Global Reality Surplus of Labor Scarcity Paid Work

UT1986

500+ Posts
That sucks! Scary times ahead in the future I believe. Hang on to your jobs as long as you can or become an entrepreneur. I can attest to the scarcity of paid work. There are plenty of jobs out there, but the available labor pool is so large to choose from now, it makes it difficult if you can't separate yourself from the pack. Employers can be very picky with finding candidates that meet 100% of all of their job qualifications. I can certainly see why some companies are hestitant to expand with the uncertainty in the coming election and not knowing the impact to their bottom lines.

"The global economy is facing a structural surplus of labor and a scarcity of paid work. Here is the critical backdrop for the global recession that is unfolding and the stated desire of central banks and states everywhere for "economic growth": most of the so-called "growth" since the 2008 global financial meltdown was funded by sovereign debt and "free money" spun by central banks, not organic growth based on rising earned incomes."

"Take away the speculation dependent on "free money" and the global stimulus dependent on massive quantities of fresh debt, and how much "growth" would be left?"

"The other trend is the cost of labor in the developed West is rising as systemic friction adds cost without adding productivity. Workers in the U.S. only see their wages stagnate, but their employers see total labor costs rising as healthcare costs rise year after year. In effect, the U.S. pays an 8% VAT tax to support a bloated, paperwork-pushing, inefficient and fraud-laced healthcare system that costs twice as much as a percentage of GDP as other advanced democracies."

"A worker making $60,000 a year costs the employer $90,000 a year. No wonder employers are shifting to contract labor (no exposure to skyrocketing healthcare) and part-time flex-labor. No wonder many entrepreneurs are selling their high-overhead businesses and becoming flexible, low-cost one-person enterprises."

"When it costs a lot to hire someone, the risk of hiring them rises, too. That is the unspoken context of high-cost economies. The productivity increases enabled by web-based software and services eliminate entire swaths of labor--not for this season or this business cycle, but forever."
The Link
 
I know that seems to be the general situation but I have such a difficult time finding qualified people that will show up to work everyday.
 
There have been some economist that estimate that the new norm for unemployment is 6-7% and that we aren't likely to see 4% anymore, unless we start mandating shorter workweeks for everyone. ie, instead of 17.5 people working 40 hrs week(700 total hrs), we will have 20 people working 35 hrs per week.

It does seem to make sense. we know that technology has made it possible for manufacturers, service sector to do more with less. heck it even takes less lawyers to work M&A deals these days.

If there is not a corresponding need for more stuff to get made or done, then the efficiency gains of technology are going to mean more people are out of work.
 
as a related aside. I think employers should shuck the old model of providing healthcare for employees. It should not be part of the employment equation anyway. They should be two different decisions.

I should by my insurance based on the best insurance for me, not based on what my employer wants.

It has become too expensive and too complex for most small companies to manage.

Put this back on individuals and we will get better care and cost and employers can get back to running their own businesses and not the healthcare industry.
 
What we are seeing is partly a manifestation of the Google Paradox. What is the Google Paradox? In a nutshell, by making everything from legal advice to blenders cheaper for the consumer to buy, Google (not just Google, but Google as a metaphor for the internet) creates a situation in which nothing costs anything but people no longer have jobs with which to buy them.
 
"There have been some economist that estimate that the new norm for unemployment is 6-7% and that we aren't likely to see 4% anymore,"

^^Unfortunately BrntOrange Stmpde the new normal is going to be higher than that. And the unemployment numbers purported by the MSM do not take into consideration short-term discouraged and other marginally-attached workers as well as those forced to work part-time because they cannot find full-time employment or those that are not counted as unemployed because they have been out of work longer than 6 months (BLS U6 number). So the MSM number and the BLS "official" number (U3) that's supposed to be official is a crock of **** to sugar coat a bitter pill of reality. U6 is about 14.5% and the The seasonally-adjusted SGS Alternate Unemployment Rate that reflects current unemployment reporting methodology adjusted for SGS-estimated long-term discouraged workers is about 22% unemployment. Getting pretty damn close to what it was during the Great Depression i other words.
The Link
The Link
 

NEW: Pro Sports Forums

Cowboys, Texans, Rangers, Astros, Mavs, Rockets, etc. Pro Longhorns. The Chiefs and that Swift gal. This is the place.

Pro Sports Forums

Recent Threads

Back
Top