Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

News Where are the jobs? Perhaps they exist.

  1. Sep 24, 2010 #1

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I thought this was quite interesting. According to this and other reports seen, we should have the employment rate Obama had hoped for. Apparently this informaton came out in the latest jobs report.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39235412/ns/meet_the_press-transcripts/
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 24, 2010 #2

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I don't know how to clean sewers. :cry:
     
  4. Sep 24, 2010 #3

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Somewhat related, Stephen Colbert appeared before a House committee today, to testify about his one day of experience as a farmworker. This was a tongue-in-cheek answer to a challenge by immigrant farmworkers to come and take their jobs. The farm worker's representitive said on the Colbert show that so far, they have had 16 takers.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37906555/

    Colbert stated that he never wants to do that again. Now, just the sight of a salad bar causes him to break out in a cold sweat. :rofl:
     
    Last edited: Sep 24, 2010
  5. Sep 24, 2010 #4

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    We would be in pretty bad shape if no one did.

    I assume that you are implying that this is a needed skill with no takers? Is this just wild speculation or is it rooted in fact?

    Labor jobs have been some of the hardest hit. People with more advanced skills and more education have done far better.
     
    Last edited: Sep 24, 2010
  6. Sep 24, 2010 #5
    It's difficult for older people who lost their jobs to learn new skills.
     
  7. Sep 24, 2010 #6

    cronxeh

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    I am highly skilled, trained, and experienced. There are jobs in the region and I can get one tomorrow if I chose to. I don't want to. I've had enough with the b.s. and I'm going to finish my BS degree and intern around, let someone else do this blue collar job. I've been kicked around for no good reason by the private companies, and they can suck it.
     
  8. Sep 25, 2010 #7
  9. Sep 25, 2010 #8

    Hepth

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    That some of the discrepancy between the predicted unemployment rate post-stimulus and the current rates can be accounted for as an unaccounted mismatch in skill-sets between available positions and viable workers? I thought that was clear?
     
  10. Sep 25, 2010 #9
    Ok, so some of the discrepancy is going to be accounted for by referring to something that can't be accounted for. I'm sorry, what am I missing here?
     
  11. Sep 25, 2010 #10

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    So how many unfilled job openings usually exist? And what kind? This doesn't pass the smell test.
     
  12. Sep 25, 2010 #11
    I always thought that all politicians are well aware of structural/frictional unemployment, and that they cannot eliminate them.
     
  13. Sep 25, 2010 #12

    turbo

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Most of the open jobs up here are telemarketing positions that require little training, and sales openings that will leave the successful applicants under-employed (or badly under-paid) until consumer demand turns around. The jobs that require specialized training/certification like education and healthcare positions can form a longer-term backlog demand. It takes a while to get someone through nursing school and come out with an LPN or RN certification - longer if specialization is required. Still, there are not many jobs going begging here. In today's paper (Saturday is a good day to post openings), there is less than a column and a half of ads, and several of those ads are quite lengthy, so the total number of openings is quite small.
     
  14. Sep 25, 2010 #13

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    That is the complaint I've typically heard; that new jobs aren't as good as lost jobs. Clinton is claiming the opposite.
     
  15. Sep 25, 2010 #14

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Time and time again we have been told that many of the jobs lost are never coming back. This has been a part of Obama's message all along. We have to build a new industrial base. It's makes perfect sense that there would be a skills mismatch if the old jobs have to be replaced with entirely new ones. This in turn is driven by globalization, our corporate tax policies, and the cost of energy, not Obamanomics. [Note that high energy prices help to spur domestic manufacturing as some imports become less competitive]

    I don't know how significant the mobility issue is, but it does make sense that many people are not in a position to sell their house and move to where the jobs are found. This is not normally a contraint during an economic recovery.

    So the implication is that this is not a jobless recovery, it is a workerless recovery. This in turn may also be putting downward pressure on the GDP and sales. Five million jobs not filled are five million salaries not spent.
     
    Last edited: Sep 25, 2010
  16. Sep 25, 2010 #15
    Clinton has a job.
     
  17. Sep 25, 2010 #16
    Well the unemployment rate is not an accurate metric for measuing the total number of people out of work.

    There are many things that will reduce the unemployment rate without creating any jobs.

    The real challenge in our economy is that most of the jobs are service based, and until the general economic conditions improve we will not see job growth. Or eventually we will adjust to the changes in the demand curves.

    The population distribution has created a permenent contraction in several sectors of the economy.

    The real issue is not job skills. And there are jobs, but how many software engineers or people with advanced degrees want to work at Home Depot, or work on a trash truck.
    It is the middle class and white collar jobs that have been decimated and they are the driving force of the economy.
     
  18. Sep 25, 2010 #17
    This is complete nonsense, and easily verifiable using the BLS JOLTS report.

    http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/jolts.pdf

    As of July, 2010 there were 3 million "open" jobs in the United States. The unemployment rate is approximately 14 million people (not including the marginal unemployed, underemployed, and part-time employed for economic reasons).

    Thats approximately 5 job seekers per open job, and 3 million, not 5, who could "go to work tomorrow" if they could be matched with a suitable open position.

    Bill seems to be implying that the only reason these positions are "open" is because no trained unemployed person can be found to fill it. This too is nonsense. Approximately 1/3 of the open positions are in technically non-skilled (non-professional) sectors, construction, manufacturing, retail, and lesiure & hospitality. Theoretically, anybody could do these jobs, with minimal training. The other 2/3 are technically skilled (professional) sectors, healthcare, business, professional services, education. This analysis excludes the public sector.

    So Bill Clinton is seriously suggesting we cannot find 2 million qualified candidates in the 14 million directly unemployed?

    Nonsense. It isn't a question of "skill set"; due to labor market inefficiencies there are always job openings as recruiters and job seekers try to find their respective best matches. The problem is that the number of job creations (opened and filled) is often below the rate of replacement (more jobs eliminated than created) and always below the rate of population growth. The only reason the unemployment rate isn't growing is that discouraged workers are leaving the labor force. In 2006, there were 4.8 million discouraged workers in the United States. This year, the average is around 6 million. Thats a growth of 25% in 4 years. Over the prior 6 years, the same figure grew by just 11%.

    Note that population growth rate in the United States is about 1%/year, so real growth rates in the number of job-seekers not in the labor force is nominal minus 1. That gives us less than 1% growth rate between 2000-2006, versus a greater than 5% growth rate for 2006-2010.

    These discouraged workers are the technical class most likely to meet Bill's hypothesis - efficiently task-trained workers unwilling to learn new skill sets but unable to find work in old positions due to the permanent removal of production capacity from the economy. This metric is therefore quite useful for measuring long-term economic harm done by a recession. The 2001 tech bubble probably didn't permanently remove much production capacity, because the number of discouraged workers stopped falling but didn't grow, either. On the other hand, this most recession cause a return to peak levels last observed in 1994, before the tech boom restructured a large chunk of the US domestic ecoonmy, probably reflecting a permanent loss of jobs in the financial services sector.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2017
  19. Sep 25, 2010 #18

    Astronuc

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    Clinton and Bush have decent pensions. :rolleyes:
    http://www.ipl.org/div/farq/pensionFARQ.html
    They can get huge speaking fees too. :rolleyes: :yuck:
     
  20. Sep 25, 2010 #19

    turbo

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Not to mention book advances.
     
  21. Sep 25, 2010 #20

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    You are citing a jobs report from July. Clinton was resonding to the one that came out last week. All that you have shown is that we have added 2 million unfilled jobs to the market since July.

    Big surprise, we need skilled and unskilled labor, as well as college grads. If we have people to fill these 5 million jobs, and we must if we have 9.6% unemployment, then clearly we have a problem with the people trying to fill these jobs.

    Many people in the trades make as much or more more than most scientists. If the objection is that industry is outsourcing good jobs, you can hardly blame Obama. Welcome to a global economy. Obama has longed to increase taxes on companies that outsource our jobs. Do we have any supporters? No doubt the Republicans would do their best to block any such effort.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2017
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook