Forum: What's the plan for future jobs?
The Labor Department's monthly report on jobs, released Jan. 9, while heralded as good news by the president and many economists, contains some troubling indicators. Business experts predicted America would add between 100,000 and 300,000 jobs in December. Instead, the economy added only 1,000 new jobs. And unemployment was down largely because more than 300,000 people gave up looking for jobs.
These few eye-catching headlines about the economy deserve further attention. Did you see: "Levi's closes last two U.S. sewing plants?" It seems the great American manufacturer of jeans since the Gold Rush decided it is much cheaper to make their signature product overseas.
One thing is certain: America is hemorrhaging jobs. Jobs are moving overseas to places like India and China, where workers are paid a fraction of the rate their U.S. counterparts earn. American manufacturing jobs are going overseas at a breathtaking rate, including jobs in steel work, textiles, shoe making and other parts of the manufacturing sector.
Final headline: "Bagalore has eclipsed Silicon Valley in high-tech jobs." The boastful headline comes from the Times of India, on Jan. 5.
This is the most troubling of the recent headlines on U.S. job losses. White-collar programmers, information technology and computer workers in other low-wage nations now are able to out-compete U.S. workers from near their homes overseas. Many of the high-tech bastions of U.S. excellence, like IBM, Microsoft and the others are moving big chunks of their work force overseas. Software developers, chip manufacturers and IT professionals are congregating in places like India, China, Ireland, Israel and the Philippines.
A recent survey of 145 U.S. companies by consultant Forrester Research found 88 percent of the firms that look overseas for services claimed to get better value for their money offshore than from U.S. providers, while 71 percent said offshore workers did better quality work.
Evidence of the shift in U.S. jobs overseas is everywhere. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, only two U.S. states added manufacturing jobs since 1998. One of those states was North Dakota, which sold a lot more stuff to Canada because of NAFTA. The other state was Nevada, and we all know what they make. The truth is, since President George W. Bush took office, this nation has lost between 2.3 and 2.7 million jobs to overseas locations.
Now I am a Republican who reads The Washington Times, but this loss of manufacturing jobs has me concerned, if not alarmed. And if we can believe the Times of India (and I think we can) our high-tech labor force, the juggernaut of our economy in the 1990s, may also become an endangered species.
Many economists and professionals at places like the Commerce Department think they know why these jobs are migrating out of the U.S.: It's the survival of the fittest. Now that we have a global economy, our inefficient industries are endangered — and they need to be forced to become more efficient or shut down.
But don't we protect endangered animals?
That's not germane here, we are told by the experts. We are in a world economy now, the philosophy goes, which is what we want because everyone benefits. If it is cheaper for China to make textiles, they make textiles. We'll buy their sheets and towels here in the U.S. and sell the Chinese something else. The entrepreneurs of the U.S. will dream up the new consumer goodies the Chinese need and make them. People on both continents will be delighted. Even better, our quicker, smarter, more efficient U.S. businesses will corner the market at what they really excel at in the world economy, whatever that is.
There is one small downside to this: a temporary slump in U.S. jobs the economists call "creative destruction." That's economist speak for loss of jobs now while we create more, presumably later.
I am suspicious. I am not yet a skeptic, but I am leery. Many products need to be made in the United States. Consider many of the defense-related high-tech assemblies and subassemblies in, say, a radar or a high-tech night-vision system. And shouldn't we make our own not-so-high-tech but still needed tank treads and aircraft engines? Shouldn't these all be made in America, by Americans, just in case of war?
More importantly, when our children and grandchildren look for jobs, what jobs will be available? We'll always need doctors, lawyers, stockbrokers, health-care providers and TV personalities. Oh, and we'll need fast-food and convenience store workers.
So I ask those wiser than myself: What am I missing here? What will the jobs be in America in 10, 20, 50 years? And will the jobs support the vast number of workers anticipated and at a standard of living Americans have come to expect?
JOHN E. CAREY
Mr. Carey is a writer in Arlington, Va. |
