Jobs don't "go overseas".
Individuals who happen to live in other countries simply provide more value in their work than individuals in this one.
So I try to keep the value of my work as high as I can.
Individuals who happen to live in other countries simply provide more value in their work than individuals in this one.
So I try to keep the value of my work as high as I can.
The basic argument is one of our own consumer practices. Not weather others do a good job.
Things like high cost of health insurance, car insurance, etc., are all results of laws and regulations, but add to the employer's bottom line.
You are suggesting that Americans buy panels manufactured in the US. I have no idea what the benefit to this would be. Worse panels at a higher price? What does this solve? It would create unsustainable and irrational employment.
The way to solve economic downturn is not to close your borders like you suggest. That is the self-centered and naive way of thinking. The way to improve your economic situation is through innovation and wealth creation.
Like forgoing health care, worker protections, basic sanitation, you know -- having a very low standard of living.
When standard of living starts to rise in one country (or in the relevant segment of it), it risks losing those same jobs to offshoring itself. E.g. India -> Vietnam.
I agree with your second statement.
If a wealthy multinational corporation can afford to build a factory overseas, it can afford to implement health and safety regulations that protect the workers. It's not like a country has to be ultra-rich to provide a safe, clean workplace.
As for actual sweatshops, let's not pretend they are bestowing some great benefit upon the poor who they ruthlessly exploit. They use people up and spit them out.
In this country people fought long and hard for the workplace rights we have today. The higher-wage jobs depend on the lower-wage jobs like an ecosystem. Shift away the foundation and everything collapses. Offshoring is like economic global warming.
They could afford to, but think about the labor problems that would result in such a market with some jobs that pay way way more than others (in terms of benefits and working conditions). Corruption run rampant, unrest, etc. Its just not viable to put the standards of a more developed economy on a lesser developed one.
> As for actual sweatshops, let's not pretend they are bestowing some great benefit upon the poor who they ruthlessly exploit. They use people up and spit them out.
The people wouldn't take the jobs if they didn't derive a greater economic benefit from such a job than other alternatives they have. In most cases this isn't slave labor.
I want better for all these people, but it has to happen sensibly, and in a way that is economically viable.
>When standard of living starts to rise in one country (or in the relevant segment of it), it risks losing those same jobs to offshoring itself. E.g. India -> Vietnam.
But the original country (e.g. India) tends to maintain a permanently higher standard of living than when things started.
I am sure you have insufficient data to establish anything approaching "permanent".