When we see an unemployment rate of 4.5% which is FULL EMPLOYMENT in the US our national media allows all this to misinform the 99% of people. Obama super-sized the pathway to getting patronage funding for startups, for independent subcontracting to global corporations, and allowed a Bush era 20-30% of US workforce misclassified as INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR go even higher. Most of our long-term unemployed are trapped in this NON-ECONOMY. Each time a citizen gets that patronage to start that business they are sent to school for job training. Our Federal Labor and Statistics say almost 50% of citizens are not in workforce while global Wall Street players tell us that is not a real stat because everyone is in school----people are classified as entrepreneurs and not employees-----people aging out of our job market.
NONE OF THAT IS TRUE. WE ARE INDEED AT A 50% UNEMPLOYMENT WITH CITIZENS SIMPLY BEING ROTATED THROUGH ECONOMIC STRUCTURES WITH NO FUTURE.
Left social Democrats have been shouting that if Clinton/Bush/Obama had not interrupted a thriving first world developed nation healthy economy most of our poor would be working and stable free from social safety nets and our communities thriving. Today people touting a figure of 58-60% in workforce as not that bad are not paying attention to the fact that those numbers include our INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS/STARTUPS/NON-PROFITS that come and go ----that is not employment.
'That’s a big drop, but the complete picture is worse. If the participation rate had kept growing from 1997 to 2012 at the same rate it did in the 50 previous years, participation would be above 90 percent now'.
Here is a global Wall Street YAHOO FINANCE telling us all those patronage startups and independent contractor as indentured servant has the job market humming with a labor force index at 60%.
Americans are entering the labor force in droves
Yahoo FinanceMarch 10, 2017
The February U.S. jobs report beat expectations. Payrolls grew by 235,000, which was much more than the 200,000 expected. The unemployment rate dropped to 4.7% and wages rose 2.8% over last year.
But the big story in Friday’s report isn’t that wage growth bounced back or that the Federal Reserve now seems all but certain to raise rates next week. Rather, the big story is that people are coming back to the work force. This report, in other words, is all about participation.
More Americans are participating in the labor force
In February, the employment-to-population ratio rose to 60%, the highest since February 2009 and an indication that one of the most discouraging labor market trends of the last decade is starting to turn.
Among prime-age workers — those between 25 and 54 — participation rose to 81.7% in February, the highest since 2011. At the height of the last cycle, prime age participation topped out at 83.4%.
And looking at this prime-age cohort more closely, the biggest gains have been been among millennials — ages 25 to 34 — with nonemployment falling below 22% for this age group after having been at 24% just a couple years ago.
“Digging into the labor force participation rate, the jump in the prime-age (25 to 54 years) labor force participation rate is especially heartening, rising to 81.7%, the highest since 2011,” write Neil Dutta, an economist with Renaissance Macro.
“All of the increase in the last month came from a surge in participation rates for prime-age women,” Dutta added. “Younger workers boosted their rates of labor force participation too; those aged 20 to 24 years saw their labor force participation rate climb to 71.7%, the highest since March 2014. The hotter the labor market runs, the more attractive it becomes to join the labor market at the margin.”
The labor force participation rate also rose in February to 63%, the highest since March 2014 and the continuation of a stabilization in this measure that began back in 2015.
Since December, the number of people in the workforce has grown by 416,000 while those not in the labor has dropped by 912,000. So not only are people getting jobs, but those who hadn’t even been looking are now trying to find work.
Back in November, Minneapolis Fed president Neel Kashkari told Yahoo Finance that the labor market story in 2016 had been one of participation. And while a long-term chart of labor participation still looks disappointing, seeing workers brought from the margins back into the labor force is a positive turn against a long-term demographic trend.
Wage growth, which in February rose 2.8% over the prior year, is certainly a tailwind for labor force participation. But if there’s one thing that the post-election economy has been about it is a confidence boost among consumers and businesses now that Donald Trump is president, and joining or re-joining the labor force is certainly a decision that requires one to have confidence in their prospects.
And while overall participation still faces demographic headwinds — Boomers retiring en masse will keep a lid on this figure to some extent — a strong labor market can still clearly draw in workers of prime working age who had been pushed to the economic margins.
“Labor force participation rates face long-run, secular headwinds that go beyond a short-run cyclical improvement drawing workers back into the labor market,” write economists at Wells Fargo.
“There is no quick fix, but focusing on improving both the quality and quantity of the labor force will be key to driving faster, sustainable economic growth.”
Every article in national media says we are at full-employment even as we have labor participation of at best 58%----full-employment in 1950s-1970s was labor participation of over 80%. Several years ago we were told the economy had to produce 190,000 jobs each month to keep the unemployment rate from falling ---now we are full-employment at 98,000 with all last year never making it to that 190,000.
The retirement of baby boomers has not even hit the bell curve max -----and we are not in a position to retire so employment structures today are no different that several decades ago ----except that we have no real local economies and real career employment.
As this article suggests this redefining of FULL EMPLOYMENT is tied to bringing global labor pool workers to US cities deemed Foreign Economic Zones AND the US FED raising interest rates because the market is 'too hot'.
Apr 7, 2017 @ 11:11 AM 519 The Little Black Book of Billionaire Secrets
March Adds 98,000 Jobs, Unemployment Down 0.2% - We're At Full Employment So Raise Rates Fed
Tim Worstall ,
I have opinions about economics, finance and public policy.
Opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own.
One way, and possibly the right way, to read the March jobs numbers is that we're now at full employment. Or if not then very darn close. For we've added only 98,000 jobs in the month and yet the unemployment rate is down two ticks to 4.5%. What this suggests is that there's no great pool of discouraged workers out there any more. Thus the Federal Reserve can and should get on with raising interest rates.
My colleague Maggie McGrath has the basic numbers:
Employers in the U.S. added just 98,000 non-farm jobs in March, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported on Friday. The unemployment rate ticked down to 4.5%, from 4.7%. The payroll result was well short of the economist consensus, which called for an addition of 180,000 non-farm jobs in March. The consensus had also called for the unemployment rate to remain unchanged at 4.7%.
Myself I'm really not sure. I'm fine with the low jobs creation number being explained by that but it's not a good reason for the unemployment rate to tick down:
Manufacturing accounts for only 9 percent of employment but punches above its weight, because factory jobs pay considerably more than many service positions.
That, sadly, is ludicrous from the New York Times. Because while many manufacturing jobs pay more than many service jobs so also do many service jobs pay more than many manufacturing jobs. Thus must be so as the median wages (where 50% earn more, 50% earn less) for both manufacturing and service jobs are largely the same across the US economy, around $25 an hour. That idea that manufacturing jobs are more important in some manner is just nostalgia for a past that never really existed.
Now, it's entirely possible that my explanation here is wrong. It really could be that as our numbers are derived from two different surveys thus they're, just because these things do move around near randomly in the details at the margin, bouncing around against each other. However, it's also true that as and when we do reach full employment this is roughly what we'll see, the two numbers moving in this manner. So, even if it's wrong it's still worth laying out the logic.
Think back a year or more. Then the general argument was, well, yes, that unemployment number is indeed around where we think full employment is. But we still shouldn't raise interest rates yet because this is the U 3 measurement of unemployment. We know that this doesn't include many of the discouraged workers out there. People who have been unemployed so long that they're not getting benefits and also they're not really looking for a job that hard. We know they're out there, we know from the European experience that it's very difficult to get them back into the jobs market--for obvious reasons, if you'd applied for 100 jobs and got nowhere then how eager are you to apply for job 101--but it's also important that we do.
The thing we don't know is how many of them there really are. Estimates were all over the place, 1% of the age group, 5% perhaps at the top end? The argument was thus that the Federal Reserve should delay raising interest rates. Let's run that jobs market hot to see how many we can get back into work even at the --slight--risk of future inflation. And the Fed itself said it was open to this view as well.
What's happened since then is that we've seen quite large job creation numbers since then. But no real decline in the unemployment rate. That means that we have been pulling people in from those discouraged workers. We must have been, if the pool of those recognised, by the U 3 measure, as unemployed has been roughly static while we can see more people being employed all the time.
But what would it look like when that process comes to an end? We'd see the numbers working as they are now. We'd have low job creation numbers but also we'd see the unemployment rate tick down. For there is no longer that movement from discouraged into unemployment. And thus we would be advising the Fed that now's the time to raise interest rates. We've, rightly, conducted that experiment in running the jobs market hot, achieved whatever we can and time to get on with it.
While I entirely believe that this will happen at some point I'm hesitant to nail my colours to the mast and insist this is it. It might be but there's always that randomness in the numbers argument. But this is the way the numbers will move when it is true.
This video is good in that it defines full employment as an economy WORKING AT CAPACITY. This is the key. If MOVING FORWARD continues with technology and robotics taking all those jobs we talked about earlier this week----then global Wall Street will still say the US is at FULL EMPLOYMENT because they think this new norm is WORKING AT CAPACITY. It doesn't matter that over 50% as today are unemployed---we have read these several years that the US never left the 2008 recession as regards rehiring and long-term unemployment.
That is what we are seeing in this video when RECESSIONARY unemployment becomes the new WORKING AT CAPACITY.
What this video calls STRUCTURAL UNEMPLOYMENT ----the retooling of skills is exactly what has tens of millions of US citizens in temporary or patronage work status. In Baltimore this cyclical run through patronage non-economy is called DOG AND PONY SHOW-----
WE THE PEOPLE are in a STRUCTURAL UNEMPLOYMENT PERIOD THAT GLOBAL WALL STREET IS CALLING FULL EMPLOYMENT BECAUSE THEY DO NOT CONSIDER A 58% LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION TODAY AS BAD---THEY KNOW IT IS GOING TO BE FAR WORSE.
What global Wall Street pols have done is implemented a new employment paradigm that accepts that 50% labor participation rate and it will continue to grow 30-40% participation in labor force is deemed CAPACITY AND FULL EMPLOYMENT. This is when they bring in BASIC INCOME TO HIDE THE FACT THAT UNEMPLOYMENT IS TREMENDOUSLY HIGH.
What Is Full Employment?
Published on Sep 1, 2014A quick video outlining what is meant when we talk about 'full-employment" in macroeconomics. It was created for my ECON304 World Campus students but can be used at both the intro and intermediate levels. It also gives a quick review of the three types of unemployment.
Add robotics with displaced human workers and they will adjust employment figures to say THEY ARE AT CAPACITY---FULL EMPLOYMENT.
'The fact that the labor force participation rate is falling at the same time the unemployment rate is falling indicates that that there is a structural problem in the economy'.
No Overstatement: Structural Unemployment Is the Biggest Economic Threat
ByRoger Arnold Follow
| Dec 03, 2016 | 12:00 PM EST
Stock quotes in this article:tsla
The overstatement of job creation and understatement of unemployment in Bureau of Labor Statistics' monthly reports is a topic I've frequently written about. But as inaccurate and misleading as these numbers have become with respect to the health of the U.S economy and labor, there is one trend that is accurately depicted in the Bureau's data. That's the steady decrease in the labor force participation rate.
Regarding the decline in the participation rate, the general meme in the financial media has consistently been that it is a reflection of an aging demographic and simply an indication of the baby boomer generation retiring.
That, however, is only one component of the issue, a cyclical phenomenon, and does not account for the secular changes to the structure of the economy, which are far more important.
Even people who appear to understand this, though, also put more weight on the impact of an aging demographic than on a structural change in the economy, which is the exact opposite of reality.
The fact that the labor force participation rate is falling at the same time the unemployment rate is falling indicates that that there is a structural problem in the economy.
The immediate structural problem is that there is a mismatch between the skill sets that corporations need and what people have to offer. The response to that by many economists and government policy makers is that the gap can be closed by education.
But that's not so easy.
The above situation is not static and the skills in demand are changing as the structure of the economy and the way commerce is transacted are changing. And that process is accelerating as technological advances are enabling the replacement of all kinds of human labor at a faster rate than new job opportunities are being created.
The net result is that an increasing percentage of the population is no longer economically viable. What's more, this condition is not going to be reversed by regulatory, tax, and fiscal policy changes at the federal level, intended to prevent domestic U.S. companies from offshoring jobs, as is being proposed by President-elect Trump.
The labor cost arbitrage opportunities that allowed companies to reduce costs by offshoring have largely been exhausted as global labor rates have begun to flatten. I've written about this trajectory and the significant implications of it for several years, but there's been almost no public awareness of the issue expressed by government and business leaders.
A few high-profile folks, such as Tesla (TSLA) CEO Elon Musk, have discussed the impact of technological unemployment on the structure of the economy, but even he is apparently unaware of the immediacy of the issue. A deep thinker like Stephen Hawking, although aware of what the trajectory for technological unemployment implies for governments, economies and societies, does not seem to recognize the immediacy of the issue.
In the near term, monetary and fiscal policy makers are faced with how to deal with a bifurcated economy in which an increasing number of people can't participate and the financial rewards migrating to the shrinking number who can.
I last addressed this in the column, "Gap Widens Between 2 U.S. Economies," and Friday's BLS report continues the pattern. More importantly, I discussed the timing and implications of the trajectory three years ago. The trajectory I outlined for -- when the U.S. economic system can no longer function and thus collapses, which occurs when the percentage of the population that is employed in the private sector dips below 25% and is absolute at 20% -- has continued since then.
So, what does this mean?
Unless substantive action is taken by public and private sector leaders soon, the U.S. economy will face a crisis that's never occurred before -- as will every other country.
The first thing needed is awareness and public acknowledgment of the issue. But neither the outgoing nor incoming executive U.S. administrations have exhibited that. Also, I have yet to see any other world leaders expressing such concern, nor any academics or private sector executives.
Regardless of the failure to comprehend the issue by society's leaders, investors would be wise to become aware of it before others do and the issue begins to resonate with the media.
Here is THE ONION ---a political satire outlet basically saying just that-----global Wall Street has created a new employment measurement paradigm that has nothing to do with what US economic models looked like these few centuries---this is naked capitalism after all-----not free market capitalism.
'Contrary to the rosy prospects he had described earlier in the evening, economist David Singleton, after imbibing nine beers and an unknown quantity of Wild Turkey, lamented that there would have to be a comprehensive shift in the nation's entire economic structure before any lasting improvement could be realized'.
NEWS 8.28.09 Vol 45 Issue 35
Nation's Unemployment Outlook Improves Drastically After Fifth Beer
WASHINGTON—Despite ongoing economic woes and a jobless rate that has been approaching 10 percent, U.S. unemployment projections drastically improved Monday after the consumption of five beers.
"It's going up," leading economist David Singleton said confidently, indicating the predicted growth in jobs with an upward wave of a Bud Light bottle. "All the way up. By the end of the month. No problem."
Singleton said the economy would begin its rebound once employers realized that there were many currently unemployed skilled laborers across the country who would "bust their asses" in a number of growing fields.
"Whether it's manufacturing, finance, hospitality, or manufacturing, these dudes trying to reenter the workforce right now have awesome skill sets and, most of all, they really deserve it," he said. "They're great, great guys. All of them."
According to analysts, both long- and short-term forecasts showed signs of recovery between the third and fourth beer, but the fifth alcoholic beverage was the point at which the employment rate began to close in on 100 percent.
Even in Michigan, home to the nation's highest unemployment numbers, fairly buzzed sources described a bright future for thousands of laid-off automotive workers and their families. State labor director Stanley Pruss echoed the sentiment, saying that he fully expected out-of-work Michigan residents to be back on their feet in no time.
"Something will come along for everyone. Something even better, you'll see," Pruss told reporters at a Lansing bar with a generous happy-hour special. "Our state, all this unemployment, you know...pfft. It's bullshit. Bullshit. If we just work together, we can make it better. For everyone! But look, why are we even talking about this? Life is short, man. Just enjoy the ride!"
The employment outlook looked especially promising for those who couldn't afford to eat before drinking.
Reports from those well on their way toward putting away a whole six pack suggested that unemployed Americans could look forward to increased job security and much higher salaries. In addition, many half-in-the-bag analysts said they foresee greater career satisfaction and massive quality-of-life improvements following the inevitable arrival of new employment opportunities.
"Why should those who've lost work have to live paycheck to paycheck, doing some miserable wage-slave job a goddamn monkey could do?" said Donald Ellington, a completely hammered senior adviser at JPMorgan Chase. "All these layoffs, they're totally a blessing in disguise. Now these people can do the thing they've always wanted to do. Like becoming a sportswriter. Or a musician. Or a pilot, even!"
"I'm telling you, this is their time," Ellington added. "This is their fucking time."
To illustrate his point, Ellington then sang most of the first verse of the Tina Turner song "We Don't Need Another Hero" for reporters.
Joblessness was not the only domestic problem that began to appear eminently solvable after the rapid downing of five beers. Also substantially improved were projections for the housing crisis, the affordability of health care, getting hot wings later, and being able to drive home just fine.
Though most on their fifth beer showed unbridled optimism—and in some cases outright cockiness—in terms of the employment landscape, those who greatly exceeded that number said they saw the current job market as hopelessly bleak. Contrary to the rosy prospects he had described earlier in the evening, economist David Singleton, after imbibing nine beers and an unknown quantity of Wild Turkey, lamented that there would have to be a comprehensive shift in the nation's entire economic structure before any lasting improvement could be realized.†
"There is no fucking way the Cavs are gonna go all the way next…yeah, that's Rick's," said Singleton, lowering his head to the table in front of him. "No, goddamn it, I told you, it's Rick's! Go ask him about it."
"Go Cavs!" Singleton added.
Here we have another article stating just as we said----it is a changing structural paradigm in calculating CAPACITY ECONOMICS AND EMPLOYMENT that has national media claiming today's unemployment of almost 50% of Americans is FULL-EMPLOYMENT.
It is critical to stop MOVING FORWARD as global Wall Street CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA have already dismantled all our labor and workplace gains from last century and now are killing what has been the most successful economic structure in world history------social capitalism----free market capitalism.
'The incoming Trump administration has made job creation a national priority. But here is a sobering prediction: No matter which political party holds the White House or Congress, over the next 25 years, 47% of jobs will likely be eliminated by technology and globalization, according to WorkingNation. It’s a phenomenon called “structural unemployment” and it affects nearly all industries and even white-collar workers. Venture capitalist Art Bilger founded WorkingNation to sound the alarm about the coming crisis and to spark discussions about potential solutions'.
They are saying 25 years from now----that would be the time line for building US cities deemed Foreign Economic Zones and global corporate campuses and global factories. The drop will be much earlier as global labor pool comes to do all that building.
Please do not allow a US FED to use excuses like FULL EMPLOYMENT to bring high interest rates and high inflation at the same time flooding our US cities with global skilled labor. We must build an economy for both US citizens AND our new immigrant citizens that have nothing to do with INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS AS INDENTURED SERVANTS.
Why the Coming Jobs Crisis Is Bigger Than You Think
Dec 06, 2016
Art Bilger on the impending jobs crisis
The incoming Trump administration has made job creation a national priority. But here is a sobering prediction: No matter which political party holds the White House or Congress, over the next 25 years, 47% of jobs will likely be eliminated by technology and globalization, according to WorkingNation. It’s a phenomenon called “structural unemployment” and it affects nearly all industries and even white-collar workers. Venture capitalist Art Bilger founded WorkingNation to sound the alarm about the coming crisis and to spark discussions about potential solutions.
Bilger believes the nature of employment is fundamentally changing and cannot be reversed. But workers, businesses and the government can prepare for it if they work together — starting with stepped up infrastructure spending that has bipartisan support. He recently joined the Knowledge@Wharton Show, which airs on Sirius XM channel 111, to discuss his prescription for ameliorating the coming jobs crisis, and what his organization and others have tried so far. (Listen to the podcast at the top of this page.)
An edited transcript of the conversation follows.
Knowledge@Wharton: Your organization did a report on the state of the job market prior to the election. What are some of the necessary things that the next president, his cabinet and the Congress need to address?
Art Bilger: You’ve got to start by understanding what the circumstances are out there, because in my three-year journey, it has been quite amazing to [see how little of the crisis is perceived by] even by the most sophisticated people. I have laid [the problem] out to major news executives, foundations, corporate executives — and people haven’t really understood the magnitude of this and how quickly things are changing.
[The idea] came to me three years ago at a dinner in New York … and the guest speaker was Larry Summers. … When he opened it to questions, I said, “Dr. Summers, as an economist, a former Secretary of the Treasury and as an educator, can you explain to the audience here how the most advanced economic society on the planet will continue to thrive and possibly even survive with a 30% dropout rate from high school?”
I said, “We’re talking about a third of the population that doesn’t have the skills for the jobs of today, let alone the jobs of 10, 20, 30 years from now.” And then, I said, “And to compound it, we’re doing something extremely well, putting aside cost, and that’s longevity.” So I said, “Here’s the math: A third of the population drops out at 15 and we keep them alive to 85. What do you do?”
“We could lose 47% of all our jobs within 25 years.”
I won’t go into the details of all the back and forth, but the reason I am sitting here now is that when he left the stage, I got up and went to the men’s room, and a guy in the audience chased me down, and when I came out, another guy chased me down. Two more came to my table that night, each of them saying, “I’ve never thought about this.” And I said, “If these major investors and top corporate executives in New York don’t understand this, then the average American doesn’t.” And I have been on this journey ever since.
Knowledge@Wharton: Maybe it’s just the culture or where people are in their particular careers, or where a company is in its life cycle, but it doesn’t even occur to them that this is an issue.
Bilger: When I posed the question, I narrowed it down to basically just education and longevity. But then you add to that [the impact of] globalization. Put a billion people into the global workforce at lower price points than we work for here. Great for the globe, not so good for jobs here. … So, when you take globalization, technology, longevity and broken education, put those four together, … the slope of the curve [based on the] change in jobs and skills measured against time has never been as steep as it is today. Matter of fact, we don’t even understand how steep it really is. And that’s the issue.
Sponsored Content:Knowledge@Wharton: In order to be able to tackle that steep curve, the solution can’t just come from corporate America. It has to come from a variety of different sources, right?
Bilger: Yes, but first of all, you have to recognize it, you’ve got to create the awareness. After that, then our philosophy is that the solutions are local. It’s not to say that federal tax policy and budget policy can’t influence matters, but the solutions themselves will be created by corporations, by not-for-profits, by academic entities, by local government. There are entities out there that are really doing very interesting stuff, but it has little to no visibility. A key part of what we’re trying to do is create awareness through storytelling.
… As we’ve watched [presidential candidates] Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders build their movements over the last year and a half, they made the point that we don’t have to look to tomorrow [for employment disruption]. It’s here today. Donald Trump’s election, which I believe was very much facilitated by the pain and discomfort at local levels, [was] about economics and jobs.
“It’s not just about the bottom 20%. This is about the lower-middle class, the middle-middle-class, the upper-middle class.”
Knowledge@Wharton: Are you optimistic that this is an issue that will be addressed in the near term?
Bilger: I believe there will be tremendous action that will take place. [The Trump and Sanders movements that tapped into job insecurity fears have] made my job of creating awareness much easier. Now, the key is [collaboration among] corporations, nonprofits, academics and local government to better understand and accelerate a lot of the programs they’re already thinking about. There are federal policies that can influence it. … Listen, the whole infrastructure job discussion that they’re talking about now is one of the stories that we were actually going to tell.
Knowledge@Wharton: How significant will be the jobs crisis?
Bilger: A study out of Oxford shows that we could lose 47% of all our jobs within 25 years … through a combination of globalization, automation and the fact that so many people don’t have the skills that will be required for those jobs. There are many corporations out there today who will tell you they have plenty of jobs they can’t fill. They are developing apprenticeship programs, things like that, to re-skill the workforce.
Knowledge@Wharton: It sounds like correcting this will take two phases: corporate retraining and the educational system.
Bilger: You’ve got two levels here. The first is the typical thing that we talk about, and that is K through 12, community college, four-year college. … There’s clearly a lot that we still should be doing, changes we ought to be making [as we recognize] how jobs will be changing. It doesn’t mean that you can’t go get a liberal arts education, but even here, are there new additions to the curriculum that are a little career-oriented or skills-oriented?
The other area that we really haven’t talked about — and it’s one of the key areas I’m focused on — is that we’re going to have to re-skill the 48-year-olds in this country. We haven’t had to do that in this type of magnitude — it’s still called education — but it’s a whole other thing that we really haven’t had to do. But now, projects are being developed for that.
Knowledge@Wharton: I’ve heard from some people that it may be harder to do. Some corporations would rather choose to not reinvest in the 48-year-olds; they would rather go with the 22- and 23-year-olds. And that 40- or 50-something generation just gets kicked to the curb.
Bilger: There’s a risk of that. One of the issues in re-skilling a somewhat older workforce is, are they going to be prepared? Individually, even if the corporations want to do it, will they be prepared to be re-educated?
We’re running some small projects, and we’re already seeing the resistance level of those 48-year-olds to the concept of going back into a classroom. Now, I think there’s some pretty interesting areas that I’m focused on. The whole area of augmented reality for training and education purposes, I think, is pretty interesting. We’re exploring that, and I’d love to be able to tell that story. We’re not there yet.
“What would our society be like with 25%, 30% or 35% unemployment?”
But you know, that’s an example of how you can train that older workforce without having to sit them down in front of a blackboard or a whiteboard and redo a lot of it. The other thing is setting up internships and apprenticeship-type programs inside corporations.
We’ve been speaking with Siemens Corp. I heard the CEO speaking one day at a conference, and he was talking about the inability to fill a lot of jobs here in the U.S. What they have done — and I think they started a little over a year ago — is they brought an apprenticeship-type program like the company has in Germany to the U.S. because of an absolute need to bring skills.
Knowledge@Wharton: You mentioned autonomous vehicles and autonomous technology in general. That’s going to change the job market. For example, Budweiser made a delivery with an autonomous truck in Colorado. I mean, just the trucking industry alone is one that could see massive change in terms of its labor force in the next decade or two.
Bilger: People who drive for a living, whether it’s trucks, taxis, buses, whatever, [will be affected]. In some states, it’s one of the largest [sources of] jobs. … You are talking about a dramatic change in employment in this country. And that’s a key reason that I am doing this, because another thing that’s different is that this time, it’s about the heart of America. It’s not just about the bottom 20%. This is about the lower-middle class, the middle-middle class, the upper-middle class.
When the movie “Waiting for Superman” was made, the people on Park Avenue in New York thought it was a terrific movie, but someone else’s issue. What I’m talking about here is, this is about the children and the grandchildren of the people on Park Avenue. It will affect them directly in terms of their own jobs.
A Wall Street Journal article published about a year ago [talked about] the whole area of data and analytics. Your marketing department of 10 becomes a marketing department of two, and you get better answers. Well, guess what? Those were good jobs.
What would our society be like with 25%, 30% or 35% unemployment? … I don’t know how you afford that, but even if you could afford it, there’s still the question of, what do people do with themselves? Having a purpose in life is, I think, an important piece of the stability of a society.
This United Nation's ILO report is too long and technical for most but those wanting to know what global Wall Street and ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE sees as this structural paradigm change for employment may look like Google to read. What FULL EMPLOYMENT has always meant in US is paid employment---people able to earn a living and support a family. What ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE is doing is broadening this to human capital in all kinds of working venues---from volunteering to force free labor/part-time vs full time.
Here is a representation of data saying there is no SKILLS GAP in the US as was being touted throughout Obama ----
Beyond the measurement
of unemployment and underemployment
The case for extending
and amending labour market statistics
Similar issues can be raised about the employment rate, i.e. the share of the population at working age that is employed.
What exactly does it mean if a country has managed to attain
a rate of employment of 70 per cent of its working-age population which is the strategic target set by the Lisbon European Council in 2000 over the decade 2001-2010? Does it not make a big difference whether this employment relates to
full-time or part-time jobs and, if it concerns part-time work, to what extent this is voluntarily or involuntary?
Remember, forced labor ----slave labor is the model of Foreign Economic Zones overseas----what we call full time work are those global factory workers working 15-18 hours a day 6 days a week----bringing the US to those terms needs a new employment paradigm.
No evidence of “structural unemployment” in the US (2 graphs)
December 16, 2012 David F. Ruccio
Rand Ghayad and William Dickens (pdf) have discovered a shift in the so-called Beveridge Curve (Figure 1) associated with the growth in long-term unemployment (Figure 2).*
Their study is significant in that they find no evidence of “structural unemployment,” the idea repeated ad nauseam by anti-stimulus economists that there’s a mismatch between job openings and workers’ skills—and therefore the problem of unemployment will be solved when workers decide to acquire the correct set of skills. Instead, they find pattern of increasing vacancies with little or no change in unemployment in the recovery from the most recent recession across all categories (e.g., industry, age, education, and blue- and white-collar groups) except one: short-term unemployment. Thus, “all of the increase in vacancies relative to unemployment has taken place among the long-term unemployed.”
In other words, what Ghayad and Dickens have discovered is a growth in what we might call the Reserve Army of the Long-Term Unemployed. It’s a large group of workers who have been unemployed for 27 weeks or more and who are being sacrificed on the altar of relying on private decisions to create jobs.
Well, private employers have not been creating an adequate number of jobs. Not by a long shot. The result is a large group of formerly employed workers who have no prospect of finding a job anytime in the foreseeable future—and who, at the same time, serve as a reminder to all the other workers who do have jobs that “there but for the grace of Capital go I.”
*The Beveridge curve—the empirical relationship between unemployment and job vacancies—is thought to be an indicator of the efficiency of the functioning of the labor market. The idea is that, when job vacancies rise, unemployment falls, following a curved path that typically remains stable over long periods of time.