Protecting American Jobs

Protecting the Statesn Jobs For the past two decades Ameri bottomlands bring forth been getting rigid dour because their jobs atomic number 18 being exilered forth border. Advances in engineering and low- make up telecommunications now mean that a computer programmer, data origination specialist, or help-desk operator answering calls for a U. S. company can spend a penny as easily from India or the Philippines as from Iowaand save p bent companies near 30 share to 70 percent in bells (Otterman, 2004). This poses the principal should the disposal protect American jobs by imposing stiff penalties on companies that transfer jobs offshore by outsourcing or manu occurrenceuring.No, stiffer taxes are not passing to significantly effect the number of jobs that are being transferred off shore due to outsourcing. rather the United States presidency needs to lower the ordinary tax rate on multinational corporations and fix the loopholes that are before long being used to av oid paying these corporate taxes. For years American companies puzzle been scrutinized for outsourcing their jobs by off shore. Even though this has been going on for the past twenty or much years it is being brought to frail even more now since our coun audition is in a recession.There are many reasons companies choose to source off shore. One of the main reasons is cost savings, many developing countries are more affordable for American companies to absorb in because an employee that may cost $50 and hour in America might merely cost or so $5 an hour in a developing country. Companies are not just off shoring for cost benefits however likewise for the fact that many opposite countries deliver many educated and heightsly skilled workers who can perform jobs that are needed overseas. Business can similarly operate 24 hours a day 7 days a week by taking advantage of the offshore workers.When it is 6 p. m. in New York it is 6 a. m. in Singapore. Americans want that 24 hours a day 7 days a week customer service when they are having problems with things like their computer. Outsourcing offshore also makes it a lot easier for companies to sell goods and services in a globular securities industry when they are producing them there and can reach their customers more cursorily and effectively. Technological possibilities are another reason companies are choosing to offshore American jobs. Since many service jobs do not require face-to-face fundamental interaction they are able to erform these jobs from wherever is needed (Popwell, 2010). Many argue that the government should protect American jobs by imposing stiff penalties on companies that transfer jobs offshore by outsourcing or manufacturing. They claim off shoring has laid off thousands of American workers who will not be able to vex other work unless they learn new skills. They also claim that off shoring is a major contributor to the United States 9 percent unemployment rate (United States D epartment of Labor, 2011).But they are only livelihood their claims by the fact that they regain companies are only off shoring for cost incentives. Where as stated before there are many other reasons companies source offshore and many ways to make up for the job sackinges. Those who oppse the government defend American jobs with stiff penalties for off shoring recognise that yes, cost savings is a big incentive for a company to outsource off shore, but there are also many more reasons that comapanies should opperate on a global scale that out weigh the loss of jobs in America. Thea Lee, policy levelor for the AFL-CIO, swears much of the economic data supporting the link between overseas investment and domestic job appendage fails to distinguish between foreign investment used to serve market demand for U. S. goods and services and foreign investment used to buy cheaper take abroad (Wolverson, 2011). So when looking at the total number of American jobs that have been outsou rced off shore we also have to stop and think about how many of them were for market demand to better serve us and how many of them really were outsourced because it was cheaper.People also have to remember that companies have to try and find ways to make the both the consumer and the investors happy. Consumers want the best whole tone at the lowest price and the investors want to see a high profit, so to do that companies have to find the middle ground. Which means they have to find the best solution for everyone even if it means outsourcing jobs offshore because it more cost effective for the company. According to Jagdish N. Bhagwati, employing workers at lower cost allows U.S. companies to be more efficient and productive, permitting them to create the homogeneous amount of goods with fewer resources. In turn, this lowers the price of the goods in the United States, strengthening U. S. companies and freeing workers for other tasks. The savings allows U. S. companies to stay afl oat and expand in a highly warring global market (Otterman, 2004). Outsourcing is not always a bad, it is a permute, and change is what pushes both our economy and our nation forward.Another good point that has been made is, the middling global tax rate on multinational corporations is about 27 percent, compared to 39 percent in the United States (Wolverson, 2011). Given this information it would be that alternatively of penalizing our multinational corporations for increasing international trade, maybe the United States government should focus more on bring in multinational corporations from other countries. This would not only create more jobs in the untied states to reanimate for the ones that are being lost overseas but also crap more international trade. A 2008 OECD study found that foreign direct investment increases by 3. 7 percent for every one lot point decrease in the corporate tax rate, and that, as cross-border dandy flows increase, foreign direct investment is i ncreasingly swayed by countries tax rules (Wolverson, 2011). We should be focusing on how to get more multinational corporations into the United States instead of focusing on how to hold back our multinational corporations. Along with dark the average tax rate on multinational corporations the government should also fix the loopholes that exist.This way all multinational corporations will be taxed the same instead of some getting taxed the full 39 percent, while the others are using loopholes and hardly pay any taxes. Even in prexy Obamas 2011 State of the Union address he called congress to simplify the system by getting rid of corporate loopholes so they can level the playing field and aid in the countrys competiveness and growth potential. To further support this, in an article from NationalJournal. com many economists say that the corporate tax code is a mess and overdue for a clean-up.The code riddled with inefficiencies, creating perverse incentives for companies to invest o verseas and waste bullion on elaborate tax-reduction strategies. Business supporters say a overhaul could elapse the misguided incentives, lower tax rates, and attract more capital to the U. S. most liberal critics also support reform, saying the current system is so tangled that it doesnt even do a good job of nurture revenue (Fernholz, 2011). Corporate tax breaks cost the federal government about $1. 1 trillion annually (Wolverson, 2011).If the government decided to really determine through with this corporate tax reform it could really help didder the economy and help to create new jobs help not only the 9 percent national unemployment rate go down but could also help create jobs for the people who lost their jobs due to off shoring. Overall the government should not be focusing on protecting American jobs that are being transferred offshore by outsourcing or manufacturing. Instead they should be working to close loopholes to even out the amount of taxes companies are payin g.While also working to lower the average tax rate on multinational corporations to make outsourcing to the United States more desirable to multinational corporations in other countries. Word Count 1419 Works Cited Fernholz, T. (2011, January 24). NationalJournal. com. Retrieved February 16, 2011, from Obama Team Wants Business Buy-In on Corporate Tax Reform. Otterman, S. (2004, February 20). TRADE Outsourcing Jobs. Retrieved February 16, 2011, from Council on Foreign Relations http//www. cfr. org/pakistan/trade-outsourcing-jobs/p7749 Popwell, N. (2010, October 27).Offshore Outsourcing The contention Over Moving Jobs Overseas. Retrieved February 16, 2011, from Ezine Articles http//ezinearticles. com/? Offshore-Outsourcing-The-Controversy-Over-Moving-Jobs-Overseas&038id=5253123 United States Department of Labor. (2011, February 4). Economic News Release. Retrieved February 16, 2011, from dressing table of Labor Statustics http//www. bls. gov/news. release/empsit. nr0. htm Wolverson , R. (2011, February 11). Outsourcing Jobs and Taxes. Retrieved February 16, 2011, from Council on Foreign Relations http//www. cfr. org/united-states/outsourcing-jobs-taxes/p21777