Will American Factories Ever Resurface Term Paper

Will American Factories Ever Resurface - Term Paper Example There is a lot of heated discussion and debate over the issue of outsourcing. Proponents insist that it is the best thing for the US economy, opponents contend that it is not so, and this is causing massive employment. Advocates are of the view that outsourcing will save money for corporations, will enable new possibilities and would lead to Americans to get their hands on executive jobs. They feel that outsourcing exercise brings significant advantages to the American economy by making imports cheaper and exports more costly for other counties. Opponents of Outsourcing: Those who are not in favor outsourcing contend that hiring people from other countries has a negative effect on the US economy and deprives hundreds of thousands of workers in the US especially skilled and semi-skilled workers. Poor Americans who are willing to do jobs that do not need many skills, are finding it very cumbersome to get jobs, and poverty isn’t really helping help the US economy, instead its red ucing consumer spending considerably and also the amount of tax collections. They say that the lost jobs will never be recovered and this is a permanent loss to the American and the economy. This does seem valid and everyone knows that outsourcing does cause people to be jobless in America, especially such jobs that have very few or no qualifications, education or technical skills, because job loss is not only confined to people limited skills, but also jobs of skilled nature are now outsourced to other countries where manpower is cheaper. The reason that outsourcing hurts the US economy is quite controversial. For those who support outsourcing for political reasons, outsourcing will on the whole have a constructive effect on the American economy, since it is cheaper and saves a lot of money for corporations, opens up advantageous chances for greater free enterprise in the US, and would have the maximum number of Americans working at higher level executive jobs. Opponents are adaman t that the hiring of overseas workers at jobs that can do done by semi-skilled or skilled laborers. The way that companies that outsource save taxes, outsourcing will diminish taxes paid by corporation and therefore also decrease spending by the governments, both federal and state. Both sides on this issue have some valid arguments. Outsourcing has become the major cause of joblessness in America and it greatly affects people with only limited skills. On the other hand the fact that tons of skilled labor jobs are being offered to foreign countries can also not be ruled out. Benefits of Outsourcing: People who favor outsourcing say that reducing the operating expenses of corporations leads to creation of new and better jobs. There are many government departments and agencies that outsource their work load, enabling them to save tons of dollars, which benefits the US economy and reduces federal spending. This is for those who state that paying workers less wagers would mean the compan ies would be able to produce more products with considerably less expenditure and this saving could be passed on to customers. Lower prices would enable more consumers spending, and would enable companies to generate more jobs for employees working in America as they usually pay those workers less who work outside the States. Outsourcing is a very controversial issue, but it is an issue all the same. Virtually no one agrees that outsourcing can be completely stopped (Wise Geek 2012). Many US citizens feel that companies are dodging taxes and cheating the US government of revenues and suggest companies should be taxed more for outsourcing, and given added incentives if they decide to keep their worker base in

Summary article Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Summary article - Essay Example The authors, in trying to answer this question conducted a research on the regularly shod athletes in the United States and the endurance athletes of the Rift valley province of Kenya. According to the research, endurance athletes of the Rift Valley province of Kenya, while on the track land on the forefoot before they could bring down their heel. In other instances though, they land with a mid-foot strike or in other instances, though less often, on the rear-foot-strike. On the other hand, regularly shod athletes land on their rear-foot strike, facilitated by the elevated and cushioned heel of the modern shoe. While running, athletes risk injuries occurring in three ways; the rear-foot strike, where the rear foot lands first, injuries from the mid-foot strike which where the heal and the ball of the foot land at the same time and fore-foot strike, where the ball of the foot lands before the heel. While sprinters often FFS, contemporary endurance runners RFS, and as such, they should be willing to endure more body weight with every impact. According to the authors, the design of the modern running shoe makes the RFS running more comfortable as well as minimizing its injuries. The shoe, by having a large heel filled with elastic materials, allows the spread of the impact over more time, thus reducing the injury caused to the runners. With this technology therefore, the authors sought to understand how athletes, before the invention of the running shoe used to hit the ground when running. Their research methodology, which involved the comparison of kinematics on tracks at preferred endurance running speeds, considered individual runners from five groups. Using the age of the runners and their shoe wearing habits, these researchers identified the study population. Among these groups were habitually shod athletes from the USA, endurance athletes from the rift valley province of Kenya, US runners who grew up using the footwear but currently run barefoot or with mini mal footwear, runners who have never won shoes and people who have for most of their lives been shod (Lieberman et al.531). The authors reveal that habitually shod runners who grew up wearing shoes, in most cases when shod RFS, although they predominantly RFS when barefoot on the same hard surfaces. On the other hand, however, individuals who grew up barefoot, or switched to barefoot running, in most cases, FFS followed by heel contact, whether shod or barefoot. Further, barefoot conditions in most cases MFS. As the research established, the cushioned sole of most of the modern running shoes, having a thickset below the heel, is the main contributing factor to the predominance of RFS in shod runners. This shoe elevates runners at least 5 degrees from the ground, and as such, the habitual unshod runners RFS less frequently. Subsequently, the shoes with elevated, cushioned heels facilitate RFS running, as the authors conclude. Further, the authors observe, that due to the differences in kinematic among foot strikes, they generate different forces of collision on the ground. By comparing this impact with the habitually shod and barefoot adult runners, all from the United States, the researchers were able to come up with this conclusion. The research also establishes that contrary to FFS whose impacts during the toe-heel-toe gaits generate ground reaction forces without a transient even when tested on a steel force plate, RFS landings cause larger