So courtesy Obamanations favorite party, US wouldn't be accused of hypocrisy and double standards at WTO
What can I say, from a cursory review of the article, it looks like the Republicans got it wrong. I say cursory because these bills always come with a bunch of other crap tacked onto them, and I haven't had a chance to review the whole bill. Just recently, the Democrats tied the repeal of "Dont ask dont tell" to the military funding bill, and it got rejected(and rightly so). One can't say the Republicans are against funding the military, but they certainly voted against the military funding bill. Looking at the article, it bill was not an anti-outsourcing bill. It was simply a bill that cut payroll taxes for new jobs created within the US, something they should have done a long time ago. I'm a fan of outsourcing, so long as jobs sent overseas comply with all US employment and tax policies, which they currently do not. I'm not sure how we can say the US laborers cant compete when foreign laborers start off with a 40% payroll advantage in that they comply with none of our US Labor laws. I also noted the article mentioned Ohio banning offshore labor for taxpayer funded projects. There is a reason why every police dept in the US drives cars built in America, I cant possibly imagine why taxpayer funded labor would be any different.
Guess the image didn't load for you, here: http://epaper.hindustantimes.com/PUBLICATIONS/HT/HD/2010/09/30/Article//009/30_09_2010_009_018.jpg
I'm curious, does India have a payroll tax? And what is a payroll tax, exactly?? Maybe this 40 percent advantage could be put in dollars, like a $8,000 rebate.
Its a percentage of the salary, so you can only put it in dollars once you establish a salary. Minimum wage in California is around $16,000 a year, so to start with, every outsourced employee would have to make at least that much. Payroll taxes come out to about 14% of that, 50% of which are paid out of the employee's salary. Supposedly, the payroll tax, and all the other associated taxes, rules, regulations, and protections we have in place are to guarantee a minimum quality of life for the workers. To say we are going to send jobs overseas and thereby avoid paying those fees could be compared to tax evasion, or laborer abuse, if you really buy into the reasons such fees exist. In fairness to the US, we spend a lot of money on the military, while many other nations spend that money on social programs, letting us pick up the tab for the world's police. It seems clear that jobs sent abroad would have to forward some portion of those taxes back to help pay for the US military. Sounds ducky, doesn't it?