Written by: Beck

Foreign Affairs magazine has a phenomenal article online about the effects of the outsourcing of American jobs written by a professor of political economy at the University of Chicago. If the subject at all interests you, you should definitely hop over and give it a read. One word of warning: this article is LONG. Definitely not lightweight stuff. It would be nice if someone would send a flying tackle into John Kerry and force him to read the entire thing. Actually, inasmuch as I don't think Kerry would change his campaign message one whit regardless of what he reads, it would be nice if someone would just send a flying tackle into John Kerry for no reason at all.

For those without the patience Foreign Affairs kindly provides a summary:

Summary: According to the election-year bluster of politicians and pundits, the outsourcing of American jobs to other countries has become a problem of epic proportion. Fortunately, this alarmism is misguided. Outsourcing actually brings far more benefits than costs, both now and in the long run. If its critics succeed in provoking a new wave of American protectionism, the consequences will be disastrous -- for the U.S. economy and for the American workers they claim to defend. [emphasis mine]

And where would I be without a money quote for you ladies and gentlemen?

The outsourcing phenomenon has shown that globalization can affect white-collar professions, heretofore immune to foreign competition, in the same way that it has affected manufacturing jobs for years... [T]he law of comparative advantage does not stop working just because 401(k) plans are involved. The creation of new jobs overseas will eventually lead to more jobs and higher incomes in the United States. Because the economy -- and especially job growth -- is sluggish at the moment, commentators are attempting to draw a connection between offshore outsourcing and high unemployment. But believing that offshore outsourcing causes unemployment is the economic equivalent of believing that the sun revolves around the earth: intuitively compelling but clearly wrong.

OK, so it's more of a money paragraph than a money quote, but you get the point.