Reply to: Plenty Cheapness Legal Eagles

[GreenerGrass]

In everything I have read about globalisation(Which is not really that much), nobody seems to have tackled the backlash, which at the risk of oversimplification, what happens when all the western worlds jobs are lost to globalisation? As processes for everything become more streamlined and technology and communications improve, everything will eventually be made or serviced from low cost destinations. So from this brief and inarticulate synopsis let me try and extrapolate some IMHO, burning questions.

1) Outsourcing of goods and services to more competive locations is usually to provide goods and services for the outsourcer nation. So what happens eventually? The host nation's purchasing power and disposable income and output decrease as unemployment increases. If the trend continues, surely their must reach a point when the demand no longer exists for the goods and services, in the host nation , owing to a decimated job market.

2) If we accept (I will use ship building as an example), that outsourcing results in loss of skills in the host nations, surely as this happens the best and the brightest will move to previous "outsourcing" destinations to get the best opportunities resulting in higer levels of inflation that previous outsourcer destinations so at some point the cost of living will become higher in Mumbai and Manilla than London?

So if I understand this correctly, the UK, being an "outsourcer", will eventually lose its industries, skills and talented people until such point that its cost base deflates to a point where its becomes financially viable to produce goods and services here again?

The only winners are the large multinational conglomerates, the man in the street loses as he and his family eventually become global migrants.

The governements lose as they need to cope with providing services for massively upnpredicatable transient populations.

I understand that globalsation has improved the lot of many people in the third world, which seems to be its only selling point.

My main thought is, is globalisation neccessary and unavoidable? Are there other options?

Yes, a good summary, it's pretty grim isn't it. In the long term you could argue as India gets richer, their middle class expands (as ours contracts due to economics and Labour's social engineering) and their living standards and salaries increase they will become less competitive.
But then again, "in the long term we're all dead" - at least the generation posting on here will be.
And the structure of the UK population will worsen with state-sponsored wasters breeding at high rates while the responsible middle classes can no longer afford to have children. The demographics will be terrible.

Our country will be 50% on the way to being India, India will be 50% on the way to being UK.

There is still a way to go yet, but that is the direction it is heading. There has to be a sensible middle ground on protectionism, which the current government is so opposed to, and I wonder how much better the Tories will be. We cannot ever compete with countries like India and China which not only have cheap labour costs, but are also zero welfare states with low tax burdens as a result.
So why should we allow them the downhill playing field (for them) which total non-protectionism does?
I may actually vote UKIP in the general election on principle.

[Churchill]

I knew all this was gay!

Gay? I'm not even amused!

[Liability]

It's international socialism by the back door

I knew all this was gay!

[JoJoGabor]

Our country will be 50% on the way to being India, India will be 50% on the way to being UK.

We will therefore be worse off, india will be better off.

That's as far as my limited brain power can work out.

As in every natural force, everything balances out, equal and opposite reaction and all that

[thunderlizard]

"The part of the first part hereby agrees to be doing the needful (which may include but is not limited to much cheapness, plenty quickness) isn't it"

[expat]

Ok so nobody is going to cry over a few redundant lawyers.

In everything I have read about globalisation(Which is not really that much), nobody seems to have tackled the backlash, which at the risk of oversimplification, what happens when all the western worlds jobs are lost to globalisation? ...

We are poorer, India is richer, but that doesn't matter to the companies doing it because they are now Indian companies not British companies. And it doesn't matter to the British politicians who actively encouraged it, because they have by then retired with gold-plated pensions torn by force from our depleted pockets (not to mention any other wealth they may have happened to accumulate....) and are happy that British labour is now cheap.

[EternalOptimist]

I read it as the opposite. Corporations (and therefore shareholders) hold the control, not the governments. Governments have less ability to intervene as there's nothing left for them to meddle with.

everyone is reduced to the same level of poorness, but without the revolution. Everything deteriorates, services, skills, education.

Mind you, they had this debate a few hundred years ago, the free traders won, and it has generally been seen as a good thing. So what do I know

[Pondlife]

It's international socialism by the back door

I read it as the opposite. Corporations (and therefore shareholders) hold the control, not the governments. Governments have less ability to intervene as there's nothing left for them to meddle with.

[EternalOptimist]

It's international socialism by the back door

[sunnysan]

Lawyers

Ok so nobody is going to cry over a few redundant lawyers.

In everything I have read about globalisation(Which is not really that much), nobody seems to have tackled the backlash, which at the risk of oversimplification, what happens when all the western worlds jobs are lost to globalisation? As processes for everything become more streamlined and technology and communications improve, everything will eventually be made or serviced from low cost destinations. So from this brief and inarticulate synopsis let me try and extrapolate some IMHO, burning questions.

1) Outsourcing of goods and services to more competive locations is usually to provide goods and services for the outsourcer nation. So what happens eventually? The host nation's purchasing power and disposable income and output decrease as unemployment increases. If the trend continues, surely their must reach a point when the demand no longer exists for the goods and services, in the host nation , owing to a decimated job market.

2) If we accept (I will use ship building as an example), that outsourcing results in loss of skills in the host nations, surely as this happens the best and the brightest will move to previous "outsourcing" destinations to get the best opportunities resulting in higer levels of inflation that previous outsourcer destinations so at some point the cost of living will become higher in Mumbai and Manilla than London?

So if I understand this correctly, the UK, being an "outsourcer", will eventually lose its industries, skills and talented people until such point that its cost base deflates to a point where its becomes financially viable to produce goods and services here again?

The only winners are the large multinational conglomerates, the man in the street loses as he and his family eventually become global migrants.

The governements lose as they need to cope with providing services for massively upnpredicatable transient populations.

I understand that globalsation has improved the lot of many people in the third world, which seems to be its only selling point.

My main thought is, is globalisation neccessary and unavoidable? Are there other options?

[HairyArsedBloke]

Will the Spear Shaker had it right; first kill all the lawyers...

I agree with the words, but this has to be the greatest out of context line ever.

[pzz76077]

The trend for outsourcing in professional occupations outside IT grows - http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa...dia/article.do

As I predicted some months ago.

The situation will become a lot worse soon when the EU introduce rules to 'harmonize' the profession across EU states. We will then see a flood of excellently trained and intelligent legal professionals from Eastern Europe that will be willing to work for even less than the Indians are.

The sleepy UK legal profession wont know what hit them!

PZZ

[Moscow Mule]

By not negotiating a reduction in their fees, they are now on precisely £0 instead of perhaps 20-30K. Even 7K a year is better than £0.

I can't agree. Being a lawyer requires a lot of investment, and is actually quite stressful.

I certainly wouldn't want to do it for 7k a year. I'd rather be a bin-man, same amount of money get a good walk in every day and it's outdoors.

[Mich the Tester]

And who will pay for all of that?

The consumer/taxpayer.

[RichardCranium]

This will end up in court ... Do you follow me?

And who will pay for all of that?

It'll still be the bloody lawyers winning.