[lbo-talk] jobs

R rhisiart at charter.net
Tue Jun 8 02:55:25 PDT 2004


thanks for your info, doug. i'd assume that anyone who needs a job to survive is a member of the working class -- blue or white collar. it seems we don't know enough to tell whether or not this is better for the working class, other than to claim that working is better than being out of a job. small consolation.

i believe the timing of these jobs is more than coincidental. i'd hazard to say they are war related and/or the ripple effect of a war based economy, which can reach into other industrial sectors, particularly since the MNCs benefiting from a war economy own a wide variety of differing businesses.

the fact huge layoffs and outsourcing are followed by small gains in jobs still puts the job market way behind where it needs to be in a society where people are forced to work for a living at low wages, often below the poverty line. as you say, "we need a lot more of it," meaning any jobs, i assume. i doubt we're going to get a lot more of it.

but if we do, to keep a nation at war, a la the shrub group model, a draft will be essential since about the only reason large numbers of people join a volunteer army is either they are too stupid or lazy to do anything else, they are in a fool's paradise or they need money.

one thing i might note: i haven't seen any signs of new jobs in los angeles, and friends report they haven't seen any in san francisco. unless you include that help wanted sign at Fry's i saw the other day.

parenthetically, a jobless recovery is a contradiction in terms. there's simply no such thing: one can't have a recovery without jobs unless one's willing to write off every person in the economy who needs a job to survive and still call it a recovery.

just my opinion. paraphrasing groucho, if you don't like that one, i have others.

----- Original Message ----- From: "Doug Henwood" <dhenwood at panix.com> To: <lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org> Sent: Monday, June 07, 2004 3:47 PM Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] jobs

R wrote:


>while i'm as excited as everyone else about all these new jobs being
>reported, i have some nagging questions. maybe i'm just naive, but
>i wonder:
>
>how many are part time and temporary?

Temp: about 1 in 10, since employment growth started accelerating in Feb. Historically, accelerations in temp employment have presaged accelerations in permanent employment by several months.

Part time: the count of part-time jobs comes from the household survey, so the numbers aren't comparable to the job count in the establishment survey. Since Feb, there have been 806,000 part-time positions created, with 529,000 of them occupied by people who want part-time work, and 277,000 who'd prefer full-time work.


>do any have benefits of any kind?

Some do, some don't; we don't know yet.


>what are the work hours of these thrilling new jobs -- are they
>going to be part of the impressive productivity statistics where
>workers work endless overtime for no pay, making the rich richer and
>the poor homeless?
>
>are these jobs a ripple effect? will these jobs last or are they
>all going away if war goes away?

The gains are widely dispersed through industries - something like 70% of industrial sectors have been adding jobs in the last several months. It's not just bullet-making, as you suggested elsewhere.


>how long will it be before they are all outsourced?

Perhaps the amazing Kreskin could answer that question, but I can't. But as I've said a hundred times, outsourcing explains only a tiny portion of our ealier jobless recovery.


>do they come in time for those who've been without work for months
>and months, and who've lost their homes, to benefit?
>
>and, last but not least, do any of them pay in real money?

It looks like they're paying average wages, which ain't great, but could be worse too.

Look, it's better for the working class if employment is expanding than if it's contracting, and it's better if employment is expanding rapidly than if it's expanding slowly. Adding almost a million jobs in three months is pretty good, though we need a lot more of it.

Doug ___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list