What a bunch of bull (on H1-Bs and outsourcing)

Post #109,279 by lincoln 7/11/03 1:48:06 PM Reply	What a bunch of bull (on H1-Bs and outsourcing) [link\|http://www.theworkcircuit.com/story/OEG20030710S0050\|link] Nasscom argues that outsourcing has not caused layoffs but, on the contrary, has helped some U.S. companies avert them. U.S. banks, financial-services companies and insurance firms saved $6 billion in the past four years by sourcing work to India, Nasscom says. During that time, part of the money saved via outsourcing has gone toward the addition of 125,000 jobs at those institutions. "Indian IT companies have [contributed] and continue to contribute to the U.S. economy by employing nearly 60,000 people in the U.S. in 2001," Nasscom states. "Nearly 170 Indian IT companies have physical establishments in the U.S." Nasscom released findings of a study by global consulting firm McKinsey & Co. to "reaffirm the fact that outsourcing to India will continue." While India's projected software and service exports to the United States in 2003-04 are expected to come in at $8.5 billion, the savings to the U.S. economy by outsourcing work to India over the period is estimated at between $10 billion and $11 billion. And high-tech imports into India from the United States (some of which will be used to write software for export) are expected to total $3 billion. lincoln "Four score and seven years ago, I had a better sig" [link\|http://users3.ev1.net/~bconnors/resume.htm\|VB/SQL resume] [link\|http://users3.ev1.net/~bconnors/tandem_resume.htm\|Tandem resume] [link\|mailto:bconnors@ev1.net\|contact me]
Post #109,296 by gdaustin 7/11/03 2:25:35 PM Reply	There you go again... See, the source is another consulting firm. McKinsey and Associates. PWC. IBM GS. Whatever Anderson is now. KPMG. Let's just list them out here... THESE ARE THE GUYS THAT ARE ADVISING US MANAGMENT TO MOVE JOBS OVERSEAS! They are the source. Go After THEM! Glen Austin
Post #109,303 by SpiceWare 7/11/03 3:11:43 PM Reply	I've seen it Where I work, we affiliated ourselves with an overseas manufacturer. We'd attempted to get business and the other companies wouldn't even talk to us because we didn't have any overseas producation abilities. Now we can get business from those companies, and not all of the work goes overseas. So, without the overseas abilities, we'd have less work to do here thus less local employees. Darrell Spice, Jr. [link\|http://www.spiceware.org/cgi-bin/spa.pl?album=./Artistic%20Overpass\|Artistic Overpass]\n[link\|http://www.spiceware.org/\|SpiceWare] - We don't do Windows, it's too much of a chore
Post #109,357 by tablizer 7/12/03 12:57:51 AM Reply	tricky math It is hard to verify such arguments because there are many variables and one cannot do the identical experiment with and without. But, there is no proof that unbridled capitalism guarentees equality of any kind. It only seems to guarentee that at least a handful of people become very very rich, but not much else. So,lets bridle it somewhat. ________________ oop.ismad.com
Post #109,441 by mhuber 7/13/03 1:17:26 AM Reply	What percentage of that $6B? would have gone for employees in the US otherwise? That would be, let's see, ummm, carry the 9, factor in pi to 29 decimal places, square it to cancel out the imaginary factor, square root of the speed of light in green jello... Um, some magic happens here... This part is left as an exercise... There is a neat proof of this bit, but it won't fit in the margin... 2x + 3y +z = -3 Unfortunately, the derivation for this step requires understanding material we will be exploring later in the semester. For now, you just have to take my word for it... x = sqrt(x) ^ 2 Ah, here it is... Savings is defined as the difference between what you would have spent and what you did spend. So we have $6B is the amount of money that would have been spent on US employees but wasn't, less the amount spent outsourcing to India. The percentage of the $6B that would have gone to US labor is (($6B + {cost of outsourcing}) / $6B ) * 100 So, taking the limit as the cost of outsouricng approaches zero, we get 100%. In real life, though, the cost of outsourcing is significantly non-zero. In which case, the percentage is higher than 100%. For example, if it cost $3B to outsource to India, in order to get $6B in savings, we would have to cut $9B in US labor costs. So what percentage of the $6B would have been used to pay for US labor? ((6B + 3B) /6B) * 100 150%. OK, so let's try to be fair - some of that $3B is going to finance computers for those guys in India to do the work on. Which will help increase the market for computers that are made in - no, wait, they aren't made in the US, we outsourced that already. ---- Sometime you the windshield, sometime you the bug...

Welcome to IWETHEY!