Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

JPMorgan Chase to Increase India Outsourcing 25%
Businessweek ^ | March 9, 2009 | Pankaj Mishra

Posted on 03/11/2009 7:16:27 PM PDT by driftdiver

The second-biggest bank of the US, JP Morgan Chase, which acquired Washington Mutual and Bear Stearns recently, will increase its outsourcing to India by 25% this year to nearly $400 million. It will also manage the integration of the acquired companies from India to bring down the cost of integrating different information technology (IT) systems.

Right now, JP Morgan outsources $250-300 million worth of IT and back-office projects every year to Cognizant, TCS and Accenture, apart from to its own captive centre in Mumbai.

(Excerpt) Read more at businessweek.com ...


TOPICS: Society
KEYWORDS: bailouts; cheaplabor; india; offshore
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-65 next last
They received $25 Billion from TARP which they are using to send jobs overseas.
1 posted on 03/11/2009 7:16:27 PM PDT by driftdiver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

Yes, but it’s a global community we live in now.

Now, Indians can purchase products from America with their new jobs.

/s


2 posted on 03/11/2009 7:17:43 PM PDT by BGHater (Tyranny is always better organised than freedom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

Wait for the crash and burn. The odds against it working out well are considerable.


3 posted on 03/11/2009 7:18:44 PM PDT by George Smiley (They're not drinking the Kool-Aid any more. They're eating it straight out of the packet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: George Smiley

“Wait for the crash and burn. The odds against it working out well are considerable.”

The loss of data will be considerable. The quality of this bank will drop dramatically. And thats before they send stuff offshore.


4 posted on 03/11/2009 7:20:24 PM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

They aren’t using the money to send jobs overseas, presumably they’re saving money by sending jobs overseas, only increasing the (already near 100%) chance that the taxpayers will get the money back.


5 posted on 03/11/2009 7:21:30 PM PDT by Arguendo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

JPMC just lost us as customers AND depositors. Veddy, veddy sorry.


6 posted on 03/11/2009 7:25:34 PM PDT by stboz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BGHater
Now, Indians can purchase products from America with their new jobs.

President Bush really said that:

As President Bush said in a speech during a trip to India in March 2006, “And the class opportunity for our American farmers and entrepreneurs and small businesses to understand, there's a 300-million-person market of middle-class citizens here in India, and that if we can make a product they want, then it becomes -- at a reasonable price -- and then all of a sudden, people will be able to have a market here. ”

Try reading this and this.

And Cheers!

7 posted on 03/11/2009 7:25:39 PM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

Jerks. I sincerely hope they go under, but then our taxes will be propping up these worthless welfare queens once again.


8 posted on 03/11/2009 7:26:11 PM PDT by pnh102 (Save America - Ban Ethanol Now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pnh102

You hope the one remaining major American bank that’s still healthy goes under because they moved a few jobs overseas?

And you think you’re “pro-American” or something because you care about American jobs? What a hypocrite.


9 posted on 03/11/2009 7:31:31 PM PDT by Arguendo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Arguendo
I am angry because my taxpayer money went to a welfare queen that put even more of my fellow countrymen out of work. As much as I cannot stand offshoring, at the very least a company that is getting my money in the form of welfare should be a little more grateful to the taxpayers that saved it from the brink.
10 posted on 03/11/2009 7:36:04 PM PDT by pnh102 (Save America - Ban Ethanol Now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: pnh102

JPM will never, never be allowed to go down. Just google Federal Reserve and see the list of banks that own it then you will see the banks that will never be allowed to fail.


11 posted on 03/11/2009 7:37:04 PM PDT by biff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: pnh102

The taxpayers didn’t save JPMorgan from the brink. You have no idea what you’re talking about.


12 posted on 03/11/2009 7:37:31 PM PDT by Arguendo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Arguendo

“The second-biggest bank of the US, JP Morgan Chase, which acquired Washington Mutual and Bear Stearns recently, will increase its outsourcing to India by 25% this year to nearly $400 million. It will also manage the integration of the acquired companies from India to bring down the cost of integrating different information technology (IT) systems.”

Bambi’s Fault!


13 posted on 03/11/2009 7:39:42 PM PDT by EQAndyBuzz (“Are you better off than you were a month ago?”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Arguendo
The taxpayers didn’t save JPMorgan from the brink. You have no idea what you’re talking about.

Of course not. That TARP money just grew on trees didn't it.

14 posted on 03/11/2009 7:42:00 PM PDT by pnh102 (Save America - Ban Ethanol Now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: pnh102

I repeat...

You should just stop talking and start reading the WSJ once in a while.


15 posted on 03/11/2009 7:44:07 PM PDT by Arguendo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

Yeah, I really want to bail these guys out - so they can use the money to send jobs overseas.


16 posted on 03/11/2009 7:45:09 PM PDT by GOPJ (CEO:Chief Embezzlement Officer- CFO:Corporate Fraud Officer-CASH FLOW: money down the toilet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arguendo
You should just stop talking and start reading the WSJ once in a while.

Good idea!

JPMorgan Chase Clarifies Statement on TARP

"J.P. Morgan, Citigroup and Bank of America each have received billions of dollars in federal aid through TARP."

Now where does "federal aid" come from?

17 posted on 03/11/2009 7:49:59 PM PDT by pnh102 (Save America - Ban Ethanol Now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

The anger is misplaced. Many more companies will follow Chase due to the anti capitalist control of the government. The rats are driving up the cost of labor across industries effectively destroying labor markets. Unfortunately the workers’ paradise envisioned by the rats will turn into an ugly movement of jobs and investment.


18 posted on 03/11/2009 8:17:12 PM PDT by businessprofessor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pnh102

I never denied that they received TARP money. But you’re an idiot if you say it was because they needed it to survive.

The government gave them money for two reasons: a) it wanted all banks, healthy and unhealthy to take it, and b) it wanted strong banks like JPMorgan to acquire weaker banks so they wouldn’t fail, and this would strengthen their ability to do so.


19 posted on 03/11/2009 8:27:10 PM PDT by Arguendo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Arguendo
I never denied that they received TARP money.

Why else would they take the money if they were not in trouble? There were numerous banks that refused TARP money because they were not in trouble and they did not want to put up with the restrictions the government imposed on the money.

it wanted strong banks like JPMorgan to acquire weaker banks so they wouldn’t fail ...

That is silly. A strong bank buying out a weaker one will only weaken the strong bank. The weak banks should have been allowed to fail.

Regardless of the supposed strength of JPMorganChase, the fact remains that they are on welfare. Like any other bum, the least we can expect is that they have some loyalty to the taxpayers that contributed to their bottom line.

20 posted on 03/11/2009 8:34:17 PM PDT by pnh102 (Save America - Ban Ethanol Now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: pnh102

Whatever. I’m one of those taxpayers and I don’t care if they ship jobs overseas, and I doubt the average customer service representative (or whatever jobs they sent to India) pays much in the way of taxes anyway. I want them to do whatever improves their bottom line to maximize the chance we see a return on the TARP money we invested in them.


21 posted on 03/11/2009 9:34:06 PM PDT by Arguendo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Arguendo

“They aren’t using the money to send jobs overseas, presumably they’re saving money by sending jobs overseas, only increasing the (already near 100%) chance that the taxpayers will get the money back.”

Yeah ok, their boss is close with BO. Didn’t BO make a bunch of campaign promises about not sending jobs overseas?

And now he’s helping companies pay for sending our jobs overseas. Cutting thousands of high paying jobs instead of creating jobs like he’s been promising.


22 posted on 03/12/2009 2:43:30 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Arguendo

“You hope the one remaining major American bank that’s still healthy goes under because they moved a few jobs overseas?”

There are a lot of healthy American Banks. Just not a lot of healthy american banks who made bad business decisions.


23 posted on 03/12/2009 2:44:29 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

in all fairness, they were force fed the $25 billion — their competitors got it, and they needed to get the same to keep competition even.


24 posted on 03/12/2009 3:59:06 AM PDT by Cronos (Ceterum censeo, Mecca et Medina delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

“in all fairness, they were force fed the $25 billion — their competitors got it, and they needed to get the same to keep competition even.”

Not buying it, they took it because they wanted to. They are shipping the jobs overseas because they want to.


25 posted on 03/12/2009 4:07:35 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Arguendo; pnh102

They were practically FORCED to take the TARP money. They didn’t need it, they were/are not in trouble. IF your major competitors get 25 b from the govt, then your competitiveness gets affected through no fault of yours. To level things out, the bulge bracket banks ALL got the funds.


26 posted on 03/12/2009 4:37:45 AM PDT by Cronos (Ceterum censeo, Mecca et Medina delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: pnh102; Arguendo
That is silly. A strong bank buying out a weaker one will only weaken the strong bank. The weak banks should have been allowed to fail.

Both wrong. A Strong bank that buys out a one that is failing gets it's assets, customers, skilled people, branches, etc. for cheap. If you run a shop and your competitor fails, you can get his customers, his skilled workers and his land for cheap.

If a weak bank is allowed to fail, then you have the same situation that happened when Lehman failed -- near global economic meltdown.
27 posted on 03/12/2009 4:39:47 AM PDT by Cronos (Ceterum censeo, Mecca et Medina delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver; Arguendo
Arguendo said "the one remaining major American bank that's still healthy" --> key word: "major" -- the bulge-bracket or giant banks. Yes, there are many smaller banks that are doing well as you point out, but Arguendo was referring to a specific subset of banks...
28 posted on 03/12/2009 4:41:58 AM PDT by Cronos (Ceterum censeo, Mecca et Medina delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

They took it as they were forced it — and if you’re getting money for nothing, wouldn’t you?


29 posted on 03/12/2009 4:42:35 AM PDT by Cronos (Ceterum censeo, Mecca et Medina delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

Thank you.

It’s one thing to oppose TARP—I’m certainly no fan—but the hatred people on this site display for every bank and banker involved in it (and even many banks who personally had nothing to do with it) is astounding. You’d think you stumbled onto DU or something.


30 posted on 03/12/2009 4:52:03 AM PDT by Arguendo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Arguendo
I think the hatred is knee-jerk and mostly spouted by folks who have no clue (as witnessed by the person saying that "Why else would they take the money if they were not in trouble?" -- commenting for the sake of commenting.

I don't think this entire crisis was caused only by bankers -- a lot of other people were also complicite -- from the govt allowing lending to be more free-er to sub-primes, to lenders, to Fannie-Mae, Freddie Mac, to the loan takers who didn't think -- to a lot of other folks like you and me who plied in money into funds to buy this stuff and keep the vicious cycle moving. A lot of blame to go around to a lot of people.
31 posted on 03/12/2009 5:11:25 AM PDT by Cronos (Ceterum censeo, Mecca et Medina delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

I disagree with them getting money, I disagree with them being ‘encouraged’ to take it. Most of all I disagree with companies getting a bailout sending jobs overseas.


32 posted on 03/12/2009 5:18:16 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Arguendo

The Wall Street Journal is the paper of record for useful idiots, having become useless shills for the business (now welfare welfare) elite long ago. The JP Morgan was bailed out by tarp as were all banks and AIG. They would have died with the rest of Bank of America and Citigroup without cash injections. TARP is only the tip of the iceberg, hundreds of billions more have been shoveled via the friendly elves at the federal reserve into them all without public knowledge or even superficial congressional oversight. The biggest fly in the ointment that few have recognized is counter-party risks. Banks owe each other money and if one of the big ones die, the others are set to enjoy the crap sandwich as well.


33 posted on 03/12/2009 5:53:44 AM PDT by cmdjing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: cmdjing
The JP Morgan was bailed out by tarp...

"The JP Morgan"? You don't even know the name of the company; why on earth should I assume you know anything else about the situation?

There's not a chance in the world JPMorgan would have failed.

34 posted on 03/12/2009 6:18:28 AM PDT by Arguendo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Arguendo; cmdjing

Actually neither of you are correct, assuming you go with their public branded name and not 1 of the hundred other names they use.

Quibbling over a space is pretty desperate.


35 posted on 03/12/2009 6:22:44 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver; cmdjing

It’s not the space, it’s the “the” he put before their name. I wouldn’t quibble over a space, but adding “the” makes it sound like he’s completely unfamiliar with Wall Street, which makes his commentary on JPMorgan’s financial health laughable.


36 posted on 03/12/2009 6:31:16 AM PDT by Arguendo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

Valid enough — however as I said, they were ‘encouraged’ or ‘forced’ to take the money. Now, sending jobs overseas — the tricky thing is that it’s not sending a job overseas but importing a service, just like importing some goods. It’s nearly impossible in a connected world to stop services and goods from being imported or exported.


37 posted on 03/12/2009 6:47:17 AM PDT by Cronos (Ceterum censeo, Mecca et Medina delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Arguendo

It was a typographical error caused by my rush to click post and I didn’t bother to proof read. Whaaagh Whaaaagh JP Morgan can’t fail. Just like how GM, Ford, Chrysler, AIG, Citigroup, Bank of America, Wachovia, WaMu, GE soon enough, et al couldn’t fail. Let me guess, you are busy growing Kudlow’s mustard seed.


38 posted on 03/12/2009 4:50:51 PM PDT by cmdjing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

“the tricky thing is that it’s not sending a job overseas but importing a service, just like importing some goods”

The work is being done overseas. The money is being sent overseas. The money stays overseas.

The only ‘import’ is the software or documentation associated with their product.

Its sending jobs overseas, pure and simple.


39 posted on 03/12/2009 5:13:43 PM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
The work is being done overseas. The money is being sent overseas. The money stays overseas. The only ‘import’ is the software or documentation associated with their product.

And how is that different from importing a product? The work for a product (say a German car) is being bone in Germany. The money is being sent overseas to Germany. The money stays in Germany. The only 'import' is the car.

This is importing a service, not exporting jobs, or else we could also say we are exporting jobs when we buy a German car, a Japanese TV set or a Scotch bottle of whisky.
40 posted on 03/13/2009 11:32:05 AM PDT by Cronos (Ceterum censeo, Mecca et Medina delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

“This is importing a service, not exporting jobs, or else we could also say we are exporting jobs when we buy a German car, a Japanese TV set or a Scotch bottle of whisky.”

Boy you’ve really swallowed it hook line and sinker.


41 posted on 03/13/2009 6:09:05 PM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

Nope, you’re just denying the fact that importing a service is the same as importing a good. If one says that getting a service (say a tech helpline) from Canada or Argentina or India is “exporting jobs”, then buying a Scotch whisky, German car, Japanese television, etc. is exporting Bourbon/US Automaker/US electronic maker jobs.


42 posted on 03/15/2009 10:01:47 PM PDT by Cronos (Ceterum censeo, Mecca et Medina delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

lets see, they get the money, the knowledge, and the work. Nope no import there. just the export of American dollars, jobs and know how.


43 posted on 03/16/2009 4:32:55 PM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
Services and goods -- both are tradeable globally, whether you import a good (like a German car, Japanese TV set) or a service (tech help from buenos Aires, Chile or India).

lets see, they get the money, the knowledge, and the work. Nope no import there. just the export of American dollars, jobs and know how.

Take a German car imported into the US -- the Germans get the money and the work. They get the 'export of American dollars', the 'export of American jobs' and the 'know-how to make a car'.

that's just the same as a service imported.
44 posted on 03/17/2009 2:42:21 AM PDT by Cronos (Ceterum censeo, Mecca et Medina delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

Spoken like a true globalist.

Do you just sign your paychecks over to the hague or are they the ones writing them?


45 posted on 03/17/2009 4:07:34 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
Do you own a German car, a Japanese / Korean TV, CD player, Blu-ray player, a Sony PS2? Do you own or have bought any goods made in China or Japan or Bangladesh or France or Italy? IF yes, then you are a globalist too -- buying a product imported from overseas is the same as buying a service imported from overseas.

If you disagree, prove that a piece of goods imported is not the same as a service imported. If you can't or don't prove that, then you agree that a product imported from overseas is the same as a service imported from overseas -- both support jobs overseas and so both, according to your definition would be "exporting jobs"
46 posted on 03/17/2009 5:36:54 AM PDT by Cronos (Ceterum censeo, Mecca et Medina delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

So, to warm up to my theme — if anyone buys a foreign made product, they’re in the same category as someone who gets a service from overseas.


47 posted on 03/17/2009 6:04:14 AM PDT by Cronos (Ceterum censeo, Mecca et Medina delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

So using your logic we should just outsource every single job and product that way we can get things really cheap.

We don’t need an economy here. We can get rich tradin hats to each other.


48 posted on 03/17/2009 4:37:36 PM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
So using your logic we should just outsource every single job and product that way we can get things really cheap.

Nope, you're extrapolating. I asked you -- have you bought a German made or Japan-made or china-made or korea-made or french-made product (Car, TV, radio, cd player, game player, toy, clothes, wine etc.)?

A simple yes or no question


If you have bought this imported product, then, effectively, by YOUR logic, you have exported the job (of making cars, electronics, toys, wine etc) to that country that made the product.

That is exactly the same as someone who imports a service.

So, if you say that a person who imports a service is "exporting jobs", then a person who imports a product is also "exporting jobs".

If you don't use foreign-made products, then good for you, you're true to your conviction that buying products or goods made outside the US is tantamount to "exporting jobs". however, if you do buy a product that is made outside the US, you can't point fingers at a person or corporation who imports a service from outside the US -- that (importing a service or a product) is one and the same thing. If you don't agree with THAT statement, disprove it.
49 posted on 03/17/2009 10:28:56 PM PDT by Cronos (Ceterum censeo, Mecca et Medina delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

Nice try, you’ve stated you support outsourcing. Enough said.

I support keeping jobs in America, money in America, and our knowledge in America.

Big American companies are increasingly controlled by foreign nationals. Those same company’s are transferring our wealth out of America while using their American company status to impact elections.

JPMorgan is a perfect example of this.


50 posted on 03/18/2009 2:51:59 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-65 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson