alt text: 18 of our 40 employees are located in the Philippines. Insanely competent, great judgement, and $5 per hour. If you run a small business and don’t have overseas help you’re at a disadvantage
alt text: 18 of our 40 employees are located in the Philippines. Insanely competent, great judgement, and $5 per hour. If you run a small business and don’t have overseas help you’re at a disadvantage
$5 in the Philippines probably has vastly more purchasing power than it does in the United States. If you’re supposed to pay them the same salary as to someone working in the US then why not just hire an American and have the dude in Philippines go back to picking coconuts for $2 and hour or something. I wouldn’t be surprised if the Philipino worker is more than happy with their salary and you might even be able to employ several people for the same amount of money.
This same effect applies to charities aswell. Donating money to some poor african country helps many more people than it does when given to a local charity.
Sure yes short term it is probably a good option for the average Filipino or any other person taking an American job in a foreign country for less money than that company would pay an American because yeah it does pay relatively well in their situation. However, it takes advantage of their material situation to pay them monetarily less than they would be paid in the US. Essentially it uses the fact that they need the money more (their demand) to pay them less. Is this not similar to paying any American poor person less because they need it more?
Regardless of how you feel about the morality of all that it’s fucking terrible for the Philippines. That Filipino labor is not benefitting the Filipino economy it’s benefitting the US economy. This might not be so bad if they were being paid more or even up to the amount that they make for that American company (though this would never happen under capitalism bc a company needs profit) because at the very least that loss of labor power would be supplemented with equivalent monetary gain.
So in short, outsourced jobs takes advantage of poor people to pay them less and strips foreign economies of their labor power
No because the poor american still has to pay high US prices for everything they buy. You can’t live a decent life in the US with $5 an hour but you can in the Philippines where the minimum wage is around $10 a DAY. Another commentor in this thread told how their relative bought a restaurant dinner for 12 people for 50 bucks in the Philippines and that includes the tip.
This is not entirely true either. That Philipino working for the US company spends their earnings in the Philippines and that benefits their economy.
I covered both of these points.
The company is still using a person’s material situation to pay them less. More purchasing power in their subjective economy is part of their material situation. They are still receiving monetarily less as is their country.
I directly covered your second point, while they do spend the money they earn from their American job within their economy they are not being paid the exact value of their labor because profit is being extracted so the amount of money they stimulate their economy with is not as valuable as their labor would be. I don’t want to explain the entire labor theory of value here because it would take up too much time and space but you can look into it if you’d like. Put simply, the profit that company makes is extracted from that employees labor meaning that some of their labor is being used not to benefit their country or people but another’s. Outsourcing is an extraction of mans most valuable resource from the less fortunate to the more
Yeah I’m not claiming these practices are without their issues but consider the alternative: if the company was forced to pay the Philipino worker the same salary they would pay an US worker then why would they hire a person in the Philippines? They wouldn’t. They’d hire an american instead and now the Philipino worker would need to find a local employer and it’s unlikely they would pay as much as the US based company does now.
Yes and that would be better not just for foreign countries but for the people of the US as well. However it would suck for business so it will never happen unless workers force it to happen
This situation would most definitely be worse for US citizens because more expensive labor means higher prices for consumers if margins stay the same.
But it would mean more employment and higher wages. How can you demand a significantly higher wage if your employer can pay some Latino kid $5/hr to do the same job? Sure, prices might go up but so would wages.
Regardless, this particular form of imperialism cannot be rolled back and I do not expect it to be. It’s much to entangled with every other aspect of our economic system. I’m not seriously arguing for changing only this particular facet of capitalism, I’m only arguing that it’s wrong and causes genuine harm.
Less than what? Your personal belief that they should be paid a us salary because you say so? And if so, should that be a new York city salary, a Louisiana salary, or?
Again you have this imaginary number in your mind that you feel everyone should be paid regardless of circumstances. I keep thinking this is not ethical, but from an economic standpoint the Filipino employee is better off than working for less money for a local employer or not working at all because of unemployment. And so are his family and their government.
Stop comparing with the American salary, it doesn’t make any sense. If the American company was paying an American salary, they would hire someone in the states.
LOL, I’m the guy you quoted. The arguments in here are straight childish, with a child’s view of how money works. They see $5/hr. and scream.
https://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/country_result.jsp?country=Philippines
And I question even those numbers! From what my wife and her friend’s American husbands have told me, and from the videos I’ve watched, it seems even cheaper than that.
Then there are the idiots saying we should flood the country with American dollars, blow up inflation and the wealth gap. Sound economic planning right there.
You’re straw-manning. No one is advocating for flooding the country with foreign money. I’ve been reading your comments and I think you might be misunderstanding the argument. It’s a more nuanced criticism about capitalism, not an argument for how much workers for foreign companies in the Philippines should be paid.
Showed my Pilipino wife your post (she doesn’t understand social media like lemmy):
“Who is this person? Why do they say these things? I do not understand. This is not true.”
LOL, she just shook her head and walked off.
Her son is working tech for Amazon and another for a different American firm. They’re WELL off in the Philippines. You should let them know they are not, in fact, doing well.
Well hell yeah! Let’s flood the country with American dollars, spike inflation through the roof and exacerbate the wealth gap. You should be running the Federal Reserve.
I am not arguing that working for foreign companies does not benefit the individual, if it didn’t no one would work for them. I’m saying that foreign companies are essentially reducing the labor force of third world countries. It’s good for the individual but bad for the country to be dependent on foreigners for employment.
Also, saying that foreign laborers should be paid the amount that their labor is worth (both the cost of providing the basic needs of them and their family as well as the profit they make for the company) was not serious because obviously that cannot happen in a capitalist society. I am not arguing for capitalism or capitalistic reforms. I don’t think companies should exist, I think they do more harm than good in the long term. Etc etc
We all agree this is not good ethically, but you are confused on how the economics work. Foreign money flowing in, and at a higher salary than local average? That’s money that gets taxed by the Filipino government, that buys groceries at the corner shop, pays for a local nanny and overall improves the local economy.
Also what are you on about with the reduction of labour force in third world countries? They have unemployment up the roof and no employers by definition, it’s a third world country the one thing there’s no shortage of is people looking for work
I understand your argument, but a living wage in the Phillipines is lower than a living wage in the US. As long as the employer is properly compensating their employees, I think it’s unfair to blame said employer for the Philippines’ economy. Even if this transaction is more beneficial to the US than the Phillipines, it would still benefit the Philippines, no? More outsourcing should mean a more trained labor force and greater purchasing power from exchanging USD for pesos.
Think of labor as a resource like food, coal, iron, etc. A country only has so much labor power just as it only has so much of it’s natural resources. When it comes to building a country as efficiently as possible in which the most people are benefitted would you rather have foreigners take your limited natural resources for a payment that while helpful makes you eventually dependent on them or would you rather use that resource to build an economy with solid foundation based on local industry?
The thing about proper compensation under capitalism is that it doesn’t exist. A person is paid enough to cover their cost of living and the rest of the value their labor produces is owned by their employer. So even within capitalism that labor value is is more secure if it is kept within ones own borders.
This isn’t a perfect explanation I don’t think but I hope you get what I mean
Using your analogy, you can argue that training and work experience provided by a foreign company is like building ports, roads, or other infrastructure that is necessary for trade. Infrastructure, as long as it’s used well, is undeniably good for a country.
Also, if wages were based on net revenue generated from a worker, that would 1. be impossible to measure, and 2. remove any incentive for a company to hire Filipino workers.
Another issue is that you really can’t build a country efficiently like the way you describe it. Trade is necessary to get good technology, and investment is needed to get said technology within your country’s borders. Effectively banning trade is just like shooting yourself in the foot and getting your other 3 limbs chopped off.
That is why it is not a perfect analogy. Training, skills, and information are not specifically a foreign resource. It is not something that is generously provided to 3rd would countries by places like the US. There’s why these can’t be cultivated domestically. Not to mention most exported labor isn’t exactly “skilled labor” (hate that term but it gets the point across).
Wages being based on net revenue generated from a specific worker would be difficult to calculate but it wouldn’t be so hard to distribute profits among types of labor based on their value to the company. Though I don’t think thats a solution at all, I don’t think companies should exist and I don’t think the profit motive should exist to be clear; I’m just trying to argue within the bounds of capitalism here.
I never said anything about not trading, trade is incredibly important because not every nation can manufacture everything domestically. Not every nation has every resource etc etc. letting foreign “investors” control your labor force and direct your economy is however, a terrible idea. Its a short term solution to long term problems. Unfortunately not every country has much of a choice though.
Give it up. Buncha kids in here white knighting for Philipinos they don’t even know.