Protectionism for call centers

[Ravi]

Not imposing undue burdens on businesses is not supporting corporate welfare.

They get tax breaks for outsourcing. How is that an undue burden?

The undue burden is taxing them.

Why? I pay taxes and it isn't an undue burden.

 

[Againsheila]

Good idea or unnecessary infringement on the free market?


Senator wants disclosure on outsourced calls - Yahoo! News

NEW YORK (Reuters) – In a bid to reduce outsourcing of U.S. jobs, a Democratic senator said on Sunday he will push legislation to make companies inform customers when their calls were being transferred outside the United States and charge companies for those transferred calls.

"This bill will not only serve to maintain call center jobs currently in the United States, but also provide a reason for companies that have already outsourced jobs to bring them back," Senator Charles Schumer said in statement.

Customers calling 800 numbers are often transferred overseas, and in such cases the bill would mandate that callers be told where their calls were rerouted.

Companies would also be required to certify to the Federal Trade Commission annually that they were complying with the requirement, and face penalties if they did not certify.

Schumer's bill would also impose a $0.25 excise tax on any customer service call placed inside the United States which is transferred to an agent in a foreign location. The fee would be assessed on the company that transferred the call.

Hear hear, it's about time our government started taking care of OUR jobs instead of facilitating the companies that outsource them.

 

[xsited1]

Unnecessary infringement on the free market. Here's the real reason for it:

That's a matter of opinion. Myself and everyone else who wants more jobs in the U.S. disagree with you.

Unfortunately, people like yourself are AGAINST American jobs and you don't even know it. By imposing more government controls and taxes, companies find new ways to operate outside of the US. You're pushing companies away by voting for anti-job politicians and you didn't even know it.

 

[Againsheila]

Yes, increasing costs for businesses always bring jobs to the U.S. Oh wait, no, it does just the opposite.

I don't really understand how increasing the cost of having call centers out of the nation is going to result in more call centers being out of the nation, maybe you can explain that one to me.

One of my brothers used to work for a huge credit company. They spent a few years building call centers in the US and then they decided to outsource to India. I would say at least 10,000 Americans lost their jobs.

And the buildings are still vacant in the US.

My job is in India, and I want it back......kudos to the senator for working for the American people instead of the corporations for a change.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

They get tax breaks for outsourcing. How is that an undue burden?

The undue burden is taxing them.

Why? I pay taxes and it isn't an undue burden.

And yet you are not being individually targeted with more taxes and regulation because of an activity you're engaged in because the government already taxes and regulates you too much.

 

[editec]

Good idea or unnecessary infringement on the free market?


Senator wants disclosure on outsourced calls - Yahoo! News

NEW YORK (Reuters) – In a bid to reduce outsourcing of U.S. jobs, a Democratic senator said on Sunday he will push legislation to make companies inform customers when their calls were being transferred outside the United States and charge companies for those transferred calls.

"This bill will not only serve to maintain call center jobs currently in the United States, but also provide a reason for companies that have already outsourced jobs to bring them back," Senator Charles Schumer said in statement.

Customers calling 800 numbers are often transferred overseas, and in such cases the bill would mandate that callers be told where their calls were rerouted.

Companies would also be required to certify to the Federal Trade Commission annually that they were complying with the requirement, and face penalties if they did not certify.

Schumer's bill would also impose a $0.25 excise tax on any customer service call placed inside the United States which is transferred to an agent in a foreign location. The fee would be assessed on the company that transferred the call.

Excellent idea.

Male it a buck a call though.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I don't really understand how increasing the cost of having call centers out of the nation is going to result in more call centers being out of the nation, maybe you can explain that one to me.

One of my brothers used to work for a huge credit company. They spent a few years building call centers in the US and then they decided to outsource to India. I would say at least 10,000 Americans lost their jobs.

And the buildings are still vacant in the US.

My job is in India, and I want it back......kudos to the senator for working for the American people instead of the corporations for a change.

If your job is in India, and you're not, then I'm guessing it's not your job. This is the problem, too many people believe they're entitled to their job.

 

[Againsheila]

One of my brothers used to work for a huge credit company. They spent a few years building call centers in the US and then they decided to outsource to India. I would say at least 10,000 Americans lost their jobs.

And the buildings are still vacant in the US.

My job is in India, and I want it back......kudos to the senator for working for the American people instead of the corporations for a change.

If your job is in India, and you're not, then I'm guessing it's not your job. This is the problem, too many people believe they're entitled to their job.

Hey, I offered to go to India to keep my job. They wouldn't let me. India says those jobs are for THEIR citizens. Ours is the only country in the world that fails to protect their own citizens jobs.

Yeah, isn't it awful that I expected to keep my job since I was so good at it even though it paid a pittance and my pay went DOWN while I was working for them thanks to United's bankruptcy protection.

Say what you will, that was my job and I was darn good at it. I object to our government shipping our jobs overseas. It's about time our government started taking care of us instead of the corporations.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

My job is in India, and I want it back......kudos to the senator for working for the American people instead of the corporations for a change.

If your job is in India, and you're not, then I'm guessing it's not your job. This is the problem, too many people believe they're entitled to their job.

Hey, I offered to go to India to keep my job. They wouldn't let me. India says those jobs are for THEIR citizens. Ours is the only country in the world that fails to protect their own citizens jobs.

Yeah, isn't it awful that I expected to keep my job since I was so good at it even though it paid a pittance and my pay went DOWN while I was working for them thanks to United's bankruptcy protection.

Say what you will, that was my job and I was darn good at it. I object to our government shipping our jobs overseas. It's about time our government started taking care of us instead of the corporations.

I'm guessing India probably didn't say that. I'm guessing the business that moved to India wanted Indians because they would work for less than you would.

You can be the best in the world at your job, but that doesn't make the job yours. The job belongs to the business, and as such they have every right to get whoever they want to fill the position.

The government didn't ship the job overseas, but it's government that makes it more profitable for businesses to move overseas by taxing and regulating too much. So more taxes and regulations don't really make any sense, and certainly won't protect any American jobs. It'll just give more incentives for businesses to move their entire operation, as opposed to just the call centers, overseas.

 

[Againsheila]

If your job is in India, and you're not, then I'm guessing it's not your job. This is the problem, too many people believe they're entitled to their job.

Hey, I offered to go to India to keep my job. They wouldn't let me. India says those jobs are for THEIR citizens. Ours is the only country in the world that fails to protect their own citizens jobs.

Yeah, isn't it awful that I expected to keep my job since I was so good at it even though it paid a pittance and my pay went DOWN while I was working for them thanks to United's bankruptcy protection.

Say what you will, that was my job and I was darn good at it. I object to our government shipping our jobs overseas. It's about time our government started taking care of us instead of the corporations.

I'm guessing India probably didn't say that. I'm guessing the business that moved to India wanted Indians because they would work for less than you would.

You can be the best in the world at your job, but that doesn't make the job yours. The job belongs to the business, and as such they have every right to get whoever they want to fill the position.

The government didn't ship the job overseas, but it's government that makes it more profitable for businesses to move overseas by taxing and regulating too much. So more taxes and regulations don't really make any sense, and certainly won't protect any American jobs. It'll just give more incentives for businesses to move their entire operation, as opposed to just the call centers, overseas.

You're guessing wrong. I can live a heck of a lot better in India on $4.00 an hour than I can here on $8.50 an hour.

And yes, charging them for each call that is transferred overseas will result in bringing our jobs back. It will make it cheaper for them to have their call centers here. BTW, there wasn't a day once they opened ship in India, that I didn't have to fix some disaster caused by the people in India before they ultimately sent my job there too. Truth is United is now dying because of their call center in India. But hey, at least the CEO make his $millions.

 

[WillowTree]

kick all those corporations in the ass then sing "jobs jobs jobs"" yep thats the demonRat ticket..

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Hey, I offered to go to India to keep my job. They wouldn't let me. India says those jobs are for THEIR citizens. Ours is the only country in the world that fails to protect their own citizens jobs.

Yeah, isn't it awful that I expected to keep my job since I was so good at it even though it paid a pittance and my pay went DOWN while I was working for them thanks to United's bankruptcy protection.

Say what you will, that was my job and I was darn good at it. I object to our government shipping our jobs overseas. It's about time our government started taking care of us instead of the corporations.

I'm guessing India probably didn't say that. I'm guessing the business that moved to India wanted Indians because they would work for less than you would.

You can be the best in the world at your job, but that doesn't make the job yours. The job belongs to the business, and as such they have every right to get whoever they want to fill the position.

The government didn't ship the job overseas, but it's government that makes it more profitable for businesses to move overseas by taxing and regulating too much. So more taxes and regulations don't really make any sense, and certainly won't protect any American jobs. It'll just give more incentives for businesses to move their entire operation, as opposed to just the call centers, overseas.

You're guessing wrong. I can live a heck of a lot better in India on $4.00 an hour than I can here on $8.50 an hour.

And yes, charging them for each call that is transferred overseas will result in bringing our jobs back. It will make it cheaper for them to have their call centers here. BTW, there wasn't a day once they opened ship in India, that I didn't have to fix some disaster caused by the people in India before they ultimately sent my job there too. Truth is United is now dying because of their call center in India. But hey, at least the CEO make his $millions.

Well, if higher taxes and regulation brought jobs back to the U.S. then those jobs probably wouldn't have left in the first place. But if you think causing businesses to pay more to do business in the U.S. is somehow the way to keep them in the U.S., then there's not much I can say.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I dunno. I think Care is right...it is hard to trust anyone with your financial information, but a little easier to trust someone in the same country.

I normally ask the person what country they are in.

What financial information?

If in this day and age, you don't have a checking account for the sole purpose of internet purchasing, you are an idiot.

I have a checking account that I keep $25 in and whenever I buy something on line I transfer the exact amount of the transaction into that account electronically.

You are responsible for protecting yourself not the government. And guess what, this little trick costs you nothing, no taxes, no fees nada zip zero zilch.

You see, you really don't need government to protect you.

 

[tommywho70x]

admittedly, this sort of thing is way out of my professional knowledge base, but as somebody who is an independent supplier of on-site technical service for home/office users of windows systems and has to try and communicate with these poorly trained foreigners with only partial fluency in english, i'm glad that the government is going to try and do something to keep those jobs on shore.

invariably when i'm connected to the bangalore or phillipine call centers the big IT companies are using, i waste at least ten minutes trying to make the problem understood before i start insisting they get me back to a domestic call center.

the fee, i don't know enough to comment, but to those of you screaming infringement on free market: that free market is being exploited by huge multinational corporations whose unregulated behavior is wiping out small and medium businesses who lack the resources to compete with their anti-competitive, monopolistic practices.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

admittedly, this sort of thing is way out of my professional knowledge base, but as somebody who is an independent supplier of on-site technical service for home/office users of windows systems and has to try and communicate with these poorly trained foreigners with only partial fluency in english, i'm glad that the government is going to try and do something to keep those jobs on shore.

invariably when i'm connected to the bangalore or phillipine call centers the big IT companies are using, i waste at least ten minutes trying to make the problem understood before i start insisting they get me back to a domestic call center.

the fee, i don't know enough to comment, but to those of you screaming infringement on free market: that free market is being exploited by huge multinational corporations whose unregulated behavior is wiping out small and medium businesses who lack the resources to compete with their anti-competitive, monopolistic practices.

Small and medium businesses can't compete with their larger competitors because the government has regulated and taxed their industry to the point where only those who are making millions or billions are able to comply and make a profit.

 

[Ravi]

The undue burden is taxing them.

Why? I pay taxes and it isn't an undue burden.

And yet you are not being individually targeted with more taxes and regulation because of an activity you're engaged in because the government already taxes and regulates you too much.

Our government taxes no one too much.

 

[Ravi]

I dunno. I think Care is right...it is hard to trust anyone with your financial information, but a little easier to trust someone in the same country.

I normally ask the person what country they are in.

What financial information?

If in this day and age, you don't have a checking account for the sole purpose of internet purchasing, you are an idiot.

I have a checking account that I keep $25 in and whenever I buy something on line I transfer the exact amount of the transaction into that account electronically.

You are responsible for protecting yourself not the government. And guess what, this little trick costs you nothing, no taxes, no fees nada zip zero zilch.

You see, you really don't need government to protect you.

You aren't paying fees for your extra bank account? Really???

It isn't a matter of the the government protecting me. It is a matter of the right to privacy and choice. Why should I have to pay extra to keep my personal information from some fuckhead in another country

 

[WillowTree]

Why? I pay taxes and it isn't an undue burden.

And yet you are not being individually targeted with more taxes and regulation because of an activity you're engaged in because the government already taxes and regulates you too much.

Our government taxes no one too much.

spoken like a true "non taxpayer" simply priceless.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Yes, increasing costs for businesses always bring jobs to the U.S. Oh wait, no, it does just the opposite.

I don't really understand how increasing the cost of having call centers out of the nation is going to result in more call centers being out of the nation, maybe you can explain that one to me.

Maybe those businesses will decide to move their entire operation out of the country rather than move the call centers into the country or pay the tax.

If it were profitable to move more of their operation out of the country they already would have. An increase in the cost of operating an out of country call center doesn't translate into reduced cost for other out of country operations.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Not imposing undue burdens on businesses is not supporting corporate welfare.

They get tax breaks for outsourcing. How is that an undue burden?

The undue burden is taxing them.

If you think taxation itself is an undue burden you might try finding some abandoned island in the pacific and forming your own tax free government.