Middle Class[Income] Jobs ain't Coming Back?

[ziggy29]

My question earlier was ignored, but is critical in this... I asked: Who here believes that welfare is better for the poor than good jobs?

No one.

But you can't wave a magic wand and conjure up good jobs out of thin air when the market is saying it doesn't need any more of them. And even if you conjured up all those good jobs, you'd also have to "conjure up" the education and training the poor would need to successfully compete for them.

 

[Bestwifeever]

I have never "ignored" anyone because I assumed it would make the threads disjointed and hard to follow. is this not the case?

NMF

No need to use "ignore" to make certain threads disjointed and hard to follow .

 

[brewer12345]

I have never "ignored" anyone because I assumed it would make the threads disjointed and hard to follow. is this not the case?

NMF

No, it actually greatly improves the experience in any cases. If you think you are missing something, you can always selectively look at individual posts of the ignored. Generally after looking at 2 or 3 posts I am reminded of why I put them on ignore in the first place.

 

[bUU]

No one. But you can't wave a magic wand and conjure up good jobs out of thin air when the market is saying it doesn't need any more of them. And even if you conjured up all those good jobs, you'd also have to "conjure up" the education and training the poor would need to successfully compete for them.

Correct. That's the challenge for society, to address those things you've written as problems it is obligated to address - not as foregone conclusions that society callously disregards.

 

[REWahoo]

I have never "ignored" anyone because I assumed it would make the threads disjointed and hard to follow. is this not the case?

I took advantage of the ignore feature a few minutes ago. Contrary to your concerns, it markedly improved a number of threads, especially this one.

 

[Midpack]

Creative destruction is still in play -- but it doesn't work the way it used to for two main reasons:

1. It is occurring on the global economy, not a single nation's economy. So even if "obsolete" good jobs are replaced by theoretically "better" jobs elsewhere, they are still flowing to where labor costs are lowest. So it no longer helps a laid off worker in a dying industry in their home country the way it used to.

2. Many of the software and "information" jobs do not scale in terms of jobs to demand. If you triple the demand for a software product or an information service, you don't need 3x as many people to "build" them. In fact, you barely need more jobs at all as when demand was 1/3 as high. Contrast that to the "old" economy where usually, when demand tripled, you needed close to 3x as many people to build product to meet the demand. (And I haven't even touched on the growth of robots in manufacturing to further dampen the job growth with increased demand.)

Good points. Probably stating the obvious, but doesn't #1 suggest standard of living is going to have to converge among global competitor countries? That's a foreign (pun intended) to most Americans/westerners. There have always been emerging countries, but not of the scale we're seeing now, and that genie isn't likely to go back in the bottle.

 

[brewer12345]

Good points. Probably stating the obvious, but doesn't #1 suggest standard of living is going to have to converge among global competitor countries? That's a foreign (pun intended) to most Americans/westerners. There have always been emerging countries, but not of the scale we're seeing now, and that genie isn't likely to go back in the bottle.

Perhaps, but if so at what level will the convergence take place? Seems to me places like China and Brazil are working on cinverging toward 1st world levels.

 

[Midpack]

Perhaps, but if so at what level will the convergence take place? Seems to me places like China and Brazil are working on cinverging toward 1st world levels.

I would assume it has to be someone in between, but if that's not true, better for all concerned. I assume the lack of real pay increases for the middle class is in part the leveling of standard of living between the west and emerging/BRIC countries. Where creative destruction in the US worked well when it was almost entirely in the US, now it's destruction of mature industries in rich countries often with creation in poorer countries it seems. As many have pointed out, less so in the case of leading edge/innovative industry where creation offshore is more difficult if not impossible for a time. But I am not positive...

 

[bUU]

While it isn't a zero-sum game, I suspect that the first tier is so far above the second tier that there simply isn't any way, even in the medium term, for the convergence point to be at or above our level (which, of course, is already reflection some of the downward pressure).

 

[samclem]

+1

Tiresome to see yet another thread where someone apparently wants to bicker for sport.

It's not even as good as that. I think we've been found by a 'bot that generates random contradictions and plausible-sounding but entirely nonsensical platitudes.

 

[bUU]

And the juvenile nonsense continues. Well I suppose it makes sense... they say that retirement is just a second childhood.

 

[explanade]

This process has been going on longer than 5 years.

I'm not sure how well white-collar jobs have fared since the GR. But I recall reading somewhere that the unemployment rate for people with college degrees was like 5% while the overall unemployment rate was double that.

 

[bUU]

Here's a direct link to that data:

Table A-4. Employment status of the civilian population 25 years and over by educational attainment

So it's 3.9% for folks with college degrees versus 7.8% overall.

 

[Texas Proud]

Here's a direct link to that data:

Table A-4. Employment status of the civilian population 25 years and over by educational attainment

So it's 3.9% for folks with college degrees versus 7.8% overall.

Thanks for the table... so far an interesting read...


But, as my boss would point out, it does not tell the whole story... as he would say, there is a lot of underemployment out there.... people with college degrees working at Starbucks or someplace else where they are not using their education... I keep hearing him say the real rate is closer to 12 or 15%... can't remember his number right now....

 

[ziggy29]

Well I suppose it makes sense... they say that retirement is just a second childhood.

"Life should begin with age and its privileges and accumulations, and end with youth and its capacity to splendidly enjoy such advantages" -- Mark Twain

 

[HFWR]

Someone say something?

 

[NotMyFault]

Someone say something?

Ok I'll bite.

All things considered, it is probably better to be under or unemployed in America than to be employed in many other countries. I have no evidence to back this up beyond gut feeling and a documentary or two.

NMF

 

[HFWR]

Ok I'll bite.

All things considered, it is probably better to be under or unemployed in America than to be employed in many other countries. I have no evidence to back this up beyond gut feeling and a documentary or two.

NMF

Re: Someone say something; if everyone is on ignore, do they still make a noise?

Yup, though a lot of people wonder if it's a good thing for someone on public assistance, or in prison, for that matter, to have better living quarters, cars, smartphones, etc. than someone busting a hump working one or more jobs...

 

[HFWR]

» The disappearance of the middle class Early Retirement Extreme: — a combination of simple living, anticonsumerism, DIY ethics, self-reliance, and applied capitalism

As a country, America is very productive. There are enough resources to live very well if those resources are spent wisely. We are twice as productive as we were 50 years ago. By all rational means it should be possible to work only two weeks a month and live perfectly happy lives. Alternatively, it should be possible to work for less than a decade and then retire early.

 

[meierlde]

And this raises another issue. Five hundred years ago, everyone knew how to stoke the coal stove (or whatever it is they did to keep their homes warm), a skill that practically no one has today. Now some people twist this fact into a veneration of having such antiquated skills, and I suppose if you're hoping and praying for a complete break-down of society and relish some dystopian vision of the future that makes sense. .

Actually 500 years ago it was a wood burning fireplace. Stoves were rare luxuries of the nobility at best. Recall that Franklin invented the Franklin Stove as one of the first stoves and that is 250 years ago or so. I was reading a history of steam and coal became a power source in the US once wood got scarce for railroads and riverboats (around the time of the civil war). Stoves really took the decrease in the cost of Iron in the early to mid 19th century. The first coal use was at Coalbrookdale in Shropshire England. The problem England had was that all the trees were gone having been used to make charcoal for iron making. So they tried coal and after a bit of experimentation figured out essentially the process used in the modern blast furnace. That is about 1700 or so. Then London got coal since you could ship it by water from Newcastle. But until the railroads coal was not a widely used commodity where it did not occur locally.
But to give an example my grandmother still used a wood burning stove part time (partly for heat) in the 1960s (the house had electricity but no running water)

 

[brewer12345]

Actually 500 years ago it was a wood burning fireplace. Stoves were rare luxuries of the nobility at best. Recall that Franklin invented the Franklin Stove as one of the first stoves and that is 250 years ago or so. I was reading a history of steam and coal became a power source in the US once wood got scarce for railroads and riverboats (around the time of the civil war). Stoves really took the decrease in the cost of Iron in the early to mid 19th century. The first coal use was at Coalbrookdale in Shropshire England. The problem England had was that all the trees were gone having been used to make charcoal for iron making. So they tried coal and after a bit of experimentation figured out essentially the process used in the modern blast furnace. That is about 1700 or so. Then London got coal since you could ship it by water from Newcastle. But until the railroads coal was not a widely used commodity where it did not occur locally.
But to give an example my grandmother still used a wood burning stove part time (partly for heat) in the 1960s (the house had electricity but no running water)

Personally, I take pride in building up my Luddite/throwback skills. I am heating the house with wood (that I cut and split) as I type this, I bake my own bread, make my own yogurt, brew my own beer, catch my own fish, hunt a good bit of my meat in season, etc. In the future I would like to learn to do more including become a better gardener/farmer and learn to cast my own bullets out of lead.

 

[Gumby]

It's not even as good as that. I think we've been found by a 'bot that generates random contradictions and plausible-sounding but entirely nonsensical platitudes.

We got a chatbot on here once before, but we smoked it out and sent it packing.