So when Accenture and IBM open foreign subsidiaries, that is not considered offshoring? Isn't that making offshoring a meaningless term?

Let's see if I understand... There is so much outsourcing to India (a country 3 times the size of the US!!!) that wages in India have risen to the point that it's less profitable. But on the other hand, Prof Drezner says that outsourcing is not and never has been a significant problem for US workers. Am I the only one that thinks these two statements are probably not consistent?

It would appear that US and Indian wages have found an equilibrium. I understand that it is a natural consequence of "free trade," but this can NOT be considered a good thing for US workers.

but this can NOT be considered a good thing for US workers.

Sure it can. Economics predicts that, in the presence of free trade, wages rise to meet productivity. India had massive productivity gains. This made India a prime spot for jobs, since the productivity gains preceeded the wage increases, as it generally does. Competition eventually leads to higher Indian wage rates, slowing the pace of offshoring as equilibrium is reached.

In the long term, economic theory very solidly predicts that rising Indian productivity does not lower US wage rates, but rather raises Indian wage rates in equilibrium. Wages follow productivity. However, in the short run there definitely can be pain in the US. Rising Indian wage rates are absolutely a good sign for US workers-- they indicate that the equilibrium is being reached, and hence the end of the temporary pain for some US workers.

Few people care about offshoring to Canada or the UK, for example. And note that the Indian firms are "onshoring" here.

With the recent Chapter 11 settlements of Delphi and Dana there will be a mad rush to offshore tens or maybe hundreds of thousands of auto parts manufacturing jobs.

Delphi is committed to offshoring at least 80% of blue collar jobs with an eventual plan to offshore or sell off 100% of blue collar jobs. Delphi workers got a settlement only because GM was still on the hook and the UAW had enough leverage to hold GM hostage.

The competitors of Delphi and Dana will have to offshore to meet labor costs.

Maybe we have been in a lull. But not for long.

And note that the Indian firms are "onshoring" here.

This is the worst of both worlds. As I read the Economist piece, most of the 'onshored' workers are actually Indians, with 10% t 30% local hires. So we get both displaced American workers and the externalities caused by population growth. Great deat.

And of course, how many of the 'local' hires are naturalized Indians, or legal permanent residents of Indian descent (i.e. first or maybe second generation). Somehow I don't think these 'onshoring' shops will be like a Toyota factory in Tennessee , providing large numbers of good paying jobs for the true locals.

@ Mitchell Young
I didnot realize that Toyota provided a large nymber of good paying jobs to American Indians, the true locals.

@ Mitchell Young
I didnot realize that Toyota provided a large nymber of good paying jobs to American Indians, the true locals.

College students are no longer majoring in computer science - enrollement is down by 50%. Why? Take IBM: they hired 50,000 Indians in the last six years, while cutting American workers.

We're still not up to the high tech job count of 2000, and the reason is outsourcing.