What this article fails to say.....was: India Leads in Clinical Trials 49

straydog Leads in an and US, and themselves If the kings-wealthy were to make rules that you should be working for free, that would be true. If the wealthy make rules that they will invest their wealth to hire the cheapest labour -then it doesn't gel well with what you are saying. How on earth can you indidt-legislate that an employer hire you if he can get the same work done from someone else for less??

were kind of.

money

No -that is the problem. The money coming in to other countries isn't necessarily money owned by americans. Even if it had to come from the US, it doesn't mean much. Private money != public property. If its not public money, it cannot be legislated. The DHS has a pending legislation which would require a product to have 50% US originated goods-services. The reason why that legislation can succeed is that it involves public aka taxpayer money. (Actually, there is one possible bit of public money encouraging offshoring -Calpers, which is a major investor in India).

the they

It hurst and whether or not you get mad about it -is a different story. What Im getting at is that the guys getting hurt aren't enbreastled to those jobs either legally or morally. The only circumstance under which they can still expect to get hired is if they provide an attractive return on investment. I mean, there is nothing to compel investors too open companies and hire Indians -and yet they are doing so because it makes financial sense. All of that talk about jobs or the entire tech sector 'belonging' to americans is baloney.

same Maybe you need a higher level of taxation for the rich.

they possible to stand, the Possibly. Even if they weren't all of the above -jobs would still be leaving expensive locales for cheaper ones. Saying no to that is like defying gravity.

leading to shareholder CEO I don't know how to put it -but I would liken the CEO to a captain who steers the ship. He can control the ship's wheel but not the waves underneath or the eventual fate of the ship. If his compebreastors either domestically or overseas use cheaper labour, he will be forced to disown his american underlings and hire people overseas. If sdhareholdees want better profits-lwoer loss during a recession -he will fire people to satisfy the shareholders. He gets paid to deliver and if he doesn't -he loses his job. delivering might also include buttressing the balance sheet with false numbers.

lies intent but to post US Property." not relevant. Tell me the facts -not the name of the book.

locations. if that is what you want to categorize investors -yeah. Since when did a country inherit moral rights to private equity?

its already happening-and but for currency distortions, you would have seen a greater no. of american jobs head back home because (a) the place is getting expensive (b) the returns aren't as good as projected.

heist. their nice. its not my way. I don't know about the companies taking work back or ratre at which work is flowing in -but if you had to take a 2 or 5 yr sampling, you will see jobs moving to India at a mbuttive rate. If you expevct them to sell of their buildings and campuses and head back home -thats probably wishful thinking.

Ph.D by they numbers our the soil does -the Foreign direct Investment doesn't. Even if the investment is by an american individual, it still doesn't belong to americans (unless you plan to go socialist).

them expense.

No -they didn't manufacture jobs.

If you really want to target anybody as the devil -it should be the investor who created so many jobs in the US. Its the investor taking those jobs overseas. The CEO is just a pid employee WITHOUT the power to veto anti-national decisions by the investor.

regards -kamal