Protectionism for call centers

[xsited1]

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

Funny you would call me a conservative since I'm not one. And where did you get the idea that call centers in the US are going to be taxed? Raising taxes on oil companies will allow them to find more oil? Yet more BS spewing from your limited brain. Does it hurt to be so stupid? I used to think 'painfully stupid' was just an expression, but perhaps it really does hurt.

 

[sangha]

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.

They raised taxes on everyone, and not just foreign based call centers. And Irelands' tax receipts have risen.

 

[California Girl]

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

Funny you would call me a conservative since I'm not one. And where did you get the idea that call centers in the US are going to be taxed? Raising taxes on oil companies will allow them to find more oil? Yet more BS spewing from your limited brain. Does it hurt to be so stupid? I used to think 'painfully stupid' was just an expression, but perhaps it really does hurt.

Stupidity can be terminal and, from my understanding, will not be covered under ObamaCares! Lots of lefties are gonna die.

 

[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.

They raised taxes on everyone, and not just foreign based call centers. And Irelands' tax receipts have risen.

You have a hard time grasping the obvious.

 

[jillian]

as far as the charges, that's a bit much

i think 25 cents a call is a pretty good incentive to keep jobs in this country. makes up for the tax advantage of outsourcing.

i think it's great.

 

[California Girl]

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.

They raised taxes on everyone, and not just foreign based call centers. And Irelands' tax receipts have risen.

Ireland's economy is dead..... They are on the verge of bankruptcy.

 

[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

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.

yea.. kinda like we saw our own housing market crash too, eh? You people ALWAYS have excuses for the failure of your economic opinion. without fail.

 

[Shogun]

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.

They raised taxes on everyone, and not just foreign based call centers. And Irelands' tax receipts have risen.

You have a hard time grasping the obvious.

and you have a hard time admitting the obvious.

 

[sangha]

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.

They raised taxes on everyone, and not just foreign based call centers. And Irelands' tax receipts have risen.

Ireland's economy is dead..... They are on the verge of bankruptcy.

So is the US, thanks to conservative policies.

bush cut taxes, and the US economy went into a tailspin.

Afghanistan also has low taxes. It's the conservatives economic wet dream. That's why all those high net worth Irish people are moving to Afghanistan

 

[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.

yea.. kinda like we saw our own housing market crash too, eh? You people ALWAYS have excuses for the failure of your economic opinion. without fail.

Isn't that special. You reply with something that has nothing to do with what we're talking about in this thread and then you say I'm making excuses.

 

[xsited1]

They raised taxes on everyone, and not just foreign based call centers. And Irelands' tax receipts have risen.

Ireland's economy is dead..... They are on the verge of bankruptcy.

So is the US, thanks to conservative policies.

bush cut taxes, and the US economy went into a tailspin.

Afghanistan also has low taxes. It's the conservatives economic wet dream. That's why all those high net worth Irish people are moving to Afghanistan

Granted, Bush was an idiot, but his tax cuts didn't put the economy into a tailspin. Do you people even think before you post?

 

[GHook93]

Ireland's economy is dead..... They are on the verge of bankruptcy.

So is the US, thanks to conservative policies.

bush cut taxes, and the US economy went into a tailspin.

Afghanistan also has low taxes. It's the conservatives economic wet dream. That's why all those high net worth Irish people are moving to Afghanistan

Granted, Bush was an idiot, but his tax cuts didn't put the economy into a tailspin. Do you people even think before you post?

Correct, it was Clinton's strong arm policies of the Community Reinvestment Act upon the banks, his policy of making student loans non-dischargable (which inadvertly skyrocketed tuition costs) and his unfair free trade agreement started the collaspe and are the root cause. Bush's neglect of the damage allowed it to snowball!

 

[Sheldon]

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?

That's true. Not all companies have the same operational costs. A large company can have the advantage of bulk discount, for an example.

It's essentially a cost/benefit analysis for each company. And it's possible the foreign services may lower their operational costs in response to this; i.e. cutting wages, or relocating to a country that isn't targeted by this bill.

There are several variables that come into play. Which is why I don't know how you arrived at this sedative mantra:

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.

They're not avoiding the expense. Whether a company continues outsourcing this service, or re-Americanizes it, the operational costs will still rise from where they are now. Whether that company passes the increased costs on to the consumer or absorbs it will depend on the cost/benefit analysis and what its competitors are doing.

This bill may increase employment in America, but by how much is pure speculation. Some of that answer will depend on the decisions of those large corps with market leverage.

 

[sangha]

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.

It's actually quite simple. It will still cost less than having them here.

Well, that was definitely simple...simple minded

At 0.25 a call, overseas call centers will be more expensive. They sell for less than that.

 

[sangha]

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?

That's true. Not all companies have the same operational costs. A large company can have the advantage of bulk discount, for an example.

I think you misunderstood what I wrote. I agree with you that different companies have different costs. It was a wingnut who is arguing that all companies have the same expenses.

There are several variables that come into play. Which is why I don't know how you arrived at this sedative mantra:

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.

They're not avoiding the expense. Whether a company continues outsourcing this service, or re-Americanizes it, the operational costs will still rise from where they are now. Whether that company passes the increased costs on to the consumer or absorbs it will depend on the cost/benefit analysis and what its competitors are doing.

I see no reason to support your claim that companies that use US based call centers will see their operational costs rise.

And you are right that a companies decision to pass on costs (or not) depends on a number of factors. However, that's what I said earlier in response to the same wingnuts claim that a business can and will just pass the increased costs off to the consumer throught higher prices.

This bill may increase employment in America, but by how much is pure speculation. Some of that answer will depend on the decisions of those large corps with market leverage.

I think you are again misunderstanding the discussion. No one here is debating that the job gains will be great or small. The disagreement here is that some seem to think that taxing overseas call centers will increase off-shoring.

 

[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.

It's actually quite simple. It will still cost less than having them here.

Well, that was definitely simple...simple minded

At 0.25 a call, overseas call centers will be more expensive. They sell for less than that.

And what makes you think they'll bring the call centers back over here where they have to pay employees more and deal with more regulation, rather than moving their entire operation overseas where they can avoid this tax and pay more employees less?

 

[sangha]

Correct, it was Clinton's strong arm policies of the Community Reinvestment Act upon the banks,

It was bush who encouraged the poor to get mortgages they couldn't afford

USATODAY.com - Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership

Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership
By Thomas A. Fogarty, USA TODAY
In a bid to boost minority homeownership, President Bush will ask Congress for authority to eliminate the down-payment requirement for Federal Housing Administration loans.
In announcing the plan Monday at a home builders show in Las Vegas, Federal Housing Commissioner John Weicher called the proposal the "most significant FHA initiative in more than a decade." It would lead to 150,000 first-time owners annually, he said.

Nothing-down options are available on the private mortgage market, but, in general, they require the borrower to have pristine credit. Bush's proposed change would extend the nothing-down option to borrowers with blemished credit.

his policy of making student loans non-dischargable (which inadvertly skyrocketed tuition costs)

Ummm, that was bush
How to get student loans discharged or forgiven | eHow.com

Bankruptcy is not a realistic option to having your student loan forgiven. In 2005, major changes to the U.S. Bankruptcy Code governing the discharge of student loans were enacted by Congress and signed by President George W. Bush. These new laws make student loans non-dischargeable, unless you, as the debtor, can prove to the Bankruptcy Court that repaying the loan will prove to be a 'substantial hardship' on you as you embark on a fresh financial start post-bankruptcy.

and his unfair free trade agreement started the collaspe and are the root cause. Bush's neglect of the damage allowed it to snowball!

You think NAFTA caused the economic meltdown? Where did you get your eco degree? In a cracker jacks box?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

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.

It's actually quite simple. It will still cost less than having them here.

Well, that was definitely simple...simple minded

At 0.25 a call, overseas call centers will be more expensive. They sell for less than that.

I highly doubt it. 25¢ is not that much. If you have a call center employee in India, taking even 100 calls a day, which is unlikely, that is only an extra $25 a day. Times seven it's an extra $175 a week. They get paid about a tenth of what we make here, in American dollars. It will still be incredibly less expensive to have them over there.

When you're going to insult somebody else's intelligence, you might want to make sure you know what you're talking about first to avoid looking like this:

 

[Sheldon]

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?

That's true. Not all companies have the same operational costs. A large company can have the advantage of bulk discount, for an example.

I think you misunderstood what I wrote. I agree with you that different companies have different costs. It was a wingnut who is arguing that all companies have the same expenses.

I understand what you wrote. It's why i agreed with you, and now you're agreeing with me agreeing with you, so i think we're in agreement that not all companies have the same operational costs.

Not too sure that LuckyDan is a wingnut, though. he was just giving a hypothetical example, like I'm about to do.

There are several variables that come into play. Which is why I don't know how you arrived at this sedative mantra:



They're not avoiding the expense. Whether a company continues outsourcing this service, or re-Americanizes it, the operational costs will still rise from where they are now. Whether that company passes the increased costs on to the consumer or absorbs it will depend on the cost/benefit analysis and what its competitors are doing.

I see no reason to support your claim that companies that use US based call centers will see their operational costs rise.

And you are right that a companies decision to pass on costs (or not) depends on a number of factors. However, that's what I said earlier in response to the same wingnuts claim that a business can and will just pass the increased costs off to the consumer throught higher prices.

If companyA moved its service off-shore, it's reasonable to assume that they did so because it was cheaper. Now with this tax raising the operational costs on such a practice, that company can either:
a) continue to off-shore the practice and pay the tax. They may absorb the cost, or they may pass it on to the consumer. I'm of the thought that they will pass it on.
b) return the service operation to the United States, where the operational costs are higher. if they costs aren't higher over here, then why would they out-source in the first place?

so either way, the operational costs of this service will rise for these companies. Crunching the actual numbers is, like you and i agreed on, a matter of individual cost/benefit analysis.

This bill may increase employment in America, but by how much is pure speculation. Some of that answer will depend on the decisions of those large corps with market leverage.

I think you are again misunderstanding the discussion. No one here is debating that the job gains will be great or small. The disagreement here is that some seem to think that taxing overseas call centers will increase off-shoring.

You brought up an increase in employment, and i was responding to that. Others can argue for why this tax could increase off-shoring.

 

[sangha]

I understand what you wrote. It's why i agreed with you, and now you're agreeing with me agreeing with you, so i think we're in agreement that not all companies have the same operational costs.

My bad. I see I mis read what you posted

If companyA moved its service off-shore, it's reasonable to assume that they did so because it was cheaper. Now with this tax raising the operational costs on such a practice, that company can either:
a) continue to off-shore the practice and pay the tax. They may absorb the cost, or they may pass it on to the consumer. I'm of the thought that they will pass it on.
b) return the service operation to the United States, where the operational costs are higher. if they costs aren't higher over here, then why would they out-source in the first place?

so either way, the operational costs of this service will rise for these companies.

Now I see what you're saying. However, there's a difference between raising the costs of the foriegn based call center and raising the cost for the customers of foreign based call centers.

My argument that this is a service commodity, and therefore the call centers can't just raise their price. Therefore, while the foreign based call center will see their costs increase, the american based companies that use these foriegn based call centers (FBCC's) will not because the FBCC's won't be able to raise their prices.

This bill may increase employment in America, but by how much is pure speculation. Some of that answer will depend on the decisions of those large corps with market leverage.

I think you are again misunderstanding the discussion. No one here is debating that the job gains will be great or small. The disagreement here is that some seem to think that taxing overseas call centers will increase off-shoring.

You brought up an increase in employment, and i was responding to that. Others can argue for why this tax could increase off-shoring.[/QUOTE]

OK. I just want to make clear that I have not made any claims as to the size of the employment increase.

So basically, the difference is whether one thinks that call centers can raise their prices to make up for increased costs. My argument is that this business is a highly competitive, low margin business that does not require highly trained workers. The people who hire these call centers (both foriegn and domestic) don't give a hoot about the quality of the service because they don't make any money from these call centers. Service is a cost center, not a profit center. Companies don't make a penny on providing this service. They only provide it so they can advertise that they provide support. They don't care is the support is crappy.

Call centers live and die on the basis of what they charge. Charge more than the competition, and you're going out of business mighty quick. In such an environment, a business can't survive by raising it prices everytime its' cost increases.

on edit, I'd like to add that a $0.25 charge for every call will make FBCC's price structure uncompetitive. Call centers don't even charge their customers that much per call so there's no way they can absorb that cost without raising their prices above their domestic competitors