Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

10. Fears That the U.S. Economy Is Running Out of Jobs Are Nothing New

Because of the recent recession, the U.S. economy has suffered from a shortage of jobs, as evidenced by the rise in the unemployment rate. There is a natural temptation under these conditions to fear that this temporary setback is the beginning of some permanent reversal of fortune, that the shortage of jobs is here to stay and will only grow worse.

To calm such fears, it is useful to recall that similar anxieties have surfaced before. Again and again, over many decades, cyclical downturns in the economy have prompted predictions of permanent job shortages. And each time, those predictions were belied by the ensuing economic expansion.

Back in the 1930s, the brutal and persistent unemployment caused by the Great Depression gave rise to theories of “secular stagnation.” A number of leading economists -- including, most prominently, Harvard’s Alvin Hansen -- argued that declining population growth and the increasing “maturity” of the industrial economy meant that we could no longer rely on private-sector job creation to provide full employment. The stagnationist thesis eventually fell out of fashion once the postwar economic boom gathered steam.

The return of higher unemployment in the late 1950s and early ’60s led to a revival of the stagnationist fallacy, this time in the guise of an “automation crisis.” The ongoing progress of factory automation, combined with the growing visibility of electronic computers, led many Americans to believe, once again, that the economy was running out of jobs. During the 1960 presidential campaign, John F. Kennedy, who ran on a pledge to “get the country moving again,” warned that automation “carries the dark menace of industrial dislocation, increasing unemployment, and deepening poverty.” The American Foundation on Automation and Unemployment, a joint industry-labor group created in 1962, claimed breathlessly that automation was “second only to the possibility of the hydrogen bomb” in its challenge to America’s economic future. For the record, U.S. employment in 1962 stood at 66.7 million jobs -- roughly half the current total.

In the early 1980s, the coincidence of a severe recession and a string of competitive successes by Japanese producers at the expense of high-profile American industries sparked predictions of the imminent “deindustrialization” of the American economy. As financier Felix Rohatyn complained, in a fashion typical of the time, “We cannot become a nation of short-order cooks and saleswomen, Xerox-machine operators and messenger boys....These jobs are a weak basis for the economy.” Along similar lines, Sen. Lloyd Bentsen (D-Texas) fretted that “American workers will end up like the people in the biblical village who were condemned to be hewers of wood and drawers of waters.” It should be noted that U.S. manufacturing output has roughly doubled since 1982.

In the early 1990s, another recession resulted in yet another job shortage scare. Ross Perot won 19 percent of the presidential vote in 1992 with a campaign that, among other things, railed against the “giant sucking sound” of jobs lost to Mexico and other foreign countries. That same year, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalists Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele published a widely discussed jeremiad, America: What Went Wrong?, about the decline and fall of the country’s middle class. That hand wringing was followed in short order by one of the most remarkable expansions in American economic history.

Again and again, serious and influential voices have raised the cry that the sky is falling. It never does. The root of their error is always the same: confusing a temporary, cyclical downturn with a permanent reduction in the economy’s job-creating capacity.

In recent years, many Americans have lost their jobs and suffered hardship as a result. Many more have worried that their jobs would be next. There is no point in denying these hard realities, but just as surely there is no point in blowing them out of proportion. The U.S. economy is not running out of good jobs; it is merely coming out of a recession. And regardless of whether economic times are good or bad, some amount of job turnover is an inescapable fact of life in a dynamic market economy.

This fact cannot be wished away by blaming foreigners, and it cannot be undone by trade restrictions. The innovation and productivity increases that render some jobs obsolete are also the source of new wealth and rising living standards. Embracing change and its unavoidable disruptions is the only way to secure the continuing gains of economic advancement.

6 posted on 07/07/2004 11:07:57 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]


To: 1rudeboy

You evil stateless merchant, you (c8


9 posted on 07/07/2004 11:11:09 AM PDT by Poohbah ("Mister Gorbachev, TEAR DOWN THIS WALL!" -- President Ronald Reagan, Berlin, 1987)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: 1rudeboy; Willie Green
Holy Mother of the Most High God, Willie! Yet more evidence that compels you to revise and enlarge your bizarrely constricted economic analyses. It's like a whole new universe of richness and truth has opened before you, inviting you to learn and grow and adapt and change. It's like you just discovered that the earth rotates around the sun, not the other way around.

I only wonder how you'll explain it all away this time.
13 posted on 07/07/2004 11:14:33 AM PDT by Asclepius (protectionists would outsource our dignity and prosperity in return for illusory job security)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: 1rudeboy
Opponents of open markets frequently claim that unshielded exposure to foreign competition is destroying the U.S. manufacturing base. That charge is flatly untrue. [] Between 1980 and 2003, American manufacturing output climbed a dizzying 93 percent. Yes, production fell during the recent recession, but it is now recovering: the industrial production index for manufacturing rose 2.2 percent in 2003.
rudeboy, are you ever going to learn how to do math? 93% over 23 years is 1.2% per year. In the next sentence you say 2.2% for 2003 is recovering. So, is 1.2% 'dizzying', or a little more than half a recovery rate? One of my professors was fond of saying "statistics don't lie, people do".

35 posted on 07/07/2004 6:52:43 PM PDT by sixmil (Tariff-free traitor, corporate conservative, labor-supply sider. There, I said it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: 1rudeboy

Bump.

Great article. Fact and figures against the other side's anecdotes and fear-mongering.

Of course, facts and figures don't matter to those who really just can't stand to deal with the reality of the benefits of globalization. "There are none so blind as those who will not see."


44 posted on 07/12/2004 6:08:06 PM PDT by Joe Bonforte
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson