Why would someone not outsource?

[volprof]

the problem is that there has never been a truly free market

I don't claim to know everything about how an entirely free market would operate, but I do know that all humans aren't moral all the time and that money often complicates morality even further.

 

[MG1968]

I don't claim to know everything about how an entirely free market would operate, but I do know that all humans aren't moral all the time and that money often complicates morality even further.

I'm not worried about individual people in a free market, I'm more concerned with government involvement. Particularly when said government has passed legislation like the Wagner Act.

 

[volprof]

I'm not worried about individual people in a free market, I'm more concerned with government involvement. Particularly when said government has passed legislation like the Wagner Act.

You're right in assuming that labor unions can overstep their bounds. Certainly this has been the case in the past and probably will be in the future. They're not perfect entities, just as corporations aren't either. The Wagner Act of which you speak was payed for in blood; it ended a nearly century long violent struggle on the part of workers to gain a legitimate and recognized voice in the workplace and in government. And I'm skeptical of corporations (and anyone for that matter) in a free market. Call me crazy but things like the Coal Creek Mine War, Ludlow Massacre, Battle of Matewan, Battle of Blair Mountain, Harlan Country War, etc. will do that to a man.

 

[volved]

I don't claim to know everything about how an entirely free market would operate, but I do know that all humans aren't moral all the time and that money often complicates morality even further.

I missed where the morality issue came in. Are you saying that buying goods made in China is immoral?

 

[volprof]

I missed where the morality issue came in. Are you saying that buying goods made in China is immoral?

No, I'm saying that the "barons" of industry don't always run things morally. Some do; some don't. We're all imperfect beings, and I can't say that I put full stock in something like a deregulated market. Some things about such a market would probably work better than things do now, and some things about such a market would probably work much worse than they do now. It's just the way it is: no one system addresses all our problems.

 

[volved]

No, I'm saying that the "barons" of industry don't always run things morally. Some do; some don't. We're all imperfect beings, and I can't say that I put full stock in something like a deregulated market. Some things about such a market would probably work better than things do now, and some things about such a market would probably work much worse than they do now. It's just the way it is: no one system addresses all our problems.

I see a big difference between "market deregulation" and still enforcing common laws against misrepresentation, stealing, assaulting striking workers, etc. You seem to be taking the second to argue against the first.

Can you give an example of the "immoral" behavior of which you speak?

 

[volprof]

I see a big difference between "market deregulation" and still enforcing common laws against misrepresentation, stealing, assaulting striking workers, etc. You seem to be taking the second to argue against the first.

Can you give an example of the "immoral" behavior of which you speak?

Yeah, I suppose the notion of a "free market" can sometimes be complicated and subjective in some cases. And I will admit that I neglected to say in my previous post that sometimes the market itself becomes immoral and not necessarily any one employer, employee, or consumer.

But, to answer your question, let's just look at something like NAFTA. That act, from many accounts, helped American farmers (especially corporate farms) while it hurt poorer farmers and peasant farm workers in Mexico and parts of Central America, also dispossessing some poor Latin American farmers in the process (such is the birth of the Zapatistas). As a result, more violence occurred and some people in that part of the world fell into even deeper poverty. There is another part of NAFTA, though. The act also led to the outsourcing of manufacturing jobs here in America, perhaps helping some Latin American workers but hurting American workers and resulting in the decline of the American middle-class (among other factors).

Now, it is possible to blame some of these developments on the immorality of the market itself and not anyone in particular, and, admittedly, the act helped some people and hurt some people (so perhaps it was a zero-sum gain). However, from an American jobs standpoint, none of this changes the fact that those corporations should retain many of these jobs here in America if they can. Obviously this would mean higher prices, but one could also ask what good do lower prices do for your society when you keep losing members of your middle-class (while executive salaries increase). Now, if someone doesn't have a problem with jobs going where the market leads them (say a Ron Paul libertarianism), then I suppose it wouldn't seem immoral. So perhaps it's simply a matter of perspective.

If that example doesn't work, there's also something like the 2007-2008 subprime mortgage crisis, which was spurred by an increasingly deregulated market. Some of these lenders were giving loans even though they knew better in some cases. It's difficult for me to see moral behavior in such actions, although, like I said before, maybe it's a matter of the market becoming immoral.

Anyhow, I'll just reiterate that there are pros and cons to a free market, just like anything else. Maybe more pros, maybe less. I don't claim that a free market is a completely bad thing by any means. It certainly has some benefits.

 

[volprof]

Also, to add to my answer, minimum wage is another issue. While some on here will swear up and down that minimum wage can earn someone a viable living (maybe for a single person who has roommates), I don't know that we can afford not to have a government involved in determining the market value of labor. The govt. has been resistant enough setting the minimum wage were it currently is, and many employers seemed to be in no hurry to aid them. It would seem that big business would want a society in which people could actually purchase their goods, but giving the fact that minimum wage is not exactly a living wage for everyone (despite what some may claim, unless everyone works like 80 or 90 hours a week and doesn't have kids as well) and that the govt. had to set the minimum wage, it's debatable about what exactly the intentions of big business are.

 

[volprof]

Hey, volved, I'll have to say that I appreciate your questions. You don't just attack me like some on this board do. You ask legitimate questions, and I understand your point of view. Thanks!

 

[utvolpj]

Also, to add to my answer, minimum wage is another issue. While some on here will swear up and down that minimum wage can earn someone a viable living (maybe for a single person who has roommates), I don't know that we can afford not to have a government involved in determining the market value of labor. The govt. has been resistant enough setting the minimum wage were it currently is, and many employers seemed to be in no hurry to aid them. It would seem that big business would want a society in which people could actually purchase their goods, but giving the fact that minimum wage is not exactly a living wage for everyone (despite what some may claim, unless everyone works like 80 or 90 hours a week and doesn't have kids as well) and that the govt. had to set the minimum wage, it's debatable about what exactly the intentions of big business are.

IIRC, under 5% of workers are at min wage (many under 25). I don't believe anyone is claiming it should be enough to raise a family on and it appears very, very few are actually dumb enough to try that. It's a first step

It would seem that big business would want a society in which people could actually purchase their goods,

what do you think the effect of raising wages would have on the cost of goods?

 

[Weezer]

Greed. Greed is what runs the economy. American corporations could keep jobs in the country but choose not to because they can find cheaper labor overseas. Their greed for money takes away American jobs creating more unemployment thus leading to more people needing govt funds to survive which they can then ***** about a welfare class that they have helped to create. Blaming consumers for what they buy is totally ignorant. The majority of consumers have to go with the cheapest because their wages force them into it. I've forgotten what minimum wage is atm, but do you really think that it is a liveable wage? If so, you are fooling yourself. Some of you have let your success in life blind you to the plight of the less fortunate. Weird how people are all about helping foreign countries such as Ethiopia or Somalia with their poverty but basically give the middle finger to their fellow Americans. And somehow if you're on welfare or homeless, then you must be lazy. It can't be a set of unfortunate circumstances, it had to be laziness. Stop looking down from your perches and imagine if you were the people you are looking down upon.

And it's quite amazing how companies, especially pharmaceuticals, can sell their products cheaper in other countries, yet to do so here would cut into their bottom dollar. They can come up with a myriad of reasons as to why this is, but the truth is, because our nation as a whole(not individually), tends to be more prosperous, they know they can get their asking price.Consumer prices have continued to rise in this country while most wages are only increased by miniscule amounts, when they are raised at all.

Neo, as to your original post(apparently I missed this thread back when), get rid of your lazy workers and replace them with more satisfactory help. Is that easy to do? No, and it can be quite frustrating, but it can be done. If you can't find reason to fire them, ride 'em until they quit. Maybe with the proper incentive they might actually develop a work ethic. IMHO, one of the reasons our country's work ethic has seen a decline is because the American spirit has been broken by sending jobs to other countries. You had a group of people who worked hard and who worked proud and their jobs were taken away and sent to other countries. Faced with sudden unemployment, they looked around the job market and found many others in the same predicament. Welfare and unemployment are probably more profitable than minimum wage jobs so faced with being abandoned by corporations they had poured their lives into and their newfound disillusionment, they said to hell with it and started living off the govt teet. And over the last several years, govt has made it easier to exist this way.

I'm not making excuses for American workers and laziness. I absolutely believe in hard work. But I think there are many reasons for the attitude change, one of the foremost being abandonment by American industry. IMO, lack of work ethic is un-Patriotic as it goes against what this country was founded on. The American dream is about working hard. On the flip side, I also belive the corporations sending their jobs overseas to be un-Patriotic as well, since they are abandoning their fellow Americans in the search for the almighty(well once) dollar. It's a system that's tearing itself and the country apart.

Personally, I believe the govt should find ways to make it more profitable to produce products here than elsewhere, and not through tax breaks so much as tariffs. I also think minimum wage should be increased and addressed more often. Ultimately, I think there needs to be a better distribution of wealth than what we currently have. Call me crazy, and I'm sure many will, but salaries at the top need to decrease and salaries at the bottom increase. I'm not saying the bottom should make as much as the top, but there needs to be better parity so that both sides can live comfortably and support their families. Love thy neighbor.

 

[Weezer]

what do you think the effect of raising wages would have on the cost of goods?

Therein lies the problem. Gotta keep that profit margin so we can beech about the welfare class.

And sorry if that comes across as snarky, pj. It's not aimed at you. My problem is with the thought process that a company must make more and more profit. When is enough wealth enough? There needs to be a balance.

 

[theutvolunteers]

Min wage would gross 290$ per week at 7.25$/hr.

I don't know how anyone could survive with that.

 

[volprof]

IIRC, under 5% of workers are at min wage (many under 25). I don't believe anyone is claiming it should be enough to raise a family on and it appears very, very few are actually dumb enough to try that. It's a first step



what do you think the effect of raising wages would have on the cost of goods?

In response to your question, I admitted above that it would raise prices. I freely admit that it is a conundrum. However, what effect does outsourcing jobs have on some Americans? I think it's just a big fat conundrum.

And to address your first statement, you're probably right with those statistics. However, not every non-college graduate can always get an above-minimum wage job. I admit that it is often a stepping stone, but that's not to say that everyone can move beyond that stone at any one point in time. Furthermore, with the economy having outsourced and transitioned into a service economy, I would actually look for that 5% you cite to grow in the future (barring some changes in economic policy). Many of those jobs are low-paying. I admit I could be wrong about my last point regarding the service sector, but it seems likely that this could be the case.

Anyhow, it's been nice fellas, but I'm going to have to bow out of this one. I feel like I've made my case, adequate or not, and I've dragged myself deeper into this particular thread than I was originally intending. I've got other things I need to be working on. haha!

 

[utvolpj]

Therein lies the problem. Gotta keep that profit margin so we can beech about the welfare class.

And sorry if that comes across as snarky, pj. It's not aimed at you. My problem is with the thought process that a company must make more and more profit. When is enough wealth enough? There needs to be a balance.

I get what you're saying (and how you're aiming it). So you want to limit profit or are you calling for them to all of a sudden develop an altruistic side and screw their shareholders? Businesses are there to make money. Not sure why so many complain about that. Honestly some of the ones that do don't seem to understand profit anyways (see evil oil company threads)

Min wage would gross 290$ per week at 7.25$/hr.

I don't know how anyone could survive with that.

very few even try. I think the govt pays more than that now anyways

 

[Weezer]

I get what you're saying (and how you're aiming it). So you want to limit profit or are you calling for them to all of a sudden develop an altruistic side and screw their shareholders? Businesses are there to make money. Not sure why so many complain about that. Honestly some of the ones that do don't understand



very few even try. I think the govt pays more than that now anyways

If shareholders want to complain about less profit, then they should stop complaining about the welfare class they help create in chasing that profit. It's a "Mr. Deeds" moment, if you will.

Exactly. Right there is why we have a welfare class. You can earn more sitting on your ass than you can working a minimum wage job.

 

[NEO]

Greed. Greed is what runs the economy. American corporations could keep jobs in the country but choose not to because they can find cheaper labor overseas. Their greed for money takes away American jobs creating more unemployment thus leading to more people needing govt funds to survive which they can then ***** about a welfare class that they have helped to create. Blaming consumers for what they buy is totally ignorant. The majority of consumers have to go with the cheapest because their wages force them into it. I've forgotten what minimum wage is atm, but do you really think that it is a liveable wage? If so, you are fooling yourself. Some of you have let your success in life blind you to the plight of the less fortunate. Weird how people are all about helping foreign countries such as Ethiopia or Somalia with their poverty but basically give the middle finger to their fellow Americans. And somehow if you're on welfare or homeless, then you must be lazy. It can't be a set of unfortunate circumstances, it had to be laziness. Stop looking down from your perches and imagine if you were the people you are looking down upon.

And it's quite amazing how companies, especially pharmaceuticals, can sell their products cheaper in other countries, yet to do so here would cut into their bottom dollar. They can come up with a myriad of reasons as to why this is, but the truth is, because our nation as a whole(not individually), tends to be more prosperous, they know they can get their asking price.Consumer prices have continued to rise in this country while most wages are only increased by miniscule amounts, when they are raised at all.

Neo, as to your original post(apparently I missed this thread back when), get rid of your lazy workers and replace them with more satisfactory help. Is that easy to do? No, and it can be quite frustrating, but it can be done. If you can't find reason to fire them, ride 'em until they quit. Maybe with the proper incentive they might actually develop a work ethic. IMHO, one of the reasons our country's work ethic has seen a decline is because the American spirit has been broken by sending jobs to other countries. You had a group of people who worked hard and who worked proud and their jobs were taken away and sent to other countries. Faced with sudden unemployment, they looked around the job market and found many others in the same predicament. Welfare and unemployment are probably more profitable than minimum wage jobs so faced with being abandoned by corporations they had poured their lives into and their newfound disillusionment, they said to hell with it and started living off the govt teet. And over the last several years, govt has made it easier to exist this way.

I'm not making excuses for American workers and laziness. I absolutely believe in hard work. But I think there are many reasons for the attitude change, one of the foremost being abandonment by American industry. IMO, lack of work ethic is un-Patriotic as it goes against what this country was founded on. The American dream is about working hard. On the flip side, I also belive the corporations sending their jobs overseas to be un-Patriotic as well, since they are abandoning their fellow Americans in the search for the almighty(well once) dollar. It's a system that's tearing itself and the country apart.

Personally, I believe the govt should find ways to make it more profitable to produce products here than elsewhere, and not through tax breaks so much as tariffs. I also think minimum wage should be increased and addressed more often. Ultimately, I think there needs to be a better distribution of wealth than what we currently have. Call me crazy, and I'm sure many will, but salaries at the top need to decrease and salaries at the bottom increase. I'm not saying the bottom should make as much as the top, but there needs to be better parity so that both sides can live comfortably and support their families. Love thy neighbor.

Reality is people in this country are lazy. You can get on your soapbox and preach about greed but you need to realize that people from other countries will work twice as hard for half the money. I have a friend who own a manufacturing company. He hires mexicans because they will work. He cant get white people in there. I am offshoring due to laziness myself.

I understand that its difficult sometimes for an outsider to see how the cogs work on the inside of a business and from your perspective its greed, greed, and more greed.

But the reality is I dont owe you a damn thing, nor does any other business owner. If we can find cheaper labor that will get the job done as well or better than its in our best interest to get them. It would be dumb not too.

People also dont seem to get how high the cost of labor in this country is compared to some many other countries that we compete directly against labor wise. You might also need to realize that whatever wage is paid to a w2 worker the actual gross cost is anywhere between 110 and 150% of that pay due to payroll taxes and benefits.

All businesses are built on greed in some form or another. It is why they are taxed as "for profits." I understand alot of Americans hate that for profit thing nowadays but it is a vital part of why a business exist.

 

[PKT_VOL]

Adam Smith also thought that the free market could be a moral market. We see where that got us. Anyhow, you have your view, and that's fine with me. I have a different view. You may very well be right though.

I don't claim to know everything about how an entirely free market would operate, but I do know that all humans aren't moral all the time and that money often complicates morality even further.

No, I'm saying that the "barons" of industry don't always run things morally. Some do; some don't. We're all imperfect beings, and I can't say that I put full stock in something like a deregulated market. Some things about such a market would probably work better than things do now, and some things about such a market would probably work much worse than they do now. It's just the way it is: no one system addresses all our problems.

Greed. Greed is what runs the economy. American corporations could keep jobs in the country but choose not to because they can find cheaper labor overseas. Their greed for money takes away American jobs creating more unemployment thus leading to more people needing govt funds to survive which they can then ***** about a welfare class that they have helped to create. Blaming consumers for what they buy is totally ignorant. The majority of consumers have to go with the cheapest because their wages force them into it. I've forgotten what minimum wage is atm, but do you really think that it is a liveable wage? If so, you are fooling yourself. Some of you have let your success in life blind you to the plight of the less fortunate. Weird how people are all about helping foreign countries such as Ethiopia or Somalia with their poverty but basically give the middle finger to their fellow Americans. And somehow if you're on welfare or homeless, then you must be lazy. It can't be a set of unfortunate circumstances, it had to be laziness. Stop looking down from your perches and imagine if you were the people you are looking down upon.

And it's quite amazing how companies, especially pharmaceuticals, can sell their products cheaper in other countries, yet to do so here would cut into their bottom dollar. They can come up with a myriad of reasons as to why this is, but the truth is, because our nation as a whole(not individually), tends to be more prosperous, they know they can get their asking price.Consumer prices have continued to rise in this country while most wages are only increased by miniscule amounts, when they are raised at all.

I'm not saying the bottom should make as much as the top, but there needs to be better parity so that both sides can live comfortably and support their families. Love thy neighbor.

I fail to see where morality comes into the equation. As long as people or entities are not stealing or rigging the game (there is certainly cases of that), I don't understand where morality has anything to do with economic decisions. Specifically, you guys have been equating the notion of shedding job with immoral behavior. I just don't see it.

If a company uses technology to automate their business resulting in job losses, is that immoral? If so, does that make new technology immoral?

To me, whether a company cuts jobs due to technology or outsourcing to cheap labor makes no difference; especially on a moral level.

The simple fact is that Americans have to now compete on a global market. Instead of competing with your next door neighbor, you now have to compete with everyone all over the world. If you only skill is your labor, your up sh*t creek without a paddle. It is part of the pains of going through an economic paradigm shift. The biggest problem of which is our educational system.

You can certainly make an argument about the patriotic aspect of the equation. However, I think it is disingenuous to hold companies that outsource as unpatriotic. Consumers drive the market. If consumers were truly against outsourcing (being patriotic), they could easily force companies to move those jobs back home.

 

[PKT_VOL]

Say PKT VOL, why are you over in Seoul? Are you in the military, Korean, or doing something else? I'm not trying to set you up for an attack; I'm just curious. Thanks!

I am back home in Atlanta. I was in Korea for a bit while I was travelling overseas.

 

[Weezer]

Reality is people in this country are lazy. You can get on your soapbox and preach about greed but you need to realize that people from other countries will work twice as hard for half the money. I have a friend who own a manufacturing company. He hires mexicans because they will work. He cant get white people in there. I am offshoring due to laziness myself.

I understand that its difficult sometimes for an outsider to see how the cogs work on the inside of a business and from your perspective its greed, greed, and more greed.

But the reality is I dont owe you a damn thing, nor does any other business owner. If we can find cheaper labor that will get the job done as well or better than its in our best interest to get them. It would be dumb not too.

People also dont seem to get how high the cost of labor in this country is compared to some many other countries that we compete directly against labor wise. You might also need to realize that whatever wage is paid to a w2 worker the actual gross cost is anywhere between 110 and 150% of that pay due to payroll taxes and benefits.

All businesses are built on greed in some form or another. It is why they are taxed as "for profits." I understand alot of Americans hate that for profit thing nowadays but it is a vital part of why a business exist.

Neo, there are lots of realities. Some people are lazy, some are put into impossible situations. And you're right, you owe me nothing. An arguement could be made as to what you owe the country that allowed you to succeed, but that's neither here nor there. If you want to outsource due to costs, fine, more power to you, but if that's your decision then please don't post disparaging remarks about a welfare class you are helping to create.

The fact of the matter is, other countries limit how imports compete with tariffs. The U.S. should do the same. If you decide to take your jobs elsewhere, then I hope your product gets taxed coming into this country. It's a simple concept. Make it cheaper to produce in house and it will stay in house, creating American jobs.

The problem with your way of thinking, IMO, is that you think only of your family and yourself. I agree they should always be your number one priority, but there is room for you to think of your fellow Americans as well. If you cannot, then I encourage you to take your production elsewhere. I wish you success, but I hope you get hit with tariffs sending your product into the U.S. I want American businesses in America to succeed. It's nothing against you personally, but companies that continue to send jobs overseas need to start being penalized with tariffs to make for a fair working environment.

I can understand your frustration with laziness. I battle it every day. Not as a business owner mind you, but I deal with it. Lazy workers with a sense of entitlement drive me insane. But they can be dealt with if you're willing to do so. Reasons can be found for termination, or, the more fun method, ride their ass so hard they quit. You'd be amazed how effective giving every **** job to someone can motivate them to change or move on. Does it always work? No, but it often works. You just have to get your point across.

 

[Weezer]

I fail to see where morality comes into the equation. As long as people or entities are not stealing or rigging the game (there is certainly cases of that), I don't understand where morality has anything to do with economic decisions. Specifically, you guys have been equating the notion of shedding job with immoral behavior. I just don't see it.

If a company uses technology to automate their business resulting in job losses, is that immoral? If so, does that make new technology immoral?

To me, whether a company cuts jobs due to technology or outsourcing to cheap labor makes no difference; especially on a moral level.

The simple fact is that Americans have to now compete on a global market. Instead of competing with your next door neighbor, you now have to compete with everyone all over the world. If you only skill is your labor, your up sh*t creek without a paddle. It is part of the pains of going through an economic paradigm shift. The biggest problem of which is our educational system.

You can certainly make an argument about the patriotic aspect of the equation. However, I think it is disingenuous to hold companies that outsource as unpatriotic. Consumers drive the market. If consumers were truly against outsourcing (being patriotic), they could easily force companies to move those jobs back home.

If by morality you mean greed, then it absolutely fits into the equation. It's all about making more money.

I think it more appropriate to hold companies responsible than consumers as companies are more fiscally stable. Do you expect consumers to buy more expensive products and have their families go without? If they could actually afford the type of protest you suggest, then I could see your point, but the sad thing is they cannot afford it.

And again I offer up to all who feel this way, fine. If this is what you want to believe, I'm okay with it. But I think it makes any arguement against a welfare class hypocritical as you are saying it's okay to drive people into unemployment in the name of making more money. If you want people to work, you have to support them having jobs to do.

 

[PKT_VOL]

If by morality you mean greed, then it absolutely fits into the equation. It's all about making more money.

Is greed immoral?

I think it more appropriate to hold companies responsible than consumers as companies are more fiscally stable. Do you expect consumers to buy more expensive products and have their families go without? If they could actually afford the type of protest you suggest, then I could see your point, but the sad thing is they cannot afford it.

It's a chicken or the egg argument. If consumers would have punished the first companies who went overseas, they would have been forced to come right back. Most people are not barely scraping by. Most poor people still have a car, smart phone, etc. I just don't buy the, "we can't afford to protest argument". Consumers are just as greedy if not more greedy than these companies you are demonizing.

 

[Weezer]

Is greed immoral?



It's a chicken or the egg argument. If consumers would have punished the first companies who went overseas, they would have been forced to come right back. Most people are not barely scraping by. Most poor people still have a car, smart phone, etc. I just don't buy the, "we can't afford to protest argument". Consumers are just as greedy if not more greedy than these companies you are demonizing.

Greed is whatever you want to make it.

I'll agree with the "first company to go" arguement seeing as hindsight is 20/20, but I disagree with your opinion about "most people are not barely scraping by". I think far more are struggling than we are given to believe. And yes, there are greedy consumers, I just don't see the current situation as allowing us to see who the greedy ones are since most cannot afford the type of protest you suggest. And I disagree they are more greedy. Large corporations and money mix like sharks and bloody water. They can't get enough and they have the ability to keep taking.

 

[volprof]

I am back home in Atlanta. I was in Korea for a bit while I was travelling overseas.

I hope you enjoyed things while you were traveling. Glad you made it back safe and sound. I know we disagree on this matter (although I share some of your opinions), but we're both humans and fellow Vol fans at the end of the day. I appreciate your insights.

 

[PKT_VOL]

Greed is whatever you want to make it.

The question is whether it is immoral.

I'll agree with the "first company to go" arguement seeing as hindsight is 20/20, but I disagree with your opinion about "most people are not barely scraping by". I think far more are struggling than we are given to believe. And yes, there are greedy consumers, I just don't see the current situation as allowing us to see who the greedy ones are since most cannot afford the type of protest you suggest. And I disagree they are more greedy. Large corporations and money mix like sharks and bloody water. They can't get enough and they have the ability to keep taking.

Having lived in a third-world country, the poor in this country are not "barely scraping by". They might be struggling compared to what they are accustom to living, but they far from my definition of "barely scraping by".

Secondly, we are talking about present day. The outsourcing business has be taking place for decades. The American consumer has been greedy, buying the cheaper products made with cheap labor for decades; even when times were good. Consumers drive the market. Companies merely respond to the market demands.