Brad Wardell's views about technology, politics, religion, world affairs, and all sorts of politically incorrect topics.

Since no one will stand up for greedy evil capitalists these days, I'll take a stab at it.

I support outsourcing.  That's right. I love it.  I would have its babies if I could.  I love a globalized economy. The more globalized the better. The more free trade there is, the better. I feel sorry for countries that don't have the amount of free trade we have here in the United States. Even with the dollar at an all time low, products and services here are incredibly cheap. I love working with people from around the world. I don't care where you're from.

So why do I love globalization and outsourcing? Because it's the only check against federal government power.  For the first 150 years of the republic, the federal government stayed largely out of the economics of the country. Instead, the states competed vigorously with one another for the best, brightest, and most productive Americans.  But over the last 50 years (and in particular the last 20 years) the federal government has greatly reduced the differences between doing business in one state versus another.

Now, the federal government is the driving force on minimum wage. States can still have their own but it's only if they want to make them higher than the federal minimum wage.  If you're making a widget trying to compete on the global market costs matter. And Americans are incredibly neutral about buying things made wherever.  So Americans push for minimum wage but buy goods made in countries without them. Result, companies ship jobs to those countries.

Similarly, there's an ever increasing effort to have the top 1% pay more and more of the taxes than ever before. Even today, the top 1% pay 20% of the taxes.  And in a democracy, who is to argue what is "fair"?  If 51% think it's "fair" that 1% pay 20% or 30% or 50% of the taxes, the 1% are basically screwed right? Not so in a globalized economy.

Who are "the rich"?  80% of them are small business owners. Most people don't realize that. But that's how you get rich. You start a successful business. And in a globalized economy, they can take their skills anywhere they want.

I've seen politicians argue that outsourcing is unpatriotic. That's a ridiculous argument since outsourcing is just another way of saying "shopping based on price". If Americans buy things based on price, why shouldn't employers hire based on price? It's the same thing. An employer is no more unpatriotic for outsourcing jobs than the consumer who buys something made in China. They are, in effect, both doing the same thing.

If Americans want to vote in politicians who think it's okay to steal from the most productive to give to the least productive with nothing in return, then those people, thanks to outsourcing and globalization, have the freedom to distribute the burden imposed on them as well.

In the long run, it's a good thing for our society as it will require the citizens of the country to take more seriously the consequences of the policies of panderers. If a vote for Obama or Hillary Clinton is likely to result in the loss of your job or that of your spouse, you might rethink whether "change" is always good.

Now, if you don't mind, I have some baby's blood to drink.

 

Further reading: Who pays taxes


Comments (Page 3)
3 Pages1 2 3 
on Mar 18, 2008

Probably not surprisingly, I know quite a few people in that top 1% and they too tend to be business owners.

Well, that's a "Nixon can't have won - no one I know voted for him!" thing.  Networking and having things in common bring you together, in Hollywood it probably seems the top 1% is mostly actors and directors.

Anyway, the reality is, whether people want to accept it or not, is that when you raise taxes on "the rich" you're basically just eliminating American jobs.  I wouldn't think twice about outsourcing American jobs overseas if my taxes went up.  If the American people are so greedy as to demand I pay ever increasing amounts to the government to be redistributed to them, then I owe them no employment allegience.

I love when you bring something up and I'm like "Why is he talking about that?" and then I realize it's the topic of the post that you wrote and I've been discussing way far afield. 

What you're saying would apply even if you and the rest of the top 1% were just shareholders -- if the U.S. taxes you, you'll move the jobs elsewhere.  Actually, shareholders would have the easiest time moving the jobs, as all they have to do to move the factory is shuffle money around.  Small business owners, by contrast, depend on smaller local networks and markets and may not be able to move -- they're easier to squeeze.  Large business owners may not be mobile either, but they're big enough to just change the system so it doesn't squeeze them. 

That's why it matters who makes up the top 1%.  If it's made up of small-scale individuals like yourself, then it's plausible that the system is weighing heavily down on them.  If it's made up of the people who own and manage our largest and best-politically-connected institutions, then that's not very likely.  If we had a better breakdown, maybe you'd make common cause with the smaller group of entrepreneurs like yourself instead of identifying with the top 1% as a whole.

3 Pages1 2 3