Oxford Analytica looks into the possibility of a “jobless recovery” in a new report. “With some — albeit highly disputed — signs of recovery in the global economy, there is growing debate on what form this might take.”
“Both recent experience and economic theory would suggest that a return to growth, at least in the short term, might not be accompanied by an increase in employment.”
In 2001, after the burst of the dot-com bubble, recovery was fairly rapid. However, though mature economies already had seen a return to growth by 2002, employment did not recover in the same way. Rather, it continued to lag behind.
Economic theory offers a possible explanation as to why the effect of downturns on labour demand can be extremely long-lived or, in other words, why recovery, in effect, can be ‘jobless’:
- When there is a downturn in economic activity, employment rates fall (ie jobs are lost) and companies stop investing in new technology.
- However, since the innovation cycle is much longer than most downturns in the business cycle the rate of innovation in the economy is not overly affected, new discoveries continue to be made.
- This means that, when demand starts to recover, surviving companies have the option to buy into the latest technology.
- Those that do so soonest are likely to be the most competitive and hence best able to increase productivity.
- For a time, companies can increase production by investing in new technologies, and thus delay re-hiring people.
The question is whether this pattern is set to recur when the world begins to emerge from the current recession.
Alfie,
Did you just discover Ayn Rand or something? You write your comments like they are coming out of an ideological handbook. If you actually want to learn something about economics try here.
#16, Alphie,
Thinking out of the box for real solutions requires we return to earlier mechanisms that worked…free market.
Unfortunately, it was the free market that got us in the situation we are in today.
#23,
Lose the regulation, and small business will explode…after a recovery, then you can clamp down on the abuses.
Your shortsightedness is showing. After the previous abuses, they regulations were clamped down. You want to open up the gates to repeat all the forms of abuse we had before. That was recently tried with the relaxation of regulations (and enforcement of the remaining ones) in the financial sector. I think we can all see what happened there.
#26,
… it does not follow you outlaw the group for the sins of a few.
Taxi drivers are not outlawed. They are regulated to ensure they are qualified to operate. Every municipality I am aware of has a Taxi Board that complaints can be directed to. These boards have no control over gypsy taxis. They do protect consumers.
But at least we have an inkling what you do for a living. Good for you! A gypsy hack, and I bet you have a St. Christopher statue on the dash too. And you pass out Jesus tracts to your
prisonerspassengers too. Now you’re upset because the Taxi Board says you can’t preach.Hmmm. The condition that caused the current mess go back to at least Clinton if not Bush I.
Even if you want to say GWB started it, so what? That doesn’t justify the incredible new damage being caused by BHO.
A minor remodeling project doesn’t start by burning the house down!
#30, Alphie,
I’ve been to the third world where regulation is not allowed to prevent street vendors from existing…as is done in the US.
First, I wouldn’t call East LA a third world country. It might be as big as some, but alas, …
Second, can you tell us of one American city where street venders are banned? I’m not asking too much, just give us one.
Now if you had the choice, which would you prefer; street venders be regulated for cleanliness or a total free market with you losing your kidney function because of e. coli?
# 39 JimR said, “That’s not the reason. Nobel economist Milton Friedman:..”
And, exactly how many economies has Mr. Friedman managed? ZERO… An expert with no demonstrable ability to operate in his field of “expertise”. You should look to more credible sources…
Do you realize that you will probably never work again at a ‘real job’?
When I was still looking for any job at all, I did get two ‘interviews’ but when they saw how old I was. That was that. I should have not wasted my time and money going to see them.
My only advice is, “Don’t get sick.” or, you will be in real trouble!
#46, Cow-Patty,
Jesus H. Christ !!! WTF do you want. Friedman is a god to the extreme right and you dismiss him? So we all need to operate a popcycle stand before we can be taken seriously?
Geeze you are a moran.
# 48 Mr. Fusion said, “WTF do you want. Friedman is a god to the extreme right and you dismiss him?”
What do I want? The same thing any sane person would want from an “expert”. A demonstrated ability in the area of claimed expertise. Again, I ask, what econmy has he successful lead?
Would you listen to a civil engineering “expert” who had NEVER designed anything that had actually been built? I hope not but, I don’t think you have that much common sense…
Sounds like more money for the wealthy by taking advantage of cheap labor.
OK,OK..
so everyone can point fingers, and toes..
THIs is wrong, thats wrong, EVERYTHING is wrong.
HOW about solutions.
I can give you a few major ones.
FOR SOME REASON
Capitalism is messed up, and its not the TOP and its not the bottom.
Look at imports, sent to this country DIRT CHEAP and we pay as IF’ they were made in the USA, OUT OF GOLD. Wonder whose responsible for the price increase?
The other point looks like this. THE STORE isnt making most of the profit, the MAKERS in the USA arent making the MOST PROFIT.. find the persons in the middle. FIND out whats making the costs of GOODS/SERVICE/FOOD go up and kill it.
Capitalism works when there is competition. NOT when 2 or more business work TOGETHER.
Who understands WHAT Walmart has done?
They are going STRAIGHT to the makers and manufacturers of the world and FORCING them to compete with each other to be SOLD in the USA.
THEN they market them at a slightly lower price then other stores.
The other companies WAIT for someone to bring products TO THEM to SELL. AFTER it has come to the USA, and a distributor has control over the shipments.
Walmarts Plan is based on another corps plan. The OIL CORPS.. Oil corps control ALL the shipping, handling, distribution, and MOST of the sales of their product.
Import tax is based on 1 thing. IF we make the SAME in this country WE CAN TAX IT, as a competitive product. OTHER WISE its not taxed.
The WHOLE design and BUSINESS MODEL has to be changed. THAT alone will make this country better. We need to go back to the 1970’s model.
IF CORPS WISH to run this country.
The more a corp makes profit, the HIGHER the tax. (they have to pay for the ROADS that trucks damage, the properties they are using)
The MORE unemployed, the MORE the tax.(as with this country, you have to PAY for the poor and unemployed)
Tax them to pay for the improvements that are needed for this country, FORCE advancement. NOT this 1 step at a time, BULL. This country is about 20 steps behind in tech.
Run the Gov as a tech industry. the MAIN CORP over all the others.
# 53 ECA said, “We need to go back to the 1970’s model.”
No, go back to the 1900 model. Much better.
#46, Patrick… so you think you know more about the 1929 crash than a Nobel Prize winning economist eh? Why am I not surprised.
First, #7 for the win
@Fusion
You say some very highly intelligent things and then ruin it for me with posts like #11
NAFTA — signed by Clinton and promoted by Gore and the Republicans — is a huge source of damage to this country.
Relocate any job to Mexico with no tariffs and avoid half of our over-regulated laws plus cheaper labor = destroy our manufacturing sector
The current economy is not Obama’s to blame, not Bush’s to blame — but the whole political system including both parties.
It is like there is a giant disconnect between laws, politics, thinking and reality.
And then the politicians go try to “fix” things that have nothing whatsoever to do with the problem or pass dreamboat legislation that makes a problem worse.
I truly believe even with Mexico’s lower cost of labor that the USA could be competitive in manufacturing (maybe).
And I am sometimes in total disbelief at watching the way both parties do business in every state and nationally — it’s like there is no way for the “people” to win with anything resembling good government.
“It is like there is a giant disconnect between laws, politics, thinking and reality.”
an economist is a person that uses numbers to TRY to prove what HAS happened/WILL happen. Insted of looking out a window and gauging WHAT IS HAPPENING.
MORe of them SUCK at the job, then can figure out WHATS wrong.
“I truly believe even with Mexico’s lower cost of labor that the USA could be competitive in manufacturing (maybe).”
And there is a reason, as the USA has the TECH(mostly) in mexico its all done by hand(mostly). And the USA standard of employment is–HIRE 1 that knows the JOB, and 10 idiots to listen to him(run the machines). You pay good wages to the 1 person and CRAP on the other 10.
And why is this?? EDUCATION. How much did you PAY to get that college degree. which makes you LOOK as if you should know something OVEr the person thats already spent 10 years DOING the job and has no education.
#56, Meyer,
Relocate any job to Mexico with no tariffs and avoid half of our over-regulated laws plus cheaper labor = destroy our manufacturing sector
Then you don’t know NAFTA. It wasn’t NAFTA that hurt the American economy. It was the flight of jobs to China and to a much smaller extent Korea, Singapore, the Philippines, and Central America. NAFTA guaranteed working conditions, the slave shop nations don’t.
Cow-Patty,
What do I want? The same thing any sane person would want from an “expert”. A demonstrated ability in the area of claimed expertise. Again, I ask, what econmy has he successful lead?
It appears that the only person you would accept then would be Bill Clinton. He was the last person to lead a healthy economy in the US.
I really do hope you can see just how ridiculous you sound.
# 59 Mr. Fusion said, “It appears that the only person you would accept then would be Bill Clinton. He was the last person to lead a healthy economy in the US.”
Umm, no. He didn’t do it. He was forced into it by the Congress, who actually holds the power of the purse in the U.S. Remember read the Constitution before you post on these matters.
So, whoever was leading congress at the time is who I’d rather listen to.
Hippies were happy enough not working. Why were they persecuted? Those are the types of people America needs. The modern slackers can take up some of the slack, but they can’t do it all.
you want to be like china??
That part of income in excess of 500 to 2,000 yuan 10% 25
That part of income in excess of 2,000 to 5,000 yuan 15% 125
That part of income in excess of 5,000 to 20,000 yuan 20% 375
That part of income in excess of 20,000 to 40,000 yuan 25% 1375
That part of income in excess of 40,000 to 60,000 yuan 30% 3375
That part of income in excess of 60,000 to 80,000 yuan 35% 6375
That part of income in excess of 80,000 to 100,000 yuan 40% 10375
That part of income in excess of 100,000 yuan 45% 15375
You pay more tax AS a rich person in China..
Y’all can bitch and moan about the government or the technology and this and that. The truth of the matter is that we are all being screwed by greedy rich elite who just want cheap labour. They don’t give a rats rectum about employing people and putting food on the table of the working person. They don’t see themselves as having any social obligation. They just want cheap labour and high profit margin. De-regulation wont fix this as its has resulted in jobs going offshore and massive corporate welfare. Government regulation wont fix this as it will stifle growth and result in massive corporate welfare.
Greed is the problem here. The rich elite and their corporate money machines are bleeding us dry to feather their own nests. The only way out of this is a more equitable society. Ain’t gonna happen though. Too many greedy immoral corporate criminals in government and positions of power.
64,
Very good. And what gave it away?
Until the IRS(which has been decimated, and culled) can have enough POWER to scare a corp..They wont straighten up.
In all the rest of the world, the HEADS of corps, get paid allot LESS then they do in the USA.
Think of a corp that has sent ALL jobs to a foreign country. They are now the Maker, and the distributor of their own product. They probably got an extra 50% in profits. but the cost of living has gone up. the USA is one of the most expensive places in the world as well as TAXES and property here is more expensive. NOW if the REST of the company went over seas..they could REALLY make more profit and live as kings.
It was interesting is that in business. The bottom 90% are getting 1/2 the money, and the TOP 10% are getting 1/2 the money.
WHAt do you do to get that much money, and not get SCREWED every hour of the day/week/year..
Lets see.
20-40 years of work.
$7 per hour..$14k per year-30% tax=$9800
$196000 in 20 years.
$10 per hour..$20k per year-30% =$14,000
ABOUt the same as $7 per hour without tax.
$280,000 in 20 years.
just over 1/4 million.
$15 PER HOUR..$30K PER YEAR-30% =$21,000
$420,000 IN 20 YEAR..
jUST OVER DOUBLE THE $7 AND ALMOST 1/2 MILLION..
$20 per hour..$40k per year-30% =$28,000
$560,000 IN 20 YEARS.
INTERESTING AS $5 more then $15 and $140K more.
NOW for the fun part.
RENT should equal 1/4 of your wages.
Utilities should be about 1/3.
Food should take another 1/8?
If your rent is $600, then you should be taking home $2400 per month.
$2400 per month is $28800 per year AFTER TAX.
BEFORE TAX its closer to $37,500.
wHICH IS SOMETHING IN THE AREA OF $18.75 per hour. JUST to LIVE.
#11 Mr Fusion said:
“The problem YOU are sidestepping is how do we fix the problem created by the last Administration.”
i dare say you have the classic Myopic view of history we all have to varying degrees.
to finger the last Administration as the cause for all our current woes, points to the common (and IMO, “by design”) problem most of us have when searching for the roots of the current issues facing the country..
..taking my cue from what #13_Cursor_ alluded to: “The problem is how do we fix what all admins have screwed up since 1880?”
I take my Myopic view just a few years further back in time to 1871 and point my finger at the “Act of 1871” [see link at bottom of page] which IMO, was one of the major turning points for our country and practically cast in stone, how all subsequent Administrations and Congresses would behave.
In the Act of 1871, [briefly] the District of Columbia was created along with it’s own form of government which eventually turned into the Washington D.C. we all so love to hate today. This also eventually converted the entire country into a defacto Corporation.
This was done at the behest of the mostly British international banking cabal.
When you look at a synopsis of the Act of 1871, many will invariably conclude that this one Act of congress is what redefined the future of the United States and has brought us front and center to the current moral and financial [corrupted] crisis that we find ourselves in. (and by extension, the Globe) -this also (for me) explains quite simply what is really going on:
The United States, is a Corporation that is now in fact, (morally) and financially bankrupt.
The CEO’s, Supervisors and Managers (white house, senate, and the house) have been told by it’s Ultimate Owners, (the investors[The Fed & Int’l Bankers] and major stock/bond holders[foreign nations/proxy entities that hold our debt] to begin bankruptcy proceedings and spin down the Corporation [ofUSA’s] assets.
For some recent example, we have Chrysler LLC being “returned” to Italy and GM’s many brand assets being saved (or returned) by Germany, Russia, and China amongst others. -not to mention the many major buildings and landmarks here in NYC that are now owned or have controlling interests by foreign entities.
[dissolving GM’s major stakes also opens many markets wide open for foreign entities..to the benefit of the counties involved, -a form of political payment for monetary debt(s)
[minor note: anyone notice how all over, the US State Legislatures [let alone in congress/white house [esp since patriot act-et al] -have wholeheartedly chucked the constitution to the wind?]
[put your political faiths aside and connect the dots back to 1871 and beyond..]
I have “cheery picked” this 6 page synopsis of the Act of 1871 in PDF to send you on a mission of relevant discovery.
Put your “faiths” aside and read it. then do some further background on the facts within it. [esp the fact that your Birth Certificate is a Bond to the state [which is sent to the Bureau of Commerce along side with the Census Bureau.]
-if you took the time to respond to *any* of the posts in this thread, ALLOW yourself to Be Honest with yourself for once.
Spend *an hour at least* on all the ramifications of the 1871 Act. -it will cast a light on much of the [illogical] actions of the three houses of government the last 96+ years.
/[leap of faith moment]
Most all you in here are quite intelligent, -extremely intelligent if you can put your biases aside. [<- most important.]
Here is an expanded view of the Act of 1871.
Do your homework. you will find the picture i have paint to be quite plausible.
It also harmonizes quite readily, to the transfer of power currently underway via many Bills under consideration in congress, to that of the stated One World Government envisioned by the rhetoric many of the world leaders speak of almost daily.
Read, learn, understand and connect the dots.
-s
#66 Good points. Also, I hope the posters here read this.
Ever notice when someone doesn’t have a clue as to how to fix a problem will delve into the history of it?
I think that truism gave rise to the expression: “Those that can, do. Those that can’t teach.”
Way to go. Sounwash–a departure for you. I look forward to your synthesis in an actual proposal.
Patrick—pat, pat.
# 68 bobbo, amused by the irrelevancy said, “I look forward to your synthesis in an actual proposal.”
His “proposal” is self evident to all but the blind.
#66, soundwash, you can find the actual act in which you are referring, here:
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=016/llsl016.db&recNum=454
In my quick skimming of it, I see nothing of your paranoid claims that establishing the District of Columbia as a single, incorporated government somehow has an effect on anybody who is a citizen of one of the states.
Wow, soundwash is either:
1) Insane,
2) Completely ignorant of how law works, or, most likely,
3) very gullible.
Even a minor understanding of what common law means completely unwinds everything said in the two documents you listed. Additionally, the idea that CAPITALIZED LETTERS somehow make a difference in legal documents isn’t even a legal fiction – it’s a factual fiction. THIS and this have both been the same word in a legal document since, I daresay, Roman times. And the United States doesn’t use “Roman Common Law”, as the documents imply, but a form of common law derived from the English Common Law (there IS no such thing as Roman Common Law – the Romans used a code of civil laws). And even then, THAT statement isn’t true, as Louisianna uses a civil law system of laws derived from the Napoleonic Code.
I will admit, I did not even continue reading the documents you linked, as by this point the stink of paranoid conspiracy had overwhelmed me. It was not even entertainingly written. So I cannot answer any further charges brought against the Organic Act of 1871.
Oh, and by the way, the Organic Act of 1871 really just created the 10×10 mile piece of land called “Washington D.C.” and gave it a government – which Congress *could* do, since Washington D.C. is a *federal* territory. The government of Washington D.C. has *nothing* to do with the federal government we refer to when we talk about The Government.
And the idea that the United States didn’t have Departments before 1871 is ludicrous. To quoth the Wiki: “The Department of the Treasury is an executive department and the treasury of the United States federal government. It was established by an Act of Congress in 1789 to manage government revenue. The Department is administered by the Secretary of the Treasury, who is a member of the Cabinet.” So at least Treasury has your theory beat by about… oh… 100 years or so.
Try again, sir.
#66, soundwash,
You are just effen nuts.
I take my Myopic view just a few years further back in time to 1871 and point my finger at the “Act of 1871″ [see link at bottom of page] which IMO, was one of the major turning points for our country and practically cast in stone, how all subsequent Administrations and Congresses would behave.
There were several Acts enacted in 1871. None of them were called the “Act of 1871”. What it appears you might be discussing is the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 That merged the existing municipalities into one political district known today, officially, as the District of Columbia and colloquially as Washinton.
I think your source is completely bonkers. If you insist her conspiracies are correct, then so are you.
Congress, with no authority to do so, created a separate form of government for
the District of Columbia, a ten-mile square parcel of land.
Congress always had the authority to govern and oversee the governance of the District of Columbia. Originally, the land area was actually much larger and included most of what is now Alexandria Virginia. Virginia reclaimed that parcel in the 1840s which the Federal Government failed to protest.
the CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA’ is a corporate constitution,
Uummm, nope. A Corporation is a license, charter, or recognition given to an organization that recognizes its unique composition as opposed to the individual members. These licenses are issued by a sovereign power to which the Corporation becomes subservient.
Actually, Roman Civil Law was fully established in the colonies before our nation began, and then became managed by private international law.
This drivel both makes me laugh and frightens me. She believes this?
American law is founded on the principles of English Common Law*. The Divine Right of Kings was laid to rest during the English Civil War and the acceptance in 1661 by King Charles II that Parliament was sovereign in its own right and held the power of the purse (taxation and spending).
* Louisiana still uses the Napoleonic Code.
Enough of this crap. Geeze, this is as bad as “Stars and Bars using a doctor suspended for “having a psychiatric condition which impaired her ability to practice medicine.” to bolster his argument.
#72, Alex,
After reading post #66 I wrote my reply. I did not read yours until after I posted my own. Well done sir.
🙂
One note, American Courts still use English Common Law. Lord Blackwell is often quoted in decisions as an ultimate source. BUT, American statute law has largely supplanted English Common Law. And I’m not sure, but I believe the Napoleonic Code is ultimately based upon Roman Civil Law.
“One note, American Courts still use English Common Law. Lord Blackwell is often quoted in decisions as an ultimate source.”
Not quite accurate. If you quote Blackwell to a judge, it’s merely *persuasive* (same as quoting any textbook), not dispositive. Once, say, Scalia (who LOVES to quote Blackwell) quotes Blackwell in a SCOTUS opinion, however, it becomes a part of the NEW decision, and therefore either dispositive or dicta.
“I believe the Napoleonic Code is ultimately based upon Roman Civil Law.”
I’m pretty sure you’re correct.