Charlie Rose

anonyme  05/23/2009 06:07 AM Report

Maybe I'm just young and naive, but perhaps it's time to stop pointing fingers and stop thinking in terms of "us against them" as some are wont to do. It's just not reality. It never was. The problem is not really globalization, which frankly, is inevitable. We simply cannot continue to think as if we live on an island. The world is getting smaller, in part to technology, but also with the realization that most of us have common interests. Soon enough geography will be irrelevant. Borders will be a thing of the past. We should really be thinking in terms of a single global economy rather than reverting to a defensive posture of isolationism which seems, in today's world, pretty archaic.

Clearly, a better system of checks and balances is sorely needed to prevent and expose rampant greed and corruption within the framework of US business. Does this mean "big government?" Think again. That's just a sound byte created by people who want to instill fear and promote ignorance about the reality of the situation. I kid you not. They have all sorts of discussions and memos about just what phrasing they'll use when they address the public. And guess who reaps the benefits? As in everything, there's a balance that needs to be maintained but "self-regulation" is a big fat myth. If someone has a propensity to harm someone, can one expect him to self-regulate himself into a prison cell to prevent him from going through with the crime? Of course not. If one thinks of other facets of civilization which are fairly transparent, from law down to waste management, an organized system is put in place to prevent things from getting out of control. Why should business be any different?

buckwuz  02/22/2009 07:32 AM Report

Unfortunately I think the actual culprits, for lack of a better word, are being ignored here. American corporations *chose* to outsource, they make the decision.India or Chinia or whatever other country is not making the decision. Just because things are available on the cheap doesnt mean its always the best deal - there are disadvantages to every advantage. Example - shopping at Walmart has obvious price advantages but you lose out on the customer service experience, among other things. So if *you chose* to shop at a cheaper store you're basically saying price advantage is most important and you're willing to live with the disadvantages.

Germany still has retained tremendous manaufacturing and engineering capabilities despite high labor costs because German companies consider those as central and important to their success so they're willing to put up with the labor cost disadvantage v/s if they had China manufacture their cars. Why dont mercedes cars proudly say - Made in China? Its because Mercedes *chose* not to outsource. I admit manufacturing and services have different dynamics but I feel the core argument is the same.

I find it incredible and alarming to see American companies put their customer care in the hands of others. Serving customers is the reason why corporations exist, how can they willingly choose to have others do it for them. So corporations have *chosen* to send their calls to India or wherever because they're willing to put up with the disadvantages - poor quality, inefficient issue resolution, etc. etc. for the benefit of lower cost. But American corproations *chose* to do this. Blaming India or China is pointless because they dont control the decisions - they just market their services for their prices. Its up to American corporations to decide what services/products they want to buy and what they lose in the bargain.

Dr_Ron  02/14/2009 02:16 AM Report

I don't see how so many people here can bash outsourcing so fervently when they they, in the end, are the gainers. If you resent the fact that your jobs can be done for lower wages offshore, put your money where you mouth is and boycott the end-products. Of course to find the true culprits responsible for the weakening of US fundamentals, you wouldn't have to look any further than the counterfeiters who have been passing the buck.

harryjay  02/12/2009 11:27 PM Report

We'll seems like this guy doesn't want anything to change, err let the bankers do what they do best?? Don't hold them accountable? But then why would he want anything to change.. riches man in India, imagine the bureaucracy and corruption involved in that esteemed Gandi equivalent statue. How much money is enough. Sorry Charlie I just don't have any admiration for people thats sole interest in life is to make more money.

Matson  02/12/2009 10:00 AM Report

I'm amazed at the attention given this man. India basically presents American consumers with cheap outsourcing that is exactly that, cheap. I spend my customer service calls with an individual who exists in an entirely different, irrelevant context, reiterating my problem, explaining, clarifying, teaching, wondering if I'm being understood, often with half-baked results. To make it worse, this customer service representative is pretending to be someone they're not, giving me a name that belongs to someone here. What kind of message does that send from this outsourcing company to its customers, who often don't have a choice about the matter, and if they need to get something done, they have to muddle along with this experience.

Yes, India's market is growing at a fast pace, hooray, but at a dear cost of U.S. jobs, stability and quality.

REMant  02/11/2009 02:16 PM Report

As I said above, we don't need to re-capitalize the banks, we need to re-capitalize the country, and we cannot do it by mfring credit. Perhaps they would like to try doing that for us in India? We would gladly outsource that, too. But, as you, yourself noted, debt has the natural limitation that it has to be either paid back or serviced. You cannot create more credit or issue more money, however, without incurring more debt. If we can't service what we have, how will we service more? If you want a repeat of this kind of crisis then continue to deny US the opportunity to protect itself from cheap overseas labor, and give us boatloads of credit at the same time, as China has been been doing. I would like to see Indians and Chinese, Mexicans, et al, at the same level as the US, but I don't want to do it by lowering the US to their level. As an astute laid-off American factory worker said a while back, "What am I supposed to do, move there?" In any case, I see no reason why those countries cannot develop their own mkts and prosper just as well as by pandering to the nobility, indeed, better, because we know what happened to them. Humm...perhaps we could use a little micro-financing over here.