We're all wondering...
Where have all the jobs gone?
In the last 10 years, the United States has lost 1/3 of its manufacturing jobs. We know that many of them have been outsourced and moved off-shore. They've gone to India, China, Malaysia, and Mexico. And, they're not coming back.
Some have been lost to automation, computers, technology. Recently I had a client who was working on a manufacturing line whose job was replaced by...a robot.
It's not just manufacturing jobs that are disappearing.
14 million people are unemployed in this country, giving us an official unemployment rate of 8.9%, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics March report.
We also know that this statistic, as horrible as it seems, represents an under-reporting of the real situation. That's why the Department of Labor has engineered a new statistic -- the Underemployment Rate -- which includes the "discouraged" workers, those who have given up looking for a job and have fallen off the unemployment rolls because of chronic long-term employment and the "underemployed," those people who have taken part-time jobs or projects because they are unable to find a full-time position.
The underemployment rate is 20%, or 1 in 5 workers.
That's pretty bad. One in five American workers can't find an appropriate full-time position. Is that because we are still in the Great Recession, or is there another explanation? Is there a silver lining amidst all this dire economic news? I believe so.
Stay tuned for tomorrow's post...
Showing posts with label Interpretations - New. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Interpretations - New. Show all posts
Monday, March 21, 2011
Monday, January 11, 2010
Challenge Conventional Wisdom
“The conventional wisdom is often wrong…conventional
wisdom is often shoddily formed and devilishly difficult to see through, but it can be done.” (from the book Freakonomics)
Conventional wisdom is a commonly-accepted set of beliefs, assumptions, and interpretations of data to which a majority of people subscribe, usually without thinking, and often unquestioned. It plays a large part in how we see and interpret our world.
Much of it is created by fleeting observations, which we accept at face value, seeing only external manifestations or symptoms, rather than diving down to find fundamental causes. This is followed by applying superficial assumptions, based on simplistic reasoning, which, we blindly accept. Whether it’s because of our caffeine-enhanced, hurried lifestyle, our steady diet of prefabricated news bites, or our general lack of intellectual curiosity, we fail to question, try and probe.
These flimsy assumptions form the basis of conventional wisdom, which becomes insulated by interpretations that are repeated over and over and over until they are accepted by most as fact. And, there we have it – the birth of conventional wisdom!
On this blog, I am going to create "Conventional Wisdom Challenges" or CWCs.
Here's how it will work: On the days of a "Conventional Wisdom Challenge", I will put in the Blog Title CWC: and the name of the post. That way, you'll know when it's a "Conventional Wisdom Challenge."
On those days, I will submit pieces of data, along with the commonly-accepted interpretations, based in conventional wisdom. The, I will post a question designed to help you think for yourself. Challenge assumptions. Intuit. Create your own interpretions. Think of it as a game. It will be fun!
My job is to provide the data, the conventional wisdom surrounding the data, and to pose the question which inspires you to see outside-the-conventional-wisdom-box. Your job is to come up with your own interpretation based on what you see and how you think, independent of others. Any questions? Let's get going!
wisdom is often shoddily formed and devilishly difficult to see through, but it can be done.” (from the book Freakonomics)
Conventional wisdom is a commonly-accepted set of beliefs, assumptions, and interpretations of data to which a majority of people subscribe, usually without thinking, and often unquestioned. It plays a large part in how we see and interpret our world.
Much of it is created by fleeting observations, which we accept at face value, seeing only external manifestations or symptoms, rather than diving down to find fundamental causes. This is followed by applying superficial assumptions, based on simplistic reasoning, which, we blindly accept. Whether it’s because of our caffeine-enhanced, hurried lifestyle, our steady diet of prefabricated news bites, or our general lack of intellectual curiosity, we fail to question, try and probe.
These flimsy assumptions form the basis of conventional wisdom, which becomes insulated by interpretations that are repeated over and over and over until they are accepted by most as fact. And, there we have it – the birth of conventional wisdom!
On this blog, I am going to create "Conventional Wisdom Challenges" or CWCs.
Here's how it will work: On the days of a "Conventional Wisdom Challenge", I will put in the Blog Title CWC: and the name of the post. That way, you'll know when it's a "Conventional Wisdom Challenge."
On those days, I will submit pieces of data, along with the commonly-accepted interpretations, based in conventional wisdom. The, I will post a question designed to help you think for yourself. Challenge assumptions. Intuit. Create your own interpretions. Think of it as a game. It will be fun!
My job is to provide the data, the conventional wisdom surrounding the data, and to pose the question which inspires you to see outside-the-conventional-wisdom-box. Your job is to come up with your own interpretation based on what you see and how you think, independent of others. Any questions? Let's get going!
Friday, January 8, 2010
First Friday -- Unemployment Numbers
Hot off the press...
According to MSNBC: Economy Sheds More Jobs Than Expected
Nation lost 85,000 jobs in December; unemployment rate flat at 10 percent
Let's talk about what this means, find our own interpretation, and challenge the explanations of the "experts." Certainly, it doesn't look good when we "lost" 85,000 jobs in December. Traditionally, the holiday season has been a great time for seasonal hiring in retail, which usually creates a kind of spike in "job creation." But, we lost jobs. So, what does it all mean?
"The economy lost more jobs than expected in December while the unemployment rate held steady at 10 percent, as a sluggish economic recovery has yet to revive hiring among the nation's employers. "
The question is: why did the economy "lose" more jobs than expected in December when the economic indicators point to improving conditions? No one seems to know. That's why experts have coined the term "jobless recovery." As you know from what I've written before, I believe that we "lost" more jobs because not only are jobs disappearing, but because the whole concept of a job, as a way to package up work, a form of work, is disappearing. Jobs are devolving, unraveling, into project-based work.
Next, we read that "the unemployment rate held steady at 10 percent...followed by the explanation that "a sluggish economic recovery has yet to revive hiring among nation's employers." The assumption is that along with an economic recovery comes an increase in job creation. That makes sense. Economic conditions improve, businesses get more orders, need to hire more people to fulfill the orders to make the products, and so begin to start hiring again.
Except that we don’t really make a lot of things any more. We have moved away from predominantly a manufacturing-based economy to service-oriented economy. We continue to offshore our manufacturing jobs, and, in fact, have lost one-third of this country’s manufacturing jobs since the year 2000. That’s incredible. These jobs are not coming back, no matter how great the economy gets.
We need to watch the tendency to interpret data through a traditional lens, trying to make sense of data points as though they were static, without taking into account the shifting social and economic landscape swirling around us. We need to look at economic indicators within the context of change. Statisticians have a propensity and preference for benchmarking data points against markers from the past, called past predictors, but this method doesn’t work in a dynamic marketplace where the past is no predictor of the future.
Why aren't jobs being created? Let’s suppose that even within a service economy, there is plenty of work that needs to be done...but it's not getting packaged up in terms of jobs. There are large disincentives for employers to create new jobs, the largest of which is cost. It's expensive to create jobs. Typically, it costs an employer 38% above a new hire’s salary just to provide benefits, most of which is health care cost. And, that number doesn’t take into account the rising costs of unemployment and other types of insurance.
Bottom-line: employers are not in the position to create jobs. It's too dang expensive. It’s easier to hire temp workers. And, that’s not necessarily a bad thing.
"The Labor Department said Friday that employers cut 85,000 jobs last month, worse than the 8,000 drop analysts expected."
Why are employers continuing to cut jobs? One reason is that business credit continues to be tight, despite what you hear from Washington.
Banks aren't lending, and even if they want to lend, they are being prevented from doing so by overzealous regulators who have been given orders rigidly to enforce existing rules and procedures, a kind of over-reaction to lax regulation of the past, and without taking into consideration the exigencies of the present. While this may sound good because we need strong enforcement of existing regulation, it's not. What this means is that banks cannot be flexible with their customers and are foreclosing on customers who have just hit a "tight corner" on liquidity and need some flexibility. More on this tomorrow...
Against this credit backdrop, to prevent bankruptcy and cash flow problems, companies are being forced to cut expenses, drastically, just to stay alive. One strategy is to cut back on employees' hours. The average American work week has been reduced to something like 33 hours. If more severe measures are needed, employers are being forced to cut jobs, which usually include benefit packages costing 38% over salary costs. Wouldn't you eliminate a job and hire a part-time person, at a lower cost and with no benefits, in order to keep your company afloat?
"A sharp drop in the labor force, a sign more of the jobless are giving up on their search for work, kept the unemployment rate at the same rate as in November. Once people stop looking for jobs, they are no longer counted among the unemployed. "
Gee, this is interesting. Most people I know don't just "give up" in their search for work. They are unable to find work, usually because they can't find jobs that were similar to the ones they left. This is true for two categories of workers: 1) skilled manufacturing jobs, people who worked on a manufacturing line that moved offshore. These jobs aren't coming back and until we start getting the "green" jobs funded -- solar energy, natural gas exploration and "green" construction, there won't be much employment, and even then, these jobs will be limited. 2) Middle level management, white collar workers whose jobs either have been eliminated permanently as companies go leaner in their management structure, or whose jobs have been replaced by skilled workers overseas in Dublin, Mumbai and Singapore. These people are in a bind as they are overqualified for the jobs that are being created -- at Taco Bell, Wal-mart and Chucky Cheese. It's no wonder that they appear to "drop out" of the job market.
Despite the dire picture…it’s not all bad news. It’s just gonna look a whole lot different from before. Keep reading to find out how to uncover opportunities today...
According to MSNBC: Economy Sheds More Jobs Than Expected
Nation lost 85,000 jobs in December; unemployment rate flat at 10 percent
Let's talk about what this means, find our own interpretation, and challenge the explanations of the "experts." Certainly, it doesn't look good when we "lost" 85,000 jobs in December. Traditionally, the holiday season has been a great time for seasonal hiring in retail, which usually creates a kind of spike in "job creation." But, we lost jobs. So, what does it all mean?
"The economy lost more jobs than expected in December while the unemployment rate held steady at 10 percent, as a sluggish economic recovery has yet to revive hiring among the nation's employers. "
The question is: why did the economy "lose" more jobs than expected in December when the economic indicators point to improving conditions? No one seems to know. That's why experts have coined the term "jobless recovery." As you know from what I've written before, I believe that we "lost" more jobs because not only are jobs disappearing, but because the whole concept of a job, as a way to package up work, a form of work, is disappearing. Jobs are devolving, unraveling, into project-based work.
Next, we read that "the unemployment rate held steady at 10 percent...followed by the explanation that "a sluggish economic recovery has yet to revive hiring among nation's employers." The assumption is that along with an economic recovery comes an increase in job creation. That makes sense. Economic conditions improve, businesses get more orders, need to hire more people to fulfill the orders to make the products, and so begin to start hiring again.
Except that we don’t really make a lot of things any more. We have moved away from predominantly a manufacturing-based economy to service-oriented economy. We continue to offshore our manufacturing jobs, and, in fact, have lost one-third of this country’s manufacturing jobs since the year 2000. That’s incredible. These jobs are not coming back, no matter how great the economy gets.
We need to watch the tendency to interpret data through a traditional lens, trying to make sense of data points as though they were static, without taking into account the shifting social and economic landscape swirling around us. We need to look at economic indicators within the context of change. Statisticians have a propensity and preference for benchmarking data points against markers from the past, called past predictors, but this method doesn’t work in a dynamic marketplace where the past is no predictor of the future.
Why aren't jobs being created? Let’s suppose that even within a service economy, there is plenty of work that needs to be done...but it's not getting packaged up in terms of jobs. There are large disincentives for employers to create new jobs, the largest of which is cost. It's expensive to create jobs. Typically, it costs an employer 38% above a new hire’s salary just to provide benefits, most of which is health care cost. And, that number doesn’t take into account the rising costs of unemployment and other types of insurance.
Bottom-line: employers are not in the position to create jobs. It's too dang expensive. It’s easier to hire temp workers. And, that’s not necessarily a bad thing.
"The Labor Department said Friday that employers cut 85,000 jobs last month, worse than the 8,000 drop analysts expected."
Why are employers continuing to cut jobs? One reason is that business credit continues to be tight, despite what you hear from Washington.
Banks aren't lending, and even if they want to lend, they are being prevented from doing so by overzealous regulators who have been given orders rigidly to enforce existing rules and procedures, a kind of over-reaction to lax regulation of the past, and without taking into consideration the exigencies of the present. While this may sound good because we need strong enforcement of existing regulation, it's not. What this means is that banks cannot be flexible with their customers and are foreclosing on customers who have just hit a "tight corner" on liquidity and need some flexibility. More on this tomorrow...
Against this credit backdrop, to prevent bankruptcy and cash flow problems, companies are being forced to cut expenses, drastically, just to stay alive. One strategy is to cut back on employees' hours. The average American work week has been reduced to something like 33 hours. If more severe measures are needed, employers are being forced to cut jobs, which usually include benefit packages costing 38% over salary costs. Wouldn't you eliminate a job and hire a part-time person, at a lower cost and with no benefits, in order to keep your company afloat?
"A sharp drop in the labor force, a sign more of the jobless are giving up on their search for work, kept the unemployment rate at the same rate as in November. Once people stop looking for jobs, they are no longer counted among the unemployed. "
Gee, this is interesting. Most people I know don't just "give up" in their search for work. They are unable to find work, usually because they can't find jobs that were similar to the ones they left. This is true for two categories of workers: 1) skilled manufacturing jobs, people who worked on a manufacturing line that moved offshore. These jobs aren't coming back and until we start getting the "green" jobs funded -- solar energy, natural gas exploration and "green" construction, there won't be much employment, and even then, these jobs will be limited. 2) Middle level management, white collar workers whose jobs either have been eliminated permanently as companies go leaner in their management structure, or whose jobs have been replaced by skilled workers overseas in Dublin, Mumbai and Singapore. These people are in a bind as they are overqualified for the jobs that are being created -- at Taco Bell, Wal-mart and Chucky Cheese. It's no wonder that they appear to "drop out" of the job market.
Despite the dire picture…it’s not all bad news. It’s just gonna look a whole lot different from before. Keep reading to find out how to uncover opportunities today...
Friday, October 9, 2009
Debunking Myths About Being Out of Work...
Yesterday, as I was running out of the Marriott Hotel to catch my plane, I picked up a F*R*E*E* copy of USA Today.
On the front page of the business section, I saw this headline: Being unemployed 6 months or more grinds on you --
Well, of course it does. It's very disheartening to look and look and look and not be able to find a job. It can be debilitating to the self-esteem and devastating to finances.
So, it certainly doesn't help when one runs into a kind of conventional wisdom that worsens the situation. Consider this quote from the article...
"The rub: the longer someone is out of work, the more likely he or she will continue to be. Skills erode: gaps on resumes widen."
Rubbish. Once you have developed a skill, you'll always have it. Sure, you may get rusty over time if you don't use the skill, but it will always be a part of you and you can always get it back. It's like riding a bike. You'll never forget how. So, please don't buy into the "belief" that if you are out of work and not using a particular skill, it will "erode."
This is especially true for stay-at-home moms. Just because you haven't used a skill in 10 years doesn't mean that it's gone. Look at Meryl Streep. How long was she away from the screen when she was raising her children? 10 years? More? And, when she came back to film, had her skill diminished? No. She is just as fabulous today in "Julie and Julia" as she was in "Sophie's Choice." No diminishment of her acting skill.
So, let's us -- you and me -- just dismiss that misplaced conventional wisdom that if you don't use a skill, it will erode. I call such "accepted wisdom" nothing more than "educated myths," which operate as "unexamined beliefs" with most people accepting them as true on face value. Please don't do that to yourself. It's hard enough to keep your spirits up when you are looking for a job. Please don't accept "educated myths" for yourself. You have the power to examine the underlying assumptions and to dismiss them. Think for yourself.
On the front page of the business section, I saw this headline: Being unemployed 6 months or more grinds on you --
Well, of course it does. It's very disheartening to look and look and look and not be able to find a job. It can be debilitating to the self-esteem and devastating to finances.
So, it certainly doesn't help when one runs into a kind of conventional wisdom that worsens the situation. Consider this quote from the article...
"The rub: the longer someone is out of work, the more likely he or she will continue to be. Skills erode: gaps on resumes widen."
Rubbish. Once you have developed a skill, you'll always have it. Sure, you may get rusty over time if you don't use the skill, but it will always be a part of you and you can always get it back. It's like riding a bike. You'll never forget how. So, please don't buy into the "belief" that if you are out of work and not using a particular skill, it will "erode."
This is especially true for stay-at-home moms. Just because you haven't used a skill in 10 years doesn't mean that it's gone. Look at Meryl Streep. How long was she away from the screen when she was raising her children? 10 years? More? And, when she came back to film, had her skill diminished? No. She is just as fabulous today in "Julie and Julia" as she was in "Sophie's Choice." No diminishment of her acting skill.
So, let's us -- you and me -- just dismiss that misplaced conventional wisdom that if you don't use a skill, it will erode. I call such "accepted wisdom" nothing more than "educated myths," which operate as "unexamined beliefs" with most people accepting them as true on face value. Please don't do that to yourself. It's hard enough to keep your spirits up when you are looking for a job. Please don't accept "educated myths" for yourself. You have the power to examine the underlying assumptions and to dismiss them. Think for yourself.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)