Write a 150 words response for each post, you can write your opinion on what you think about what the person said but please state a reference for each. no copy ir pasting
1. For a corporate or business to outsource, it usually means a dive in the cost to manufacture a product and a high form of profit. The business itself may find this ideal, who would really deny a huge profit margin? Those who understand that Americans need those jobs and the revenue would help stimulate the economy, are worried that all the outsourcing to other countries is putting American citizens in a higher percentage of unemployment. American Apparel, a popular clothing brand in Los Angeles, has laid off over a few hundred of American workers, but does not specifically say where they will outsource to. Dr. Paul Roberts in his article writes that people that lose their jobs to outsourcing are impacting the American economy because, those who have lost their jobs or took pay decreases can’t afford to be a consumer (Roberts 2016). This is a problem that effects our economy, and is a very common problem for many Americans. Another issue is in educational fields and technology. Two leading professors who have studies the impact of outsourcing for the U.S. state that in three years, for fields such as “computer science enrollment dropped by 40 %,”(Hira and Hira 2008, 4). Thus innovation of products and ideas become limited in the U.S., making other countries such as India and China leading in technology and science (Hira and Hira 2008, 4). Being laid off for the possibility of outsourcing and revamping the company and its margins is a big issue that American’s face. This month American Apparel out of Los Angeles is said to be looking into outsourcing in the future, starting with Southern states and the possibility of having jeans made cheaper overseas laying off over 500 employees to do so (Li 2016). Outsourcing does not just stop with technology and clothing, it also has its hand in the food industry. In Chicago an Oreo plant will be laying off more than 600 workers to send the factory to Mexico where they work for less than half the price (Trumka and Durkee 2016). Illinois Senator Durbin addressed Abbott Laboratories that laid off about 150 workers, to send the jobs to India, and then made the employees sign gag orders or they wouldn’t get paid for the lay-off (Durbin 2016). In so many fields outsourcing effects Americans from small jobs to white collar jobs. This hurts Americans because, while it is cheaper to send work overseas for profits for the companies, the citizens left here in the U.S. are facing unemployment and the competition of holding a job at a lower salary just to keep a job from those who will work for cheaper. The cycle will continue because people can’t afford to stay afloat with necessities thus will be less inclined to buy any consumer goods. Outsourcing is a bigger problem than many are lead to believe.
2. For this weeks forum I am selecting to discuss corporate subsidies. Policy makers claim business subsidies are needed to fix alleged market failures or to help American companies compete better on a global scale. Corporate subsidies in the federal budgets cost taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars annually. However corporate welfare often subsidizes failing and mismanaged businesses and induces companies to spend more time lobbying rather than improving their fundamental business practices. Corporate subsidies are also popular with policymakers who want to come to the aid of their home state businesses. These subsidies only create strong ties between politicians and business leaders, which are often found to be the source of governmental corruption. These subsidizing policies only undermine a broader economy while transferring wealth from the average taxpaying household to favored corporations. One sure way policymakers could trim the federal budget is to eliminate damaging and wasteful spending on corporate subsidies. One such failing example is the business of coal. This year a couple of energy companies that have received billions of dollars of federal support in subsidies will go into bankruptcy. All told seventy seven percent of total U.S. production of coal came from three leading providers through extracting the coal from federally owned land (Jervey, 2016). Decades of federal subsidies surmounting tens of billions of dollars are ultimately failing to keep big coal afloat as our nation transitions to cleaner energy sources. Other subsidies are provided at the state level. The state of Pennsylvania is another example at the state level at how corporate subsidies are harmful and ineffective. Pennsylvania owns the dubious honor of spending the most on economic development (Dick, 2016). However this dubious distinction of exorbitant spending has failed to translate into a stronger economy. Pennsylvania ranks thirty-fifth in job growth, thirty-first in personal income, and thirty-eighth in population growth. Government subsidies create an economic system that favors the privileged few at the expense of everyone else. Corporate subsidies do not aid economic growth. Corporate subsidies are an affront to America’s constitutional principles of limited government and equality under the law. This is money the American taxpayers will never get back. Government should let the markets take care of the marketplace.