Monday, November 5, 2012

Assets and Liabilities

Goodness gracious! Another busy week. I committed months ago to hosting a Halloween party on Friday, without understanding how much time and energy my coursework would require. It was a fantastic time and one friend even called it "the party of the year," but I'm paying the price right now. Time and energy are a limited asset at the moment, while I suppose sleep debt is a short-term liability. Basically, I feel like I'm over-leveraged right now and that won't change until my work schedule subsides next week. (How's that for internalizing our economics lingo?) Live and learn.

Some of the research and reading I've done this week has centered around structural versus cyclical unemployment, and their roles in the current economic climate. Structural unemployment refers to a mismatch between jobs and workers. That mismatch can be in skills, geography, experience, or any number of other factors. As the economy changes along with the types of goods and services we consume, there will naturally be a mismatch as workers in old industries will lack the jobs for new industries. While I'm sure this plays some part in the currently high under- and unemployment rates, this Atlantic article and this Reuters article both argue that the more pressing and dominant issue is the overall lack of jobs. In fact, according to Economytrack.org, the number of unemployed workers per job opening peaked at over 6 in 2009, and is still hovering above 4. And high-school graduates fare significantly worse than college graduates in competing for middle-education jobs in the current economy.

So maybe adequate or appropriate education (or lack thereof) is not the dominant issue facing recent college graduates. If much of the workforce is overqualified, then the real goal should be job creation, not reeducation. But what about jobs outside of the current employment system? Can we just sit around and hope that something will change and all will be okay? Some on the right think that simply cutting the taxes on the rich will fix the economy, but Norm's recent blog post suggests otherwise. And what if the current economic system is broken? Perhaps limited participation in the existing system of greed and exploitation is possible. Perhaps there are other ways to live a productive, comfortable, happy life outside of corporate America.

As Jill mentioned in a comment last week, there is a growing trend of young people creating their own economic opportunities - creating a new economy where the roles of giant corporations are limited and flexibility and relationships are paramount. For instance, Airbnb hooks up vacationers with property owners who want to rent out empty rooms or homes for some extra income. Taskrabbit allows people with valuable skills or physical resources and free time to bid on tasks ranging from raking leaves to planning a party. Time banks offer a similar function, except helpers are paid in time credit, which they can then use to pay for other services from members of their communities.

These are just a few ideas for how we might improve income among unemployed and underemployed college graduates while providing more meaningful interaction and services. But how about the psychological impact of the last four years, and the feelings many of us hold that we are now outsiders, disenfranchised from the mainstream of society? Can these alternative economies start to heal the wounds of unemployment and disappointment, or will it take a wholesale shift in the economy for the disenfranchised to feel validated? I hope to examine that in next week's blog. Stay tuned!


1 comment:

  1. Great comments, Chris -- and excellent resources: I skimmed both the Atlantic and Reuters articles. They match an interesting piece I must have read in the NYT (damned if I can properly source it -- actually, I think it was in this Sunday's magazine section) that talked about the alleged skills gap in manufacturing. It contained two interesting comments: 1) a comparison of wages between a shift manager at a McDonald's and an entry level manufacturing worker -- not a lot, given the comparative difficulty of the manufacturing position, and 2) questions from job applicants' parents about whether the manufacturing jobs will remain a good source of income over time -- or will be moved offshore or eliminated by automation in the future. The manufacturing employers had no good answer.

    I am a bit curious about your use of the term "structural unemployment." In my mind, this is exactly our problem, whether it's because of a skills mismatch or the elimination of positions due to automation or offshoring. The bottom line is that this is not simply a business cycle phenomenon, but something deeper that won't automatically bounce back once the cycle picks up. Is it your understanding that we only use the term "structural unemployment" to cover the skills mismatch situation?

    ReplyDelete