Protectionism for call centers

[sangha]

Spite? That's a good description, but the 'spite' is coming from the government, not the corporations.

Why wouldn't they have already sent more operations offshore? It's not cost-effective. If the government continues to raise the cost of doing business in America, it will be more cost-effective to do business elsewhere. And if they can't save anymore money but want to stay in the US, the cost gets passed on to the consumer.

Thank you big-government!!!!

Someone obviously doesn't understand the call center business. Otherwise, they would realize it's impossible for a call center to service americans without doing business in the US. I guess some people think call centers help american customers by talking to people in India.

Another misconception being tossed around is that a business can just raise prices to pay for any tax increases. That would be true if ALL the call centers were charged this tax However. the article was quite clear in pointing out that this tax only applies to call centers located overseas, and not to US-based call centers. If the foriegn call centers raise their prices to pay the tax, then their US-based competitors will beat them on price because they don't have to pay the tax, so they don't have to raise their rates.

But given all the economic absurdities being expressed here, I'm not surprised that the conservatives ran this country's ecomomy into the ground when they controlled the govt. Conservatives believe that govt doesnt do anything right, and when they get into office, they do everything they can to prove themselves right.

Depends on the given industry. If 90% of the businesses involved in a certain industry subcontract to Indian call centers, while the 10% who do not are not a threat to the bigger players, then the .25 cents will almost certainly be passed to their customers.

Gee. that really sounded all scientificy with all those numbers, so why do I suspect you just pulled those #'s from a place I, as a heterosexual male. would rather not go?

Could it be because of the economic ignorance concerning commodity pricing your fictional scenario makes obvious? (Hint: It's possible!!)

 

[LuckyDan]

Someone obviously doesn't understand the call center business. Otherwise, they would realize it's impossible for a call center to service americans without doing business in the US. I guess some people think call centers help american customers by talking to people in India.

Another misconception being tossed around is that a business can just raise prices to pay for any tax increases. That would be true if ALL the call centers were charged this tax However. the article was quite clear in pointing out that this tax only applies to call centers located overseas, and not to US-based call centers. If the foriegn call centers raise their prices to pay the tax, then their US-based competitors will beat them on price because they don't have to pay the tax, so they don't have to raise their rates.

But given all the economic absurdities being expressed here, I'm not surprised that the conservatives ran this country's ecomomy into the ground when they controlled the govt. Conservatives believe that govt doesnt do anything right, and when they get into office, they do everything they can to prove themselves right.

Depends on the given industry. If 90% of the businesses involved in a certain industry subcontract to Indian call centers, while the 10% who do not are not a threat to the bigger players, then the .25 cents will almost certainly be passed to their customers.

Gee. that really sounded all scientificy with all those numbers, so why do I suspect you just pulled those #'s from a place I, as a heterosexual male. would rather not go?

Could it be because of the economic ignorance concerning commodity pricing your fictional scenario makes obvious? (Hint: It's possible!!)

Who said anything about commodities? And why do you feel a need to announce your sexual preference?

It's a simple example. If 90% of an industry subcontracts to foreign call centers, that industry's callers will most likely have the cost of doing so passed on to them.

 

[sangha]

Depends on the given industry. If 90% of the businesses involved in a certain industry subcontract to Indian call centers, while the 10% who do not are not a threat to the bigger players, then the .25 cents will almost certainly be passed to their customers.

Gee. that really sounded all scientificy with all those numbers, so why do I suspect you just pulled those #'s from a place I, as a heterosexual male. would rather not go?

Could it be because of the economic ignorance concerning commodity pricing your fictional scenario makes obvious? (Hint: It's possible!!)

Who said anything about commodities? And why do you feel a need to announce your sexual preference?

It's a simple example. If 90% of an industry subcontracts to foreign call centers, that industry's callers will most likely have the cost of doing so passed on to them.

Who said anything about commodities? Everyone in this thread who posted about call centers, but I can see how you missed that since you don't understand what a commodity is. If you did, you'd understand that call centers are selling a commodity

And yes, it is a simple example; Simply wrong

 

[LuckyDan]

Gee. that really sounded all scientificy with all those numbers, so why do I suspect you just pulled those #'s from a place I, as a heterosexual male. would rather not go?

Could it be because of the economic ignorance concerning commodity pricing your fictional scenario makes obvious? (Hint: It's possible!!)

Who said anything about commodities? And why do you feel a need to announce your sexual preference?

It's a simple example. If 90% of an industry subcontracts to foreign call centers, that industry's callers will most likely have the cost of doing so passed on to them.

Who said anything about commodities? Everyone in this thread who posted about call centers, but I can see how you missed that since you don't understand what a commodity is. If you did, you'd understand that call centers are selling a commodity

And yes, it is a simple example; Simply wrong

I thought a commodity was like, milk and eggs and pork bellies and shit. Can I invest in a call center, without having to work in one?

Call centers are a service, a means of doing business. Some companies run them in house, some subcontract, but if I'm running a company in an industry where I and most of my largest competitors are subcontracting to India, why wouldn't I pass the cost on?

 

[sangha]

Who said anything about commodities? And why do you feel a need to announce your sexual preference?

It's a simple example. If 90% of an industry subcontracts to foreign call centers, that industry's callers will most likely have the cost of doing so passed on to them.

Who said anything about commodities? Everyone in this thread who posted about call centers, but I can see how you missed that since you don't understand what a commodity is. If you did, you'd understand that call centers are selling a commodity

And yes, it is a simple example; Simply wrong

I thought a commodity was like, milk and eggs and pork bellies and shit. Can I invest in a call center, without having to work in one?

Call centers are a service, a means of doing business. Some companies run them in house, some subcontract, but if I'm running a company in an industry where I and most of my largest competitors are subcontracting to India, why wouldn't I pass the cost on?

Services can be a commodity too. Look at stock trading. If you're a knowledgeable investor with no need or desire for investment advice, and all you need from a broker is to execute the trades you tell him to make, then all you care about is the price you're charged for the trade. After all, a trade is a trade. It's not as if one broker can execute a trade any better than any other.

So, if all of your competitors are in India, and the Indian call centers raise their prices, your competitors will move their business to a US based call center which has lower prices because they didn't have to raise their prices to cover the tax.

BTW, this is pretty basic economic theory. The idea that taxing overseas businesses increases employment in the US is considered gospel, which is appropriate given the way history has confirmed it over and over and over. Every nation that has industrialized used taxes and tariffs on foriegn businesses to protect its' industrial base.

 

[LuckyDan]

Who said anything about commodities? Everyone in this thread who posted about call centers, but I can see how you missed that since you don't understand what a commodity is. If you did, you'd understand that call centers are selling a commodity

And yes, it is a simple example; Simply wrong

I thought a commodity was like, milk and eggs and pork bellies and shit. Can I invest in a call center, without having to work in one?

Call centers are a service, a means of doing business. Some companies run them in house, some subcontract, but if I'm running a company in an industry where I and most of my largest competitors are subcontracting to India, why wouldn't I pass the cost on?

Services can be a commodity too. Look at stock trading. If you're a knowledgeable investor with no need or desire for investment advice, and all you need from a broker is to execute the trades you tell him to make, then all you care about is the price you're charged for the trade. After all, a trade is a trade. It's not as if one broker can execute a trade any better than any other.

So, if all of your competitors are in India, and the Indian call centers raise their prices, your competitors will move their business to a US based call center which has lower prices because they didn't have to raise their prices to cover the tax.

BTW, this is pretty basic economic theory. The idea that taxing overseas businesses increases employment in the US is considered gospel, which is appropriate given the way history has confirmed it over and over and over. Every nation that has industrialized used taxes and tariffs on foriegn businesses to protect its' industrial base.

That's sounds all nice and economicy, but this thread is about taxing US businesses who transfer calls to overseas centers, and my argument is the liklihood that the US businesses will likely pass the tax on their customers.

Thanks for the info, tho.

 

[sangha]

I thought a commodity was like, milk and eggs and pork bellies and shit. Can I invest in a call center, without having to work in one?

Call centers are a service, a means of doing business. Some companies run them in house, some subcontract, but if I'm running a company in an industry where I and most of my largest competitors are subcontracting to India, why wouldn't I pass the cost on?

Services can be a commodity too. Look at stock trading. If you're a knowledgeable investor with no need or desire for investment advice, and all you need from a broker is to execute the trades you tell him to make, then all you care about is the price you're charged for the trade. After all, a trade is a trade. It's not as if one broker can execute a trade any better than any other.

So, if all of your competitors are in India, and the Indian call centers raise their prices, your competitors will move their business to a US based call center which has lower prices because they didn't have to raise their prices to cover the tax.

BTW, this is pretty basic economic theory. The idea that taxing overseas businesses increases employment in the US is considered gospel, which is appropriate given the way history has confirmed it over and over and over. Every nation that has industrialized used taxes and tariffs on foriegn businesses to protect its' industrial base.

That's sounds all nice and economicy, but this thread is about taxing US businesses who transfer calls to overseas centers, and my argument is the liklihood that the US businesses will likely pass the tax on their customers.

Thanks for the info, tho.

The tax increases the cost to american business when they use a foriegn based call center. In order to avoid this expense, the businesses will use US based call centers. This will increase employment.

You are clinging tenaciously to the idea that businesses can just pass on their costs to consumers despite the obviously inane results it produces. If businesses could just increase their prices in response to increased expenses then no business would ever go bankrupt; They would just raise their prices

 

[LuckyDan]

Services can be a commodity too. Look at stock trading. If you're a knowledgeable investor with no need or desire for investment advice, and all you need from a broker is to execute the trades you tell him to make, then all you care about is the price you're charged for the trade. After all, a trade is a trade. It's not as if one broker can execute a trade any better than any other.

So, if all of your competitors are in India, and the Indian call centers raise their prices, your competitors will move their business to a US based call center which has lower prices because they didn't have to raise their prices to cover the tax.

BTW, this is pretty basic economic theory. The idea that taxing overseas businesses increases employment in the US is considered gospel, which is appropriate given the way history has confirmed it over and over and over. Every nation that has industrialized used taxes and tariffs on foriegn businesses to protect its' industrial base.

That's sounds all nice and economicy, but this thread is about taxing US businesses who transfer calls to overseas centers, and my argument is the liklihood that the US businesses will likely pass the tax on their customers.

Thanks for the info, tho.

The tax increases the cost to american business when they use a foriegn based call center. In order to avoid this expense, the businesses will use US based call centers. This will increase employment.

You are clinging tenaciously to the idea that businesses can just pass on their costs to consumers despite the obviously inane results it produces. If businesses could just increase their prices in response to increased expenses then no business would ever go bankrupt; They would just raise their prices

Clinging tenaciously is what I do.

I'm still not sure you're seeing my point, but if most businesses in a given industry incur the same costs, like a 25 cent tax per outsourced call, they would most likely pass it on to the customers of that industry.

If the cost of outsourcing becomes so great that passing it on results in a loss of cutomers, or if it makes that company uncompetitive(as would happen of many competitors have an in-house center, or less expensive domestic subcontractors, then your theory comes into play.

All this talk of commodities has me craving an egg sandwich and a glass of milk.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

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.

Yeah right.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

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.

That's the ticket, when you have nothing smart to say just suggest that the other person leave the country.

 

[California Girl]

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.

That's the ticket, when you have nothing smart to say just suggest that the other person leave the country.

Do you honestly expect intelligence from Whinyman Tuna?

 

[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.

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

You never heard of a free checking account, really?

And you should pay to keep your personal information from anyone because there are fuckheads in this country who will steal your identity in a heartbeat. But you would rather the government tax you for the privilege of protection that way you're not responsible right?

 

[Ravi]

If they could save money by sending more operations offshore, why wouldn't they have already done it? You seem to think corporations are actually motivated by spite instead of just profit.

Spite? That's a good description, but the 'spite' is coming from the government, not the corporations.

Why wouldn't they have already sent more operations offshore? It's not cost-effective. If the government continues to raise the cost of doing business in America, it will be more cost-effective to do business elsewhere. And if they can't save anymore money but want to stay in the US, the cost gets passed on to the consumer.

Thank you big-government!!!!

Someone obviously doesn't understand the call center business. Otherwise, they would realize it's impossible for a call center to service americans without doing business in the US. I guess some people think call centers help american customers by talking to people in India.

Another misconception being tossed around is that a business can just raise prices to pay for any tax increases. That would be true if ALL the call centers were charged this tax However. the article was quite clear in pointing out that this tax only applies to call centers located overseas, and not to US-based call centers. If the foriegn call centers raise their prices to pay the tax, then their US-based competitors will beat them on price because they don't have to pay the tax, so they don't have to raise their rates.

But given all the economic absurdities being expressed here, I'm not surprised that the conservatives ran this country's ecomomy into the ground when they controlled the govt. Conservatives believe that govt doesnt do anything right, and when they get into office, they do everything they can to prove themselves right.

Good post. I'd much rather see companies that I give my business to operate in the US and employ Americans. This tax will not hurt them.

 

[sangha]

That's sounds all nice and economicy, but this thread is about taxing US businesses who transfer calls to overseas centers, and my argument is the liklihood that the US businesses will likely pass the tax on their customers.

Thanks for the info, tho.

The tax increases the cost to american business when they use a foriegn based call center. In order to avoid this expense, the businesses will use US based call centers. This will increase employment.

You are clinging tenaciously to the idea that businesses can just pass on their costs to consumers despite the obviously inane results it produces. If businesses could just increase their prices in response to increased expenses then no business would ever go bankrupt; They would just raise their prices

Clinging tenaciously is what I do.

I'm still not sure you're seeing my point, but if most businesses in a given industry incur the same costs, like a 25 cent tax per outsourced call, they would most likely pass it on to the customers of that industry.

If the cost of outsourcing becomes so great that passing it on results in a loss of cutomers, or if it makes that company uncompetitive(as would happen of many competitors have an in-house center, or less expensive domestic subcontractors, then your theory comes into play.

All this talk of commodities has me craving an egg sandwich and a glass of milk.

I see your point but as a businessman, I know you're wrong.In fact, me and my partners jsut ahd a good laugh over your belief that taxes increase economic activity instead of decreasing it. One partner couldn't believe that a conservative forgot all about the very reason why they're so against taxes.

Here's the thing (and I"m simply amazed that this has to be explained to you) - No two businesses incur the same costs. Are you so out of touch that you think businesses all pay the same rent? The same salaries?The same for office supplies, etc?

Do you really think that a large call center, that can buy supplies in greater amounts than a small call center, will pay the same price for those supplies as the smaller call center?

I'm beginning to think you must work for the govt? How else could not know things my 13yo niece understands?

 

[SpidermanTuba]

(You would think this is common sense, but I guess common sense is not common.)

If you make it costlier for a US-based business to do business in the US, they'll find even more ways to save money. That includes moving even more operations offshore. Just keep pushing and they'll eventually leave. But that's what people like yourself do. It's really a shame.

If they could save money by sending more operations offshore, why wouldn't they have already done it? You seem to think corporations are actually motivated by spite instead of just profit.

Spite? That's a good description, but the 'spite' is coming from the government, not the corporations.

Why wouldn't they have already sent more operations offshore? It's not cost-effective. If the government continues to raise the cost of doing business in America, it will be more cost-effective to do business elsewhere.

How does taxing out of country call centers raise the price of doing business in America?

And if they can't save anymore money but want to stay in the US, the cost gets passed on to the consumer.

Prove that all of it would.

 

[Againsheila]

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.

We are still the majority of their consumers. By charging extra for calls placed here and transferred to other countries, it's an incentive to bring those jobs back. The only way it would encourage businesses to move out of the country is if we didn't call them at all, in which case, the company is pretty much defunct. Something they are all going to be soon as you can't take our jobs away and expect us to continue consuming their products.

 

[xsited1]

Who said anything about commodities? Everyone in this thread who posted about call centers, but I can see how you missed that since you don't understand what a commodity is. If you did, you'd understand that call centers are selling a commodity

And yes, it is a simple example; Simply wrong

I thought a commodity was like, milk and eggs and pork bellies and shit. Can I invest in a call center, without having to work in one?

Call centers are a service, a means of doing business. Some companies run them in house, some subcontract, but if I'm running a company in an industry where I and most of my largest competitors are subcontracting to India, why wouldn't I pass the cost on?

Services can be a commodity too. Look at stock trading. If you're a knowledgeable investor with no need or desire for investment advice, and all you need from a broker is to execute the trades you tell him to make, then all you care about is the price you're charged for the trade. After all, a trade is a trade. It's not as if one broker can execute a trade any better than any other.

So, if all of your competitors are in India, and the Indian call centers raise their prices, your competitors will move their business to a US based call center which has lower prices because they didn't have to raise their prices to cover the tax.

BTW, this is pretty basic economic theory. The idea that taxing overseas businesses increases employment in the US is considered gospel, which is appropriate given the way history has confirmed it over and over and over. Every nation that has industrialized used taxes and tariffs on foriegn businesses to protect its' industrial base.

You sure do post a lot of garbage, but it is amusing to read. That's a nice little rant about overseas businesses, but we're talking about American companies that have offshore operations. Taxing these US companies will result in higher US prices and/or more offshore operations which is what we've been seeing for decades. Kudos to people like you for making it even harder for US companies to stay in business.

 

[Shogun]

I'm all for protectionism. Companies, and those who want to pretend free market capitalism is some kind of economic panacea, who are not loyal to the US should have no right to use our consumer base like a disposable cup. If companies want to move call centers to India then let them use India's consumer base to scrape together a profit. It's not like the US can't produce home grown options after these multi-national corps are purged from using the US like toilet paper. If prices are passed onto the consumer then we foster LOCAL options to replace jettisoned options. Starving the US and pretending that protecting American jobs is not worthwhile, while replacing former US standard of living jobs with service sector wage slave jobs, doesn't benefit the US even if it benefits the profit margin of companies. We, as a nation, should take back the reigns of our commerce and keep from letting free market capitalista pieces of shit from turning our nation into the husk that Ireland became AFTER being touted as some FMC cibola.

Ireland Shows Revival Signs, Offers Lesson to Greece (Update1) - BusinessWeek

 

[sangha]

I thought a commodity was like, milk and eggs and pork bellies and shit. Can I invest in a call center, without having to work in one?

Call centers are a service, a means of doing business. Some companies run them in house, some subcontract, but if I'm running a company in an industry where I and most of my largest competitors are subcontracting to India, why wouldn't I pass the cost on?

Services can be a commodity too. Look at stock trading. If you're a knowledgeable investor with no need or desire for investment advice, and all you need from a broker is to execute the trades you tell him to make, then all you care about is the price you're charged for the trade. After all, a trade is a trade. It's not as if one broker can execute a trade any better than any other.

So, if all of your competitors are in India, and the Indian call centers raise their prices, your competitors will move their business to a US based call center which has lower prices because they didn't have to raise their prices to cover the tax.

BTW, this is pretty basic economic theory. The idea that taxing overseas businesses increases employment in the US is considered gospel, which is appropriate given the way history has confirmed it over and over and over. Every nation that has industrialized used taxes and tariffs on foriegn businesses to protect its' industrial base.

You sure do post a lot of garbage, but it is amusing to read. That's a nice little rant about overseas businesses, but we're talking about American companies that have offshore operations. Taxing these US companies will result in higher US prices and/or more offshore operations which is what we've been seeing for decades. Kudos to people like you for making it even harder for US companies to stay in business.

And another consrvative hypocrit claims that taxing overseas call centers will result in MORE call center going overseas. You must think we can find more oil by raising taxes on the oil companies.

ANd of course, you have to make up the claim that call center in the US are going to be taxed. It's a shame that reality has a liberal bias

 

[xsited1]

I'm all for protectionism. Companies, and those who want to pretend free market capitalism is some kind of economic panacea, who are not loyal to the US should have no right to use our consumer base like a disposable cup. If companies want to move call centers to India then let them use India's consumer base to scrape together a profit. It's not like the US can't produce home grown options after these multi-national corps are purged from using the US like toilet paper. If prices are passed onto the consumer then we foster LOCAL options to replace jettisoned options. Starving the US and pretending that protecting American jobs is not worthwhile, while replacing former US standard of living jobs with service sector wage slave jobs, doesn't benefit the US even if it benefits the profit margin of companies. We, as a nation, should take back the reigns of our commerce and keep from letting free market capitalista pieces of shit from turning our nation into the husk that Ireland became AFTER being touted as some FMC cibola.

Ireland Shows Revival Signs, Offers Lesson to Greece (Update1) - BusinessWeek

Ireland lowered corporate tax rates years ago which cause growth to explode. However, the top tax rate on personal income is high and they imposed a new income levy last year. As a result, an increasing number of high-net-worth people are leaving.

Isn't that interesting? Raise taxes and people (and companies) move operations offshore.