Global economic growth too slow to provide jobs for all

dirtboy

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
6,745
1
81
Global economic growth too slow to provide jobs for all

Tue Dec 2, 2:05 PM ET Add Business - AFP to My Yahoo!

NEW YORK (AFP) - The global economy is not growing fast enough to provide jobs for millions of people who want them, according to a study released by the Conference Board (news - web sites), a private business research group.

World economic growth rates have slowed sharply since the 1960s, with growth rates falling not just in the United States but also in Europe, Latin America, the Middle East and Africa, the survey found.

Only East Asia and South Asia recorded stronger growth during the past decade than in the 1960s.

"It is startling to think that what was viewed as the boom times of the 1990s was actually the slowest-growing decade in the world economy in the past 40 years," said Gail Fosler, chief economist of the group and author of the analysis.

The current average annual economic growth rate of two to three percent in the global economy is not robust enough to absorb the emerging workforce, the study indicated.

"There is simply not enough growth to go around," said Fosler.

Global economic output is some 35 trillion dollars, in roughly 200 countries, the report said.

At current growth rates, tens of millions of people are going to remain unemployed, and the ones who get jobs are going to put increasing pressure on living standards in higher-income countries, the board said.

Virtually all of the labor force growth is in emerging countries, especially in the Middle East, North Africa, South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa.

"Among the advanced countries," says Fosler, "only the United States has been able to maintain its labor force growth, although about one-half of the new labor force entrants in the US are foreign-born."

"The real question is how everyone can advance faster together," said Fosler. "Unfortunately, the issue of how to achieve higher sustainable world growth is still not being asked."
 

Witling

Golden Member
Jul 30, 2003
1,448
0
0
DirtBoy, I found your article interesting. The penultimate paragraph about the number of foreign-born workers entering the American workforce was a shocker. Several times on this board I have mentioned that I think the U.S. economy has severe structural problems. I don't think this can be held off past 2008, regardless of who is elected President. Here's a Financial Times article that mentions some of the problems. The article is really about the decline in the dollar.

Financial Times 12/2/03
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
Soon machines will do everything even build and program themselves.. then what?
 

dirtboy

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
6,745
1
81
I also thought the number of foreign workers entering our economy was interesting. I'll check out your article.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
Several times on this board I have mentioned that I think the U.S. economy has severe structural problems

Like what? just curious cause I hav'nt seen it.. My main problem with USA is access to capital..while easy it's not easy enough and very easy for big boys like enron and S&L's because the have political power. IMO it's all monoploy money anyway so we should'nt worry about it and loosen lending standards.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: Zebo
Soon machines will do everything even build and program themselves.. then what?

Dang you Zebo!

You're my inspiration and the more I thought about it the more you're right... Then people will have to think about people than what job they have and how many toys they can accumilate since the "struggle" won't be there anymore. Only question is hw will we divy up mahines and/or machine time?
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,960
6,802
126
Originally posted by: Zebo
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: Zebo
Soon machines will do everything even build and program themselves.. then what?

Dang you Zebo!

You're my inspiration and the more I thought about it the more you're right... Then people will have to think about people than what job they have and how many toys they can accumilate since the "struggle" won't be there anymore. Only question is hw will we divy up mahines and/or machine time?

I'm sure the machines will tell us.
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
I'm shocked you posted this DB, you've been jumping up and down that everything is perfectly fine with the Economy. Maybe you have been reading and paying attention to my posts after all. I'm touched. :)
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,874
6,409
126
Originally posted by: Zebo
Soon machines will do everything even build and program themselves.. then what?

You can stop Judgement Day, only delay it.
 

Witling

Golden Member
Jul 30, 2003
1,448
0
0
There are several things wrong with the U.S. economy. First, we import way more goods and services than we export. Ultimately (and I think less than six years), those chickens have to come home to roost. For a long time the Arab economies were making very, very large bucks and they needed to do something with them. The Japanese also needed a stable place to put their excess money. The cold war is over for everyone but us. The security factor that the U.S. traditionally offered is rapidly vanishing. Without discussing what may or may not be true about Bush, most of the world perceives this government as irresponsible, both financially and militarily. That doesn't encourage them to put their money here. Eventually someone will say, "The Emperor has no cloths." Money will start to leave our system very, very fast. It's leaving now. That's what the decline of the dollar means. A second part of the problem is, the things we export are very complicated and are of interest to stable, economically sound countries, e.g., airplanes and telecommunications systems. There's also wage rates. Manufacturing jobs have been leaving for a long time and that seemed OK to most intellectuals. Sort of part of the natural system. Service jobs are now leaving -- and we live in a service economy. As economists say, "in the long run." But in the long run, we're all dead. It is my opinion, that if you're a young person now, you are going to live in interesting times. You know about the fake Chinese curse, "May you live in interesting times." EDITED: By the way, if you're in the insurance industry as a back office worker, brace yourself.

As a secondary theme to this rosy scenario, Americans aren't going to like reality. They're going to support people who tell them that they don't have to put up with reality. We'll start relying more and more on the military. Even now, it is questionable as to whether any benefit we might get from Iraqi oil (assuming we could produce and pump it, which we can't) is worth more than what we're going to have to lay out in "defense" costs. As you probably know, this is what has brought down most empires; trying to maintain the status quo. There will also be a war against poor people, which started about 20 years ago. More and more money spent for debt maintenance and defense. Less for what most people think of as "welfare."

I think you will see a temporary surge in the economy because there is a lot of money that left the stock market. They want to do something with it. Nobody knows what that money is going to be invested in. Perhaps it will reinflate the stock market so that it can be taken out by smart money managers before the downturn.

Remember, this is just one opinion.
 

dirtboy

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
6,745
1
81
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
I'm shocked you posted this DB, you've been jumping up and down that everything is perfectly fine with the Economy. Maybe you have been reading and paying attention to my posts after all. I'm touched. :)

Why wouldn't I post this? The point of this article is that the 90's weren't as great as you thought they were and that the population is growing faster than jobs are.

That still means the economy is fine.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
Originally posted by: Whitling
There are several things wrong with the U.S. economy. First, we import way more goods and services than we export. Ultimately (and I think less than six years), those chickens have to come home to roost. For a long time the Arab economies were making very, very large bucks and they needed to do something with them. The Japanese also needed a stable place to put their excess money. The cold war is over for everyone but us. The security factor that the U.S. traditionally offered is rapidly vanishing. Without discussing what may or may not be true about Bush, most of the world perceives this government as irresponsible, both financially and militarily. That doesn't encourage them to put their money here. Eventually someone will say, "The Emperor has no cloths." Money will start to leave our system very, very fast. It's leaving now. That's what the decline of the dollar means. A second part of the problem is, the things we export are very complicated and are of interest to stable, economically sound countries, e.g., airplanes and telecommunications systems. There's also wage rates. Manufacturing jobs have been leaving for a long time and that seemed OK to most intellectuals. Sort of part of the natural system. Service jobs are now leaving -- and we live in a service economy. As economists say, "in the long run." But in the long run, we're all dead. It is my opinion, that if you're a young person now, you are going to live in interesting times. You know about the fake Chinese curse, "May you live in interesting times." EDITED: By the way, if you're in the insurance industry as a back office worker, brace yourself.

As a secondary theme to this rosy scenario, Americans aren't going to like reality. They're going to support people who tell them that they don't have to put up with reality. We'll start relying more and more on the military. Even now, it is questionable as to whether any benefit we might get from Iraqi oil (assuming we could produce and pump it, which we can't) is worth more than what we're going to have to lay out in "defense" costs. As you probably know, this is what has brought down most empires; trying to maintain the status quo. There will also be a war against poor people, which started about 20 years ago. More and more money spent for debt maintenance and defense. Less for what most people think of as "welfare."

I think you will see a temporary surge in the economy because there is a lot of money that left the stock market. They want to do something with it. Nobody knows what that money is going to be invested in. Perhaps it will reinflate the stock market so that it can be taken out by smart money managers before the downturn.

Remember, this is just one opinion.


And a well reasoned one too:)

I don't know if I agree 100% but much seems true. I'd just like to point out most courties rely on our dollars for trade and to pump thier economy.. The dollar is still the international currency (over 1/2 is outside USA, intrest free loan) and we have plenty to selll them back like unparalled arms, land, stocks in the largest and most powerful corps in the world which have the full brunt of the military behind them to secure resources.
 

Witling

Golden Member
Jul 30, 2003
1,448
0
0
Your point is well taken, Zebo, about the U.S. currency being a standard. Did you know that there's only one Middle Eastern country that had switched its oil transactions to being denominated in Euros rather than dollars. Do you know which country that is? Hint: It starts with I, ends with Q, and borders on Turkey and Iran.
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: Whitling
Your point is well taken, Zebo, about the U.S. currency being a standard. Did you know that there's only one Middle Eastern country that had switched its oil transactions to being denominated in Euros rather than dollars. Do you know which country that is? Hint: It starts with I, ends with Q, and borders on Turkey and Iran.

It is Iran, not iraq.
 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: Whitling
Your point is well taken, Zebo, about the U.S. currency being a standard. Did you know that there's only one Middle Eastern country that had switched its oil transactions to being denominated in Euros rather than dollars. Do you know which country that is? Hint: It starts with I, ends with Q, and borders on Turkey and Iran.

It is Iran, not iraq.
You sure about that? I read the article long ago, don't have a link, but I remember this being one of possible reasons behind our invasion of Iraq. In order to hurt the U.S., or at least to spite us, Hussein switched to Euros for oil transactions. His goal was to get other Middle East countries to do the same, ultimately devaluing the dollar.

I may well have this wrong, but it seems a little too obscure for me to have merely imagined it. I know I read something along those lines, but maybe it was inaccurate. Do you have any good links?
 

Ferocious

Diamond Member
Feb 16, 2000
4,584
2
71
Yeah I read that some people think the war was about Iraq switching to the EURO.

Saddam wanted to slap Bush in the face.
 

Witling

Golden Member
Jul 30, 2003
1,448
0
0
Charrison, you're wrong, not to put to fine a point on it. I must say, I have a slight prejudice against people like you who post a factual statement in opposition to something else that's been said but don't bother to back it up with a link. Try Googling Iraq & Euros. This link takes you to one article.
 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
Do you folks think the European Countries benefit or lose holding $ investments to pay for oil while the $ weakens to 1.21$ to the Euro? Assume a constant oil price (which is adjusted to account for lots of issues) the dollar weakens and oil costs less Euros but, their investments are here so it matters not to them on this issue.. But, if oil is denominated in Euros.. whoosh out comes the funds of nearly 3.5 trillion from our National debt vehicles and we owe that accumulated trade deficit of almost 3 trillion $. How do we pay for it? Who will hold our debt? That is 6.5 trillion.. What you think is going to occur next...? Hyper inflation or hyper recession? Or just nothing? I think with out question Hyper Inflation...
Why are we in the middle east? Ask Professor Moonbeam!... Oil and the US dollar inextricably entwined!
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: dirtboy
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
I'm shocked you posted this DB, you've been jumping up and down that everything is perfectly fine with the Economy. Maybe you have been reading and paying attention to my posts after all. I'm touched. :)

Why wouldn't I post this? The point of this article is that the 90's weren't as great as you thought they were and that the population is growing faster than jobs are.

That still means the economy is fine.

"the population is growing faster than jobs are. That still means the economy is fine" :confused:

 

dirtboy

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
6,745
1
81
Originally posted by: dmcowen674


That still means the economy is fine.

"the population is growing faster than jobs are. That still means the economy is fine" :confused:[/quote]

Did you actually read the entire article? Probably not. If you did, you would see that this trend started in the 1960's, and has been going on for the last 40 years. You only complain about what has happened in the last couple years, what about the previous 40??
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: dirtboy
Originally posted by: dmcowen674


That still means the economy is fine.

"the population is growing faster than jobs are. That still means the economy is fine" :confused:

Did you actually read the entire article? Probably not. If you did, you would see that this trend started in the 1960's, and has been going on for the last 40 years. You only complain about what has happened in the last couple years, what about the previous 40??[/quote]

That proves what I've been saying about many in here, continually looking at the past. That doesn't do anything for today and the future. History is just that, History and for Historians.

 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: Whitling
Charrison, you're wrong, not to put to fine a point on it. I must say, I have a slight prejudice against people like you who post a factual statement in opposition to something else that's been said but don't bother to back it up with a link. Try Googling Iraq & Euros. This link takes you to one article.

I was in error. I was unaware that Iraq was being paid cash from the UN in the oil for food program. Iraq wanted to paid in euros for the oil it could sell, but it had little control over the pricing.


I was not wrong however about Iran wanting to price its oil in euros.