Jobs Come and Go (One of the smartest economists in the world hits the nail on the head)

www.townhall.com ^ | 11/26/2003 | Walter E. Williams

[sly671]

Jobs come and go Walter E. Williams

In 1970, the telecommunications industry employed 421,000 switchboard operators. In the same year, Americans made 9.8 billion long distance calls. Today, the telecommunications industry employs only 78,000 operators. That's a tremendous 80 percent job loss.

What should Congress have done to save those jobs? Congress could have taken a page from India's history. In 1924, Mahatma Gandhi attacked machinery, saying it "helps a few to ride on the backs of millions" and warned, "The machine should not make atrophies the limbs of man." With that kind of support, Indian textile workers were able to politically block the introduction of labor-saving textile machines. As a result, in 1970 India's textile industry had the level of productivity of ours in the 1920s.

Michael Cox, chief economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, and author Richard Alms tell the rest of the telecommunications story in their Nov. 17 New York Times article, "The Great Job Machine." Spectacular technological advances made it possible for the telecommunications industry to cut its manpower needs down to 78,000 to handle not the annual 9.8 billion long distance calls in 1970, but today's over 98 billion calls.

One forgotten beneficiary in today's job loss demagoguery is the consumer. Long distance calls are a tiny fraction of their cost in 1970. Just since 1984, long distance costs have fallen by 60 percent. Using 1970s technology, to make today's 98 billion calls would require 4.2 million operators. That's 3 percent of our labor force. Moreover, a long distance call would cost 40 times more than it does today.

Finding cheaper ways to produce goods and services frees up labor to produce other things. If productivity gains aren't made, where in the world would we find workers to produce all those goods that weren't even around in the 1970s?

It's my guess that the average anti-free-trade person wouldn't protest, much less argue that Congress should have done something about the job loss in the telecommunications industry. He'd reveal himself an idiot. But there's no significant economic difference between an industry using technology to reduce production costs and using cheaper labor to do the same. In either case, there's no question that the worker who finds himself out of a job because of the use of technology or cheaper labor might encounter hardships. The political difference is that it's easier to organize resentment against India and China than against technology.

Both Republican and Democratic interventionist like to focus on job losses as they call for trade restrictions, but let us look at what was happening in the 1990s. Cox and Alm report that recent Bureau of Labor Statistics show an annual job loss from a low of 27 million in 1993 to a high of 35.4 million in 2001. In 2000, when unemployment reached its lowest level, 33 million jobs were lost. That's the loss side. However, annual jobs created ranged from 29.6 million in 1993 to a high of 35.6 million in 1999.

These are signs of a healthy economy, where businesses start up, fail, downsize and upsize, and workers are fired and workers are hired all in the process of adapting to changing technological, economic and global conditions. Societies become richer when this process is allowed to occur. Indeed, because our nation has a history of allowing this process to occur goes a long way toward explaining why we are richer than the rest of the world.

Those Americans calling for government restrictions that would deny companies and ultimately consumers to benefit from cheaper methods of production are asking us to accept lower wealth in order to protect special interests. Of course, they don't cloak their agenda that way. It's always "national security," "level playing fields" and "protecting jobs". Don't fall for it -- we'll all become losers.

©2003 Creators Syndicate, Inc.

[XBob]

356 - PS - "in the Jud/Christian tradition, it is NOT up to those in need to, ah, re-appropriate the items. It IS an obligation of the owner .... you damn-near-automatically hand him one or two of your shirts"

Charity is not limited to Western Culture, it is universal, in all the cultures I am aware of.

In fact, in Buddhist cultures, it is 'routine' for monks to go out with their rice bowls, daily, for people to put food into. This is how they eat and how they live. They have no posessions other than a single piece of safron cloth, a pair of sandals, and a rice bowl.

[jpsb]

"But, manufacturing is also moving overseas because Asians will do the hard work of getting college degrees in the sciences."

People are not stupid, the jobs that required those skills are going and not comming back. Why acquire skills you can't (in the USA) use any longer?

[sly671]

The real difference is that technology provided cheaper means of shipping, and reducing the majority of the disincentive to relocate. Can you say our nation isn't richer from it now?

[sly671]

Not likely. But I know I won't be whining about the government trying to hold back companies from acheiving their sole purpose - to make as much money as possible. I WILL be spending my time trying to make a living for myself, even if it's not in the same field as my degree.

[sly671]

one word - INFLATION....happens every year

[sly671]

It IS similar. Losing jobs to sources outside the workers' powers is what it's about.

[aruanan]

In 1924, Mahatma Gandhi attacked machinery, saying it "helps a few to ride on the backs of millions" and warned, "The machine should not make atrophies the limbs of man."

Williams is the anti-Gandhi in that he is about as far as possible from the insular, self-absorbed, idiotic arrogance that was Gandhi. The best thing Gandhi did for the world was to leave it. A pity it was a few decades too late.

[sly671]

The what do you propose we do? Tax the heck out of those companies that move? Revoke NAFTA and the WTO? Because if you do, you'll create more of a "National Security issue" than it is today. With your long very informative reply, I wouldn't think someone like yourself would fall for that blanket excuse of National Security.

One more thing.....since you researched how many jobs are expected to go, did you bother to research how many jobs are being created or the net change in new businesses? I haven't found those figures myself and from what I see in daily life here and other states, most towns and cities are growing exponentially, including lots of new jobs.

[XBob]

364 - "Not likely. " (that sly will be looking for work in india after he graduates)

Well, that's where the jobs are going, Sly, and you will need a job when you graduate.

And you will need to get educated, (that doesn't start until you get out of school), and you are in for some surprises.

And workig here in the US, you will need to support all those rules and regulations and programs, that they don't have in india.

Starting out, you can just write off at least 1/3 of your salary, just to get a pay check. And it only goes up from there.

[RaceBannon]

Bad analogy

Losing work to a gain in production at home is one thing

Losing work because trade practices allow manufacturing bases to leave the country, and then applauding that move and trying to fool people it is all for the better, that is another thing

[MonroeDNA]

Bump for those unable to be responsible for their own life in the most prosperous nation on earth. Bump for those who want "government" to protect them.

Your odds of being a US citizen are amazing. And instead of proudly taking charge of your own destiny, you whine.

Your ancestors would be proud.

[nopardons]

I know about Levi Strauss and that tidbit is NOT completely accurate. They were called dungarees, were made from Indian material from some area, which sounded like dungaree, and were NOT known as " jeans ", until quite recently. Growing up, I never heard them called anything other than dungarees and I'm NOT that old. :-)

[XBob]

Main Entry: jean
Pronunciation: 'jEn
Function: noun
Etymology: short for jean fustian, from Middle English Gene Genoa, Italy + fustian
Date: 1577
1 : a durable twilled cotton cloth used especially for sportswear and work clothes
2 : pants that are usually close-fitting and made especially of jean or denim -- usually used in plural

[XBob]

Main Entry: den·im
Pronunciation: 'de-n&m
Function: noun
Etymology: French (serge) de Nîmes serge of Nîmes, France
Date: 1695
1 a : a firm durable twilled usually cotton fabric woven with colored warp and white filling threads b : a similar fabric woven in colored stripes
2 plural : overalls or trousers usually of blue denim

[XBob]

Main Entry: dun·ga·ree
Pronunciation: "d&[ng]-g&-'rE, 'd&[ng]-g&-"
Function: noun
Etymology: Hindi dugrI
Date: 1673
1 : a heavy coarse durable cotton twill woven from colored yarns; specifically : blue denim
2 plural : clothes made usually of blue denim

[XBob]

Visit the Levi Strauss Signature Site
From the makers of the original jean, Levi Strauss Signature TM offers value-conscious consumers high-quality, affordable, stylish jeans and denim shirts for the entire family.
www.levistrausssignature.com

[XBob]

dungarees are shirts, the lighter weight, lighter blue material.

http://www.patchesofpride.com/poppages/pop136.html

In the Navy, the individual sailor has always been responsible for applying his (or her) own rating badges onto their daily blue "dungarees" or "utility" uniform shirts (as worn by crewman [seaman through PO 3rd class] as well as the tan/khaki shirts worn by CPOs and up.--see photo of an actual bridge crew below). Non-rated (junior) enlisted sailors (paygrades E1 to E3) do NOT wear ANY rate marks on their dungaree shirt sleeves; nor have they EVER worn any markings on their work uniforms (so we don't sell those rates in this EZ-Iron style). Only petty officers (E4 to E6) wear these sleeve chevrons (aka "crows").

[nopardons]

In the 1930s,'40s.and '50s, Lvi Straus, dark blue pants, were called dungarees. That Old Navy is now selling pale blue shirts and calling that a dungaree, is silly. LOL

[XBob]

Who is 'Old Navy'? I am talking about the US Navy:

In fact, I still have one of my old dungaree shirts from the 60's, it is so well built.

Continued from my previous post:
"Until 1949, petty officer rating badges were worn on the right OR left sleeve, depending on whether the person concerned was on the starboard (right) or port (left) watch. But since February 1948, ALL distinguishing petty officer marks have been worn on the right sleeve (left-facing) between the shoulder and elbow.

Nowadays, modern-era Chief Petty Officers and above (E7 to E9) do not wear any iron-on crows on their sleeve Only during the pre- and post-WWII era did CPOs wear enlisted dungarees and had their "rocker crow" stenciled on their dungaree shirts; particularly if they worked in industrial areas or topside as boatswains, machinists, electricians, boilermen or gunners. Khaki uniforms were introduced for CPOs in 1941, along with collar devices; by the 1950s, khakis eliminated the need for CPO dungarees and so were phased-out.

Finally, rate (job specialty) markings were never authorized as part of ANY iron-on dungaree badge. ONLY the petty officer eagle and chevron(s) are authorized. The job rate markings (Gunner's Mate, etc.) are only worn with chevrons on dress, working (non-industrial area) and summer uniforms. Dungarees are considered "industrial-area" uniforms. "


===

Recruit Training NSCC 2001
Cadet Seabag List - Checkoff Report
Name:
Unit:

Male

Uniform Items
White (Dixie Cup) Hat 1
Sunscreen (Min. SPF 15) 1
White Trousers 1
Bug Repellant 1
White Jumper 1
Deodorant (NO Spray Cans) 1
Neckerchief 1
Talcum or Baby Powder 1
Dungarees 3
Anti-fungal Foot Powder 1
Dungaree Shirt (Chambray) Short Sleeve 2
Soap and Soap Dish 1
Dungaree Shirt (Chambray) Long Sleeve 2
Shaving Kit (No aerosol) Electrics Okay 1
Belt, Black with Silver Buckle 1
Toothpaste and Toothbrush 1
Belt, White with Silver Buckle 1
Hairbrush 1
Raincoat (Black) 1
Shoe Shine Kit & Sewing Kit 1
Athletic Shorts (Black or Dark Blue) 2
White Bath Towels 2
Swimsuit 1
White Wash Cloths 2
Undershorts (White Cotton) 6
T-Shirts (Plain White Crew Neck) 6 Supplies
Hankerchiefs 4
Sea Bag (NO SUITCASES!) 1
Black Socks 6
Canvas or Leather Work Gloves (pair) 1
White Socks, Athletic 4
Military Canteen, Cover and Belt 1
Shoes (Black Leather Only - broken in) 1
Flashlight with Second Set of Batteries 1
Shoes (Tennis) 1
Coat Hangers (Plastic Recommended) 12
Shoes (Shower) 1
Key Locks with 2 Keys each 2
Spare Shoe Laces (Tennis & Leather) 1
Stationary (Paper/Stamps) 1
Ball Point Pens (Black Ink) 2
http://wahoo-ss238-seacadets.com/custom3.html

[nopardons]

Sorry...fingers typed what I was not thinking. I'm more tired the I supposed.

Even so, something THAT pale blue, wasn't called " dungaree "( which IS what jeans used to be known as ! ), in the civilian world.