• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

June 2005 Job Creation Report -- Few Education-Requiring Jobs Created


Paul Craig Roberts, a pro-capitalist who served as a high Treasury Department official under the Reagan Administration, has just released an op-ed examining the June 2005 employment report numbers.

You know, the numbers that claimed 144,000 new jobs for June that all of the Republicans and advocates of unrestrained free trade and immigration went gaga over (even though 144,000 barely keeps up with the population growth of working-aged people).

Here are some excerpts:

Only 144,000 private sector jobs were created, each one of which was in domestic services.

56,000 jobs were created in professional and business services, about half of which are in administrative and waste services.

38,000 jobs were created in education and health services, almost all of which are in health care and social assistance.

19,000 jobs were created in leisure and hospitality, almost all of which are waitresses and bartenders.

Membership associations and organizations created 10,000 jobs and repair and maintenance created 4,000 jobs.

Financial activities created 16,000 jobs.

This most certainly is not the labor market profile of a first world country, much less a superpower.

Where are the jobs for this year?s crop of engineering and science graduates?

In other words, that "big" number was for mostly jobs that are barely better than McJobs! "Would you like fries with that?"

Where are the jobs for college graduates? Where are the jobs for scientists and engineers? You should read the entire op-ed, America's Descent Into the Third World:

http://www.vdare.com/roberts/050715_descent.htm

 
I just graduated Mechanical Engineering, got a job as a Production supervisor (Manager in Training). My job would not count as an "engineering/science" job, but a proffessional/business service.

Does anyone know what happens when people retire, engineers take their senior jobs and a new engineer is brought on to replace that engineer? Does that count as an added job or zero job growth? Because this would lower the labour force and have no effect on increasing jobs, even though it did.
 
Originally posted by: Stunt
I just graduated Mechanical Engineering, got a job as a Production supervisor (Manager in Training). My job would not count as an "engineering/science" job, but a proffessional/business service.

Does anyone know what happens when people retire, engineers take their senior jobs and a new engineer is brought on to replace that engineer? Does that count as an added job or zero job growth? Because this would lower the labour force and have no effect on increasing jobs, even though it did.

Congrats on graduation again.

I was scheduled to replace a senior engineer, he had groomed me for the spot the last year. I have been contracting there. I started the official process to be brought on board and I was told yesterday I am not qualified.

This is bogus as I have been training guys that have been in the business longer than my 5 years in this particular sector on a lot of things and they have nothing but praise for my work.

I wonder if I could even get a job as a bartender.
 
Originally posted by: Stunt
I just graduated Mechanical Engineering, got a job as a Production supervisor (Manager in Training). My job would not count as an "engineering/science" job, but a proffessional/business service.

Does anyone know what happens when people retire, engineers take their senior jobs and a new engineer is brought on to replace that engineer? Does that count as an added job or zero job growth? Because this would lower the labour force and have no effect on increasing jobs, even though it did.

I've asked similar questions before and had mixed answers. Technically, it does add a job since you're looking for a job and the person leaving isn't. Very qood question. IIRC, someone mentioned tax receipts (rolls at the agency) gave the actual number of people employeed, but I'm really not sure.

Waiting for the answer...

 
Engineer, this is a trend that is bound to continue as the baby boomers start retiring. Imagine a constant 5% unemployment or LESS but having negative job growth 😱

PS. Dave, sorry to hear about the position; I'm sure as a contractor, you will have many more opportunities.
 
I think it was predicted 5 or 6 years ago that most of the new and comming jobs was forcast as being in the service sector. Unless the dollar plumits I doubt you will see much in the realm of manufacturing. Probably what will happen is more companies will design stuff here, but manufacture it elsewhere. Sort of like ATI (even though it is canadian) and Nvidia and a lot of other places. (if I am correct about those two.) People are looking to do business the cheapest way possible. Also new manufacturing techniques allow for smaller amount of workers at a location. The thing that bothers me is the service industry jobs that are done electronically and over the phone are being outsourced too. Most of the world now understands that education and training is the key to economical success. With this knowledge and poorer economies, it makes for cheaper well trained labour. Most of the jobs here in this country that will be in the service sector will be brick and mortor places. Also downsizing is still occuring at an alarming rate. Most big fields only have one or two huge players, well more like 5 or 6, but you get my drift.

Does the saying free trade is good for owners/management, but not good for workers ring true?
 
Originally posted by: Willoughbyva
I think it was predicted 5 or 6 years ago that most of the new and comming jobs was forcast as being in the service sector. Unless the dollar plumits I doubt you will see much in the realm of manufacturing. Probably what will happen is more companies will design stuff here, but manufacture it elsewhere. Sort of like ATI (even though it is canadian) and Nvidia and a lot of other places. (if I am correct about those two.) People are looking to do business the cheapest way possible. Also new manufacturing techniques allow for smaller amount of workers at a location. The thing that bothers me is the service industry jobs that are done electronically and over the phone are being outsourced too. Most of the world now understands that education and training is the key to economical success. With this knowledge and poorer economies, it makes for cheaper well trained labour. Most of the jobs here in this country that will be in the service sector will be brick and mortor places. Also downsizing is still occuring at an alarming rate. Most big fields only have one or two huge players, well more like 5 or 6, but you get my drift.

Does the saying free trade is good for owners/management, but not good for workers ring true?



Free trade benefits all.
 
Free Trade: (from the Economist)
FREE TRADE

The ability of people to undertake economic transactions with people in other countries free from any restraints imposed by governments or other regulators. Measured by the volume of IMPORTS and EXPORTS, world trade has become increasingly free in the years since the second world war. A fall in barriers to trade, as a result of the GENERAL AGREEMENT ON TARIFFS AND TRADE and its successor, the WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION, has helped stimulate this GROWTH. The volume of world merchandise trade at the start of the 21st century was about 17 times what it was in 1950, and the world's total OUTPUT was not even six times as big. The ratio of world exports to GDP had more than doubled since 1950. Of this, trade in manufactured goods was worth three times the value of trade in SERVICES, although the share of services trade was growing fast.

For economists, the benefits of free trade are explained by the theory of comparative advantage, with each country doing those things in which it is comparatively more efficient. As long as each country specialises in products in which it has a COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE, trade will be mutually beneficial. Some critics of free trade argue that trade with DEVELOPING COUNTRIES, where wages are usually lower and working hours longer than in developed countries, is unfair and will wipe out jobs in high-wage countries. They want AUTARKY or FAIR TRADE.

Real-world trade patterns sometimes seem to challenge the theory of comparative advantage (see NEW TRADE THEORY). Most trade occurs between countries that do not have huge cost differences. The biggest trading partner of the United States, for instance, is Canada. Well over half the exports from France, Germany and Italy go to other EUROPEAN UNION countries. Moreover, these countries sell similar things to each other: cars made in France are exported to Germany, and German cars go to France. The main reason seems to be cross-border differences in consumer tastes. But the agricultural exports of Australia, say, or Saudi Arabia's reliance on oil, do clearly stem from their particular stock of natural resources. Also poorer countries often have more unskilled labour, so they export simple manufactures such as clothing.
 
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: Willoughbyva
I think it was predicted 5 or 6 years ago that most of the new and comming jobs was forcast as being in the service sector. Unless the dollar plumits I doubt you will see much in the realm of manufacturing. Probably what will happen is more companies will design stuff here, but manufacture it elsewhere. Sort of like ATI (even though it is canadian) and Nvidia and a lot of other places. (if I am correct about those two.) People are looking to do business the cheapest way possible. Also new manufacturing techniques allow for smaller amount of workers at a location. The thing that bothers me is the service industry jobs that are done electronically and over the phone are being outsourced too. Most of the world now understands that education and training is the key to economical success. With this knowledge and poorer economies, it makes for cheaper well trained labour. Most of the jobs here in this country that will be in the service sector will be brick and mortor places. Also downsizing is still occuring at an alarming rate. Most big fields only have one or two huge players, well more like 5 or 6, but you get my drift.

Does the saying free trade is good for owners/management, but not good for workers ring true?



Free trade benefits all.

In other news, blind faith leads people to believe in Jesus. :roll:
 
Originally posted by: EatSpam
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: Willoughbyva
I think it was predicted 5 or 6 years ago that most of the new and comming jobs was forcast as being in the service sector. Unless the dollar plumits I doubt you will see much in the realm of manufacturing. Probably what will happen is more companies will design stuff here, but manufacture it elsewhere. Sort of like ATI (even though it is canadian) and Nvidia and a lot of other places. (if I am correct about those two.) People are looking to do business the cheapest way possible. Also new manufacturing techniques allow for smaller amount of workers at a location. The thing that bothers me is the service industry jobs that are done electronically and over the phone are being outsourced too. Most of the world now understands that education and training is the key to economical success. With this knowledge and poorer economies, it makes for cheaper well trained labour. Most of the jobs here in this country that will be in the service sector will be brick and mortor places. Also downsizing is still occuring at an alarming rate. Most big fields only have one or two huge players, well more like 5 or 6, but you get my drift.

Does the saying free trade is good for owners/management, but not good for workers ring true?



Free trade benefits all.

In other news, blind faith leads people to believe in Jesus. :roll:


Please come back when you have something relevent to add to the discussion.
 
Well there is a forecase of a shortage of health care professionals in the future and in the present as well. As baby boomers get older, someone has to take care of their healthcare. However, the supply of young sutdents is suppose to be shrinking. Therefore the supply is going down and the need is rising.

I work for a community college, which I have mentioned in the past. We received a large grant/donation from various sources both government and private to build a new Nursing Program Building so we can increase our nursing program and graduate more nurses. This program I do believe will also have cooperation with Southern Illinois University which has helped us in the past with out Dental Programs and our nursing programs.

We also recently constructed a new Dental training facility for dental assistant and dental technician training that is a fully functional dental clinic that accepts patients.

We have had excellent Certification rates when our graduates take the state certifications.

The whole jist of this is there is a real need for more medical care workers.

What do you think?

I think many of these reports are too general. Job classifications designed by some labor department do not always match up with reality.

A doctor for instance is in the service sector.
A Stock Broker is in the service sector.
An insurance salesman is in the service sector.
Your auto mechanic is in the service sector.
They are not all hamburger flippers and retail store workers.

You must think we are all a bunch of narrow minded morons with no ability to think.
 
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: ntdz
144,000 jobs > 0 jobs
No one is disagreeing on that however at least admit and stop saying they are quality jobs when they are clearly not.
Where are you getting this 'quality of the job' infromation from?
 
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: ntdz
144,000 jobs > 0 jobs

No one is disagreeing on that however at least admit and stop saying they are quality jobs when they are clearly not.

Yes, they are quality jobs. You are claiming they aren't quality, PROVE IT. The burden of proof is on you, and none of you libbies has proved that these jobs aren't quality.
 
Originally posted by: Stunt
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: ntdz
144,000 jobs > 0 jobs
No one is disagreeing on that however at least admit and stop saying they are quality jobs when they are clearly not.
Where are you getting this 'quality of the job' infromation from?


Originally posted by: ntdz
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: ntdz
144,000 jobs > 0 jobs

No one is disagreeing on that however at least admit and stop saying they are quality jobs when they are clearly not.

Yes, they are quality jobs. You are claiming they aren't quality, PROVE IT.

The burden of proof is on you, and none of you libbies has proved that these jobs aren't quality.

Explain how Number one and two, "Internet Publishing" and "Temp" jobs with no benefits are "quality" jobs.

That's your Republican version of quality the U.S. is doomed. No surprise there though.
 
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: EatSpam
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: Willoughbyva
I think it was predicted 5 or 6 years ago that most of the new and comming jobs was forcast as being in the service sector. Unless the dollar plumits I doubt you will see much in the realm of manufacturing. Probably what will happen is more companies will design stuff here, but manufacture it elsewhere. Sort of like ATI (even though it is canadian) and Nvidia and a lot of other places. (if I am correct about those two.) People are looking to do business the cheapest way possible. Also new manufacturing techniques allow for smaller amount of workers at a location. The thing that bothers me is the service industry jobs that are done electronically and over the phone are being outsourced too. Most of the world now understands that education and training is the key to economical success. With this knowledge and poorer economies, it makes for cheaper well trained labour. Most of the jobs here in this country that will be in the service sector will be brick and mortor places. Also downsizing is still occuring at an alarming rate. Most big fields only have one or two huge players, well more like 5 or 6, but you get my drift.

Does the saying free trade is good for owners/management, but not good for workers ring true?



Free trade benefits all.

In other news, blind faith leads people to believe in Jesus. :roll:


Please come back when you have something relevent to add to the discussion.

Actually, it was relevant to your comment. You believe in free trade the way people believe in Jesus. Its really quite pathetic.
 
Originally posted by: EatSpam
Actually, it was relevant to your comment. You believe in free trade the way people believe in Jesus. Its really quite pathetic.
Actually you have no idea what the hell you are talking about. You are contributing nothing to the discussion, troll some more, i dare you...:cookie:
 
Originally posted by: EatSpam
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: EatSpam
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: Willoughbyva
I think it was predicted 5 or 6 years ago that most of the new and comming jobs was forcast as being in the service sector. Unless the dollar plumits I doubt you will see much in the realm of manufacturing. Probably what will happen is more companies will design stuff here, but manufacture it elsewhere. Sort of like ATI (even though it is canadian) and Nvidia and a lot of other places. (if I am correct about those two.) People are looking to do business the cheapest way possible. Also new manufacturing techniques allow for smaller amount of workers at a location. The thing that bothers me is the service industry jobs that are done electronically and over the phone are being outsourced too. Most of the world now understands that education and training is the key to economical success. With this knowledge and poorer economies, it makes for cheaper well trained labour. Most of the jobs here in this country that will be in the service sector will be brick and mortor places. Also downsizing is still occuring at an alarming rate. Most big fields only have one or two huge players, well more like 5 or 6, but you get my drift.

Does the saying free trade is good for owners/management, but not good for workers ring true?



Free trade benefits all.

In other news, blind faith leads people to believe in Jesus. :roll:


Please come back when you have something relevent to add to the discussion.

Actually, it was relevant to your comment.

You believe in free trade the way people believe in Jesus. Its really quite pathetic.
:laugh: :thumbsup:

 
I'm still waiting for the Republicans (and Democrats), and the "no-think" economists to explain where all of the wonderful high-value-added college-education-requiring jobs will come from to replace all of the ones that have been lost to other countries (like computer programming). So far no one has been able to come out and identify where they will come from nor explain why good new jobs created in a "Next Big Thing" technology field won't also be one in foreign countries where the cost of labor is lower. A few economists have admitted that they merely have faith that it will happen.

It should be noted that 144,000 jobs is not an amazing number since we need about 150,000 net new jobs per month to keep pace with our third world rate of population growth (of working-aged people). So, 144,000/month is merely treading water. Sadly, we lost millions of jobs over the past couple years and many of the new jobs were significantly inferior to many of the lost jobs.

If you have big student loan payments on loans taken out in anticipation of a solid American job market, I feel badly for you because now you've been screwed since the economic value of a college education has decreased dramatically.

 
Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper
the economic value of a college education has decreased dramatically.
That is complete crap and you know it.
Lets *say* for argument's sake the "good" jobs are in decline (which i disagree)...the more educated are far more likely to get these rare jobs.

Also, I'd like more information on my question above...does a person retiring with a replacement count as job growth or not?
 
Originally posted by: Stunt

For economists, the benefits of free trade are explained by the theory of comparative advantage, with each country doing those things in which it is comparatively more efficient. As long as each country specialises in products in which it has a COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE, trade will be mutually beneficial. Some critics of free trade argue that trade with DEVELOPING COUNTRIES, where wages are usually lower and working hours longer than in developed countries, is unfair and will wipe out jobs in high-wage countries. They want AUTARKY or FAIR TRADE.


The simplistic comparative advantage argument is explicitly predicated on capital not moving between the trading areas. This was to some extent true back when Ricardo wrote about it 1817, but is now totally laughable. Every manufacturing strike in the US these days is faced with the bosses threatening to move production elsewhere.

And people often neglect to mention some of the reasons labor is cheaper in some countries: for instance, labor organizers are frequently killed in Columbia, or thrown in jail in China. And when the local people manage to set up some sort of democratic control of their society, the CIA immediately sets out to install a different, more company-friendly government. For example, check out Operation Condor.

And if you think the US government is concerned with bringing "democracy" to Iraq -- why did the CPA keep the Saddam-era laws against unions?
 
Originally posted by: Stunt

Also, I'd like more information on my question above...does a person retiring with a replacement count as job growth or not?

I've thought about this since I saw your initial post(s) and I say that you're correct. Job count didn't go up or even goes negative in rare cases, but unemployment goes down as you, someone looking for work, now has the job while the person retiring isn't counted anymore.

Tax statistics (persons paying taxes as working) doesn't increase therefore, the workforce stays the same and, based on survey, the number of people looking for work goes down (i.e. unemployment decreases).

As you mentioned earlier, it might show an interesting trend when the baby boomers go out.

Also, I'm torn on the quality of "service" jobs. When you have so much more coming into your country than going out in terms of goods and much more money going out than coming in, it just seems like a balance would eventually have to happen, but what do I know. Service jobs typically don't produce anything, and can't typically make anything exportable.

I still think, IMO, that outsourcing and losing your "building blocks" job hurts us in the long run. Just my opinion.
 
Originally posted by: EatSpam
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: EatSpam
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: Willoughbyva
I think it was predicted 5 or 6 years ago that most of the new and comming jobs was forcast as being in the service sector. Unless the dollar plumits I doubt you will see much in the realm of manufacturing. Probably what will happen is more companies will design stuff here, but manufacture it elsewhere. Sort of like ATI (even though it is canadian) and Nvidia and a lot of other places. (if I am correct about those two.) People are looking to do business the cheapest way possible. Also new manufacturing techniques allow for smaller amount of workers at a location. The thing that bothers me is the service industry jobs that are done electronically and over the phone are being outsourced too. Most of the world now understands that education and training is the key to economical success. With this knowledge and poorer economies, it makes for cheaper well trained labour. Most of the jobs here in this country that will be in the service sector will be brick and mortor places. Also downsizing is still occuring at an alarming rate. Most big fields only have one or two huge players, well more like 5 or 6, but you get my drift.

Does the saying free trade is good for owners/management, but not good for workers ring true?



Free trade benefits all.

In other news, blind faith leads people to believe in Jesus. :roll:


Please come back when you have something relevent to add to the discussion.

Actually, it was relevant to your comment. You believe in free trade the way people believe in Jesus. Its really quite pathetic.



I guess you prefer to protect the sugar industry at the expense of industries that use sugar. Candy makers have been moving jobs to Canada for this very reason.

I guess you prefer to protect steel makers at the expense of industries many times larger that use steel. This of course means higher prices for consumers.

I guess you want to keep cheap textiles from coming into the country so the less well off in this country have to pay more for clothes.

I guess you want to keep ohter countries down so they remain unable to buy goods and services from teh US.

So do you care to add something relevent to the discussion?
 
Originally posted by: ntdz
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: ntdz
144,000 jobs > 0 jobs

No one is disagreeing on that however at least admit and stop saying they are quality jobs when they are clearly not.

Yes, they are quality jobs. You are claiming they aren't quality, PROVE IT. The burden of proof is on you, and none of you libbies has proved that these jobs aren't quality.

:cookie: Eat it in line at the UI office.

 
Back
Top