Wednesday, August 4, 2010

We Are All the Outsourced

And the latest skirmishes in the dismantling of the American working and middle classes . . .

Two articles in the New York Times today, one about employee wages being squeezed, one on the outsourcing of lawyers. Oh, for the rage of Howard Beale.

All this outsourcing began thirty years ago when blue collar manufacturing jobs moved to the unregulated, anti-environmentally protected, anti-union South. And don't forget how the most "beloved" president in American history launched the first of many salvos in the battle to destroy organized labor, firing striking air traffic controllers. But while the South prospered for a little while, the good times eventually stopped rolling. Those shuttered factories of the rustbelt were mirrored in places below the Mason-Dixon line when those solid blue-collar jobs moved to Mexico, Thailand, Vietnam, and China. We shouldn't be making televisions and clothes, the economic experts told us. We should be a nation of technocrats, idea men and women.

Fast forward to today, as increasing numbers of white collar jobs—those idea jobs—are being offshored in professions once thought sacrosanct. IT workers were hit first more than a decade ago, then the med tech guys, engineers, and banking support staff. Now, it's the lawyers' turn.

It's nice to know that, while globalization pays workers in those "rising" countries a few dimes more a week today, it is also depressing American wages—and with it Americans' pride and their hope for the future. American labor is like those beautiful, fecund marshes that Saddam Hussein drained and turned into desert. Sure, Americans aren't perfect. But they do work hard. Very hard. Yet that fact matters little to Wall Street and its shareholders. The economy has become a zero-sum game. And most of us know which side is which. Unfortunately, too many citizens are so confused or willfully ignorant or blinded by greed or the false dream that, well, hey one day they'll be rich too, to fully appreciate what is happening even as they watch their own livelihoods erode. But why truly understand when it's easier to blame a "usurper socialist" faux president with a foreign-sounding name.

Who will be left to buy all those televisions and Wiis, all those smartphones and tech gear? Not the growing number of citizens scraping out a living on the salaries paid in the service industries. For years, state governments and corporations reneged on funding workers' pension funds and funneled their workers' contributions to the great rigged casino that is the markets. Instead of stabilizing taxes (or horrors, raising them on the wealthiest who benefit the most), they cut them. You can have a free lunch with all the trimmings, they told eager Americans who, like children, want everything—but don't want to have to pay for it. Now, as the gaping holes caused by their poor governance become glaring apparent in budgets written in red ink, they use the old tried and true, blaming it all on the workers and their greedy demands. Of course it's nonsense. Yet again, a gullible and blind electorate go along, saying yes! workers just expect too much.

The only winners these days are the wealthy who have gamed the system. These ruthless robber-barons are well on their way to taking America back to the time of William McKinley, economically, politically, and socially. They are supported by those on both sides of the aisle in congress who blame the unemployed and the uninsured for their plight while giving billions in corporate welfare to big agribusiness, big banks, and big pharma. It's not pretty, and it's not going to get better anytime soon, not if people vote in the very types who caused this mess over the course of four decades in the first place in the November midterms.

And so it goes.

More Workers Face Pay Cuts, Not Furloughs, New York Times August 4, 2010


Outsourcing to India Draws Western Lawyers, New York Times August 4, 2010


Defining Prosperity Down, Paul Krugman, New York Times August 1, 2010


A Sin and a Shame, Bob Herbert, New York Times July 30, 2010

Monday, August 2, 2010

Women, Afghanistan, and the Taliban

This past weekend, the New York Times ran a disturbing article entitled Afghan Women Fear Loss of Modest Gains. (I'll link at the bottom; I've become an acolyte of The Shallows, but more on that later.) During the 90s, I used to joke with the males in my family that if I'd been born in a place like Taliban-controlled Afghanistan, I'd have been stoned to death for being, well, an outspoken, independent female. I couldn't imagine being restricted in my movements, forbidden from venturing outside without a male family member. Not being able to work or go to school or take a bus alone, whenever I felt like it. But these are just a few of the depredations millions of Afghani women endured as they were forced into the shadows by the Taliban's peculiar view of Islam.
But while these women were shrouded into burkas and forgotten by the world—many of them alone, without men to protect them—somehow they survived. In an eye-opening and inspiring new book, former ABC journalist and producer Gayle Tzemach Lemmon introduces us to one of these Afghani women, a girl barely out of her teens named Kamela Sediqi who created a dressmaking business that kept her family alive, and helped support a number of others like herself. The Dressmaker of Khair Khana details how Kamela devised the idea for her home-grown business and the risks she took to make it work. Yet Kamela wasn't alone; the Taliban of course allowed women doctors—they had to since a woman cannot be touched by a non-familial male—and others to "earn a living." But only in the shadows, behind the locked doors of their homes. And one wrong move could have spelled disaster.
As we debate the pros and cons of our involvement in Afghanistan and the costs of the war, Kamela's story is a reminder of what's at stake beyond our own designs. It reveals the essential contribution millions of women—mothers, sisters, daughters just like us—offer their nation and its future; the strength and motivation, courage and audacity to create, to build, to believe. Hillary Clinton has promised we won't abandon these women again. But history is not on these women's side. Next time you wonder why we are in Afghanistan, think about Kamela and her sisters. Think about yourself and the young women you know. There are no easy answers, but as The Dressmaker of Khair Khana shows, the stakes are very, very real. Sure, these women can survive once again. But don't they deserve better from their own nation—and from us?

Watch the headlines now, and look for The Dressmaker of Khair Khana in March 2011. You won't look at Afghanistan in the same way again.