Where are the jobs?
Should companies that outsource jobs receive tax breaks equal to the employers that keep jobs within a country's borders? If yes, why do you feel that philosophy is acceptable?
I do NOT believe that companies who outsource jobs should receive anywhere near the tax breaks as those employers who remain loyal to the American work force. Of course not! My loyalties are in the appropriate place.......so WHY aren't the loyalties and concern for American jobs in the right place for these corporations and companies? G R E E D. High profits for the pockets. No other reason.
Sad, disheartening, but reality.....and this should easily answer your question as to "where the jobs are."
Great question, pages.......
No one should get tax breaks. That is rediculous. And there are some jobs here in Texas.
No. I think companies that outsource to other countries should not receive the same tax breaks as companies who keep the jobs here in America. Now, after saying that, I understand WHY companies outsource - labor is cheaper, so profits are higher.
But, here's the thing - as long as we (the consumers) continue to expect lower prices and shop at discount stores like Walmart, Kmart, and other discount stores, companies are going to continue to go overseas to find cheap labor in order to occommodate lower prices. After all, if I'm a shoe store owner, I can't sell a pair of shoes for $5 if it costs $10 to manufacture them here in the U.S. I can sell those shoes to the consumer only if they can be manufactured for less than $5. If I can find labor for less, say... $2, then I can sell the shoes to you for $5 and still make a profit. Now, if I (the consumer) am willing to pay $13 for those same pair of shoes, then maybe the shoe store wouldn't have to depend on cheap labor.
Americans want everything for less, hence Payless Shoe Source. They want to buy the shoes for $5 at Payless instead of paying $13 for the same shoes that are manufactured in the U.S. and sold by a "Made in America" shoe store. The "Made in America" companies are going out of business because they simply cannot accommodate consumer demand for cheaper products.
As consumers, if we are asking American companies to stay in America, then we need to be willing to pay a higher price for our products. This is one of the reasons I don't shop at the discount stores - it's because I know that the company had to go overseas to manufacture the products in order to get the lower prices. I pay more for the products I buy; I do not knowingly purchase products that are not made in the USA. Yes, it costs more, but I want to do all that I can to support this country. Until consumers are willing to pay more, they are virtually forcing companies to buy cheap labor in order to sell cheap products. It's simple economics, folks!
100% right i agree with you.. Every company should give more importance to customers or clients. And so if they want cheap prices and better quality then the best choice is to outsource and that's by no means wrong..
Thank you Panzer Kumar. I see nothing wrong with outsourcing in order to produce products at the price customers demand. At the same time, I think companies that outsource should not receive the same tax benefits as company that don't.
Outsourced jobs should not qualify for tax breaks. Some economist could probably make an argument against that statement, but he would be wrong. We have three major issues regarding jobs in this country.
1. Type of jobs: People who are working will say I will flip burgers if I have to. I have tried to avoid that. The pay would be less than my unemployment checks, and restaurants (fine or fast food) have the habit of hiring more people than they need, thus avoiding benefits. The same is true for other industries.
2. Jobs do not just leave the country because of cheap labor--that is one reason. However, the regulatory climate is so unstable, that it is hard for a manufacturing facility to know when it is or is not in compliance. Environmental and safety regulations, but if you want to keep business here, they have to be phased in over time and that pushed in on short notice.
3. We have states competing with each other with various tax incentives and tax breakers, causing some companies to pick up and move a few states ove, thus leaving a lot of unemployed people behind and creating new jobs for other people. States that grant incentives should demand a definite time period for that company to stay in the state, and if it does not, all of the incentives should be repaid--if there is no cash, the state should seize the business and look for another operator.
There are exceptions to each of the mandates I just listed. A company might do well do outsource a portion of its sales and distribution operations overseas if it is going to attract new businesses. Sometimes, regulations have to be adopted in a hurry if a new and serious problem is found and sometimes a business moves because the needed workforce is not available or there is a problem getting the raw materials to the facility because promised infrastructure improvements did not ever take place.
It is a complicated issue and there are no easy answers.
The answer to your question is "yes", and the philosophy is acceptable. But it is not easy to determine whether a company that outsources jobs receives the same tax breaks as the one that doesn't. In fact I'm not aware that any tax break is available for a company merely because it outsources jobs. But smart corporations find ways to navigate through our complicated tax codes to avail of tax breaks for a variety of reasons, not related to their job creating capabilities. I believe President Obama had made a proposal to provide tax breaks for small businesses that hire people, but it is languishing along with many other proposals in the uncompromising situation that our Congress finds itself in. I agree with Larry Wall that it is a complicated issue.
In my view i think its up to the companies to decide whether to outsource their jobs or not.. For it depends on the price, quality at affordable prices , availability of skilled labor and laws of respective state(where the company is located).
Just imagine you are running a software development company in USA and you face the following issues..
Low cost solutions:
If most of your clients want and ask for low price solutions and yet they want most out of it. Even if you have highly skilled labors in your state or city the chances are they want high wages, and further more the cost of running a large work environment in USA is considerably greater when compared to outsourcing it to the developing world nations such as India.
Although it sounds rather unbelievable, developing nations are the brain stock in today's trends. For example with much greater population developing nations have great number of skilled professionals than in the developed world for most people in the developed nations look to be or become owners rather than works. And so most companies in America, UK and Australia prefer to outsource their tasks to ensure greater quality @ less price.
Availability of work skilled workforce:
If their company suddenly has some urgent requirement of a skilled IT professional and its a little hard to find there (may be skilled professionals are there but you cant find them in time) so it makes sense to outsource such tasks.
Laws in respective states:
If a state law prohibits a certain type of task then there is no other go for companies in that state that needs such tasks to be done. So they look forward to outsource that specific task(s).
You make some good points. Your views and others can be boiled down to the fact that we live and operate in a global economy, and accordingly everything cannot be done in our backyard, city, state or nation.
Yes. I also like the fact that you bring up the point that employees want high wages and so if a company needs to provide a product or service at a particular price point, then the company doesn't have many choices beyond outsourcing.
High wages and expensive benefits are part of the issue. I wanted a high wage at my last job and I had good benefits, but we were not competing with a foreign entity. We have to find a way to balance the scales. Reducing income taxes would be one way
I have a friend who earned a good living as a virtual assistant in the U.S. But companies started going overseas for her type of service and she was no longer able to compete with the prices. Plus, I agree with you about lower income taxes, Larry.
I agree with most of our views, the point is not competing but cooperating. On the whole both companies and service firms abroad both get benefited and it indirectly benefits US by bringing in more money in terms of taxes.
by Dennis L. Page 6 years ago
Do tax breaks for the rich really create jobs?Nick Hanauer, a venture capitalist states consumers create jobs and not the wealthy. He claims the rich only hire if consumers are buying goods and products and that there are not enough wealthy to support our economy. He says, "If it were true...
by Brian 7 years ago
This may not be news to a whole lot of people, but, I am getting sick of this. Why isn't the Government doing anything about it, especially when they know that it is killing our economy? Not, to mention that we are fighting wars over it, only to have the countries we are "Aiding" are...
by nightwork4 7 years ago
should tax breaks be given only to companies that don't outsourse their jobs?why are companies that send jobs to other countries given tax breaks and how does these breaks help our economy if they do help at all.
by Bill Russo 7 years ago
Should we give tax breaks to start-up companies developing wind, water, or solar power?Should we increase tax advantages to homeowners who install wind, water or solar power?
by ga anderson 4 years ago
Or put another way - Would you rather see U.S. brands closed or bought-out by foreign brands that have no problem using overseas labor?Hopefully these are some common-ground facts all can accept:1. American, (and probably all), consumers will overwhelmingly buy the lowest priced item if all other...
by Eric Newland 6 years ago
One of the biggest problems I have with OWS and the whole "wealth redistribution" thing is that it seems to vilify and thus call for the punishment of certain people based entirely on their income level. Doesn't matter how they got their wealth or what they do with it. They're...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|