Herbert Meyer on Jobs on National Review Online

National Review Online ^ | 3/29/04 | Herbert Meyer

[anonymous_user]

More than 60 years after Nevil Shute wrote his savvy novel about a British investment banker who struggles to restart a dormant shipyard in the midst of England's depression — the book should be required reading for MBA students — the need for work sits at the top of our national agenda. Indeed, as the 2004 election cycle revs up, the only thing that President Bush and Senator Kerry agree about is that today we are not creating enough new jobs.

The question is, "Why not?" One obvious reason is that we are only now emerging from a recession. This should improve the jobs situation over time as economic growth takes hold. Another is outsourcing — the transfer of both manufacturing and service jobs that would have been done by Americans to workers overseas who are well educated, well trained, and willing to work for a lot less money. This won't improve over time; we are so addicted to low prices that we bemoan the loss of jobs to foreigners even while driving to Wal-Mart for a $60 DVD player made in some country whose capital has only just gotten indoor plumbing.

A less obvious reason we aren't creating new jobs fast enough is that — like agricultural productivity a century ago — manufacturing productivity today has risen so high, so fast, that we are able to make whatever we need with fewer people. Since 1995, more than 22 million factory jobs have disappeared worldwide, while global industrial output has risen by more than 30 percent. This really is a worldwide phenomenon; the total number of manufacturing jobs has dropped not only here in the U.S., but in low-wage countries including Brazil and even China.

[anonymous_user]

Excerped due to formatting.

I believe this is a must read for anyone worried about jobs, where they come from, and who's undecided about the candidate and political philosophy most qualitfied to help create more of them.

[Askel5]

=== the need for work sits at the top of our national agenda. Indeed, as the 2004 election cycle revs up, the only thing that President Bush and Senator Kerry agree about is that today we are not creating enough new jobs


Yeah you rite ...

What have got --- 10-15 years, tops -- to wait it out before the Boomers start leaving, and dying, in droves?

I expect the Artificial Womb and our President's legitimizing of the manufacture of human life as crops to come in pretty handy sooner rather than later.

(Assuming our "US/AIDs" style stealth sterilization programs abroad proceed apace and we run out of subhumans to draft in as faux citizens of our Welfare State.)

[ARCADIA]

A good article. One does sense that we will soon evolve into a socialist nation. Not because any would favor public control over the means of production; but, because only the state is robust enough to operate (abet inefficiently) through the ever growing minefield of regulation and litigation. We have too many lawyers and they are multiplying like so much crab grass.

[Snuffington]

It is a must read. The three job-killers: over-regulation, high taxes, and out-of-control tort law. Until we address these, we'll find ourselves having a harder and harder time trying to grow our economy.

[q_an_a]

you are kind of angry. unless I missed something the President went of TV and said that there would be no harvesting or stme cell research of the type you complain about. So why are you putting this on him? He is getting it from the other side of this arguement, where is the support?

[Askel5]

=== unless I missed something the President went of TV and said that there would be no harvesting or stme cell research of the type you complain about. So why are you putting this on him?

Because he claimed it for himself by legitimizing the loser practice that was using purposefully "sacrificed" embryos instead of bone marrow, placenta or other sources of stem cells.