Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 04-08-2011, 09:45 PM   #21
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
kyounge1956's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,171
Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterBlaster View Post
So if I read the tables correctly, manufacturing dropped off a cliff. State and local government, as well as government health care really took off.
Why do you say specifically government health care? The fact that the category immediately before "health care" is "Private services except health care" suggests to me that this category refers to private employment in health care, and that "government health care", is included in the Local, State and Federal percentages. Either that, or the health care percentage includes both government and private employment.
__________________

__________________
kyounge1956 is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 04-08-2011, 10:46 PM   #22
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
kyounge1956's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,171
Quote:
Originally Posted by Independent View Post
The OP links to an article in the WSJ which begins
Quote:
By STEPHEN MOORE

If you want to understand better why so many states—from New York to Wisconsin to California—are teetering on the brink of bankruptcy, consider this depressing statistic: Today in America there are nearly twice as many people working for the government (22.5 million) than in all of manufacturing (11.5 million). This is an almost exact reversal of the situation in 1960, when there were 15 million workers in manufacturing and 8.7 million collecting a paycheck from the government.
IF that's a problem, what might we do about it? The first thing that comes to my mind is that it's hard to have "free trade" when one side is manipulating its currency, so maybe we should have put a small tariff on Chinese goods, just enough to offset the currency peg. I'll bet the WSJ and this author would be up in arms against any such suggestion.
But the Chinese are holding oodles of U.S. debt. If they didn't like the tariff couldn't they retaliate by refusing to lend us any more money? I sometimes wonder if the economic situation between the US and China is analogous to the past military situation with the US and USSR, with Mutual Assured Destruction if either side attacks the other—the only way to avoid catastrophe is for neither side to strike first.

An interesting thought from a book I read last year is that as the price of oil goes up, the potential profit from moving manufacturing to low-wage countries will eventually be outweighed by the transportation costs. It will no longer be less expensive to ship raw materials halfway around the world and then ship the finished products to the US than to manufacture the products here. So eventually, given high enough oil prices, manufacturing jobs will come back to the US—at least the ones that are left after the robots do their thing.
__________________

__________________
kyounge1956 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2011, 11:04 PM   #23
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 11,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by kyounge1956 View Post
But the Chinese are holding oodles of U.S. debt. If they didn't like the tariff couldn't they retaliate by refusing to lend us any more money?
There's the old saying: " “If you loan a man a dollar, he's your servant… loan him a million dollars and you're his slave.” The Chinese have loaned us enough that they won't want to do anything that would adversely affect our ability to repay them.
__________________
"Freedom begins when you tell Mrs. Grundy to go fly a kite." - R. Heinlein
samclem is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2011, 11:44 PM   #24
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
kyounge1956's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,171
Quote:
Originally Posted by samclem View Post
There's the old saying: " “If you loan a man a dollar, he's your servant… loan him a million dollars and you're his slave.” The Chinese have loaned us enough that they won't want to do anything that would adversely affect our ability to repay them.
That's what I meant by "Mutual Assured Destruction". If we do something the Chinese don't like and they attack us economically they would at the same time be destroying their biggest customer—or vice versa. However it might start, it's a fight that China and the US would both lose, and I suspect it would trash other countries economically at the same time, just as a nuclear war between the US and the USSR would have destroyed the rest of the world along with us.
__________________
kyounge1956 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2011, 10:07 AM   #25
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,820
Quote:
Originally Posted by kyounge1956 View Post
But the Chinese are holding oodles of U.S. debt. If they didn't like the tariff couldn't they retaliate by refusing to lend us any more money? I sometimes wonder if the economic situation between the US and China is analogous to the past military situation with the US and USSR, with Mutual Assured Destruction if either side attacks the other—the only way to avoid catastrophe is for neither side to strike first.
.
I go somewhat with the MAD analogy. The Chinese have a lot to lose, too. The accumulation of US debt is a mathematical necessity from their decisions to peg their currency and run a trade surplus. If they don't want to hold US debt, then they have to give up on the peg, and they will eventually lose the trade surplus. (... which might be a good thing for the average Chinese citizen, but apparently not for the people making the decisions).

At any rate, the post was really meant to be looking backwards. Lots of people complained about losing manufacturing back when the jobs were moving, but the establishment said we shouldn't try to do anything about it. Now the jobs are gone and we're dealing with the after effects.
__________________
Independent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2011, 10:14 AM   #26
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
HFWR's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Lawn chair in Texas
Posts: 12,964
Quote:
Originally Posted by kyounge1956 View Post
An interesting thought from a book I read last year is that as the price of oil goes up, the potential profit from moving manufacturing to low-wage countries will eventually be outweighed by the transportation costs. It will no longer be less expensive to ship raw materials halfway around the world and then ship the finished products to the US than to manufacture the products here. So eventually, given high enough oil prices, manufacturing jobs will come back to the US—at least the ones that are left after the robots do their thing.
I remember a number of CEO-types on CNBC saying as much, during the last run-up in oil. Plus, it's a bit easier to hop a plane to the midwest or south than to China.
__________________
Have Funds, Will Retire

...not doing anything of true substance...
HFWR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2011, 10:48 AM   #27
gone traveling
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,864
Quote:
Originally Posted by samclem View Post
The Chinese have loaned us enough that they won't want to do anything that would adversely affect our ability to repay them.

Unlike most countries, our debt is in our own currency... and we can always start the printing presses...
__________________
Westernskies is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2011, 10:48 AM   #28
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 391
Independent, let me assure you that the higher-ed teaching jobs are predominantly part-time adjunct positions with no benefits, or temporary (1-3 years). The number of tenure-track positions has been falling since the 1970s. Administration, though--that's a growth industry.
__________________
palomalou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2011, 01:38 PM   #29
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,820
Quote:
Originally Posted by palomalou View Post
Independent, let me assure you that the higher-ed teaching jobs are predominantly part-time adjunct positions with no benefits, or temporary (1-3 years). The number of tenure-track positions has been falling since the 1970s. Administration, though--that's a growth industry.
Interesting, my source didn't have that kind of detail. Do you have numbers?

My sister is an "emeritus" professor who teaches one course most semesters. That has been going on for a long time (IMO, a good reason to be a professor), but with the boomers retiring I'd expect those numbers to grow, too.

Plex was saying that the growth in education is much faster than than overall job growth. You might be saying those are part time jobs?
__________________
Independent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2011, 05:46 PM   #30
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
MasterBlaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,359
Quote:
Originally Posted by kyounge1956 View Post
Why do you say specifically government health care? The fact that the category immediately before "health care" is "Private services except health care" suggests to me that this category refers to private employment in health care, and that "government health care", is included in the Local, State and Federal percentages. Either that, or the health care percentage includes both government and private employment.
In order to make the numbers consistent with the document presented in the original post, the health care numbers must be government health care numbers.

Either that or one of the two documents is missing something.
__________________
MasterBlaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2011, 12:24 AM   #31
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,929
There's a reason we don't employ as many people as we used to in manufacturing. Most manufacturing tasks are rote repetition, and more consistent results can be obtained when inconsistent meatbags aren't in the loop...


China is now going through a drop in manufacturing employment, for the exact same reason. Yes, there are many more robots working on the iPod Touch and iPad production lines than there were on the original iPad.

The article is fundamentally sort of dumb.

Robots don't need much in the way of health care, government or private. Just keep 'em oiled up.
__________________
M Paquette is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2011, 04:29 AM   #32
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 589
Quote:
Originally Posted by Independent View Post
Plex was saying that the growth in education is much faster than than overall job growth. You might be saying those are part time jobs?
Actually the growth I was referring to was increased general spending on college, as per tuition rates. The spending growth rates are similar to health cares (except the college spending increases have been going on an entire decade longer). That does not mean job growth though.

Colleges and the health care system went through a similar phenomena through the 70s and 80s, they became almost entirely for-profit. While this resulted in some job growth, much of the money went elsewhere, in such things as infrastructure, endowment funds, bonuses, massive advertising campaigns, etc.... Money to keep the machine growing and running smoothly. I have noticed an increasing trend to use cheap adjunct professors (more profit), which does not really reflect significant job growth, as they are not full time positions.
__________________
plex is offline   Reply With Quote
from the NYT, discussed in Chronicle of Higher Ed
Old 04-15-2011, 11:51 AM   #33
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 391
from the NYT, discussed in Chronicle of Higher Ed

The Adjunct Issue Moving Forward - Brainstorm - The Chronicle of Higher Education
quote: "“In 1960, 75 percent of college instructors were full-time tenured or tenure-track professors; today only 27 percent are. The rest are graduate students or adjunct and contingent faculty — instructors employed on a per-course or yearly contract basis, usually without benefits and earning a third or less of what their tenured colleagues make. The recession means their numbers are growing.”

Well, perhaps the recession is raising the pace, but not by much. The temptation to cut costs by hiring three adjuncts instead of one tenure-track prof is too strong for adminsitrators to resist whether times are tough or times are good..."

I'll also mention that all of the non-teaching duties those missing TT or tenured profs did, is having to be absorbed by the few of us dinosaurs around--oh, but that has nothing to do with our compensation.
__________________
palomalou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2011, 03:37 PM   #34
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,820
Interesting stuff. I picked up this from later in the article:
Quote:
The article is important, however, because it means that the adjunct issue may be rising in visibility off campus. It is hitting the rankings fields, for instance, and that may play out with parents and prospective students ...
If non-tenure staff are considered inferior, then it seems parents and students would start noticing. I can see the stress, why pay three times as much if you can get nearly the quality at the lower price?

It appears parents can get stats for individual schools here: AFT - Higher Education Department

As a parent, I'd be interested. I would be more interested in quality (e.g. audited by a common standard) statistics on jobs after graduation.
__________________
Independent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2011, 05:05 PM   #35
gone traveling
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,864
Quote:
Originally Posted by Independent View Post
As a parent, I'd be interested. I would be more interested in quality (e.g. audited by a common standard) statistics on jobs after graduation.
Careful there Independent, the topic of educational accountability has a bad history of threadkilling...
__________________
Westernskies is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2011, 05:20 PM   #36
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
HFWR's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Lawn chair in Texas
Posts: 12,964
Quote:
Originally Posted by Independent View Post
Interesting stuff. I picked up this from later in the article:

If non-tenure staff are considered inferior, then it seems parents and students would start noticing. I can see the stress, why pay three times as much if you can get nearly the quality at the lower price?

It appears parents can get stats for individual schools here: AFT - Higher Education Department

As a parent, I'd be interested. I would be more interested in quality (e.g. audited by a common standard) statistics on jobs after graduation.
I think it depends on the subject matter and course level. I'm confident that many undergraduate courses can and are taught proficiently by adjuncts. I suspect, though, that graduate/doctorate programs demand full-time, tenure-rack professors. Would part-timers be able to establish the relationships required to fund research? Plus, continuity is important if your PhD student is to work on a project for 2-4 years. And, top students will look at that when choosing...
__________________
Have Funds, Will Retire

...not doing anything of true substance...
HFWR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2011, 07:27 PM   #37
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
GregLee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Waimanalo, HI
Posts: 1,881
Quote:
Originally Posted by HFWR View Post
I'm confident that many undergraduate courses can and are taught proficiently by adjuncts. I suspect, though, that graduate/doctorate programs demand full-time, tenure-rack professors.
I'm not sure, but I think it may be just the other way around. A grad student working on his doctoral research might be ideally suited to teach a grad course in his specialty, since it's quite possible he knows more about it and has more enthusiasm for the teaching of it than any on the senior faculty. But more elementary courses need the experience and breadth of vision that a seasoned professor can provide.
__________________
Greg (retired in 2010 at age 68, state pension)
GregLee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2011, 11:36 AM   #38
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 391
Many adjuncts are competent teachers, and many tenured faculty may be stale (although that has not been my experience).
The situation is more complicated than that, though. Adjuncts are paid (poorly--most are either just clinging to the poverty level or married to someone who makes the money so they can do as they please) only for teaching, and that is all they do. But that is only 1/3 to conceivably 1/2 of what tenured/tenure track faculty are asked and evaluated on. The committee work, service expectations, and research demands cannot be shared by the adjuncts. The growth field, higher ed administration, has created additional mounds of paperwork for faculty to deal with. So we are in the peculiar position of doing the work we never had any interest in--often what could be better done by a competent secretary--while adjuncts are hired to do the work we went into the field to do, namely teaching.
The argument about grad students being more up in the field is totally bogus--they are all doing their research/writing their dissertations shepherded by people who have been doing research in the field for 10-40 years.

Therefore, I am eagerly looking forward to retirement as soon as possible, whereafter I'll be looking for work--as an adjunct! Provided, that is, that I don't do something else that pays better.
__________________

__________________
palomalou is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Supporting grown-up kids after FIRE BigNick Life after FIRE 52 08-24-2010 10:56 PM
Leave it up to the government UncleHoney FIRE and Money 0 04-30-2009 10:10 PM
More from the grown male acting like a 1st grade boy. newguy88 Other topics 1 01-17-2008 08:58 AM
July manufacturing numbers Leonidas FIRE and Money 1 08-01-2006 12:32 PM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:06 PM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.