Hacker News Reader

Who are they taking advantage of? The workers who make more than they would otherwise?

Or are they taking advantage of the Americans that they don't employ?

I agree with you. I don't think it's right but we're in a shitty situation now. You have the following choices:

    1. Choose to fire the now reasonably well off employees forcing them to go back to a previous lines of employment that were less lucrative
    2. Force companies to stop outsourcing labor which will in turn make it more likely for other countries to create similar sanctions like this against you.
    3. Make companies pay foreign employees a "reasonable" rate based on local offering thereby making these jobs infinitely more lucrative then even well-educated professions and ultimately tilting their economy in an unwanted direction.

We live in times where economic action is also foreign policy. How would you like it if a country richer then yours started offering jobs for 100x the average wage that you are used to? Would you try and get one of those jobs? Would people start expecting that wage in other places? Would this change the way the market behaves?

> The destitute, desperately grasping at the crumbs dropped on the floor by the rich, is not a positive thing

I wouldn't call the Philippines destitute. I know a few people who'd be offended by that characterization. I'd also ask: why are these people doing these jobs if it's not better then what they were doing before? Better either being higher pay, easier labor, or more enjoyable work environment.

>> why are these people doing these jobs

The only question is "why are rich American companies outsourcing to the poor?". There's no reason why they have to. They can entirely afford paying full market wage in the US. If it's acceptable to outsource, then it should be legal to hire within the US for the same salary. Let Americans make $2/hour if that is the acceptable rate.

Why do you think Americans should get these jobs over Fillipinos?

One "reason" would be that FB derives the most income from the US, especially compared to the US. They certainly benefit from the US education system, which at least in part benefits from the infrastructure and social environment in the US that was created and paid for over a long period of time by essentially all Americans.

In the past, you wouldn't even have to ask this question, you would employ Americans as a matter of principle, as a matter of pride, to give back and reinforce this shared infrastructure and society for the benefit of future generations.

But then, none of this really matters in the new and improved globalist every man for himself world. (While the executives preach the virtues of socialist values.)

"especially compared to the the Philippines"

>If it's acceptable to outsource, then it should be legal to hire within the US for the same salary.

That's not how economies work.

> Let Americans make $2/hour if that is the acceptable rate.

I see no reason what that should be disallowed in my moral structure. If you don't think that's a reasonable wage don't take that job. You won't see any takers.

I think your anger is misguided and ignorant.

(a) They do receive reasonable wages. Better than the average in fact as the parent articulated. If you paid them US wages you would be completely distorting the local economy as suddenly you've created a community of millionaires. Do you really want medical/law students etc dropping out to become Facebook moderators because the money is so much better ?

(b) There is universal health care in Phillipines. Companies paying for health care is a US concept that doesn't apply in many other countries.

(c) They are employees of Accenture not Facebook. And not sure where you get the idea that all employees get stock options. That's something that again is a foreign concept in most places in the world.