CLICK This Link for more charts.
Posted on 06/17/2011 9:17:09 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
The United States will have to create 21 million jobs in the next 9 years to reach full employment, according to a study from the consulting group McKinsey.
The report details how this is going to be a long slog. It will take 60 months at our current growth rate to return to pre-recession employment levels, according to the report. And that doesn't even count all those new employees entering the workforce. More Americans will need to go back to school to get these new jobs, with McKinsey estimating that the market needs 1.5 million more Americans with undergraduate degrees. More worrying: the U.S. could shed 6 million workers without high school diplomas by 2020.
They highlight six sectors ripe for growth: healthcare, manufacturing, retail, construction, leisure and hospitality, and business services. They make up 66% of the labor force now, and will make up 85% of the jobs created this decade.
But while many are trying to get back to work, companies will continue to streamline their teams due technological advances that mean they can do more, with less.
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
The article says the 21 million new jobs need to be created. There are perhaps 15 million illegal aliens in the country. Let's assume that 10 million are working.
So, Step 1: Deport all illegal aliens.
We have just found jobs for 10 million Americans. 11 million more jobs to find.
Step 2: Put a tariff on goods coming in from all those countries with unfair trade practices (yes, that would be China). At the same time, make it easier for American businesses to expand.
Less Chinese goods will be sold because now they are priced higher. American factories will pick up the difference.
Step 3: Stop letting in millions of Somalis and other legal immigrants on the Teddy Kennedy welfare train.
(1) One of the reasons why illegals are here is that they work cheaper than minimum wage.
Even if there were 15 million, and even if 10 million had full-time jobs rather than just episodic day labor, the minimum wage would guarantee that much of that employment would simply evaporate.
(2) Imposing a tariff would immediately cause consumers to rein in spending, which would cause an immediate loss of many retail jobs. There is a long-term argument to be made here, but in the short term it would be punishing.
If you were very lucky, your two proposals would leave the unemployment rate flat.
Yes, I know. My post was a bit tongue-in-check. However, something has to be done. The illegals are taking jobs that Americans could be doing, and the Chinese are destroying our manufacturing base.
There, fixed it.
And the reason they come here is because there are employers who break the law by hiring them. The employers not only pay them lower wages, they don't pay SS, Medicare, and unemployment benefits. This depresses wages generally and American workers, especially the unskilled, have seen their wages go down and be stagnat over the the past thirty years.
The latest data show 23 million immigrants holding jobs in the U.S. with an estimated 8 million being illegal aliens. By increasing the supply of labor between 1980 and 2000, immigration reduced the average annual earnings of native-born men by an estimated $1,700 or roughly 4 percent. Among natives without a high school education, who roughly correspond to the poorest tenth of the workforce, the estimated impact was even larger, reducing their wages by 7.4 percent. The reduction in earnings occurs regardless of whether the immigrants are legal or illegal, permanent or temporary. It is the presence of additional workers that reduces wages, not their legal status.
The Bureau of Labor statistics for May 2011 show a national unemployment rate of 9.1 percent, including 16.2 percent for blacks and 11.9 percent for Hispanics. 23 million Americans are seeking full-time employment. Despite the economic downturn, the U.S. continues to bring in 125,000 new, legal foreign workers a month. This includes new permanent residents (Green Cards) and long-term temporary visas and others who are authorized to take a job. This makes no sense.
And you are also correct about innovation. But the country simply has to provide meaningful employment for those not able to handle a high-tech job.
We can't have a country where 40% of the workforce is operating robotic super-computers and 60% are on welfare.
So, Step 1: Deport all illegal aliens.
We have just found jobs for 10 million Americans. 11 million more jobs to find.
Step 2: Put a tariff on goods coming in from all those countries with unfair trade practices (yes, that would be China). At the same time, make it easier for American businesses to expand.
Less Chinese goods will be sold because now they are priced higher. American factories will pick up the difference.
Deporting illegals is a good start, but many of those jobs would simply be outsourced to other countries where the labor costs are lower (frighteningly, the chart notes the high cost of labor here................and we are flooded with illegals.......which if illegals are doing the jobs of Americans, then that cost of labor wouldn't be an issue, which leads me to conclude this whole line about illegals doing work is simply B.S.).
As of right now, thats not considered an unfair labor practice.
You would see the great American exporting of all jobs.
Yep, that's an enormous hurtle.
But I wonder what would happen if every state was a right-to-work state, and if health insurance was market-driven, and if the government was not so tax-and-regulate crazy.
I know, I'm just dreaming.
If these trends are not altered, by government policy and by the choices American citizens make, then Social Security could actually generate actual “generational” warfare - at least in terms of public policy debates and actions. Why?
The current, and exponentially increasing, annual deficits (payroll tax contributions insufficient to pay current benefits) for Social Security CANNOT be corrected without a greatly expanded workforce that is actively employed; producing an expanding number of employed workers paying more (than is being paid today) into Social Security.
This report suggests that that may be impossible; at least in terms of job growth being sufficient for the “employed” base needed to rescue the Social Security program from itself.
In fact this report essentially forecasts a larger force of chronic unemployed and under-employed. They cannot help pay for Social Security and in fact make the problem worse by the drag on financial resources that they make on working taxpayers through the government programs established to help them.
Drastic measures are needed and no matter how correct and necessary those measures are, millions of people will be unhappy about them.
Using that rationale, all of those jobs will be exported eventually. There is no way we can compete with the labor costs of China and India and the rest of the emerging economies. In fact, China and India also have educated, skilled workers that work for far less than in this country.
If labor costs is the determinant factor, then there is no way we can compete unless our labor wages decline signifcantly. The mulitinational corporations are exporting whole industries, including the latest technology, to these countries making their workers just as productive as our own. And skilled labor jobs can also be exported.
In 1950 there were 16 workers for every retiree; today it is about 3; and by 2030 it will be two. And by 2030, one out of every five residents of this country will be 65 or older, twice what it is today. We are being crushed by the welfare state. We can't afford it.
SS and Medicare are pay as you go programs. They are consuming a greater and greater portion of the US budget non-entitlement funding. 75% of the costs of Medicare Parts B and D are paid by the General Fund, by law. The premiums collected pay for only 25% of the costs. A greater expanded work force cannot cover those costs. Actuarily, it will not work.
Get rid of minimum wage laws AND illegals.
“The country” cannot provide employment of any form. They can, to a degree, provide a job but it is always at the expense of (1 + x; x > 0) jobs in the private economy therefore employment is reduced overall.
“A greater expanded work force cannot cover those costs. Actuarily, it will not work. “
Your figures are right, and in spite of what you think, you and I are NOT in true disagreement.
Its not that SOME level of very expanded active workforce COULD help “save” Social Security (a population that grows to say 500 million with 60% of it in the age group of 20 to 40; making again 3 or more active workers for each retiree).
The problem is that that “COULD” was NOT feasible (not likely to happen) even before the present economic downturn and now, under the present economic, demographic and “jobs” picture, it appears it is not only not feasible (if some other trends were possible to develop) but under current trends that “COULD” moves from not feasible to not even possible.
You and I are not in disagreement. We had a Social Security deficit problem, an exponentially expanding problem, before the present conditions evolved. The present conditions demonstrate that the problem will be even worse.
Yes, I did not phrase that very well! What I was trying to say is that the government should get out of the way and let private enterprise do its thing.
The government should reduce taxes, reduce regulation, and stop unfair foreign trade practices.
If labor costs is the determinant factor, then there is no way we can compete unless our labor wages decline signifcantly. The mulitinational corporations are exporting whole industries, including the latest technology, to these countries making their workers just as productive as our own. And skilled labor jobs can also be exported.
I'm think labor costs are a major factor, but not the only one. Say a company decides not to use illegal labor, but is surrounded by illegal "workers", who proceed to rob, rape and murder the companies workers, that company may choose to relocate, or maybe they tolerate it, until the workers say "oh hell no, we want more pay if we got to deal with this crap", which then drives the cost of that legal labor up.
We don't have to do a race to the bottom in terms of compensation, if we have a market salary/compensation base, while driving all the other costs down, this will be a better work environment. Keep in mind, that while labor costs overseas are lower, there is associative costs in relocation and training, along with distance and instability. Its why everyone, does NOT outsource what they easily could, while alot still do. Its also why alot of companies will relocate their businesses from union states to right to work states and not go overseas.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.