We all know that Obama has made it clear that he is going to make restrictions on outsourcing. If implemented then that means trouble for many countries who relies on outsource businesses like call centers and others. Do you think it’s a sound decision made by him?

Yes.. It's one of the few things I like..

If you want a job in the U.S., and can legally work there, it is a great decision. If you own, or have a job with an offshore call center, its a horrible decision. If you own a business in the U.S. that used offshore labor, the cost of your products just went up which, in my opinion, is neither here nor there.

I suppose for U.S. webmasters and programmers, the denial of many of the H1B visas means jobs will be more plentiful and pay better. There are rumblings that he will cancel the tax immunity for the first $85k earned abroad, so U.S. citizens who work abroad will be double taxed (U.S., and whatever country they reside in). That ought to be incentive enough for many to return home or, if you make enough, drop your U.S. citizenship for that of Great Britain, which has no taxation on income earned abroad.

Did I mention Obama's approval rating just dropped below 60%. Wonder what it will be when the dow hits 5000 in the next few weeks. It took Bush 8 years to go from a 300b surplus to a 500b deficit. Obama went from 500trillion deficit to a 2b deficit in 8 weeks. What a talent.

It is a lie whatever he says is a lie!

There should definitely be some sort of control on outsourcing. People within the USA don't all live on welfare after all.

more do than you think... how else would Obama get elected?

As far as I can tell, the only control on outsourcing is the restriction of how stimulus money is spent. Am I wrong about this?

I have a little bit of a different take on outsourcing, because I compete in a global market personally. There are competent people in Russia, or the Ukraine or India or the Philippians that will do the same thing that I will for less of a cost. The thing that allows me to beat those people who will work for less, is my ability to effectively communicate with my clients in order to help them accomplish their goals.

I do think it is sad that American jobs are lost when companies exploit those in poor countries by not paying any benefits, but I also believe that some of the blame lies in American's unwillingness to compete for those jobs, because we feel helpless against those who will work for less, and think we can't offer something better. Our auto industry is falling apart because of how inefficient it is. Companies like Toyota and Honda outsource labor to the USA, then sell us better cars for less money.

I don't think outsourcing is the problem at all, it is rather, a symptom of the greater problem, which is inefficiency, apathy, and greed.

Originally Posted by wayfarer07

There are competent people in Russia, or the Ukraine or India or the Philippians that will do the same thing that I will for less of a cost. The thing that allows me to beat those people who will work for less, is my ability to effectively communicate with my clients in order to help them accomplish their goals.

I think its awesome that you find a way to differentiate yourself from offshore labor(your competition). That attitude will keep you in money. Lets be honest, when Obama talks about not sending more jobs offshore, does he really expect small companies to quit using Guru.com? It seems at least half the people on that site are based in a foreign country.

Originally Posted by wayfarer07

Our auto industry is falling apart because of how inefficient it is. Companies like Toyota and Honda outsource labor to the USA, then sell us better cars for less money.

It seems our auto industry is falling apart because of unions. I'm fairly certain Toyota and Honda build their cars that protect them if they decide not use union labor.

It seems our auto industry is falling apart because of unions. I'm fairly certain Toyota and Honda build their cars that protect them if they decide not use union labor.

There is no doubt that the union contributes to the increase in cost, and their focus on grabbing as much money as possible is less than helpful. It isn't just a greedy union, as some like to focus on. It is also greedy executives that take home millions in bonuses in addition to bloated salaries, fly around on private jets, and with that attitude are expected to reshape these companies to be lean and competitive? Even if the executives agree to suspend their pay, and the union agrees to take a pay-cut, will the retired people be willing to give up some of their pension? Everyone is being greedy, so its up to the rest of us to bail them out. It does piss me off, but I don't know what we'd do without our car companies.

It seems I left out the word "States that protect them" in my previous post.. ooops.

Originally Posted by wayfarer07

It is also greedy executives that take home millions in bonuses in addition to bloated salaries, fly around on private jets, and with that attitude are expected to reshape these companies to be lean and competitive?

All this talk about jets. Lets be honest. The per minute cost in salary for 2-4 executives to receive a BCS by the TSA(time lost) at any commercial airport far outweighs the cost of transportation by private jet. Its just the favorite thing for people to pick on these days.

Originally Posted by wayfarer07

Even if the executives agree to suspend their pay, and the union agrees to take a pay-cut, will the retired people be willing to give up some of their pension?

And there in you have the problem. Unions only have so much to give, because of the wonderful pensions they have already promised their many long term employees. Who is going to pay those pensions when GM goes out of business (now considered highly likely)? Answer: Nobody.

The only company or group on the planet you can reliably expect a pension from is the state or federal government. Who else would you trust to pay on Tuesday in exchange for a hamburger today? If the union workers were on 401ks GM would have been long since sold off piece by piece , the unions would be dead, and the tax payers wouldn't have to get the bill. It will be interesting to see how many tax payer dollars Obama will be willing to dish out to pay Union pensions, since unions were a big part of putting him in office.

Jets / Planes - do away with them and you put literally hundreds of thousands of people out of jobs.. Manufacturers, maintenance, support, pilots, airport staff, etc etc etc..

Auto Industry - the biggest difference between US and foreign manufacturers is depth of product.. Mercedes, Honda, Toyota make about 10 car types each.. GM makes Chevy (10 types) GMC (4 types) Pontiac (10 types) etc etc etc.. And all those lines actually compete with their other lines.. Can you say Duh?? Reduce the lines to so that you don't compete with yourself, go back to having a simple car, mid range car, top end car, all on the same platform, same badge, with simple option packages..

Unions.. I've been in 2.. Teachers Union in California and Teamsters here in Indiana.. In both cases it was "required" that I join the union to get the job.. And I hated every second of it.. It was ALWAYS work at minimum speed to meet quota, and no going above and beyond.. It screwed up their carefully laid out numbers.. Never again.. BTW, I can't think of a single good reason to pay a forklift drive $80k+ / year.. I could do that job at 12 years old..

I do agree that some of the wages are outrageous. They do an important job, and deserve to be well-enough compensated for it, but the bubble has burst.