Bring Jobs Home

The outsourcing of jobs is a good thing. It allows capital at home to be spent towards producing jobs that create goods and services that there is a higher demand for and that will improve quality of life. Of course, capital can only be reinvested if the market is free enough for improved industry to move in and for people to gain access to re-education opportunities to adapt to it. For instance, a few decades ago, pretty much all of the steel industry in Pittsburgh was bought by Japan and relocated to places with lower production costs and wages for workers. Instead of lamenting this fact, Pittsburgh deregulated its economy and the software industry jumped on it. Now Pittsburgh is a much wealthier and cleaner place to live in (I would know. My family’s lived there since the fifties when steel particle dust would cover the lawn every afternoon.). Of course, there was a painful adjustment period. Things don’t happen over night. Rome wasn’t built in a day. I grant that providing incentives to keep jobs here that we don’t need and are too costly to maintain might look like a great short-term solution. But such a faulty economic policy will actually stalemate our economy and lead to a decrease in the standard of living over time. Are you looking for a quick fix with horrible long-term effects? Or are you looking for sustainable economic prosperity? This is economics 101. There’s a book you should read. It’s called Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt. After reading it you should be better able to inform your audience. Just trying to help you out.

Mr. Burns,

I appreciate the comments. Those are good points. I would suggest that there is an imbalance because there are so many barriers to entry (regulations) for new businesses. Again, outsourcing is not itself the problem, though I do agree that we are losing jobs faster than we are making them. It is the result of a century-old problem in our economic policies. Do you want to treat the symptom or the disease? Like I said above, it comes down to whether people want a quick Keynesian fix or a solution that will lead to real economic growth for future generations.

Also, I see no problem with helping people in other parts of the world (i.e. Red China) obtain employment and earn wages (even if they are meager by our standards). It helps people living under those leftist regimes to learn the virtues of the free market. I do think you have a good argument, though, and I’m definitely not in favor of propping up dictatorships and socialists or justifying their regimes. I will have to think about that one a bit more.

As to your last comment, I have yet to purchase a dishwasher or a washing machine. I only make 8 bucks an hour. Such is the life of a recent college graduate who graduated top of his class from the most difficult school in the country. I did buy a used car once, though. It was from Japan. And my computer is from the U.S. Both of these purchases support my point 100% (I think you’ll be able to understand why.). ;)

Red China? The use of such Cold War language is so 20th Century.

Wow. It must be a sign of ignorance that Jack and David choose to dish out insults and meaningless critiques of word usage instead of participate in rational discussion. Until I hear a compelling argument on why I’m wrong or why Mr. Burns is wrong, I will consider you two as novices. And yes, China is definitely Communist. And the symbols of its government are literally red in color. What world do you live in?