Reference no: EM132173433
Our text provided interesting information on offshoring vs not offshoring. Basically, companies that go offshore or outsource labor or service to a foreign country do so because they can save money. They save on labor costs primarily. They also may need to seek a skilled labor pool.
The critics for offshoring argue that jobs are lost in the home country, and companies are ignoring their social responsibilities. The other big argument is that when companies offshore they lose or put at risk their innovative technology and trade secrets. These host affiliate companies catch on quickly and start profiting from the new technology. Many times, companies have broken away and become the home countries biggest competitor. The RCA example was a very compelling argument for not offshoring.
This Silicone border operation in Mexicali when completed and completely built out, will be an interesting experiment to watch. They are banking on being so close to Northern California’s Silicon Valley. They will be able to capitalize because of proximity on the border, the resources available currently supplying Silicon Valley. The Silicon border could hire away labor talent from up north. Provide excellent weather and close proximity to the fabulous metropolitan city of San Diego. This seems to be a smart move for Mexico.
I took it out. I just need a feedback for this post above. the topic is as below
Nearshoring and Silicon Border
Based on your reading and current events on the topic, research and debate with your fellow peers your opinions of the subject.
Discuss the developments of the Silicon Border and the merits of nearshoring as compared to offshore and outsourcing.
What do you think about the debate in the text that addresses, “Offshoring Verses Not Offshoring” (pg. 110)?