UC Berkely Says 14 Million American Jobs @ Risk

[chequita guevara]

Gone in the blink of an eye (as usual, you may have to sit through an advert)

We went through all the 800-odd occupations that make up the U.S. labor market. Then we used a kind of heuristic, a rough-and-ready algorithm, to see what occupations are the most vulnerable to outsourcing. The attributes that we used are things like there is no face-to-face customer-service requirement. The job should be Internet enabled. It should have high information content. There should be a significant wage differential between the U.S. and abroad.

We narrowed it down to those occupations where already some outsourcing has either occurred or is being planned. Then we added up. What are the total number of jobs in these occupations?

That's how we have arrived at the 14 million figure.

. . .

You write that 25,000 to 30,000 jobs were outsourced from the U.S. to India in July of 2003. How did you come up with those numbers?

That figure was came from U.S. firms announcing the establishment of offices and facilities and centers. In India, the media gave an estimate of how many jobs were being created because of that. It doesn't mean that it created them right away.

I was there last July, and every day there were major U.S. firms saying so-and-so firm plans to open a payroll-and-accounting office in such-and-such an Indian city, which would be employing around 3,000 people or 4,000 people. Big numbers are being bandied about.

[JohnT]

This issue again.

My position: shipping jobs overseas is good for humanity, especially since this country seems to create new ones at an astonishing pace. I am human. Therefore, this is good for me.

Personally, I am confused at Leftists who complain about third world poverty while at the same time complaining about the US shipping basic (and not so basic) jobs and skills to these same countries. Do y'all just want to be upset?

[Caligastia]

Sounds pretty dodgy to me. Just because US companies open offices in other countries does not mean jobs are being lost in the US. That's a pretty big assumption to make.

[Japher]

True, Cali, but at the same time I think when they "lost" the mean "jobs that could of been created here by American companies instead of given to poor people"... Dems hate giving poor people jobs (both here and over seas) because when poor dems get a job and make money they become Repubs...

Anyway, I agree with JohnT. If we can't keep "our" jobs here in the states than that is not their fault but ours.

[Spec]

North America is becoming a place of specialized human ressources, which is normal considering it is one of the most modern places in the world. People here, in the near futur, will only be able to get jobs that require education.
''Hand work'' jobs in general will disapear from modern countries to be relocated in generaly ''un-educated'' contries.

It comes with evolution.

Spec.

[Lefty Scaevola]

So, soon yhe USA will be all talents, specialists, and drone, and not ordinary workers.

[chequita guevara]

Not without programmers it won't.

[Q Classic]

indian tech support people are, by and large, friendlier than american tech support people.

could just be me.

[DanS]

This trend is good for us. These services will be done for us more cheaply and the jobs lost will be replaced with higher value jobs for Americans.

It's scary going through it, but I don't think Americans should fear moving up a link in the value chain.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by DanS
This trend is good for us. These services will be done for us more cheaply and the jobs lost will be replaced with higher value jobs for Americans.

Yes, like all those guys who lost their high paying industry jobs? Oh, right, they're still waiting for their higher value job.

[DanS]

Che: One thing I don't understand about your position is that it doesn't take into account the fact that our economy has been declining in industry intensity for at least 50 years, but we're better off now than we have ever been.

Anyway, "waiting" for a job isn't a very effective employment strategy.

[JohnT]

Yes, like all those guys who lost their high paying industry jobs? Oh, right, they're still waiting for their higher value job.

None shall benefit until all shall benefit, Che?

[JohnT]

Originally posted by DanS
Che: One thing I don't understand about your position is that it doesn't take into account the fact that our economy has been declining in industry intensity for at least 50 years, but we're better off now than we have ever been.

Anyway, "waiting" for a job isn't a very effective employment strategy.

His argument is based on the fact that he can find specific individuals who are not better off than they were 25, 50 years ago. It is irrelevant to the Left if one can find 3 people who benefitted for every one that didn't, the fact that not all benefitted equally is the issue here. It's arguments like these that make me realize that the Left, despite how they want to portray themselves, are the true reactionaries in this society, a ideology based upon the principle of "to each, his place."

As bizarre and totally contrary to real life sentiment as one can find, but unfortunately, all too common.

[Lord Merciless]

I don't understand this either:

Lefties whine constantly about poverty around the world. But when our business actually starts investing there to create jobs and wealth, they whine even louder.

[Kidlicious]

Remove the barriers to hiring labor and this is what happens. It's not about specialization. The rest of the world is becoming just as educated as we are, especially India. It's about supply of labor. Remove the barriers which constrain supply, wages fall and there is unemployment. Good for the country? Absurd.