beknighted foreigners

Philanthropy and your precious Left "concern" for the colourfully impoverished natives of course don't drive investment, and thank God for that.

Wealth creation requires efficiency and business, not muddle headed wishful thinking and magical "solutions" without the slightest real numbers to support them.

Finally:
Once upon a time a declining currency was a self-correcting problem to some extent, because theoretically cheaper prices in export markets would boost sales of domestically manufactured goods. Well, we stopped making things in this country, so no goods to export.

This is comical. American exports, your exports of manufactures are up significantly, and above all in heavy machine equipment etc., queer since you make nothing... - data not hand waving repetition of assertions heard third and fourth hand, with no real relation to developments economic except emotional reaction and fear... fear, gibbering fear.

Fear of the nasty brown natives that are so much nicer to think about as recipients of aide, mendicants, rather than competitors.

@ Helena Montana:

Here's the thing. Rural american, especially places like Minnesota and Iowa, is far better educated with functioning schools and communities that you don't have in a lot of depressed urban areas. That's why you already have so many call center jobs in places like the Dakotas and Iowa and even Texas.

Of course the better inside jobs there are in these places: you'll have even LESS people to work in the fields. Which of course is why we need immigrant labor so. Just like we've done in other parts of our history when we were rapidly expanding in the midwest and west -- the 19th century.

Since we don't have an immigration system that is at all meeting the needs of our employers -- more immigrants will come in undocumented. Which upsets the locals even more. So it's very circular.

As someone pointed out, this "trend" of moving jobs from high cost states (New York, California) to lower cost states in the South and the Midwest is nothing new. And has happened in every industry over time. Those Southern states are all so-called right to work states and so have few union jobs. The difference between a mill job and an IT job though is the quality of the skills required. But jobs move where labor is cheaper and has for centuries. Hell, the U.S. was colonized as a place for cheaper labor, land, and raw materials by European countries that were experiencing rapid population explosion and rising costs.

Why again are we surprised?

The issue is now is that our states compete against each other as if they were independent countries. I suppose that's always been the case too. But it does make for interesting interstate migration patterns over the years.

The Left is confused on trade because they don't know who is the victim. Is it the foreigners, who are suffering under horrible working conditions, or is it the American working class, who are losing their jobs to the foreigners? Who is the oppressor? The foreigners, who were given jobs that once went to Americans, or the "nativist" Americans, who want the jobs back?

Because the Left can only understand the world in terms of the Oppressor and the Victim, they do not understand that there is more that motivates human history than a clash between the forces racism/nativism/sexism/plutocracy and the forces of tolerance and compassion.

Now the Left's oversimplified view of the world and their opponents has been their undoing. They do not know which position to take on trade because they don't know which interest group, Union workers or foreign lobbies, to pander to.

In a nutshell, this is an example of the disorganization of a Democratic Party controlled by extreme Leftists.

they could probably use some big batteries to stabilize the power supply

http://www.technologyreview.com/Energy/19584/page1/

It doesn't take that much to change the decisions to relocate. The population of San Diego county has declined over the past years, following a small exodus of entrepreneurs but driven mostly by San Diego County housing prices.

"In commentary, I find it very amusing the hidden racism of the Left: It's amazing to think that providing jobs for your own people would be considered an innovative concept.

Yes, terrible to provide jobs and opportunities to those nasty brown foreigners, they're so much more authentic and adorable when they're living in enforced poverty behind tariff walls and we can send them pennies in "solidarity" with their quaint poverty. "

I'm accustomed to being accused of racism from the right. The accusation of racism is considered a good substitute for rational argument on the right. But if you read further, you would note that I am friends with one of those "nasty brown foreigners" (your words, not mine). If fact, I am friends with quite a lot of brown- skinned foreigners. Presumably, you feel it is racist to have such friends and not insist they take the jobs of my white and brown skinned friends here in the US. The recognition that US citizens can provide a better value for their labor is not racism, it is simply recognizing the labor market for what it is. And with wages rising in India and the dollar dropping, the labor market will swing in favor of US workers. But don't worry, there are still plenty of jobs in India, and my Indian friends will do fine. They will just be more likely to work for an Indian company rather than an American company. That must break your colonial heart.

If it's manufacturing, not just data processing or other electronic work, Peak Oil will eventually force more of the work back here.

I hope unions recognize the opportunity.

In a nutshell, this is an example of the disorganization of a Democratic Party controlled by extreme Leftists.

I love it when the cartoons are on!

American company. That must break your colonial heart.

I could care less about the nationality of firms, why I would be concerned about American firms as such escapes me mate.

craigie: I love it when the cartoons are on!

Me, too! Great line, craigie.

"I could care less about the nationality of firms, why I would be concerned about American firms as such escapes me mate."

Good for you. Then I'm sure you won't mind if American companies operate in America and Indian companies operate in India. As wages, currency, and education balance out worldwide, that is the direction the global economy will take. It's not a bad thing. What would be bad is if US companies continued to use foreign labor even when it's not cost- effective. It would hurt our competitiveness and stifle local business creation in developing countries.

American, Indian and other companies, and better yet, the overall populations they employ, are best served not having ill informed mercantilist illiteracy restrict where they invest and employ labour. Nor in the case of emerging markets firms, should they be penalised because of illiterate scare mongering over X dollars a day pantswetting and other poorly disguised racist scaremongering.

Interesting comments here today - I see the Lassez Faire Invisible Hand Flat Earth crowd is in full cry.

Creating wealth - ah that's a classic. True believers in the inherent virtue of money love that one. How about sharing wealth? How about returning value for value received?

Creating wealth is one thing - but too often 'creating' wealth is based on little more than gaming the system and exploiting resources at the expense of others. Creating wealth for whom? How? At what cost - and who bears that cost?

"This is comical. American exports, your exports of manufactures are up significantly, and above all in heavy machine equipment etc., queer since you make nothing... - data not hand waving repetition of assertions heard third and fourth hand, with no real relation to developments economic except emotional reaction and fear... fear, gibbering fear."

I grew up in a small town in Western New York. That town used to ship farm machinery all over the world. It was a manufacturer of heavy construction equipment. It was a major producer of television sets. Those jobs are gone, just like they vanished from so many other places around the country. Don't try to bullshit me on this one - I saw it happen.

Let's see, what were the reasons? Oh yeah, workers wanted decent wages and benefits. Investing in new technology and product quality was too expensive. Stockholders wanted their dividends and managers wanted to keep their jobs by keepingt them happy. And so on.

Money is colorblind - there's nothing inherently racist about it. But, money knows no morality either. Money has no sense of history. Money doesn't give a damn about the future as long as today is profitable. Money is a tool, nothing more - and it can be used well or used badly in the hands of human beings. Pretending that values that can't be entered on a balance sheet have no place in economic policy is a recipe for disaster.

"Wealth creation requires efficiency and business, not muddle headed wishful thinking and magical "solutions" without the slightest real numbers to support them."

Bollocks! Ants are efficiency and all business. If you want to live in a world run like an ant hill, fine - but I'll be damned if I let you drag everyone else along. People are not ants. It's amazing how often "efficiency and business" seems to translate into workers forgoing raises, losing pensions, and giving up benefits in order to create wealth for managers, stockholders, financiers, and other players of games with money.

The G.I. bill after World War II saw huge amounts of money given to returning veterans to let them go to college, buy homes, etc. Billions of dollars were spent on "fuzzy-headed liberal' programs. Conservatives, those stalwart 'troop supporters,' were appalled. How dare the government give away all that money?

It turned out to be one of the best investments of all time. I believe Kevin Drum had an item here not long ago that looked at the money spent, and how it came back multiplied in terms of increased productivity, higher earning power and other returns to the benefit of the whole economy. The ratio was something like 17 to 1 if I recall correctly.

Free markets and invisible hands are all well and good in an ideal world without imbalances or inherent conflicts. The real world is rather different. Consider this:

"Markets work well with goods that economists call private goods" like cars or other consumer durables, Maskin said in his office at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, New Jersey.

"If I buy a car, I use the car, you don't and the market for cars works pretty well. But there are many other sorts of goods, often very important goods, which are not provided well through the market. Often, these go under the heading of public goods," he said.

"How do we ensure in the case of public goods that they are provided at all, and that they are provided at the right level, taking into account citizens' preferences?" he said.

A clean environment, for example, is not a private good in that "my enjoyment of it doesn't preclude yours," he said.

"So the theory of mechanism design asks what sort of procedures or mechanisms or institutions could be put in place which allow us to choose the right level," he said.

Oh yeah - there's that concept that's gotten lost: Public Good. It's amazing how quickly that gets shoved aside when it stands between someone and a pile of money.

You know, there is something disgusting hearing the charge of racism raised by people who don't give a damn about social justice or anything but their own economic interests. If you were so concerned about racism, you wouldn't be denouncing liberals - you'd be denouncing those corporations shifting jobs away from all those poor brown people you seem so concerned about.

Wait, I get it.

Lounsbury is actually a character in one of Somerset Maughham's short stories set somewhere in the Raj in the 1920s.

This is either a brilliant parody of British colonial hogwash, or he's a complete idiot, albeit one with swagger and barely-concealed contempt for everyone else.

The Lounsbury- You seem to be arguing for free markets. On that, we are in complete agreement. You also seem to be defending what many liberals call "sweat shops." I'm with you on that as well. I have a friend who worked in a shoe factory in Bangkok. She said it was the best job she ever had in Thailand. That's not surprising given that prostitution is the alternative. But "racist scaremongering"? Give me break. My opposition to outsourcing is based on it not passing the cost/ benefit test for US companies and the negative "crowding out" effect it is having in the Indian labor market. That's practical, not racist. And my concern is for both American and Indian workers. Remember, I have friends in both countries.

This is either a brilliant parody of British colonial hogwash

right down to the wildly overdone "mates" and "bloodys" and other c. 1925 masterpiece theatre fare.

In commentary, I find it very amusing the hidden racism of the Left: It's amazing to think that providing jobs for your own people would be considered an innovative concept. Yes, terrible to provide jobs and opportunities to those nasty brown foreigners

The hidden premise that our "own people" only includes whites is *your* racist assumption, you slack jowled dipshit.

All the rest of your commentary flows from that bit of intellectual dishonesty, and as such is best ignored.

Ah, it is quite hilarious how every fucking time a wingnut trots out the "oh, you evil pergressives are the real racists" they merely underscore what utterly stupid racists they are.

Behind the acrimony there seems to be a wide spectrum of views here as to whether a government ought to be interfering in a globalized labor market. Conservetives clearly say no (they only believe in invading countries which want to have independent control of their natural resources). But liberals seem to be taking both sides -- for and against some government action to keep jobs in the US.

Yet large cities in the US (New York for example) regularly offer major tax incentives to companies to induce them not to relocate to lower-cost areas. What's wrong with the federal government doing the same -- after all, doesn't it also lose tax dollars when companies move operations overseas? And in any case I don't believe it's un-liberal to feel a greater obligation towards supporting the citizens of your own country (the same ones who fight wars in your behalf, by the way) than toward improvig the lot of citizens of other countries.

You do care about your own family most, don't you? You'd rather that your son or daughter get that job rather than someone else? Isn't there a similar bond for citizens of a country? If not, then what exactly is a country and why should it be able to compel its citizens to fight wars to defend it?

As for increasing US industrial exports, I wish someone who knows more about this can explain: When Dell Computer or Apple sell a computer in Europe that was assembled in the US but whose components were made in Asia, does the entire sale price get added to US exports? If so, does the total exports number hide a lot of imported technology that is simply being re-sold overseas?

So, when does all of America get the same kind of high-speed broadband for telephony, internet, television and talk/music radio that we've been paying for?

Other countries are far ahead of us. This is obviously a ridiculous situation and unnecessary.

Are the comm companies trying to blackmail us into the best financial arrangement for them -- profits as far as the eye can see?

Who will lead us to net neutral broadband for everyone?

In answer to my own question about foreign content of US exports:

It is impossible to try to determine the foreign content of U.S. exports and the U.S. content of foreign imports, the National Academies of Sciences has concluded. Congress asked the Academies to study the issue, due to growing concern about offshore outsourcing.

Congress wanted to know whether or not the U.S. was in fact losing more jobs due to the growing imports of parts and components that go into end products for export.

"The content question," which is how the National Research Council committee studying the issue describes it, cannot be answered because data "simply do not exist," says their report.

http://www.allbusiness.com/manufacturing/1174306-1.html

Aerospace worker: "In the 90's, Lockheed closed their Burbank facility and moved all their engineers to Georgia, forcing them to take pay cuts in the process because 'the cost of living was so much lower.'"

Look at the bright side. Now that Lockheed's facilities are closed and demolished:

(a) Embarking Southwest Airlines passengers awaiting their flights at Burbank Airport's old terminal now enjoy an unobstructed vista of the San Gabriel Mountains; and

(b) The Burbank City Council can freely revel in its own unbridled NIMMBY-ism, as it opposes any and all reasonable attempts to build a much-needed new terminal on the now-vacant land.

JS,
Import Statistics:
if goods are imported, they're counted by Customs at import value;
Export Statistics
if those imported goods are used as inputs to another product that is later exported, the export is counted at the $ value but no attempt is made to analyze the value of prior imports to US exports.

Welcome to the broadband revolution, rural America.

Amen. We've found over the last couple years that we can hire people and serve lower cost/density markets that would have been infeasible 4-5 years ago. For a small specialized company like ours, it's a nice growth path; we don't have to compete with the big guys or incur the cost of establishing ourselves in first-tier markets.

Not to mention that the customers tend to be nicer to work with. It's wonderful working with people who are as grateful for our help as we are for their business. (Very rare in markets such as NYC, LA, SF, etc.)

It's a big country, and there's plenty of opportunities outside the big cities.

My husband, Maximillian, not one to go in for fads (or a slave to fashion), has worn Sperry Topsiders for decades. He gets a new pair every few years. Sperry Topsiders also fulfilled our practice of buying American-made whenever possible. With the exceptiion of automobiles manufactured the last twenty years or so, we think that American-made is a superior quality product.

Then came NAFTA, and the manufacturing of Sperry Topsiders moved to Mexico. The quality suffered, and he was replacing them more frequently than he had before. But, 'new world order', helping to lift Mexicans out of poverty so that the world would be a more equitable, peaceful place, demanded it.

The latest pair that Max purchased have a 'MADE IN CHINA' tag. Now, ironically, the Mexicans are the victims of outsourcing to Asia because why pay a worker $3/hour in Mexico to make shoes when you can pay somebody from China 50 cents an hour to make shoes?

He still has his last pair of American-made Topsiders (over ten years old) for puttering around in the garage and garden. They look old, but "keep on going". The difference in the quality of materials used (between the American made and Mexican/Chinese made) is obvious. They cost about the same - the price doesn't seem to have been adjusted for inflation, so while he's paying less for each pair than the old ones (in real money), he has to replace them much more frequently. So he paying more over the long run for an inferior product. Our economy and world peace suffers (lost American jobs, then lost Mexican jobs creating more illegal immigration, and Chinese trade imbalance, etc.).

Irony sticks out all over this story.

TJM, that's what I found too. So the fact that US exports have been increasing does not tell the full strory -- if a significant portion of what we sell is what we buy from abroad.

It would seem that it's more meaningful to look at the net of exports minus imports (euphemistically called "balance" of trade) -- and that, of course, AKA our trade deficit, has been going steadily south for some time now.

I grew up in a semi rural area (Fargo-Moorhead) 135,000 in the metro area... we were the biggest town between us and Seattle.

I've had broadband since 2000.... and in 2005 Moorhead switched to broad band municipal wireless--and it was awesome.

Sad I had to leave it.

Socractic Gadfly,

Nice theory on manufacturing forcing things back to the USA, but it's not going to happen.

Shipping is an incredibly fuel-efficient way to move things from place to place compared to roads or rail (unless the rail is electrified).

And, if needs be, it's possible to run ships on things other than petroleum - for instance, using some wind-assistance (it's proposed periodically, the main reason it's not done is that oil is too cheap), coal (greenhouse issues aside, of course), or even nuclear power - and before you start on about the risk of terrorism, consider that the world's shipping lanes are currently full of oil tankers and LNG carriers.

If Peak Oil happens, it's going to place an even greater premium on manufacturing being close to ports than ever before, rather than shifting manufacturing back into America's interior.

Ah, it is quite hilarious how every fucking time a wingnut trots out the "oh, you evil pergressives are the real racists" they merely underscore what utterly stupid racists they are.

Overreact much mate?

A few points:
(i) I hardly, I should think count among your "wingnut trolls" - I believe you mean that "Al" and his mimickers insofar as I am most staunchly against your current President and his bumbling incompetence.
(ii) Pointing out the underlying xenophobia and racism in the fearmongering on the Left with respect to "$X day" dataless argumentation says nothing at all about real racism; just as I would personally never deny that persons on my favoured end of the political spectrum can and do lapse into racism, I would expect the Left is not innocent of its own....

But then the narrative has to be between EVIL and GOOD, eh right? You're no bloody different than those you shriek on about really.

Fostert: My opposition to outsourcing is based on it not passing the cost/ benefit test for US companies and the negative "crowding out" effect it is having in the Indian labor market. That's practical, not racist. And my concern is for both American and Indian workers. Remember, I have friends in both countries:
Fair enough, mate, fair enough. Regardless there is quite a vein of "scared of the brown people undercutting our pampered wage levels and bloody well unable to see our profit" supra.

Regardless, most whinging on about outsourcing is about fear rather than any analysis (see the Western NYer supra).

I don't know the numbers, but this isn't totally new. I know of one bicoastal law firm that has its tech support in West Virginia.

corpus juris: The advantages for companies sending work to Red State America are obvious

Don't assume that rural means Red State. Vermont is rural, and they send Bernie Sanders to Congress.

Otherwise I wholeheartedly agree that I'd rather see jobs in rural America than offshored (and no I don't live in a rural area).

The Lounsbury: most whinging on about outsourcing is about fear rather than any analysis

And most cheerleading for outsourcing is based on on mindless devotion to simplistic theories whose proponents seem curiously uninterested in empirical verification.

terrible to provide jobs and opportunities to those nasty brown foreigners

Ah, playing the racism card. Maybe you can join Hillary in characterizing her pandering for bribes (oops, I mean campaign contributions) from outsourcers as "reaching out to the Indian-American community". Never mind that most Americans of Indian ancestry get just as screwed by it as other Americans - collecting bribes is ok if it's from a brown person.

If it makes you feel any better, I'm just as opposed to outsourcing to Russia as to India, and last time I checked, most Russians were pretty white.

Now for a fantastical rumor: have you heard that some Americans are brown?

they're so much more authentic and adorable when they're living in enforced poverty behind tariff walls

Opposed to tariffs, are you? Perhaps you'd like to comment on India's average 112% tariff on food (non-negotiable to them, I assure you) or China's average 30% tariff on cars, car parts, and various other industries they're building up.

Free trade might be a good thing - when do we get some? If you think that the current trade regime is anything approaching free trade, you either don't understand what free trade is or are completely ignorant of the actual situation. Either or both is characteristic of mindless cheerleaders. BTW, are you any relation to Tom Friedman?

....Regardless, most whinging on about outsourcing is about fear rather than any analysis....The Lounsbury at 6:18 AM

First: And most cheerleading for outsourcing is based on on mindless devotion to simplistic theories whose proponents seem curiously uninterested in empirical verification.

Queer, if there is one item in trade economics that is emperically studied to death (and not via "simplistic theories" although perhaps if you have a mere Econ Entry Level understanding you understand it simplistically).

Let me recommend to you Martin Wolf of the Financial Times - not that cretin Tom Friedman. His survey of Globalisation literature may, if you rise to the occasion of comprehension, help you.

If it makes you feel any better, I'm just as opposed to outsourcing to Russia as to India, and last time I checked, most Russians were pretty white.

Eh bother, nativist xenophobia plain vanilla, just as bloody enlightening.

Opposed to tariffs, are you? Perhaps you'd like to comment on India's average 112% tariff on food (non-negotiable to them, I assure you) or China's average 30% tariff on cars, car parts, and various other industries they're building up.

The Tariff Raj is one of the worst aspects holding back the Indian economy, promotes rents and grotesque monopolistic exploitation of Indian labour. China, eh, they're massive importers already.

Free trade might be a good thing - when do we get some? If you think that the current trade regime is anything approaching free trade, you either don't understand what free trade is or are completely ignorant of the actual situation. Either or both is characteristic of mindless cheerleaders. BTW, are you any relation to Tom Friedman?

Using idiot boy Friedman as a straw man is fine, but I have no truck with him.

No, Free Trade doesn't obtain perfectly. Little in the real world is prefect. But then most situations evolve, pragmatically step by step.

Throwing up your hands because India has retarded tariff (and punitive domestic tax and regulatory regimes discouraging small business, etc) is mere excuse making.

As for the "no labour law" rubbish - quite the contrary, most emerging markets have fine labour laws on the books. And little enforcement, above all for local magnates. Unrealistic standards drive informal sector and off the books employment that ends up worse than realism.

I see it every bloody day, but then the Left Protectionists go on and on about "standards" and their little no labour laws standards straw man.

The Lounsbury: if there is one item in trade economics that is emperically studied to death

Please finish the sentence - you said nothing.

Let me recommend to you Martin Wolf of the Financial Times

Ah, yes, Mr. Wolf. Splendid chap. Commander of the British Empire you know. What an especially appropriate honor for an FT man, considering that those blokes spend much of their time ignoring the fact that the Empire is dead. Really, even the Jewel in the Crown is now independent. Bloody wogs wanted it that way, don't you know. Of course it was a Labour government that gave it to them. I say, even Gladstone wouldn't have tolerated such tommyrot.

Of course if you're interested in empirical research on "globalization" (or even globalisation), including the subleties, whys and wherefores so often overlooked by cheerleaders, try the likes of Dani Rodrik. It ain't all "globalization good".

The Tariff Raj is one of the worst aspects holding back the Indian economy, promotes rents and grotesque monopolistic exploitation of Indian labour.

Much better they should drop their agricultural tariffs and put up to 2/3 of their population at risk of loosing their livelihood. Oh, well, it will all work out int the long run (corpses make good fertilizer).

China, eh, they're massive importers already.

And even more massive exporters. Their trade surplus is enormous and growing. Anyone who characterizes China as "massive importers" while ignoring that detail is either ignorant or a shill (as well as being guilty of bad grammar).

Free Trade doesn't obtain perfectly.

Not perfect? While we're at it, let's say that Cuba doesn't have a "perfect" democracy.

Reminds me of the chaps in the Victorian era who touted free trade. When exactly did creating an empire that destroyed your potential competitors qualify as free trade? At least they knew what to do about protectionist China - fight the Opium Wars!

Ricardo was honest enough to admit that his interest in free trade was that it would reward his class, not that it would benefit everyone. Since then honesty has been a scarce commodity.

From the LA Times' mouth to God's ear.

As a native of a small Midwestern town, I hope, hope, hope this story is true. Rural America is dying from industrial agriculture fed by commodity subsidies going to BigAgriBusiness.

Plus, the speak real good American English out there in the Heartland.

Gotta run, but I want to say that keeping jobs in America not an issue of race.

There are plenty of people of all races in America who can use these jobs. Working Americans pay taxes here, including the payroll taxes we need to keep Social Security as funded as possible and the local taxes we need for our schools and infrastructure.

It's about providing work for those who need it HERE, for those with house payments they can't make and for health insurance they can't afford if they don't work, or (for you conservatives) to keep them out of Medicaid and hopefully SCHIP, too.

There is always something positive about the dollar falling, and this is one of those things.

Cal Gal: speak real good American English out there in the Heartland

A midwestern accent is considered the most desirable for things like phone support, as it's the most widely intelligible.

OT, but most non-Americans consider a midwestern accent to be the quintessentially American accent. Personally, I think we New Yawkas speak normal and the rest of yous sound funny, but I can live with it.

There is always something positive about the dollar falling, and this is one of those things.

Good for the trade balance in general. Realizing that you can't forever spend more than you earn is called fiscal responsibility, but it seems to have been lost on the "globalization" cheerleaders.

And so we have comments on a bloody fucking Leftist blog, eh?

Well, for the intellectually adventurous, you can read Mr Wolf, else, you can read Left whanking (which I am sure 99% will prefer), else, we go round and round.

I have not the patience to educate in economics those who can bloody well barely balance there chequeir.

(and re the claims that trade is not racial, well I say bollocks, but then the Left is endless self-deceiving in these issues)

The Loonie: And so we have comments on a bloody fucking Leftist blog, eh?

You've been posting since yesterday and you're just realizing that? Sheesh, no wonder you still think Victoria is on the throne.

Well, for the intellectually adventurous, you can read Mr Wolf [CBE]

Read my favorite editorialist or else we can't talk. Ignore those silly folks with the academic credentials.

I have not the patience to educate in economics

Translation: I cannot rebut your arguments.

Long live the Queen!

Lounsburyfeatherstonehaugh (pronounced "Pfffft")-
You are a cartoon character. No matter how much you long for 1898, the world turneth, with or without you. Educate people? You have nothing to "educate" anyone about.

Stereotypically English--they swan about, condescending to all and sundry, loftily offering to instruct them on what to read, what to wear, how to behave, all based on repulsive class distinctions propped up by 300 years of a system of colonial tyranny. Really, the lot of you can just drop into the North Sea for all anyone else on the planet would care. Take your bad teeth with you.

Cheerio and pip-pip, ass.

The question of whether you want American jobs or Indian jobs is an incorrect one - the assumption is, if we outsource, that good job goes to an Indian at the expense of an American. I think outsourcing is a legitimate tool for American businesses to use to seek a lower cost precisely because I believe in the long run, it will benefit Americans, and create more and better high-paying jobs here. If we are not efficient at something, we shouldn't be doing it. It's that simple. Let's say we added 100% tariffs to Japanese cars in the 80s & 90s. We artificially make American cars lucrative to produce in the US - American car companies therefore have no incentive to produce a better product. Allocation of capital goes to cars, but not to better cars, and we all suffer. Let's leave Americans do what Americans do best - iPod, Google, Youtube, Cisco, and the many other highly successful American companies are the result of free markets, allowing capital to go where it is most efficient. Outsourcing is a natural by-product of that. Who would've thunk - an American company(Apple) producing a more successful electronics device than the Japanese. Let American ingenuity win the day - not artificial barriers. In the end, Americans will be the biggest winners.

Um, I didn't mean iPod was a company..

Northrup is doing this because defense technology cannot be sent to India without State Department licensing under the International Traffic in Arms (ITAR) regulations. That can be quite expensive, raising the costs of "offshoring" as compared to "onshoring." Moreover, ensuring 100% compliance with the regulations is difficult. The whole problem can be avoided by sending the work to Iowa instead of India.