A solution for unemployment and under-employment

Why does the right insist on a warfare-State regime instead of a specifically enumerated Welfare-State, implemented through our republican form of Government.

 

Automation doesn't create jobs. It destroys jobs. If you automate cashiering for example, you replace 10 cashiers with one person who watches to make sure that customers are using the self-scan properly. If you automate auto-manufacturing, you get rid of lots of human welders in favor of one or two guys who fix welding machines. And on and on it goes. Shortening the workweek might work for middle class jobs that work on regular hours, but shift-work is hard to predict that way. You need lots of staff in a store when the store is busy and not so much when it's not. So how you'd work that out I don't see -- even as it stands now, half-weeks are common, which is being offset by the fact that most people making those wages literally work two full time jobs already to make a fairly decent living. So shortening the week would in essence mean that more people need a second job. sure, on paper, you have more jobs, but at the same time, you have equal, if not higher, unemployment because the people who were working 1 job before the shorter workweek are now working 2 jobs. As for increasing income, again, you have automation reducing the job opportunities, and a shorter workweek meaning that people are working less hours and thus making less money, all of which means a labor surplus even greater than what you have now, especially since the same worker is now capable of working 2 of those jobs, rather than having only one. The maths just don't work here. If anything, this would make unemployment a bigger problem as you effectively raise the number of workers chasing a job. As it stands now, we have a labor surplus, and that's one thing that keeps wages low.

 

Other than endless government stimulus spending in the private sector, what creates jobs is a robust economy. What happened to Obama's meeting with business representatives after the election...haven't seen Obama introduce any legislation or policy to assist US companies becoming healthier or more competitive?

All these stupid threads about government and creating jobs are just that...stupid. Grow the economy and you grow jobs! You cannot force the economy...you must grow the economy. And since 30-40% of the US economy stems from exports, the health of the world economy effects the US economy.

And as the economy does grow, it will not look like the economy of the past 50 years. It is constantly evolving. Americans need to do more than drop out of high school. Or graduate from high school? As the economy grows and creates jobs, if Americans are too stupid or unqualified for these jobs, employers will simply bring in more green card workers or move more facilities off shore.

I suggest it's too late for anyone over the age of 45-50 but younger Americans need to be less lazy and more educated and aggressive in creating a viable career...

 

OR, we simply withdraw from this globalist crock o' stink.

 

Simply subsidizing the least efficiency through unemployment compensation could engender a profit motive to make advances in automation since the least efficient could be subsidized through unemployment compensation that clears our poverty guidelines, until they learn enough to be more competitive in our global economy; even if it may require going to school and obtaining several degrees in technology.

 

You seem to be looking at only the micro variables and not the macro variables.

Besides, introducing more government programs to help the wealthier while decrying the sad state of entitlement mentalities for the least wealth, is not very conducive of establishing much confidence in your sincerity.

What happened to laissez-faire for the wealthiest Capitalists who need public sector intervention to help improve their Standard of living the least?

 

Deep thought you have...let's see...stop exports which are about $5.6 trillion per year, and this will directly create about 50 million more Americans on unemployment, plus the collateral damage to the economy...hecka of a plan!

In reality...and I know it's difficult for many of you to think in reality, but INCREASING EXPORTS is the best thing that could happen to the US economy...

 

I must agree. There are two essential components to the United States economy: consumption spending and exports. The country cannot function efficiently and effectively without strong and robust growth in both areas.

 

Exactly...there are ONLY three ingredients to our economy; personal spending, exports, and government spending.

If people refuse or cannot increase their personal spending, and if government is deep in debt, then the ONLY viable area to greatly improve and sustain the US economy is increasing exports. Gotta wonder what Obama & Co have done lately to assure US industry can increase their exports?

I'm eager to hear how PHOEBE BUMP will mitigate the 50 million Americans who become unemployed when exports are forbidden...

 

What moral objection can there be to artificial persons of wealth subsidizing unemployment compensation on an at-will basis?

Unemployment compensation is mostly self-funding now, with the public sector making up for any short falls.

Increasing the circulation of money, instead of teaching so many people how to fish, is what engenders a positive multiplier in our economy.

 

Private Market power do not stay for long before they got replaced unless with the support of government, as it is nature of economic agents to seek profit. My view is that it is a terrible idea to have a permanent law to deal with a temporary problem. Can we repeal the law easily as fast as market power vanishes?

And minimum wage only deal with the lowest income group, not specifically by industry market structure. To tackle along that idea of market structure unions are the answers not wage laws.

Lastly, in the current real world the global wage arbitrage still exists. Developed countries workers are institutionally protected from global competition. Your idea of labor monopsony, even if true, remain significant only in the realm of theory as it will only accelerate the pace of outsourcing to cheaper locations like China, India and Philipines.

 

In my opinion, simply subsidizing the least efficient to not provide labor input will allow more developed economies to work smarter, not harder when competing with a third world work ethic.

 

How many receive money from the government (government employee, retirement (non-SSI), welfare, disability, SSI, Medicaid, student grants, etc.).

I bet the answer surprises you

 

One solution to unemployment and underemployment is to correct for the "inefficiency" of any rate of unemployment above one percent in our market for labor. Since the private sector has no real basis for metrics concerning phenomena external to its individual markets, it can only mean public sector intervention in the market for labor to accomplish that end.

Because, any "natural" rate of unemployment under any form of Capitalism, is merely an inefficiency rate under Socialism.