Ok, so jobs are going overseas. Simple economics dictate workers can be paid less, which allows for a greater profit margins back home. There's no denying the overseas lure, even when it can potentially alinate the local economy. But is it the proverbial knife at the throat of the American worker?

Hardly.

Or more to the point, we're a sad, sad country if this trend is actually the harbringer of economic ruin some people would have you believe. Contrary to popular belief, this country was not founded on the job. It was founded on the concept of small business and innovation with tax regulations and those mythical 'loopholes' written to benefit them as such. What does that have to do with anything, you ask? There is no innovation required to do perform the average wage slave position. Sure it requires brain power, but there is nothing that sets it apart from Al'hubob half way around the world. He may not have a strong grasp of the english language, but he can follow a trouble shooting script on the phones as well as anybody else. To put it succinctly, most of the jobs being shipped overseas require no innovation and can easily be done by anybody with half a brain and a minor speach impediment. Sure, some of them are higher level positions such as Al'habib the coder, but by and large these are skills anybody can aquire and are not the monopoly of the your Union Local 180. Chopping off the nuts of free enterprise is not the answer, and I'll prove it.

Look at it from the perspective of the RIAA-- The trends of high speed downloads and easily duplicated music have combined into a force that may very well render the current record label sales model obsolete, and the they are not happy about it. Their control over the music revenue stream is being sucked away and they've been left with two options: Innovate or Litigate. They've opted for the latter. In order to retain control of that revenue stream, they've opt to sue and over-regulate their industry and in the process have continuously alinated their customer base while creating opportunities for new, more agile competition to take root. Most people have agreed that this is a bad way to do business. Holding on to power at whatever cost will eventially kill you or the consumer, which will eventially kill you anyway.

They could have taken the latter method. Instead of clinging to a dying sales model for dear life, they could have embraced the new age and innovated a solution which would have benefited all parties innvolved. I won't go into how they could have done it since there are too many ways to list, just that it doesn't take too much brainpower to think it through. Some, to their credit, have already started down that path and will be in position to catch the next surge. Good for them.

By now, the analogy should be clear. In my opinion, this is an unstoppable trend in American economics. It's an irrefutable law that people want stuff cheap. It's caused music downloading to explode and it's what is compelling industries to farm their workforce out to other countries. These companies have to remain competitive and in order to remain competitive they have to cut costs somewhere. In a land of ever increasing minimum wages and Unions, the workforce is a logical place to start. So far, most people's reaction has been to litigate their way out of this dilemma; Keep jobs at home, have a nice comfy salary and demand low prices without any concessions to the contrary.

Congratulations, folks. We're the RIAA.

But there is that other way. Innovate your way out of the problem. Find a niche and fill it. Overcome, adapt and improvise. Find something you can do that they can't. Frankly, most of this can't be done easily with in the average 9-5 job. It's the wrong vehical for the job and the workforce of America is going to have to go against half a century of conditioning to realize it is not the end all, be all of success. It's not what will provide them long term security, especially in a globally competitive market.

The US should have learned something from World War 2: Isolationism at our own peril. This fact applies to economics as firmly as it does military warfare. America cannot engage in a siege mentality when it comes to global economics, and we all know how sieges end. They end in an opposing army setting up shop outside your walls and pounding on them until they crack, wence you are sacked, raped and gutted. If you don't think that can't happen to us, look at that juggernaught called China. I don't think they're better than us, but left alone in the global arena they can be. In order to remain competitive, we, the American worker are going to be the ones that have to change. The market place is already doing so as a matter of nessesity. The status quo is fading rapidly and we're all faced with a choice: Will we cling wildly to the sinking ship or will embrace the new market and innovate accordingly? After all, it's been innovation and adaptivity that has allowed this country to remain the dominate, most successful power for over 50 years. Eventially this economic cycle will run its course. Al'Habib and his brothers will begin to realize how much their skills are worth and demand more. The market will adjust accordingly as the price of maintaining overseas bases becomes cost prohibitive to hiring out American workers. Once more, the market will adapt as it always has. But for now, it comes down to the very same choice the RIAA is being forced to make:

Innovate or die.

Privacy is a hottly contested issue here on Slashdot and as such, a closely followed one. So what if I were to tell you that your medical records are now fair game for search and seizure, no warrent or subpoena required? What if, more over, I were to tell you that such an action specifically violated your state's constitutional right to privacy? Most of you, I suspect would be yelling "Burn the Patriot Act!" or something similar. And rightly you should...

...If it were the Patriot Act we were talking about. Unfortuantely, the invasion of privacy we're talking about here requires no special governmental powers apparently, only the will to abuse them. The person we are hypothetically referring to may or may not have commited a crime, but such is irrelevant at this moment. What is relevant is the impact it will have on the rest of us. Without a search warrent, subpoena or even consent, this persons medical records were opened, searched and used as evidence in order to bring charges against him. It might as well have been his house.

Again, this doesn't bode well for any of us if the action is upheld. At that point your medical records are fair game and anything therein can and will be used against you in a court of law without your knowledge, consent or due process. Nor is it a story you'll see here on Slashdot, despite the far reaching consequences it holds and the general fanatisim Slashdot holds for this specific topic in general. Why? Because of the high profile nature of the person being persecuted.

His name is Rush Limbaugh, and now it's OK to crucify him without due process because of what he represents to some people. It is no less than political terrorism, on the order of ransacking republican voting centers and burning swatsikas into the lawn of your opposition, only more insidious as it not only affects a controversial high profile figure such as Limbaugh, but you and I as well. He may very well be guilty. Or not. Justifying your case through illegal activities after the fact, however, is abuse of power of the highest order and should be smacked down hard, regardess of the figure in question.

Or you can sit back and laugh at your wonderful fortune as he gets taken down... At least until the Nazis come looking for you.