Skip to comments.Jobs Versus Net Jobs (Thomas Sowell)
Posted on 07/09/2012 9:45:57 AM PDT by jazusamo
One of the reasons for the popularity of political rhetoric is that everybody can be right, in terms of their own rhetoric, no matter how much the rhetoric of one side contradicts the rhetoric of the other side.
President Obama constantly repeats how many millions of jobs have been created during his administration, while his critics constantly repeat how many millions of jobs have been lost during his administration. How can both of them be right or, at least, how can they both get away with what they are saying?
There are jobs and there are net jobs. This is true not only today but has been true in years past.
Back during the 1980s, when there were huge losses of jobs in the steel industry, the government restricted the importation of foreign steel. It has been estimated that this saved 5,000 jobs in the American steel industry.
But of course restriction of competition from lower-priced imported steel made steel more expensive to American producers of products containing steel. Therefore the price of these products rose, making them less in demand at these higher prices, causing losses of sales at home and in the world market.
The bottom line is that, while 5,000 jobs were saved in the American steel industry, 26,000 jobs were lost in American industries that produced products made of steel. On net balance, the country lost jobs by restricting the importation of steel.
None of this was peculiar to the steel industry. Restrictions on the importation of sugar are estimated to have cost three times as many jobs in the confection industry as they saved in the sugar industry. The artificially high price of sugar in the United States led some American producers of confections to relocate to Mexico and Canada, where the price of...
(Excerpt) Read more at creators.com ...
Sowell needs to enter the no-spin cycle and go shopping. Just about everything what was made here is now made elsewhere. That’s how you figure out net jobs.
Thanks for the ping to another excellent column by Dr Sowell
I see Dr. Sowell is still fighting unfairly by using facts!
Nothing will drive a libtard more batsh*t crazy.
heh, heh, heh
Well said, he does it consistently. :-)
Sowell is pure genius. I love the favorite quotes page from his website.
Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
— C. S. Lewis
1) If "you" created a job, it was a government drone hired to come and eat out my substance. You'll excuse me if I don't do a happy dance for the drones.
2) That number isn't balanced against the millions of jobs lost that are never coming back. Manufacturing where employers have adjusted to the new normal of fewer workers comes to mind. There are more.
That is, in technical terms, a huge "net loss" of millions of good jobs people used to have. I'm not even going to get into the minutia of the relative quality of the jobs lost vs. the jobs gained.
Quick baseball analogy I thought of after I hit “Post.”
If the Diamondbacks and the Dodgers played last night, and the morning radio announcer said my team got seven runs, I’d be pretty happy if I did not hear about the nine runs the other team got.
Thanks for the ping to another excellent informative article by Dr. Sowell jaz. Appreciate it.
But the 5,000 steel industry jobs saved were more likely to be union jobs, so from the Dems perspective it was all good.
3) The high-wage job lost replaced by the minimum wage-paying job. A net of zero but hardly a loss you can make up with volume!
Thanks...Excellent piece by Dr. Williams.
Sowells note Jobs Versus Net Jobs is excellent and worth reading by all who question how government can create jobs.
First of all, Dr. Sowell is probably the least practiced spinmeister of all time. He is clear and thorough with his observations.
Secondly, I take from your comment that you are against free trade? That is a flawed position my FRiend. Free trade is a good thing, even if "just about everything what was made here is now made elsewhere". Don't fall into the trap that Dr. Sowell is describing where you only look at one half of the equation.
Thanks for reply. I disagree with any trade agreement other than we buy product from you and you buy product from us.
What is now called 'free trade' are agreements between governments where we agree to buy items from other countries and pay for them with jobs, factories and Treasuries. I see this as faulty.
I see this as successful model for corporate balance sheets but unsuccessful for the nation's balance sheet. The unemployed citizens, removed from the business ledger, are transferred to the government ledgers. This is costly for the nation.
People needs to have productive work making things, buying things and paying taxes. This needs to be worked out because the alternative of living on foreign labor rates and environmental conditions will cause massive political ramifications hardly a desirable outcome for cheaper goods. Regards,
"What has been the net effect? During this administration, the proportion of the working age population that has a job has fallen to the lowest level in decades."
That's what I was thinking as I listened to "Obama" spinning "jobs created" numbers in Ohio recently.
Ideally/Theoretically, shouldn't that cost be negative?
>> The bottom line is that, while 5,000 jobs were saved in the American steel industry, 26,000 jobs were lost in American industries that produced products made of steel. On net balance, the country lost jobs by restricting the importation of steel.
True, but such job and economic loss is generally a consequence of manipulating competition regardless of how the results are achieved.
I’m not deeply in favor of imports, but neither do I care for the entitlement nature of big labor threatened by World competition.