4 ms·

In a vibrant economy, jobs move to where there are workers. That is the reason so many factories were built out of the major cities in the first place. Trump i

In a vibrant economy, jobs move to where there are workers. That is the reason so many factories were built out of the major cities in the first place. Trump is right to identify insufficient aggregate demand as the cause of unemployment in the midwest and underemployment pretty much everywhere. The culprit is much more China than Mexico. If the administration can significantly reduce the trade deficit it will have very positive effects on US employment and income.

prodmerc 10y ago
Workers move where there are jobs. I haven't seen anything else, anywhere. Factories were built where it was cheap or where the founders decided, but to be fair, as close to people as possible.
azemetre 10y ago
The culprit is neither China or Mexico, it's automation [1]. To say anything else is to deny reality. You can accomplish far more today with the advances in robotics and logistics than you could 30 or even 20 years ago. This is an example of a brewery working at full capacity with a total of 6 people per shift. If this brewery was operated 35 years ago it would be 600 people per shift. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tLim5pkfOw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tLim5pkfOw So how exactly are you going to stop these owners of capital that are so rightfully praised in the United States? You have entire cities that will offer free electricity, massive tax incentives, and looser regulations for what? A couple hundred jobs? What about the tens of thousands of people that are out of work? Are we really going to subsidize hundreds of thousands of tax dollars for jobs that barely pay $15/hour? I don't know what the solution is but I do know it will require massive amounts of tax dollars and it won't be the poor paying it. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/21/upshot/the-long-term-jobs-killer-is-not-china-its-automation.html https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/21/upshot/the-long-term-jobs...
- dukeluke 10y ago
  The problem now is automation, but that's because all of the jobs that couldn't be automated have already been shipped overseas. I argue that automation, globalization, and arguably illegal immigration are the three largest factors gutting the lower and middle classes in America. Also, you don't have to give better jobs to everyone, just a big chunk. There are ~10 million illegal immigrants in the US, which has a population of ~300 million. Right or wrong, shipping them out or giving some sort of work visa(to require at least minimum wage pay) would raise demand for lower class jobs to the point where lower and middle class wages may finally start rising again. Edited to recognize the open debate on illegal immigration. I don't understand how illegal immigration could lead to a better job outlook for the lower class. If anyone has some info on that, I'd appreciate it.
  - zimzam 10y ago
    Nope: you forget that immigrants (legal or otherwise) increase demand for goods in their local economy which creates demand for jobs to fulfill these goods. Research shows that this demand creates more jobs than the immigrants "consume".
    - mistermann 10y ago
      > Research shows that this demand creates more jobs than the immigrants "consume". This seems a bit counter-intuitive to me, could you point me to any research?
      - closeparen 10y ago
        Jobs are made possible by consumption. Illegal immigrants are consumers too. Without them, we'd have fewer workers competing for jobs, which seems like a good thing, but we'd also have fewer jobs to go around because of decreased consumption.
        mistermann 10y ago
        That's a fine theory but do you have any proof?
      - zimzam 10y ago
        This episode of the "Science Vs" podcast goes over a lot of research on immigration including what I mentioned about job creation: https://gimletmedia.com/episode/immigration/ https://gimletmedia.com/episode/immigration/
  - tomrod 10y ago
    The first two are on point. The third is politically motivated. The question of whether illegal immigrants contribute more to everyone is still relatively open: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_impact_of_illegal_immigrants_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_impact_of_illegal_imm...
- blusterXY 10y ago
  Read the NYT piece again: it cites evidence the trade deficit is a major problem. Of course, since accepting this means admitting that Trump is correct on trade, the authors immediately write-off the evidence by insisting that these jobs would eventually disappear anyway. So can we really blame China? Unfortunately, the problem is not about keeping any particular job so much as keeping the American economy vibrant enough to create new jobs as the old ones disappear. This requires the economy to operate at full employment, which requires adequate aggregate demand, which requires... well... there's your problem with the massive trade deficit and Chinese protectionism. Put more simply, if the Chinese were purchasing as much from the United States as they were selling into it, there would be a lot more job opportunities in the industries selling to China. Those would drive up wages and create competition to hire those newly unemployed. Incidentally, it is worth remarking on the fact that China is going through the same pattern of automation and labor dislocation as the United States. The country also has an endemic problem with rent-capture and corruption that works against an efficient private sector. Despite this, the economy is doing much better at job creation largely because of the country's mercantilism: its politically engineered trade surplus ensures adequate demand in the southern export-oriented parts of the economy, while state control of the financial sector serves to redistributes gains from trade to the SOE sector etc.

prodmerc 10y ago

Workers move where there are jobs. I haven't seen anything else, anywhere. Factories were built where it was cheap or where the founders decided, but to be fair, as close to people as possible.

azemetre 10y ago

The culprit is neither China or Mexico, it's automation [1]. To say anything else is to deny reality. You can accomplish far more today with the advances in robotics and logistics than you could 30 or even 20 years ago. This is an example of a brewery working at full capacity with a total of 6 people per shift. If this brewery was operated 35 years ago it would be 600 people per shift. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tLim5pkfOw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tLim5pkfOw So how exactly are you going to stop these owners of capital that are so rightfully praised in the United States? You have entire cities that will offer free electricity, massive tax incentives, and looser regulations for what? A couple hundred jobs? What about the tens of thousands of people that are out of work? Are we really going to subsidize hundreds of thousands of tax dollars for jobs that barely pay $15/hour? I don't know what the solution is but I do know it will require massive amounts of tax dollars and it won't be the poor paying it. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/21/upshot/the-long-term-jobs-killer-is-not-china-its-automation.html https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/21/upshot/the-long-term-jobs...

dukeluke 10y ago
The problem now is automation, but that's because all of the jobs that couldn't be automated have already been shipped overseas. I argue that automation, globalization, and arguably illegal immigration are the three largest factors gutting the lower and middle classes in America. Also, you don't have to give better jobs to everyone, just a big chunk. There are ~10 million illegal immigrants in the US, which has a population of ~300 million. Right or wrong, shipping them out or giving some sort of work visa(to require at least minimum wage pay) would raise demand for lower class jobs to the point where lower and middle class wages may finally start rising again. Edited to recognize the open debate on illegal immigration. I don't understand how illegal immigration could lead to a better job outlook for the lower class. If anyone has some info on that, I'd appreciate it.
- zimzam 10y ago
  Nope: you forget that immigrants (legal or otherwise) increase demand for goods in their local economy which creates demand for jobs to fulfill these goods. Research shows that this demand creates more jobs than the immigrants "consume".
  - mistermann 10y ago
    > Research shows that this demand creates more jobs than the immigrants "consume". This seems a bit counter-intuitive to me, could you point me to any research?
    - closeparen 10y ago
      Jobs are made possible by consumption. Illegal immigrants are consumers too. Without them, we'd have fewer workers competing for jobs, which seems like a good thing, but we'd also have fewer jobs to go around because of decreased consumption.
      - mistermann 10y ago
        That's a fine theory but do you have any proof?
    - zimzam 10y ago
      This episode of the "Science Vs" podcast goes over a lot of research on immigration including what I mentioned about job creation: https://gimletmedia.com/episode/immigration/ https://gimletmedia.com/episode/immigration/
- tomrod 10y ago
  The first two are on point. The third is politically motivated. The question of whether illegal immigrants contribute more to everyone is still relatively open: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_impact_of_illegal_immigrants_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_impact_of_illegal_imm...
blusterXY 10y ago
Read the NYT piece again: it cites evidence the trade deficit is a major problem. Of course, since accepting this means admitting that Trump is correct on trade, the authors immediately write-off the evidence by insisting that these jobs would eventually disappear anyway. So can we really blame China? Unfortunately, the problem is not about keeping any particular job so much as keeping the American economy vibrant enough to create new jobs as the old ones disappear. This requires the economy to operate at full employment, which requires adequate aggregate demand, which requires... well... there's your problem with the massive trade deficit and Chinese protectionism. Put more simply, if the Chinese were purchasing as much from the United States as they were selling into it, there would be a lot more job opportunities in the industries selling to China. Those would drive up wages and create competition to hire those newly unemployed. Incidentally, it is worth remarking on the fact that China is going through the same pattern of automation and labor dislocation as the United States. The country also has an endemic problem with rent-capture and corruption that works against an efficient private sector. Despite this, the economy is doing much better at job creation largely because of the country's mercantilism: its politically engineered trade surplus ensures adequate demand in the southern export-oriented parts of the economy, while state control of the financial sector serves to redistributes gains from trade to the SOE sector etc.