Why have your employees work remotely in a city 100 miles from their original office at 80-90% of the cost when you can have them be 1000 miles from the office at 30-40% of the cost.
If you find employees in Central and South America they would also be in the same timezone.
A lot of communications type work suffered from outsourcing due to language barriers and poor connectivity and poorer skillset from workers in other areas of the world (or even the US). That may not always continue to be the case.
I'm guessing the top 10% or 20% of workers do not need to be worried since they can provide so much value that outsourcing is not worth it. But if you're in the bottom 4 quintiles, I would be wary.
Sure they are. The expertise and factories to build a lot of components are no longer in the US, which has a ton of knock-on effects in the economy - job loss, decline, etc.
That's a hidden cost that offsets whatever cash savings were experienced on the front end.
Essentially for short term gain for some, entire companies were destroyed.
So there were heavy costs on the backend.
It shouldn't matter who I am, but I say this as someone who immigrated into North America after having worked several years in South America. There are real barriers to collaboration that prevent outsourcing from being a silver bullet. They don't make collaboration necessarily impossible or difficult, but these barriers need to be taken into account.
Of course it was less about cost and more about the ability to quickly provide additional resources, and it was done with the upmost care to make it still feel like one team, but it doesn't have to be a nightmare.