Somebody's gotta do it

April 26, 2005 5:26 AM

Got Conscience? His company did $22 million in business last year, moving American manufacturing plants offshore. "It's not right," Hosea says. "But if I don't do it, someone else is gonna do it." Interesting, if it’s true, is that he tells his potential clients that what they’re about to do is wrong.
posted by tizzie (21 comments total)

If it's so wrong he wouldn't be doing it--i think he's trying to rationalize it all by the fact that at least he tells them they shouldn't (while pocketing their money and moving their stuff for them). It's sad.
posted by amberglow at 6:01 AM on April 26, 2005

"EZconscience-Wipe" - cheaper by the gallon, leaves no residue !
posted by troutfishing at 6:30 AM on April 26, 2005

"Yeah, sure, Big Al, I'll wipe out them guys for you. You want I should use the tommy gun like last time? OK, that'll work. Uh, by the way, ya know killin' people is wrong, right? Yeah, just so you know. I'll send you the bill."
posted by languagehat at 6:36 AM on April 26, 2005

I dunno... the guy runs a large scale moving company, that it happens to be doing well in the midst of all the outsourcing is good for him but from the sound of it he'd be much happier schlepping machinery into the country than out.

When someone buys cigarettes who do you blame? The person doing the buying or the guy who runs the corner store who would probably much rather sell the guy a pack of gum but it's cigarettes that pay the bills and feed his family.

And languagehat: somehow I don't think moving large moving machinery is morally equivalent to killing someone...
posted by PenDevil at 6:54 AM on April 26, 2005

amberglow: Why would he need to rationalize it if he didn't think it is wrong?
posted by Doug at 7:11 AM on April 26, 2005

Is "the ends justify the means" the new "standing by your principles"?

Works pretty well for the Bushie crowd.
In fact, I've been getting pretty tired of the Democrat and Libertarian concept of "stand the real high ground, don't stoop to 'their' level, and people will notice and you will win them over". Rules and principles are for pussies. Responsibility and accountability are passe'.

But you know, we can always stick to our principles, and bemoan the outcomes that happen when we do.

Or we can start waking up to the fact that the winners don't play by "the rules" anymore. Thanks Bushies!
posted by Balisong at 8:18 AM on April 26, 2005

What, exactly, is wrong with offshoring or outsourcing? As long as the players involved are being treated equitably, all it really does is force the US to raise its educational standards. This could lead to government subsidation of college educations.
posted by SeizeTheDay at 8:24 AM on April 26, 2005

When I read this article about Offshoring Ethics, at first I thought maybe the author was being sarcastic. Obviously, there are a lot of people who share the mindset that "for every job lost, another job is created, so what's the problem?"

Those people can shop at Wal-Mart with a clear conscience, but I can't.
posted by tizzie at 8:24 AM on April 26, 2005

Obviously, there are a lot of people who share the mindset that "for every job lost, another job is created, so what's the problem?"

Pretty much. What is the problem?
posted by biffa at 9:42 AM on April 26, 2005

amberglow: Why would he need to rationalize it if he didn't think it is wrong?
But he does think it's wrong: ... But he hates it.
"It's not right," Hosea says. ... That leaves empty factories behind - and leaves Hosea frustrated. ... "I just tell people, 'You're making a bad decision,'" he says. "I mean, I want the work, but I'm an American, and I don't want our manufacturing base destroyed. ...

The problem is that another job isn't created. Even this guy's company and employees isn't replacing even one fraction of the jobs he's helping move overseas.
posted by amberglow at 10:21 AM on April 26, 2005

The problem is that another job isn't created.

Based on what evidence can you possibly make that conclusion? The law of instant gratification, where one job immediately pops up out of thin air after another job is outsourced?

Even this guy's company and employees isn't replacing even one fraction of the jobs he's helping move overseas.

That's not his job. That's Wal-Mart, Starbucks, and Target who are creating jobs to replace the ones left behind. Don't misunderstand me; the jobs are obviously not equal, but there is significant job growth in the US right now. You're making a fallacious argument based on nationalistic thought, which is admirable and patriotic, but not very economically advantageous to consumers in this country.
posted by SeizeTheDay at 10:35 AM on April 26, 2005

You all like them brown people, unless they start taken oerrrr joebbbs!!!!
posted by PissOnYourParade at 11:49 AM on April 26, 2005

SeizeTheDay, I think the fact that "the jobs are obviously not equal" deserves more than a mention. Textile manufacturing vs. working at the checkout at WalMart selling cheap, imported, no-longer-made-in-the-USA Levi's, for example. The manufacturing job offered higher pay and better benefits.

Hosea's internal conflict is evident in his statements. At least he's intelligent enough to acknowledge that there's a downside to what he's doing.
posted by tizzie at 12:04 PM on April 26, 2005

Obviously, there are a lot of people who share the mindset that "for every job lost, another job is created, so what's the problem?"

...

The problem is that another job isn't created.

No, the job is, by definition created. Created somewhere else, sure, but created somewhere else. Actually, the job still exists it's just been moved.

The only way you can find overseas outsourcing 'morally wrong' is if you believe that Americans are somehow intrinsically more deserving of a job then other people, period.
posted by delmoi at 2:19 PM on April 26, 2005

Hosea's internal conflict is evident in his statements. At least he's intelligent enough to acknowledge that there's a downside to what he's doing.

Downside for some people, upside for others.

The only problem I see with globalization is that some countries have more lax environmental or labor laws, which should be addressed in any global trade agreement, I think.
posted by delmoi at 2:22 PM on April 26, 2005

Outsourcing some hazardous job to a country with fewer worker health regulations would be wrong, don't you think?

Corporate outsourcing also contributes to the economic instability of regions that depend on those corporations. When a large factory in a small town shuts down, people may lose their homes. There are network effects at work here. Are you going to tell me that there would have been analogous damage to the people in Dongguan (or wherever) had the new American factory not opened there?

Only by simplifying the outsourcing phenomenon down to a universe consisting of nothing but abstract "jobs" does your assertion make any sense, delmoi.

on preview: your faith in the abilities and intentions of our treaty-makers to provide for the health of those unfortunates abroad is touching.
posted by sonofsamiam at 2:31 PM on April 26, 2005

he obviously doesnt think its wrong. theyre just words.
posted by Satapher at 9:22 PM on April 26, 2005

...but there is significant job growth in the US right now. You're making a fallacious argument based on nationalistic thought, which is admirable and patriotic, but not very economically advantageous to consumers in this country.

That is a lie--there is not significant job growth in the US and there hasn't been for quite a while. Prove it. I'm not the one making fallacious arguments here. ... The share of the working-age population working or actively seeking a job in March held steady at 65.8 percent, a nearly 17-year low first reached in January. And, the number of people who could find only part-time work rose sharply, as did the number of self employed. ... We haven't even been creating enough jobs to cover all the new jobseekers entering the workforce each year.
posted by amberglow at 9:43 PM on April 26, 2005

The word significant as I used above does not always mean "gigantic rises in employment", amberglow. From where we were three years ago, when we were bleeding jobs (remember the whole argument that Bush has lost more jobs than any other President since the depression), we're much better off. Our economy is stronger; job growth has been consistently rising (again, albeit small, it's a relative judgement based on our immediate past).

I'm not trying to tout the Bush motto that we're fine. Because we're not. But your anti-outsourcing stance without any academic or logical reasoning cannot go without a comment. Quite frankly, I'm upset that Americans are having difficulty finding jobs (I'm one of those people). But your reaction, while full of passion, is devoid of logical thought.

Screaming that Americans are losing jobs doesn't sit well with me when the US is one of the worst educated in the industrialized world. We're losing jobs because the market is determining that it's more efficient to send the job elsewhere. There are many moral and ethical implications regarding this issue, but I've yet to see you raise any of them. All I hear is, "They're giving away our jobs, those evil bastards!"
posted by SeizeTheDay at 10:25 PM on April 26, 2005

Shorter version for those paying attention: Out-sourcing as one of the primary causes of our increasing unemployment is a red-herring, a straw man invented to scare people into marginalizing the more complex truth. Our economy has consistently lost manufacturing jobs while letting other countries pick up the slack due to a lack of innovation, a shortage of skilled labor, a labor force that's demanding far too much money, among other factors. This is an extremely complicated issue so I get annoyed when people blame "outsourcing". It's fucking silly when you look at the real number of jobs being outsourced versus simply being eliminated by a lack of production in this country. Shoot, that wasn't as short as I wanted it to be.
posted by SeizeTheDay at 10:30 PM on April 26, 2005

The day we can travel as easily as our jobs can is the day outsourcing and offshoring is ok. Until then, forget it.
posted by amberglow at 4:59 AM on April 27, 2005