The debate on the impact of outsourcing to U.S. economy and employment outlook continues to dominate the 2004 election campaign. Many presidential candidates have made it a part of their "selling" platform and the possible "X factor" that could help them win the election.

To support the bill that calls a ban for outsourcing government jobs offshore, many experts have started to wonder what the next steps would be. According to Thomas Sowell from Capitalism Magazine, if we impose restrictions to limit the outsourcing of American jobs, will it lower unemployment rate?

The notion that by eliminating the export of American jobs to other countries would save future downsizing and increase job growth is probably no more than a mere speculation. In my March 15, 2004 entry entitled "The Bright Side of Outsourcing," the United States is in fact the largest exporter of services, which actually makes them the largest outsourcing supplier in the world.

This explains why only one job out of 100 layoffs in the United States are caused by outsourcing jobs offshore.

Imposing restrictions to limit outsourcing US jobs might even cause far greater a problem: retaliation from importing countries. This is something that would definitely cause American workers to lose their jobs due to "outsourcing problems," which will be the ceasation of exported services.

I personally do not agree with the bill calling a ban of outsourcing US government agencies' jobs. I do not agree with some presidential candidates' platform to reduce outsourcing of US jobs either. It would be irresponsible to approach the macro economy from a single issue.

In a capitalist economy in which the check-and-balance system is in place, such as in the United States and other western countries, a failure in one area would not create a domino effect provided that the three powers (executive, legislative and judicial) work hand-in-hand to objectively understand the problems at hand and work things out carefully.

Sowell further added that many economists blamed trade restrictions that were supposed to "save jobs" for making the Great Depression in the early 1930s worse and longer lasting.

We don't want to create Great Depression II, do we?

- Author and blogger Jennie S. Bev can be found at JennieSBev.com