When I read this comment from a regular commenter:
The fact that a job goes begging in one place while 10 people beg for a job somewhere else still means there aren’t enough jobs. And were those jobs in oil shale for displaced bank tellers? Not so much?
It’s fascinating that you won’t even begin to address the hypothetical. Maybe you’re right. But maybe you’re not. A theoretical possibility, right? I mean it is just barely possible that you’re wrong and that I (and a lot of other people) are right, and that we’re going toward a world where, to put it in simplified terms, anyone with an IQ < 100 can be replaced by a machine.
I immediately thought of the scene above from the end of the wonderful old movie, Dinner at Eight. The actress on the right is the incomparable Marie Dressler and that on the left is, of course, the luminous Jean Harlow.
All joking and leering comments aside, let’s consider the likelihood and implications of his hypothetical.
Here’s my two cents. I don’t believe we have that problem right now. I think that the problem we have right now is more of a problem of matching and mobility. I think there are thousands, tens of thousands, or even hundreds of thousands of jobs going unfilled because the right people with the right skills aren’t in the right places, aren’t aware of the jobs, can’t go to where the jobs are, or don’t like the jobs that are on offer. Here’s an example of what I’m talking about:
Tough as it is to find work these days, tens of thousands of jobs paying middle-class wages are going unfilled.
Open truck-driving jobs require little more than a high school diploma and a month or so of training. But not everybody wants to be a long-haul truck driver, and many who do find they just can’t hack it.
The story began three years ago when freight traffic fell off a cliff, pulling tens of thousands of truck drivers down with it. But now, at the American Central Transport terminal in Kansas City, Mo., recruiting manager Chad Still is showing off a lot of empty concrete.
“Not a lot going on over here today, which in the trucking industry, that’s a [big] deal,” Still says. “The less trucks and trailers you see around here, the better the freight is.”
Freight is now moving at pre-recession levels and companies are hiring. Transportation analyst Noel Perry figures trucking companies are short of about 125,000 drivers. What’s the hold up?
“It’s real simple,” he says. “Let’s say you get laid off tomorrow. Do you have a commercial driver’s license? No.”
There are companies that are so desperate for drivers they’re willing to pay an applicant’s tuition through trucking school. IMO a lot of people who are physically capable of doing the work could cobble together the money to go to trucking school. Why aren’t they doing it? It’s a semi-skilled job that pays adequate wages.
There are thousands of jobs for skilled machinists that are going begging. Why? My guess: the right people aren’t in the right places.
And then there are all of the positions in the healthcare industry that can’t be filled, e.g. RNs, certain kinds of medical technicians. Why? My guess is that it’s a combination of a peak load problem and an antiquated and inadequate educational system.
It’s currently estimated that there are something like 3 million job openings unfilled nationwide but several multiples more than that of people unemployed. What about that? That’s where our old pal the multiplier comes in. It’s not just for fiscal stimulus, you know. If a million more people were working, their increased consumption would produce jobs for more people. And their going to work would create jobs for yet more.
All of the foregoing notwithstanding I think it’s a still a serious issue. But it’s a serious issue for decades from now and when it is China’s rear end will be much more in the wringer than ours. What happens when the value of unskilled labor is not just near zero but actually zero?
A great many of the unemployed simply don’t have the financial means to relocate and fill those vacancies. A lot of people are dead f’ing broke: on the rare occasions I enter a convenience store, it’s quite common to hear the person in front of me pay for five bucks worth of fuel because that’s all they’ve got. Ditto for grocieries. I tend to buy them at somewhat upscale businesses, but when entering stores specializing in cheaper goods I see real poverty.
That’s why I think it important to throw everything we’ve got at mass unemployment; underclasses tend to beome self-reinforcing as their conditions deteriorate.
Heh. Let’s let the clip speak for itself.
This is of course in reference to a long running debate between me and Michael, and at times Icepick. I happen to think they don’t really want to hear a word I say. They have their “end of the world” worldview,” because it supports a government interventionist policy prescription. I’m sure they would beg to differ, and say Drew is just blind to realities…….or doesn’t care.
I certainly agree with this: “I think that the problem we have right now is more of a problem of matching and mobility.” And was a point I was trying to make with the references to the job websites.
This of course is the economist’s “friction” discussion and part of the “natural rate of unemployment” rationale. But there is certainly more. After all, we are at 9% unemployment and not 5%.
But I stand by the point that we have a potential employee set that simply want a job on their terms. Its an entitlement concept. Historically people went where the jobs were – period.
Beyond that, yes, we have a structural problem. But the defeatist attitudes, and immediate and reflexive notion that the government should take from the productive and shift it to the unemployed – no doubt creating a structural problem – I reject with every fiber in me.
I know its crude, but a first point is whether we have the stomach to light a fire under the ass of some people, or whether we just want to coddle them because we consider ourselves “caring.”
Second, could we just get the government out of the way and let the private sector heal and do their thing? They always have. Waiting for government solutions will be like waiting for Godot.
The best account of the Drew/Michael argument you’ll ever read:
Will Wilkinson, Tea Party vs. OWS: The psychology and ideology of responsibility
That doesn’t address the specific issue raised above: trucking companies that’ll pay the tuition for trucking school. No local pool of applicants? Sounds far-fetched to me.
I guess the question I’m asking is what should be the objective of policy? Creating jobs or helping people take the jobs that exist?
Drew, I talked about Arco, but I take the Deep Horizon spectacle personally.
“That doesn’t address the specific issue raised above: trucking companies that’ll pay the tuition for trucking school.”
Yes, but is the school nearby, or do they have to move to get there? Are they working marginal job under the table to provide what little they can for their families? Will they have to give it up to embrace the trucking school opportunity? Where will their runs be based from? Will the company paying their way through the program help them move to the new location?
It isn’t as simple as “just go to school”.
I bypassed a great opportunity in my field because my father was dying of cancer.
“I bypassed a great opportunity in my field because my father was dying of cancer.”
Then you have my admiration. I’m not sure I could make the same choice.
Most likely not. I put it out there as another of the elements that can confine one’s ability to follow the yellow brick road.
“I guess the question I’m asking is what should be the objective of policy? Creating jobs or helping people take the jobs that exist?”
I think the objective should be to create as many jobs as possible, making it easier for people to find an acceptable job because there will be more of them to choose from.
Open truck-driving jobs require little more than a high school diploma and a month or so of training. But not everybody wants to be a long-haul truck driver, and many who do find they just can’t hack it.
This is funny. I knew someone in real estate. When the property bubble burst, there went his job. He got training in truck driving. He moved to Denver to get a job in truck driving. He got the job. Five months later, he got laid off. Back to Florida. When I met him he was training for his third or forth career since the start of the recession, I forget which. Spoke to him recently – nothing in his new field either, so he keeps going to school. He’s got VA benefits, but I’m guessing that it still doesn’t end well.
That’s where our old pal the multiplier comes in. It’s not just for fiscal stimulus, you know. If a million more people were working, their increased consumption would produce jobs for more people. And their going to work would create jobs for yet more.
So why aren’t the tens of millions of people employed now not producing even more opportunities? The multiplier, if it exists, is variable.
Let’s assume it’s constant, and look at the numbers. In September (the last month reported by the BLS, as of tonight) there were 140,502,000 people employed in the US, to one degree or another. Those 140+M are creating 3M more oportunities. If there are 3,000,000 unfilled jobs, that implies that those 3,000,000 would ultimately produce another 65,000 jobs, after three iterations.
Yeah, that’s going to really really help.
But it’s a serious issue for decades from now and when it is China’s rear end will be much more in the wringer than ours.
Yeah, it can’t possibly be a bad thing if China implodes, what with their techical capabilities, their arsenal, their nukes, etc. The world ain’t what it used to be, and problems of that magnitude in China are likely to be problems for the rest of us, too. I seem to remember a small epidemic a few years ago (SARSs) that caused a bit of economic damage world-wide. What are the odds of some other contagious health epidemic if China goes down the crapper?
Drew: I happen to think they [Michael & Icepick] don’t really want to hear a word I say.
You’ve made it clear you don’t want to hear a word I say, so fuck off.
They have their “end of the world†worldview,†because it supports a government interventionist policy prescription.
Asshole, I’m farther to the right than you are. I’ve put down what I think should be done, and that includes ending Medicare/Medicaid. (To be fair, I think it’s a coin-flip – end it or go full-bore socialized medicine. Both are horrible options, but they’re the only options that MIGHT work long-term.) So either pay attention, or quit making shit up.
But I stand by the point that we have a potential employee set that simply want a job on their terms. Its an entitlement concept. Historically people went where the jobs were – period.
Historically, I could move to the frontier (in the US) and scrape out an existence there in return for property. Now? Not so much. You advocate I move to North Dakota. That means I have to abandon my house (or the half of it that is mine), because it will not sell at any price, and move to North Dakota just in time for winter. I do not have a place to stay. I do not have any friends or family to rely on. My coats that worked in Baltimore will not be anywhere near sufficient to live in ND, especially if I have to live on the streets in winter, which is what I would have to do. All of this for no quarantee of a job. (How many people move to boom towns just in time to get left out of the boom but get all of the bust? Yeah, NEVER happens.)
So you arae basically telling me to go to ND and die so you don’t have to pay any more fucking taxes.
There are companies that are so desperate for drivers they’re willing to pay an applicant’s tuition through trucking school. IMO a lot of people who are physically capable of doing the work could cobble together the money to go to trucking school. Why aren’t they doing it? It’s a semi-skilled job that pays adequate wages.
Yes, that’s all I need – more student loan debt with no guarantee of a job. Remember that I know someone that went through this – what happens if we do slide into a recession again, as seems likely when Europe implodes, and everyone getting hired now gets let go as shipping drops like a stone again? More debt for me, no wages for me. That’s assuming anyone hires me at all. As Drew likes to point out, I’m worse than Hitler, dopey, incompetent and malcontented.
If there are 3,000,000 unfilled jobs, that implies that those 3,000,000 would ultimately produce another 65,000 jobs, after three iterations.
Excuse the typing error – that should have been ~65,500 jobs. That extra 500 is all the difference, dontchaknow?
“But I stand by the point that we have a potential employee set that simply want a job on their terms. Its an entitlement concept.”
Unemployment was low in 2007. It was high in 2009. In order for your statement to make sense you need to explain why people changed so much in two years. Why were they entitled in 2009 but not 2007?
Steve
Why were they entitled in 2009 but not 2007?
We all became DIM* in 2008.
* “dopey, incompetent, or malcontent”
“You’ve made it clear you don’t want to hear a word I say, so fuck off.”
Thankfully, I know you mean that in only the kindest way.
Janis – I’m not familiar with your reference. ??
Deep Horizon? Did you forget the spill in the gulf? It was only a couple of years ago.
Oh, well, then. Deepwater Horizon. Macondo, what, 32.
steve –
“Unemployment was low in 2007. It was high in 2009. In order for your statement to make sense you need to explain why people changed so much in two years. Why were they entitled in 2009 but not 2007?”
The employment opportunity set changed. After all, who even heard of shale oil and fracing in 2007? But this is not new. When times are good people have an easy transition from job to job. When times are tough, its much more difficult.
It does not logically follow that we must, in tough times, declare that all is lost and set up government programs to tax away OPM so the some don’t have to deal with economic realities.
This is not a difficult concept, unless you start from a frame of reference of entitlement, and that hard times should never visit anyone, and that everyone should be shielded from them by government programs. And before the shit slinging starts, I’ve known hard times, and been faced with difficult career and geography decisions. I managed through them, and didn’t ask you, steve, to pay me to avoid them.
Janis –
Oh.
So what is the point you are making?
That you are all for absolute deregulation of business. And some of these bastards are killers. One of the men who died on that crew lived 30 miles down the road. He left a lonely wife and and a lonely baby.
“That you are all for absolute deregulation of business.”
Janis – I thought you were more level headed than that. That’s ridiculous and petty. I have never, ever said that or implied that. You are starting to sound like our resident absolutist: Michael, and our resident malcontent: Icepick.
I gotta go, but I’m glad to see we are getting more commenters here.
Goodnight all.
You just said, “Get the government out of the way and let the private sector heal.” I am level-headed, but you overstate your case.
Push fracking, even if it might contaminate the water supply in rural areas. I don’t know the state of the science now.
I think Ben Wolf has a point about how little cash so many people really have on hand. Here’s a piece I heard on the news a while back claiming that a new study says 64% of Americans have less than a $1000 in the bank. I was stunned by this figure, if it is indeed true.
There was another news piece, several months back, supporting some of the thoughts on this thread, that there are more jobs out there than people realize. The example cited in the news piece was a small manufacturing firm, who was having difficulties filling job openings. The owner’s opinion as to why this was the case was speculation that younger college-educated adults looked at manufacturing jobs as being beneath their level of expertise — in other words, lacked the status they wanted from a job.
There are a million jobs on Mars.
There are a million people unemployed people on Earth.
Therefore there are plenty of jobs.
That you are all for absolute deregulation of business.
Drew is all for that which will help Drew. And he’s doing it for AMERICA, dontchaknow?
The owner’s opinion
was just as valuable as the owner’s asshole, no doubt.
Here’s a piece I heard on the news a while back claiming that a new study says 64% of Americans have less than a $1000 in the bank. I was stunned by this figure, if it is indeed true.
And many of those people have no credit either. I guess we could all thumb our way to
North DakotaMars.There are thousands of jobs for skilled machinists that are going begging. Why? My guess: the right people aren’t in the right places.
This keeps coming up, here, there, everywhere. All those companies that want skilled machinists want people that already have 20 years on the job. At a minimum, they want five years on the job. They do not want to hire any entry level workers. So there’s no point in even attempting to get the skills to do that because these companies do not hire entry level types. The firms merely want to canabalize their competitors work-forces as those other firms either go out of business or off-shore their current jobs.
It’s hardly a growth opportunity if none of the companies actually want to hire any entry-level types.
It’s hardly a growth opportunity if none of the companies actually want to hire any entry-level types.
In my own context: I happen to be in demand right now. X number of publishers would like to hire me. Does this mean there are X jobs? No. There’s only one job: mine.
You know how many jobs there are for Steven Spielberg? A million. Hell, I’d hire him in a heartbeat, if only he lived in Tiburon and would work for the minimum wage I could pay him.
Sounds like a good premise for a book.
This is definitely the quote-of-the-month.
Dave,
Another thing to consider is basic human psychology. If someone’s worked in a certain field for 20, 30 years they aren’t going to pick up their roots and turn to truck-driving overnight. I think it was you that wrote something a couple of years ago about poor kids who couldn’t even imagine what it would be like to be an accountant. Oh yeah, here it is:
The poor aren’t unique in their lack of imagination. There are a lot of fifty-something unemployed white collar types who can’t imagine being a truck driver. There are a lot of jobs I can’t imagine ever doing. It’s only when people become desperate that they’re willing to change their mindsets.
Icepick makes a lot of good points. It’s not easy or simple to pick-up and start something new somewhere else. It’s quite risky. There’s also two-income families to consider. With one bread-winner it’s a lot easier to move. With two it’s much more problematic because you need to find two jobs and not just one.
The problem of experience is a real one. Icepick didn’t mention it but there’s also credentialing. Once you get the credentials, then you’re at the entry-level point and you get to compete with twenty-somethings for the few entry-level jobs available.
BTW, steel in making a comeback in the USA. My father-in-law is a 30-year+ steelworker and the second mill at his plant is going to come online and with it a lot of jobs. His son, a 23 year-old who can’t find work in what he went to college for, is going to take a job at the plant. He’s sure to get hired because there’s a preference for relatives of existing employees. Of course, everyone knows it will be a temporary gig for him – the global steel market will change, the mill will shut down again and he’ll be first on the list of layoff’s thanks to the seniority structure.
In short, there are a lot of barriers to long-term employment.
Finally, Drew mentions an entitlement “concept.” Well, I think that’s true to a certain extent, and for some people, but then how does one differentiate entitlement from reasonable expectations? And yeah, people want jobs “on their terms” and I bet that includes you Drew (it certainly includes me).
Anybody ever see this? Craig T. Nelson spewing on Glenn Beck:
I suspect that level of cluelessness is rife in conservative circles.
Does this mean there are X jobs? No. There’s only one job: mine.
Thank you, Michael, for understanding that concept.
Andy, here’s something else to consider: How many of the 50+ aged accountants are going to have eyesight problems? Like not seeing well in the dark? (I’m 43 and I’m already noticing a marked decline in my depth perception at night.) It’s one thing to start losing that visual acuity when you’ve got 25 years of experience on the road to bolster your skills. A new 55 year-old big rig driver is going to have all the disadvantages of age and none of the benefits.
Drew- I don’t think you can really make the case that the jobs changed that drastically in two years. You can make the case that jobs disappeared.
Steve
” I don’t think you can really make the case that the jobs changed that drastically in two years. You can make the case that jobs disappeared.”
A fundamental flaw in neo-liberal economics is its inability to recognize involuntary unemployment. Somehow, ten million people all got lazy and quit their jobs in the span of two quarters. It couldn’t possibly be the result of a bubble, the existence of which neo-liberals also deny. Ideology again trumps data.
Janis –
“You just said, “Get the government out of the way and let the private sector heal.†I am level-headed, but you overstate your case.”
C’mon. You aren’t going to stand behind that kind of literalist interpretation, are you? Really?
My point is very simple: the regulatory burden has become schlerotic and burdensome, retarding employment. I’ve been lending to, owning and operating businesses for 20 years. I know what I’m talking about. And its a serious issue because one of the major issues in the economy is employment.
But to devolve the argument from “regulations have become excessive” into sweeping generalizations like “you are all about total deregulation” and then making allusions to dead rig workers is absurd. What next? Nancy Pelosi’s poisoning the water, wishing disease on childeren etc “arguments?”
You always know you have someone who can’t argue the issue on the merits when they go for the emotional heartstrings or the ridiculous straw man. Did you see Michael’s “jobs on Mars.” Inane. Our CFO position is near Harrisburg, PA. Not a garden spot, but – let me get out my map and compass – no, nope, not on Mars. Oh, and it is the capitol of the state.
If you don’t agree with me on an appropriate regulatory posture, fine. But really, invoking dead rig workers?
Thing is, I’m genuinely interested in your views on regulatory reform. What I read from you, and I never skip your comments, is always “get the government off my back,” not “our manager at company X is complaining about an unnecessarily stringent code for impurities in the plastic he uses for imjection-molded bottles.”
That’s all.
And some failures to regulate properly do have disastrous consequences.
Let me give an example of streamlining regulation without total deregulation. Here in the U. S. we have fifty-one major, differing, sometimes conflicting regulatory regimes and thousands of minor ones. If an organization is to do business in more than one jurisdiction, it quickly needs to have compliance experts to deal with the differing regulatory regimes.
It doesn’t need to be that way. We already have a uniform civil code where once we had thousands of differing competing codes. That can be extended to make it easier to do business here.
Janis –
Fair enough, specificity has its merits. But I’m no anarchist or “pure” libertarian. There is a role for a regulatory structure; a role for a social safety net etc. But beware the left. Its like the camel’s nose under the tent.
Once you give them an opening – to continue metaphors – its Pandora’s Box. And dare suggest its gotten out of hand and you threaten their power……………and you will be villified as the “worst person in the world.”
Andy –
“BTW, steel in making a comeback in the USA. My father-in-law is a 30-year+ steelworker and the second mill at his plant is going to come online and with it a lot of jobs. His son, a 23 year-old who can’t find work in what he went to college for, is going to take a job at the plant. He’s sure to get hired because there’s a preference for relatives of existing employees. Of course, everyone knows it will be a temporary gig for him – the global steel market will change, the mill will shut down again and he’ll be first on the list of layoff’s thanks to the seniority structure.”
I could “talk steel” for hours and hours. First job. Not exactly an environment for the faint of heart, and of a scale that in now 30 years of business I have not seen again. You haven’t lived until you’ve been dressed in greens and metatarsals, with your aluminum coated reflective suit and face shieled – looking like a man from Mars – sticking things into ladles of molten steel at 2800 degrees and watching all hell break loose – that happens at 2800 degrees – ……its a trip.
We used to give tours through the shop and we’d walk as close to the BOF furnaces as we could (or knew we should, since we worked there and knew where danger actually lay – and these things are something like 30 feet high – like Godzilla). Sparks, smoke, huge noise and shit – little pops and explosions – would be flying out but we knew it was OK. But wimpy sales guys and guys from auto stampers etc were practically shitting their pants. They thought they were going to die. Great fun when you are 25 and have an evil streak. I only had one close call, a steam explosion. That’s pretty much how you die in these environments. Hot stuff, and water. Not good together. Took me straight off my feet and threw me into the back wall…….while all kinds of crap on the shop floor was shot into the air. A crane operator (carrying red hot metal) missed when dropping into the slag ladle, dropping it into a couple feet of water on the floor. That’s called a bomb. I was fine. But when I walked up to the continuous caster deck the (high school educated) caster foreman had his way with me. “Hey college boy, you went there for this? Ha, Ha Ha.”
Fair enough, although I think I’ve made out OK.
So endeth the walk down memory lane. At least I didn’t have to move to Harrisburg, PA, right?
Andy – I wish the best for the FIL and son. Be careful.
I notice that one of the arguments the gas companies are making contra the EPA’s regulating fracking waste water is that the states are better positioned to regulate disposal of waste water than the feds. Apparently, they’re not interested in streamlining this kind of regulation. Or rather, they’re interested in not streamlining, etc.
Our CFO position is near Harrisburg, PA. Not a garden spot, but – let me get out my map and compass – no, nope, not on Mars.
yep, and that’s a position that just any of the 14,000,000 people that need jobs can apply for and expect to get an interview! Please. Michael covered that point as well, using a wonderful reductionist arguement that was NOT absurdist. You are looking for particular skills that no one currently unemployed can hope to acquire in time to take that position, unless they already have those skills. And given that you think everyone unemployed is eiether “dopey, incompetent, or a malcontent””, you would not bother to interview anyone currently unemployed.
“Let me give an example of streamlining regulation without total deregulation. Here in the U. S. we have fifty-one major, differing, sometimes conflicting regulatory regimes and thousands of minor ones.”
Well, yes. But, I think this has been in place for quite a while, even when unemployment is low. What changed recently to make this a cause of our current unemployment problem?
Steve