Bailout Cash Subsidizing Outsourcing

by: David Sirota

Sun Feb 01, 2009 at 12:46


In the intensifying fight over Buy America laws and whether to make sure U.S. taxpayer money works for U.S. taxpayers, it's not just stimulus money that corporate lobbyists want subsidizing outsourcing, it's also bank bailout money:

(AP) Banks collecting billions of dollars in federal bailout money sought government permission to bring thousands of foreign workers to the U.S. for high-paying jobs, according to an Associated Press review of visa applications. The dozen banks receiving the biggest rescue packages, totaling more than $150 billion, requested visas for more than 21,800 foreign workers...The figures are significant because they show that the bailed-out banks, being kept afloat with U.S. taxpayer money, actively sought to hire foreign workers instead of American workers.

As my book, The Uprising, showed in its examination of efforts to unionize high-tech workers, these companies use the H-1B program to hire workers who will take much lower wages and whose immigration status is effectively determined by their visa-holding employer (read: they can't try to unionize, etc.), thus undercutting American workers. In the case of the banking industry, while "lower wages" still certainly means decent wages, the bottom line is that the importation of foreign workers - at a time when domestic unemployment is rising - is a way to drive down the corporate bottom line. And now, that drive is being subsidized by the very taxpayers who it is hurting.

And yet, in the face of this, we're expected to believe that provisions ensuring taxpayer cash is used to hire American workers is somehow evil "protectionism," while letting taxpayer cash subsidize outsourcing is Enlightened Prgamatism. What a joke.

David Sirota :: Bailout Cash Subsidizing Outsourcing

Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Talk about outrageous! (4.00 / 2)
Has it ocurred to anybody up there to NOT give them the money?  And they made the autos crawl and demanded the UAW take paycuts...  WTF!

This from the Detroit Free Press. (4.00 / 2)
...for positions that included senior vice presidents, corporate lawyers, junior investment analysts and human resources specialists. The average annual salary for those jobs was $90,721, nearly twice the median income for all American households.


[ Parent ]
Good point! But this isn't solved by "buy anerican". (0.00 / 0)
Of course, the US should strengthen the unions bargaining power, and should orohibit green cards form being misused by companies to apply pressure on domestic wages. But "buy american" wouldn't solve any of these problems, and instead create new ones because of collateral damage from such a trade war.  

no it is not (4.00 / 2)
if they do not tie government expenditures to U.S. companies and more importantly U.S. workers, citizens, perm residents....citizens of the domestic economy...
the entire Keynesian model, which ties increased demand to income, why government expenditures in things like IT infrastructure, public works etc. work, the entire stimulus model falls apart.

To date this is not in the Stimulus bills.

NoSlaves.com  


The Economic Populist


[ Parent ]
Keynes never said this! (0.00 / 0)
And I'm sure you would be hard pressed to find an honest, serious economist suppotrting your view.

[ Parent ]
How about Paul Krugman? (4.00 / 1)
He just wrote a piece correcting the misunderstanding...

it is quite implied in the theory that one must keep the money contained within the "incomees" that's American workers,  for those economic theory disabled.

Krugman on Keynes

Keynes showed that the fact that spending equals income

Krugman on Milton Friedman's permanent income theory:

suppose the government introduces a one-time, $100 billion program to repair bridges over the next year. The government will have to issue debt to pay for this, and will have to service that debt, requiring higher taxes - say, $5 billion a year. That's a much smaller impact on consumers' future after-tax income than the permanent program. So much less of the spending rise will be offset by a fall in consumer demand. (I'm not considering the effect of the spending in raising income, which would probably cause consumer demand to rise rather than fall.)

To make it more clear, in Keynesian economics, spending ~= income!

In C+I+G+X-M= GDP

C = savings + income + debt!

Income defined as disposable income, that stuff that comes from wages....ya know paychecks that American workers make.

Not workers in India, not workers in China and not temporary workers who wage repress, i.e. income is not reduced plus unemployed domestic worker....still unemployed!  

This is a domestic economic stimulus package, government expenditures to save a domestic (The United States of America) economy.....

Read up!


NoSlaves.com  


The Economic Populist


[ Parent ]
Blah. I studied economics, too, and so I know... (0.00 / 0)
..that most of the time, economists only look at national markets, international trade is considered an external factor that would make the models too complicated. But, of course, some economists do cover international trade and its consequences, and actually Krugman is one of them. Hey, you seem to believe you know something about economics - did you somehow miss the detail that Krugman got the Nobel price exactly for his work in that field???

I propose YOU read that up, it debunks your points here!
:P


[ Parent ]
For your convenience, here's the link (0.00 / 0)
http://www.princeton.edu/pr/pi...

Well, read this, and weep. Krugman advocating protectionist measures? Nonsense.


[ Parent ]
hilarious (4.00 / 2)
Pointing to Krugman's work of economies of scale is hilarious!  He's not trading people at all, he's referring to localized economies where domestic workforces are immobile!

So amusing watching someone with no real comprehension try to justify some ill conceived religion probably ascertained from cable TV talking heads reading some corporate lobbyists' talking points.  

We're done here.  

NoSlaves.com  


The Economic Populist


[ Parent ]
You're more than done, you're burnt! (0.00 / 1)
If something is hilarious here, it's you firstly pretending Keynes' "Gernal Theory" is dealing with international trade, and then to state that Krugman's work on economic geography is irrelevant in the "buy american" context!
:D

[ Parent ]
I suggest strongly (4.00 / 1)
You need to site economic theory, which of course you cannot for any in depth analysis shows the above is correct.

And if you believe somehow, magically in the WTO GATS mode 4 there is an international agreement to trade people, i.e. domestic workforces, there is not.

I also strongly suggest you consider citing Gomory and Baumol, Global Trade & Conflicting interests  text on international multilateral trade theory or may I even suggest reading a more layman's interpretation of Paul Samuelson's paper.  

How many Nobel Prize winners must one list?

NoSlaves.com  


The Economic Populist


[ Parent ]
Btw, OpenLeft policy sez that Max Berger has the right to respond , right? (0.00 / 0)
I remember that Paul stated repeatedly that any commenter singled out in a front page story has a right to respond with a frontpage article of his own. Well, here's hoping that Max uses this chance, and points out all the problems with "buy american" that aren't mentioned in your postings!

Great AP story! (4.00 / 2)
I have an addition:

Citigroup offshore outsourced jobs AFTER receiving bail out

No one seemed to even notice that Citigroup fired 50,000 U.S. workers while signing a $2 billion dollar contract with TATA (yes they are now mega rich by offshore outsourcing your job!).  

The banks already offshore outsourced hundreds of thousands of IT jobs, other back end jobs from 2001-2008, but this is incredible that after receiving $25 billion U.S. taxpayer dollars they turn around and sign such a massive contract to offshore outsource even more.

In other words, you give them $25 billion and the first thing they do is send $2 billion to an company in India...
along with your job.

NoSlaves.com  


The Economic Populist


all countries are protecting jobs/industries at home -- here's France -- (4.00 / 2)
France Dangles EU6 Billion in Auto Aid, Wants Plant Commitments  -- http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/...

France extended more credit to PSA Peugeot Citroen and Renault SA and said aid to the carmakers may reach 6 billion euros ($7.8 billion) in return for their pledges to keep domestic plants open.

"Our efforts for carmakers will be massive," Prime Minister Francois Fillon told an industry conference today in Paris. In return for aid totaling 5 billion euros to 6 billion euros, the government wants the carmakers to give "exemplary commitments" to keep production in France and help their struggling suppliers, he said.  ...



LOnce again you ignore this has nothing to do woth "buy american" (0.00 / 0)
The US is durectly supporting thier industries with bailout bills, too. But no European nation has considered implementing a "buy our own products" rule. Apples and oranges.

[ Parent ]
they already have them -- the EU won't even buy our corn -- (4.00 / 1)
they all have protectionist laws about their own products and raw materials -- and workers in industries that produce them  -- all of them.

[ Parent ]
Sure. You can take your genetically modified corn and stuff it. (0.00 / 0)
Nobody here has any problems with importing natural corn from the US. But since Monsanto stuff spreads everywhere, it's increasingly difficult to guarantee that even natural corn isn't contaminated.

Sry, but you really can't force us Europeans to buy theat engineered crap you call food. No, thanks.


[ Parent ]
i agree with you but it's still restricting "free trade" and "protectionist" (0.00 / 0)
that's the whole point.

Every country is protectionist, and they also ALL want THEIR goods/materials/products to be sold everywhere -- but won't allow ALL goods from everywhere to be sold inside their countries at the same time.


[ Parent ]
The point is, the US would unilateraly start a new round of protectionism! (0.00 / 0)
I mean, sure, there already are protectionist measures, some based on reasonable arguments like consumer safety, some not. But the US would go one step further with "buy american", and the international response is clear in rejecting this and threatening retaliatory measures. Is it a good idea to engage in new trade wars in such a dire situation? And is it to much to ask for to demand that a serious case for the pros and cons of this measure hast to be made first, based on verifiable facts on arguments, before engaging in behaviour that may hurt the economy even more?

[ Parent ]
and did you miss the "suppliers"/"auto parts" part of that? (4.00 / 1)
from that story --

... Auto-Parts Fund

Streiff, Ghosn and Fillon today signed an accord formally opening a 300 million-euro fund to help ailing auto-parts suppliers. The government and the two carmakers have each pledged 100 million euros to the facility.

Announced last month, the suppliers' fund was accompanied by 1 billion euros in low-interest financing for car loans and a 1,000-euro bonus for car buyers who scrap their old vehicles, amounting to an estimated 220 million euros in state funding.  ...

and here's IHT on France and Germany both protecting that industry -- http://www.iht.com/articles/20...

... France and Germany, the twin economic engines of continental Europe, will not let their auto industries flounder amid the financial meltdown and economic crisis, French President Nicolas Sarkozy said Monday.

Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angela Merkel said they agreed during talks that coordinated action was key to addressing the economic downturn, even if different measures were used by Paris or Berlin.

"We want to react with speed and with force to relaunch the economy" in a manner appropriate to each country but coordinated, Sarkozy said at a news conference with Merkel after their talks.

"What is sure is that we won't let the auto industry down," Sarkozy said.

The two leaders came into the talks - one of a series of regular get-togethers between the powerful European partners - with a different set of approaches. Berlin prefers national aid and Paris is partial to a Europe-wide plan.

No concrete proposals were offered but Sarkozy raised the possibility of "fiscal" or "targeted" measures.

He noted that in France the auto industry, including dealerships, involves 10 percent of the working population.

Washington could accord a $25 billion loan to help save Detroit's big three automakers, Sarkozy noted, so automakers in Europe cannot find themselves without aid and still be obliged by the EU to build cleaner cars.

"The will to help European industry, and notably the automobile sector, is total," said the French president.

He said he and Merkel were on the same wavelength in their wish to defend industry, through innovation, research or technology - not protectionist measures....



[ Parent ]
Airbus subsidies too now -- (4.00 / 1)
 Industry grows more accepting of government help for airlines -- http://www.iht.com/articles/20...

and we're complaining about their protectionism about that!! amazing! they're all full of sh*t, and everyone is protectionist -- we better be too!


[ Parent ]
That's the same as the US is doing! What's your point? (0.00 / 0)
Again, this isn't at all the same as implementing a "buy american" policy. Apples and oranges.

And do you really want to complain that Europeans create the same rescue packages for their indstires as the US? Ridiculous.


[ Parent ]
You would be in a much better position to protest against Airbus... (0.00 / 0)
...if the US wouldn't have capitulated to Boeing demands. Remember how Airbus won the tanker plane competition fair and square, after Boeing was cought bribing the officials? Well, Boeing's lobbyists applied a lot of pressure, and the deal was cancelled.

What do you cll that, fair competition? Ha!
And now excuse me pls, it's Superbowl time.


[ Parent ]
it proves the point -- we're already protectionist about stuff -- and they are too -- (0.00 / 0)
it doesn't matter what the EU says when they're already being protectionist themselves.

it shouldn't stop the US from mandating that every penny of this "stimulus" be spent here and only create jobs here.


[ Parent ]
Well, we'll retaliate with "don't buy American", of course. (0.00 / 0)
Exactly what Caterpillar and other export oriented US companies fear. But you can't expect us Yurpeans to spend our rescue plan Euros on US products, if this is a one way street. You want trade war, you'll get it.  

[ Parent ]
never -- the EU itself says we're each too interdependent on trade back and forth -- (0.00 / 0)
it's not possible for the US or EU to truly stop all the others' imports.

the EU itself says --

...  In 2006 the EU and the US combined economies accounted for nearly 60 % of global GDP, 33 % of world trade in goods and 42 % of world trade in services. The EU and the US are each other's main trading partners. Trade flows across the Atlantic amount to around €1.7 billion every day. The two economies are interdependent to a high degree. Close to a quarter of all EU-US trade consists of transactions within firms based on their investments on either side of the Atlantic. The transatlantic relationship also defines the shape of the global economy as a whole as either the EU or the US is also the largest trade and investment partner for almost all other countries in the global economy. Total FDI stocks held in each others countries reach approximately €1.89 trillion. The overall "transatlantic workforce" is estimated at 12 to 14 million people, of which roughly half are Americans who owe their jobs directly or indirectly to EU companies.

...

-- http://ec.europa.eu/trade/issu...

[ Parent ]
here are just some of the trade disputes w/EU -- (0.00 / 0)
all based on EU restrictions on foreign products -- scroll down for ones with the US --

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/wtod... --


[ Parent ]
I was talking about adding "don't buy american" to OUR rescue plans (0.00 / 0)
I thought that was obvious. Pure retaliation. No US tax dollars for Europe, no EU tax Euros for you. Tit for tat.  

[ Parent ]
Cloud cookoo land (4.00 / 1)
The kool-aid of "free trade" uber alles, outsourcing jobs, having fake non-existent corporate headquarters in international tax havens, etc. may serve these masters of the universe but it hardly serves either the US tax payer or the US citizens as a whole.

Let me remind you that since the 1950s the corporate share of Federal taxes has been cut in half while corporate profits have soared.  The number of special loopholes for lower paid workers has soared.  The number of jobs shipped to India and China and god knows where else have soared.  The percentage of income going to the top 5% has soared.  Worker productivity has soared in the US but worker income adjusted for inflation is flat (contradicting basic economic theory, but then unions have gone from a high of 35% of the work force down to 12%).  All the while. Friedmanism and free trade gone riot and the whole ball of wax have taken root.

This does not work for our country or our economy although it benefits a few.  I don't know where you studied economics bit I studied economics at Harvard, thank you.  Your theories neither connect to the real world nor hold up even theoretically.

I am not goiung to troll rate you because you are trying to make a real argumernt but Bush economics has failed and it is time to move on.


That's supposed to be an answer to Sirota? (0.00 / 0)
Doesn't make much sense. He certainly doesn't defend Bush economics. Afaics nobody here does.

[ Parent ]
the future (0.00 / 0)
Just about all eco theory will say protectionism is bad.
that is because theory is theory - what ifs inside a glass bottle where everything is equal and there are no human emotions involved.  This is not how the real world works.

The real world works like this - either there is protetionism or we lose 20,000 jobs a day, grow the deficit, and have companies go bankrupt.

I hope companies keep on outsourcing so the sheeple wake up and elect reps who care about us.

Every other govt cares about its people except the US.
I'm not bashing my country.  I'm bashing its leadership.

We had some positive change just now, but we need a lot more change in the upcoming elections. That is the only way change will happen.


Yeah, just a theory. Like evolution. (0.00 / 0)
Surprising, how many people who don't really know anything about the topic now think they're experts and can debunk all economics. If Paul Krugman says, there's reason to disregard theory n this situation because there are specific arguments for that, you can be sure he really has those arguments and numbers. But you, Sir, think you can debunk decades of economics research just because you think that's not "how the real world works". That's ridiculous.

[ Parent ]
Yeesh! (0.00 / 0)
This is an outgrowth of the national banks being connected to the foreign banks and scared that the foreign banks will get these people. All these banks are in the same boat folks! You are not competing with them as much as trying to stay alive!  

Darkness has a hunger that's insatiable, and lightness has a call that's hard to hear.  

the future, part 2 (0.00 / 0)
I am not debunking economic theories. I'm saying that there are things happening now that were not around when the theories were made.
1.  6 billion + people in world and growing like hell
2.  Internet
3.  Foreigners learining English as much as they know now
4.  Email
5.  US Working class giving up and quitting
6.  Democrats only care about gay rights and global    warming and now hate working people who drive cars.

Hence, my opinion that outsourcing will continue to keep firing US workers until all that can be outsourced will be outsourced unless voters vote against it.


USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox