Fair & Effective Solution to OUTSOURCING Problem

[shivaji]

We simply can not outlaw outsourcing of office jobs.
Because it is then unfair to import products such as
cars, electronic products, clothing etc. since that
also exports jobs. If we cut-off foreign trade, the
economy will be badly hurt. That is because we also
employ millions of people in the export area.

Actually there is a more effective way to have our
cake and eat it too. This method not only will help
restrain outsourcing, it will increase prosperity,
increase middle and lower class incomes, increase health
benefits, make corporations more competetive, reduce
corporate fraud, make products cheaper for consumers,
give all the workers a fair wage, and many more
benefits too long to list here.

No, I am not advocating snake oil! It is actually a
very simple concept and very easy to legislate and
police it's compliance by corporations. I just don't
understand why it has not been tried before. Basically,
we need to pass a law which restricts the maximum total
compensation to minimum compensation ratio to some
reasonable figure. I would recommend 50, but will
go along with as high as 100 but no more.

This will reduce outsourcing because then the CEO's
will need to take a big paycut if they can't earn
more than 50 times what they pay a worker in India.

Middle & lower rung workers will benefit because with
the CEO & other big executives unable to loot the
corprate treasury, more dollars will be available for
others. That means more dollars for these people to
buy more benefits such as healthcare.

Less cash stolen by CEO types means products can be
priced cheaper. Also, more dollars to hire extra workers.
On and on.

Ofcourse the CEO's will fight like crazy. But they are
a distinct minority. And last time I checked this is
still a voting democratic republic. I have personally
worked in position ranging from a drafter, to corporate
manager of engineering and computerized manufacturing.
And I have never EVER seen the need to pay anyone more
than a million dollars a year to attract skilled CEO's.
A million is 50 times $20,000 which should be the minimum
fair wage in a corporation which can afford to pay one mil
to the CEO.

[mhr]

1. Agree Completely - The Freepers Will Argue That We Would Be Stifling

creativity and motivation.

Hogwash I say!

What human being is worth even 1 million a year let alone over that.

Clamp down and clamp down hard.

Teach these SOBs a lesson! NOW!

[outinforce]

2. Yeah! Clamp Down REAL Hard!

"What human being is worth even 1 million a year let alone over that."

mhr, you are waaaaaaay too generous.

Why set the limit so high -- at 1 million a year?

Hell, is any human being worth more than $50,000 a year, let alone over that?

I say clamp down on them REAL hard. No one gets more than $50k a year.

That ought to teach those SOB's a lesson!

[shivaji]

7. The current AVERAGE is running at 500 times the smallest wage

in the corporation. So you can see that CEO's are stealing
10 times of what they should earn very generously.

[shivaji]

8. 1 million is TOPS. Not every corp. will afford that, but...

it will make it illegal to take more which is done
in corporation after corp. It will be also a lot
easier to prosecute all those crooked Enron executives.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

3. great idea

I like it!

[shivaji]

9. Thanks.....but like all really good idea's it will not become a reality

due to the greed of top executives who fuel the
campaigns of politicians in both parties.

[Qutzupalotl]

4. Couldn't they still leave the country entirely?

CEO, HQ, staff, everything? Then they wouldn't be subject to the law.

Good start, though.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

11. they would have a hard time getting access to our market

if we wanted to make it difficult. Foreign companies that don't operate in the US are not the issue.

[shivaji]

14. They can leave the country now.................so

this does not change anything for them. You gotta
remember that even with the huge outsourcing of jobs
the real innovation is done here. Even in IT industry
where one hears the loudest outcry about outsourcing,
only 1 in 10 jobs is being outsourced.

The corporations stay here in the USA because we have
a highly educated AND ONE OF THE MOST INNOVATIVE WORK
FORCE. That is why corporations are not abandoning the
good ole USA for cheaper foreign shores.

[OneBlueSky]

5. well, it's as good as any idea I've heard so far . . .

something has to be done, and I've always been in favor of some kind of min/max ratio . . . think any politicos would support the idea? . . .

[shivaji]

10. Its possible but difficult since

politicians depend on corporate cash on both sides of
the aisle. However if we keep losing jobs, and the
billionaire executives keep getting richer, some
significant changes will become a necessity.

[BillZBubb]

6. It hasn't been tried before because it would be impossible

to enact into law until the Democrats had the presidency, control of the House, and a filibuster proof majority in the Senate. And all of those would still have to agree that it's a good idea. That wouldn't happen in my opinion.

Even if it did, there would be a court challenge. I don't see how it could stand up to Constitutional scrutiny. What are the grounds to enable the government to curtail the earnings of certain individuals and not others?

A better approach might be simply to tax all income greater than 50 times the U.S. minimum wage at 70%. In other words, tie tax rates to the minimum wage. Then put a tariff on all goods and services coming into the U.S. based on the relative wage rates/living standards of the country of origin and our minimum wage. High wage countries like those in Western Europe would pay no tariff. Low wage countries like China would pay a significant tariff.

[shivaji]

12. I do not favot the high tax idea because.....

it truly stifles innovation. If a company is highly
resourceful and ingenuious, there is nothing wrong
with the head hancho making 50 million if then EVERY
employee makes ONE MILLION.

We do not win by punishing the most productive, and
carrying the load of the less efficient corporations
by giving them tax write-offs and even government rescue
of corporations such as was done for Chrysler at taxpayer
expense.

As for being unconstitutional, if federal minimum wage
is constitutional, why is not a maximum ratio illegal?
This proposal DOES NOT LIMIT THE HIGHEST WAGE FOR ANYONE,
just requires that the lowest wage be proportionally
higher, as will be the case in a highly productive and
innovative corporation. I would celebrate if a CEO can
earn $100 Million per year if they will pay everyone
else $2 million per year.

[Xithras]

13. Nope, there's a better solution.

Believe it or not, I actually stumbled across this gem while trolling Freeperland, and I happen to agree with it.

The best way to fix the outsourcing problem is to change the way we define a corporations location. Today we have companies that are incorporated in one state or country, but effectively exist in another. So change THAT and you fix the problem. Redefine a corporations nation of existance as "The nation where a majority of that corporations primary products are created and/or where the majority of that corporations required daily operations take place".

Many of these companies doing their outsourcing would then be redefined as "foreign", which would open them up to possible levies and tarriffs, or higher tax rates.

This would also mean that a company like Hewlett Packard, which is outsourcing so much of its development and production to India, would be redefined as an INDIAN company. This would strip them of the unspoken "protections" that they enjoy as an American corporation and subject them to Indian corporate law. That thought should scare the hell out of ANY CEO considering outsourcing to a foreign country!

[shivaji]

15. Tariffs are a real bad idea......................because

it ends up punishing the consumers in the end.
We tariff them, they tariff us, and it is no win
for everybody.

But also please do not miss my other important point,
which is that our executives are ROBBING the corporations.
American executives get paid the highest ratio over the
lowest wage in their respective corporations than any other
industrialized country.

If HP is outsourcing programming to India, they are then
making more profits, and paying higher taxes. So US tax
payers are benefitting in a round about way. However if
Carly Fiorina HP head hancho) was restricted to 50 x lowest
paid employee in HP, then HP would save several million
every year. Then add all the other exorbitantly paid
executives in HP, and HP could then afford to employ more
programmers right here in USA. Currently Carly makes 15 to
20 million a year but based on my 50 ratio, non of the
programmers are making $300,000/year.