Business.24wn.com

I find it interesting how Lou Dobbs has avoided the hot outsourcing debates since his snafu of recommending subscribers of his “pay-for-advice” newsletter late last year to actually buy stock in companies who are known outsourcing clients!

Its unfortunate that the authors thought Dobbs’ forward would sell more books for them…(when in fact it made me check it out from the library instead of buying a copy) just to be bored by their high brow, repetitive text.

They lost credibility hooking a dull book unto Dobbs’ falling star. Just what the practical business world needed…two more clones of Lou Dobbs yelling, “The Sky is Falling!”
Rating: 1 / 5

I feel bad there are so many Americans out of work. I also am optimistic that this is another phase of job retooling and functional change. Those who aren’t ready to face that their career path has alerted will find this great company for their misery because they won’t find a new job spending money on this book.

Think outside the box. Look at the obvious. Change and grow my friends. I want you all to find great new jobs in the global economy but this book will not move you any closer.
Rating: 1 / 5

After attending a recent lecture by Dr Hira, I found his book and his ideas on US economic evolution incomplete and wavering. Unfortunately, its not information are not grounded or empirical based on US employment trends and globalization.

I recommend you keep looking for better volumes.
Rating: 1 / 5

I think this is basically Lou Dobbs, Mark 2; little wonder Dobbs writes the Foreword. What is totally amazing is the lack of adequate attention to international economic, political and historical contexts. Americans are (or at least clearly, may be) fighting a losing battle. Such losses will become even worse if they resort to simply rehashing self-comforting cliches.

I strongly urge readers to check out ‘Rising Elephant’ instead (Common Courage Press, and also available on Amazon). Even if they feel India is an enemy, it is better to understand the enemy, certainly not under-estimate it.

There is an especially interesting quote about Mr. Hira in the book, on page 247.

“The right of Indian-origin Hira staking territorial claim to America, and keeping out others originating from India (or still to be born there), is not only a problem of who-caught-the-earlier-bus. It also flies in the face of America’s own complex identity as a land of opportunity and a nation of immigrants, both from ethnically-white Europe and elsewhere.

Such factors will remain troubling. They lie at the root of the outcry which followed Democratic presidential candidate Gen. Wesley Clark’s suggestion that the U.S. invite Indian IIT graduates to become American citizens and set up IT companies. They also illustrate the immense, and inevitably, continuing, complexities, of relocation.”
Rating: 1 / 5

The authors of Outsourcing America claim to explain the real world of Globalization, as opposed to the unduly optimistic proclamations of many economists. They focus on uneven distribution of gains from international trade, the costs of retraining displaced workers, persistent unemployment and lost income, and uncertainty regarding which parts of the economy will replace jobs lost to outsourcing. Hira and Hira think that Globalization is threatening America’s future by allowing corporations to export high paying jobs, rather than revenue generating manufactures. They see global competition as a national, rather than an individual matter. Corporations focus on short run profits rather than long run national well-being. The Federal government must save America from the myopia of the market with a policy to protect important domestic industries.

Their contention that the effects of Globalization are uneven is correct, and already known to economists. Free trade benefits consumers through lower prices, as well as those workers and capitalists who edge out rivals in global markets. Obviously, those who come in second place lose income, but still benefit from lower prices as consumers.

The authors contend that Globalization benefits capital at the expense of labor. They also complain about businesses influence in politics. Narrow business interests do have inordinate influence in politics. However, the same thing is true of narrow labor interests. Smaller is better in politics. Relatively small groups, like business associations and labor unions, can organize to lobby the government more effectively than larger groups, like the general consuming public. Mancur Olson proved this in his book `The Rise and Decline of Nations’. The authors fail to realize that efforts to protect workers in select industries redistribute incomes between workers. President Bush’s steel tariff benefited steel workers at the expense of autoworkers, construction workers, and all consumers. Both industry and labor have lobbied to avoid competition throughout history, and success in these efforts comes at the expense of the general consuming public. Yet Hira and Hira speak of special interest politics as an unfortunate turn of events that favors business interests. They think that government should oppose competition in labor markets, instead of supporting big business. What they overlook is that by supporting competition in general the general consuming public benefits at the expense of narrow business and labor interests. This is why mainstream economists support globalization.

Special interest bias is a general defect of government. Hira and Hira insist that government can promote the national interest, but this is a highly controversial notion . They also ignore the costs of politicizing commerce. The fact that government restrictions on global competition redistribute income means that interest groups will expend real resources to influence government policy. Competition over redistribution wastes a substantial part of many nations GDP.

Hira and Hira also misrepresent the economic case for Globalization. They claim that Economists have faith in free trade, and merely proclaim that all will be well in the long run. This is inaccurate. The authors avoid discussing the logic Comparative Advantage, and the body of empirical evidence supporting free trade and free markets, such as the work of Douglas Irwin and Peter Bauer. They claim to have written this book for the layperson rather that for the expert, so that all Americans can understand Globalization. Outsourcing America misinforms the layperson about what experts actually claim, while it promotes a nationalist agenda. The authors advance polemical untruths that fit in with their “pro-labor” politics.

Two simple facts undermine authors’ case for fair trade. Hira and Hira want Federal policies whereby America always reaps most of the immediate gains from Globalization. If America’s trading partners also traded only when they gained most of the immediate gains from trade, then international commerce would collapse, and nobody would realize the immense benefits of Globalization. America will not always win the majority of the immediate gains from Globalization. It is utterly unrealistic to think that other nations will accept America claiming an automatic right to most of the immediate gains from trade.

With regards to long term issues, Hira and Hira correctly note that economists do not know what jobs will replace those lost to outsourcing. Politicians do not know this either. Actual competition in the real world reveals not only who gets the best jobs, it reveals which jobs are best. For their proposals to work politicians must not only ignore special interest influence in pursuit of national goals, they must also know which industries will deliver the highest paying jobs for Americans in the future. This is absurd.

Outsourcing America is the latest in a series of misleading books on Globalization. America will only be a second place winner sometimes, but this is better than a situation where all lose. We never know what the first place outcomes will be in advance anyway. These simple facts invalidate their case for “fair trade” policies.
Rating: 1 / 5