Small Town USA Competing With India 496
William Hood writes "According to a news article at ABC, companies are sometimes opting to outsource to rural USA rather than foreign countries. Although it still achieves the same result of lowering the value of a job, I think the idea of moving to a larger house that costs less in a town with no traffic is a much better option than flying to Bangalore to train your replacement." From the article: "Sebeka is 14 miles from the closest traffic light, hours from the nearest Starbucks coffee shop and a far cry from the Chicago suburb he left. 'There is no traffic,' said technical consultant Clayton Seal, who also works in Sebeka. 'Anytime, day or night, you can cross Main Street -- almost don't have to look 'cause there's nobody there.' Seal also lost his job to outsourcing."
Larger house on smaller salary, huh? (Score:3, Interesting)
So let me get this straight... you move away from your family and friends. You pull your children out of their school, away from their family and away from their friends. You go through the trouble of selling your house and moving to a new place and buying a new house on your reduced salary. You lose the conveniences and diversity of a big city.
And what do you end up with? A job that could still always be outsourced if someone gets that bug up their ass. And what happens when that position is no longer there? Well, now you're stuck in the middle of nowhere and will probably have to move again because your new little podunk town isn't where all the jobs are - just your current one.
But if you want to inconvenience your family and live like a nomad, at the beck, whim and call of your employer - go for it.
For the record, my employer did this recently, too. But I refused to follow along unless they not only retained my previous salary dollar for dollar (not just salary GRADE), but gave me an increase. Most people, however, are not in a position to make such demands and will be in the "do it or we give your job to some guy in Russia" category.
Even companies that are doing this then move on to the next step of outsourcing, because no matter how cheap they can find labor in America, it's cheaper elsewhere. There are places without OSHA. Places without the same expectation of benefits. Places without the same taxation requirements or insurance. Places with cheaper construction, electricity and maintenance costs. If you can hire an engineer for $4-$7/hr outside of this country, why would you ever waste your money hiring an American when they could make more than that at Burger King?
To stay employable in the future in this country, you need to have highly marketable skills that are unlikely to be shipped overseas. Brush up on your ability to push a broom or ring up a cash register.
Seriously, any and every job that can be outsourced, eventually will be. I can't think of many that could not be. Even surgery eventually (since we saw the story of a surgery taking place across the ocean, via a remote/robot). Management could be handled overseas. Product manufacturing can be done over seas. Taking orders at a fast food drive through can be done overseas. Gas pumping can be automated. Even cashier work will eventually be automated. I guess security guard work is probably a sure bet. Police work. Janitorial work. And, I suppose, hollywood/acting type of work. Maybe teaching?
And yes, I'm a little bitter because I was too young to get into the game to enjoy the dot-com insanity and profit from it and now it feels less like a career every day and more like an 8-5 burger flipping job.
Good or bad, depending on what's important to you (Score:4, Interesting)
Personally I'd take this sort of job in a short second. Friendlier people, a real sense of community, no commute, an amazingly lower cost of living... sure sounds good to me. Plus it'd make my wife happy - she's still a small-town girl at heart.
Unaware to the causes (Score:2, Interesting)
In a capitalist country, how could you justify it as a citizen to keep your job when someone else is willing to do it for cheaper?
That's how the game is played, the harder you work and less you complain the more likely you will have a job. This whining about outsourcing is just a bunch of over-priviledged people who are used to having it easy.
If you want your job back, move to India and work for $5/hour, that's right you didn't just want "your" job (its a position, not a posession) you wanted the paycheck.
Get into a field of work that can't be outsourced if you want job security.
[cx]
I'll work for $12/hr or 25k/yr (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Larger house on smaller salary, huh? (Score:4, Interesting)
Anyone who has watched "What You Get for the Money" on cable tv knows that what you get depends more on where you are than on what you make. Rural America is no different. In N. Dakota you can buy 300 acre farms for less than a studio apartment in San Francisco. But unless you are a damn good farmer (or semi-retired) you might not want to move there.
However there are lots of places with most of the amenities of big cities without the high prices. In Moses Lake, Washington, for instance, you can buy a nice 3br, 2ba ranch house for under $100,000; often lots less. Or a condo on the water with dock for your jet-skiis for $129,000. And about 2.5 hours to Seattle or 1.5 hours to Spokane if you really *must* get to a big city.
Want Internet? Moses Lake has DSL and cable Internet plus Fiber-to-the-home in many places (not all) at reasonable prices (under $50 per month for duplex 1mbps). And power rates that are among the lowest in the country at under 4 cents per kw/hour.
Moses Lake has an entire former B-52 bomber base with a 13,000 foot runway and tons of room for construction of new buildings in case you don't like the old Air Force hangars.
Recreation? The lake itself is great for water skiing, kayaking, sailing and jet-skiing. We have hundreds of acres of sand dunes south of town for 4-wheeling and off road motorcycling. Bird hunting in the fall, fishing in the summer and deer and elk close by if you really have to go kill something. We are 1.5 hours from ski resorts and x/c ski areas, Moses Lake has a *FREE* ice skating rink in the winter, bike trails, tennis courts, a dozen baseball fields, great parks, and friendly people.
Ever want to learn to fly gliders? One of the finest locations for soaring flight is run by the Seattle Glider Council and located at a former WWII training base in Ephrata; only 20 miles away. This is where the Seattle pilots come to really learn to fly gliders.
Top it off with free concerts in the park every Saturday during the summer, a Community College and affiliations with several 4-year universities, splendid weather featuring summers with rainy days you can count on the fingers one hand and friendly people.
So not only can you buy a bigger house on a smaller salary but you get a better lifestyle too.
Get a clue about what "rural" is - and isn't (Score:5, Interesting)
A few data points from Plattsburg, Missouri (pop. 2,375), where I call home... based on what I can tell (and I've lived in Chicago and SoCal, as well as other rural areas) these data points could be duplicated in many areas:
Where I live is a perfect example (Score:4, Interesting)
Seriously, these companies are abysmally stupid. They can always hire an English-speaking CS or CIS student and start a new branch in bumblefuck USA for much less than going to India. The best part about it for the management is that it's all domestic and if they do it right, they can drive out that day and talk to the team in person.
Like many CS students here, I'd rather work in this town for $45,000 because it's close enough to bigger areas that it's not a struggle to get out on the weekend, but it's small enough to make an entry level salary really attractive. I can honestly say that I'd be very happy making that same salary around here for 4-5 years because barring VA's tax rate going through the roof (yeah, fuck you Gov. Warner!) it'd be easy to really save and invest A LOT out here on that kind of salary.
Outsource to bumblefuck USA, not Bangalore India. That should be our new anti-offshoring slogan
Bribery (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Outsourcing work to people's homes... (Score:1, Interesting)
Oh wait, I'm forgetting that in this country, people who don't do their job leech off of others until they retire, and vendors who don't fulfill agreements & deliverables laugh all the way to the bank with their prepaid check.
I guess I have no clue, then.
This is why I'm content in here in.... (Score:2, Interesting)
The big thing that seems to be lacking are jobs though that seems to be changing. I've always thought they ought to outsource to the MW.
Re:Larger house on smaller salary, huh? (Score:5, Interesting)
Not necessarily:
* City magnet schools are some of the best, if your kid is smart and can get in
* Rural areas have their social problems, too, often more so than cities (witness the recent problems with crystal meth in the Midwest and West)
* Kids can actually *walk* in cities with less of a risk of being hit by a car (counterintuitive, but cities have sidewalks and traffic doesn't move that fast). Not to mention that there are interesting places to go to within walking distance. I see a lot more 10-12 y.o. kids out walking on their own in NYC than in any rural area
* Gangs are still a problem in "rural" areas. Look at some parts of New Mexico for an example of this.
* Don't think that rural areas aren't polluted. Pesticide runoff and industrial pollution (like from mining and coal burning powerplants) is more of a problem than one would like to think.
Cheers,
-b.
No (Score:3, Interesting)
Come join me! (Score:3, Interesting)
1) work in the IT world (check)
2) have a great house for little money (check)
3) have 3MB DSL to my house (check)
4) 3 minute commute to work...on my bike (check)
Yup...I love it here. Outsource to these regions would be a very nice alternative.
Got any questions about rural America and IT works? Feel free to ask.
(wow...am I an info-mercial?)
Success by failure (Score:3, Interesting)
You'll die young because you wanted to stay in software, but whether dying young was necessary or not, a lot of people are going to still be around after you pass away. You'll have achieved nothing but miss out, and no-one's going to care why you missed out.
The other thing you'll realize is that Indians are buying bigger houses. Chinese are buying bigger cars. Your college buddies are moving to more extravagent neighborhoods. But you're in the same situation you were in 10 years ago.
Most humans want to be in a better situation than they were in 5 minutes ago. Whether you feel a poorer situation is mandated by the decline in software jobs or not, the world is going to be richer tomorrow than it is today.
Meanwhile you're degrading your situation and making sacrifices to stay in software. You know, no-one else cares.
Dave La Reau (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Larger house on smaller salary, huh? (Score:1, Interesting)
Rural public schools are some of the best statewide, hands down including all public and private schools. I know--I found after I graduated from my school district that it and the neighboring district ranked in the top 5 in the state.
I never even heard of magnet schools until I was in medical school. (Most people don't say they went to magnet schools; they say they went to such and such private institution.) My understanding is that they are private schools and usually specialize in a particular area.
btw, if you can only afford rent and can't buy a place, chances are private institutions are out of the question too. Leaving public education and home schooling, the former which the city tends to be worse than rural or suburban public schools.
"Rural areas have their social problems, too, often more so than cities (witness the recent problems with crystal meth in the Midwest and West)"
Yes, we have problems. But we are talking sweeping generalities here, aren't we.
I went to the U of Chicago. Then went to DC. Chicago was nice. DC wasn't (despite living in a supposedly reputable section). Taking where I grew up and am now into the equation, I see this as a draw. There are city sections that are downright horrific, while in the suburban and rural areas, it's sporadic and understated.
To put it more blutently, I see more drunks and addicts walking in a city than in a rural area. We have our drunks and addicts, but we usually only see the former.
"Kids can actually *walk* in cities with less of a risk of being hit by a car (counterintuitive, but cities have sidewalks and traffic doesn't move that fast)."
So what. Suburban and rural crime rate per population is higher than city crime rate, but a city dweller is exposed to more people than a suburban or rural dweller, meaning the overall risk is greater living in the city.
Similar logic applies here.
This is downright ludicrous for you claim otherwise. You have more traffic. We have sizable yards. Houses in the city do as well, but hardly comparable usually. City parks are usually pretty nasty (some are really nice though). Suburban ones less so. This is night and day if we speak in generalities, lending me to believe you've never spent any decent amount of time in a rural or suburban area.
btw, in a rural area, you don't usually walk. You ride a bike, rollerblade, get your parents to drive, or have less of an impetus or need to travel anyways.
"Gangs are still a problem in "rural" areas. Look at some parts of New Mexico for an example of this."
*laugh* You are clueless. This is a smear.
Parents should be concerned mostly about gang VIOLENCE and illicit activities. Motorcycle gangs, the local club or bar, the little frat group at the local college don't really count when you look at the real problems that manifest from gangs.
Also, most gang violence in suburban or rural areas are developed from cultural or media ties or exported from cities. In the city nearest my area, the gangs moved in from Philadelphia due to a runaway when she came back to town.
Also, we don't put up with violence as much as in the city; in the city, some murder occurs, hardly anyone lifts an eyebrow. That occurs in a rural area, there's a crackdown. Hard.
I cannot state this enough--gang violence in suburban and rural areas are exported from cities; this is not only a problem with rural areas domestically but also in other countries when members of gangs are deported back to their home country and set up there.
btw, hands down, gang violence is more tied to economic prosperity coupled with population density versus enforcement. One of the reasons for the rise in gangs in suburban areas is due to the crackdowns in cities and the lack of infrastructure or expected need of such in suburban areas.
Also, it's harder to have gang violence in an area with sporadic but
It depends on the place. Just like in the city. (Score:3, Interesting)
You paint a pretty bleak picture compared to what I've seen living in rural areas of the US for 40 odd years. I'm in a town of 1200 and have better cable modem throughput than a lot of people in cities.
One thing I notice about rural areas, is that what poverty there is is less shoved off to the side than in cities and suburbs. When the town is a half mile square, the other side of the tracks is still just up the block. In some ways, I think that's healthier than in some of the Chicago suburbs I visit where the only minimum wage earners you see are the ones working in fast food joints. The poverty there is miles away, and easy to ignore.
Re:It wasn't HIS job (Score:1, Interesting)
No, it's because of the lack of a completely free market that people starve. In a truly free market, no one would be starving, because the number of people who couldn't afford to buy food would be so small that charity would easily fix the problem.
Now, as soon as you start messing with the money supply through the banking system, as the United States has always done, even in so-called free banking eras, you will get business cycles. Business cycles result in recessions, and that usually means unemployment and starvation for some. Attempt to fix these recessions with social programs, and you will only disrupt the market further (since government programs do not create real wealth efficiently, if at all). Communism, socialism, and fascism also distort the market, in more obvious ways. With the exception of natural disasters, all wide-spread starvation is caused by government intervention in the market.
Only a small minority in India are benefitting from any of this outsourcing, the rest are just as poor as they ever were.
A minority is better than no one.
The net effect of outsourcing has been to lower the standard of living, not to raise it. As soon as the standard of living gets to high, the corporations will move.
How does the standard of living get too high if the corporations are lowering the standard of living? I'm not following.
You keep describing this as a process of wealth redistribution to the 3rd world, when the reality is that the wealth is being distributed to the rich.
You speak of wealth as though there is a set amount, and it is simply redistributed around the world. The reality is that wealth is continuously created in capitalism. Workers in the 3rd world create wealth (i.e. a programmer writes a program), often using the tools provided to them by corporations, and the workers offer their creations to corporations for something the workers value even more (i.e. a salary). Both parties benefit from the transaction; it doesn't really matter which party benefits more, because if they don't cooperate, neither will benefit.
free trade has taken money away from the middle and lower classes, and put it in the hands of the upper classes.
Money is never taken away from anyone, except in the form of taxes. Perhaps what you mean is, if a rich person is paying someone in India to do work, then that means he is not paying that money to someone in the USA. In that instance, money has not been taken from the middle or lower classes in the USA; rather, it simply means they won't be getting something they were never entitled to. That's what the "free" in free trade means; you can spend your money where you want.