Tomorrow's Jobs

Barron's ^ | 1/5/04 | Gene Epstein

[Texas_Dawg]

THE OLD, TIRED IDEA that America has only a finite number of jobs -- and that we must guard them zealously against raids from cheap foreign labor -- has been making a remarkable comeback. The only difference is that its upside-down view of the economy has plumbed new depths.

[Beck_isright]

Gold? I should buy gold now? At what price? How much? Miners or futures? Inquiring minds need to know....

/sarcasm off...LOL

[Orangedog]

This has been more fun than I likely allowed to have tonight. The only thing I can think of to top this night off would be to watch a silly movie before I go to bed. Maybe I'll watch 'Tron' or something equally silly. It will be hard to top what I've seen from the regulars tonight. I'll check in on this later to see how it ended up.

[FITZ]

If you live in Manahattan

New York City??? Get a rope.

[arete]

Hey, it's a tough job but somebody's gotta do it.

Carry on. LOL

Richard W.

[Jorge]

We're all doomed.

Cool.

[Choose Ye This Day]

"tards"????

Please define for the rest of us...

[Orangedog]

short for retards

[Choose Ye This Day]

That's what I was afraid of.

What are you, in junior high school? Show some maturity and class. That is a demeaning, infantile, Howard Stern kind of term.

[endthematrix]

All is good and well on tomorrow's jobs, but what of today's jobs? The high-tech sector is an American standard because of the huge taxpayer R&D subsidies. When pushed to the market most (small and medium corps) will slither to Asia. Your post maybe forward as to the technology created, but as for tomorrow's jobs think waitresses, janitors, teachers, plumbers and of course the quickest growing segment in any faltering economy - governemnt.

[Orangedog]

Don't worry. Modern medicine is making big advances every year. Soon they will be able to graft a sense of humor onto you.

[endthematrix]

Are you a Neil Bush fan? He likes superconductors.

[endthematrix]

"...pro-capitalist nature of the WTO to the anti-capitalist FRinge? "

I'll bite. Where does pro-America and US sovereignty and supremacy fit into your definition of either the WTO or anti-capitalist FRinge? You do favor the above for fear of being ANTI-AMERICAN, don't you?

[CROSSHIGHWAYMAN]

but as for tomorrow's jobs think waitresses, janitors, teachers, plumbers

Add to these electricians, carpenters, car repair mechanics, etc.........most of which are good paying jobs.

Not everone is equipped for a high tech or high stress job.

Manual labor jobs like house painters and landscapers are fine jobs because of the surge of home ownership in the last few years.

Yes, the prospects of jobs now is improving rapidly.

For example:

Last spring I had repairs done on my garage from where my snowplower backed into a wall.

The handyman company which performed the repairs was staffed by former white collar execs who in midlife turned personal hobbies into a steady and growing business.

They did a fine job at a reasonable cost.

Their list of referrals allowed them to discontinue newspaper advertising.

[1rudeboy]

You asked for a "direct restriction." I gave you more than 4 billion of them.

[1rudeboy]

I'm so glad you take everything you read from the US Department of Commerce and USTR as "fact."

I'll have to remember brilliant response the next time someone posts a Krugman piece from the NYT, or Willie posts from TradeAlert.org and sets off another protectionist circle-jerk.

[Beck_isright]

"You asked for a "direct restriction." I gave you more than 4 billion of them."

The response I'm sure you're referring to is #230:

"You must've forgotten that the EU was ready to slap 4.1 billion dollars in sanctions on U.S. firms in response to our 30% steel tariff. Does that count? [smirk]"

Once again, I ask the question:

What is the direct restriction on American capitalism? It is a tax. So what. It does not prevent the steel companies from operating. It does not mandate that they can not sell to other nations. You're avoidance of the answer is an illustration that you think a tariff is a government regulation which prevents the operation or creation of any company. Again, I ask, how does a tariff prevent myself, yourself or anyone else from the creation or operation of an American corporation within our own borders?

[Beck_isright]

"I'll have to remember brilliant response the next time someone posts a Krugman piece from the NYT, or Willie posts from TradeAlert.org and sets off another protectionist circle-jerk."

If anyone is quoting Krugman as a source, I lose respect for them immediately. TradeAlert.org is another source I give little credence to. I prefer to the WSJ or even CNN (Lou Dobbs only) who hae done some excellent reporting in the protectionist arena.

[Beck_isright]

"Are you a Neil Bush fan? He likes superconductors."

Big time. I want Jeb to use our state and W to use his influence in Texas to lure and create the superconductor industry. I think it will rival if not exceed Silicon Valley in the stregth of it's economic engine.

[1rudeboy]

Again, I ask, how does a tariff prevent myself, yourself or anyone else from the creation or operation of an American corporation within our own borders?

Your fixation on "direct" cost is mystifying, as if you believe an "indirect" cost is less of a cost in any case. I'll leave you to determine whether the following are direct or not, and you can argue semantics elsewhere.

The U.S. imposes a tariff on imports. This action can impede the "creation or operation" of an American business in the following manners:

1. The EU, for example, retaliates by imposing duties on American exports. More duties, less exports. Ergo, we have a restriction on the operation of American business.
2. Restricting the available market for an export raises the barrier to entry for that market. Thus, we have a restriction of the creation of American business.
3. Under the unbrella of the tariff, domestic producers of the "protected" product raise prices, shifting the cost of the tariff regime to producers farther down the economic ladder.

Naturally, this discussion of cost is not comprehensive, and can be re-applied until we reach the consumer, provided he can purchase the product without being priced out of the market, or provided the consumer has not lost his job as part of the cost.

[Jim Cane]

No about page.

Soros plant.

Likewise:

Ego desperately calling attention/seeking validation on its about page.

Adult male wannabee.