Actually, if companies were not allowed to slim down and become profitable again so quickly, then the stock market would have languished for a much longer period of time. The reason why 2003 was such a good year was threefold. 1) Bush didn't sit around waiting for the terrorists to come get us, rather he actively went after them. 2) Bush and Greenspan added a huge helping of stimulus to the economy to get it kickstarted. 3) Companies did whatever it took to slim down to fighting trim, including offshoring, which showed up very quickly in their EPS numbers. All of the above showed up in the stock market as a huge 2003.
Show me statistics that say we are giving all the jobs away. Just because the media says it, doesn't mean it's true. I've seen statistics, which show that offshoring is a miniscule component of the job loss that is occurring in the U.S. Even if companies did not offshore, the jobs would still not have been there, because surprise, we just went through a recession. Like I said before, when companies burn through the slack and start hiring, it will more than offset any offshoring going on now.
You talk of bad leadership, why don't you ask Clinton why he was so busy messing around with an intern and then lying to defend himself, when the CIA had Bib Laden in their sights and were awaiting an approval from him to pull the trigger. He didn't give that order by the way, and that was a mistake that the U.S. will regret every day for the rest of this countries existence.
Here's an article that talks about who wins in offshoring. It paraphrasesa a McKinsey report.
news.com.com |
