[widebody911]

Originally posted by dd74
Is it fair to say most American corporations who sent their jobs overseas were forced to do so because of the continual strain (financial and otherwise) unions have placed on their businesses model?


I don't know that forced is the correct word. A lot of jobs have gone overseas that were not union, and the companies that sent jobs overseas were making money before they sent the jobs, it's just they made a lot more after sending them. The cost 'savings' went into CEO pockets. What companies have been finding out is that you can only outsource (or lay off) only so much. Once the short-term gains are in the bank, you have to come up with something else to keep profits up.

Efficient capitalism requires low-cost labor. American manufacturers would love to return to the days of wage slaves toiling in the factories for 16 hours a day for pennies starting at the age of 8 - that's why they're moving to Asia where they can get that.