9 ms·

> Because there are no jobs there. This is simply not true. There are a record number of job openings. I would go on to say that there has never been a time in

by mbesto 5y ago

> Because there are no jobs there. This is simply not true. There are a record number of job openings. I would go on to say that there has never been a time in history where finding a job was this easy. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/jolts.pdf https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/jolts.pdf https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/JTSJOL https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/JTSJOL "The number of job openings was little changed at 10.4 million on the last business day of September, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today"

throwawaygh 5y ago
Presumably OP means a job in their profession, not employment generically.
- lostmsu 5y ago
  In the current system not everyone is entitled to a job for their profession. People should get used to it.
  - uncomputation 5y ago
    > People should get used to it. Historically, this line of thinking never ends well.
    - lostmsu 5y ago
      That's true, but it is also true, that this is (at least partially) a self-imposed problem. Many people are giggling when they hear about a liberal arts graduate who struggles to find a descent job, but they never think the same might apply to their profession too.
  - throwawaygh 5y ago
    So instead of optimizing for efficient allocation of labor and capital, we should instead optimize for the short-term benefit of the landed gentry class? Seems like a likely path to either economic ruin or political revolution. Probably both. Since you don't seem like you're be sympathetic to an ethical argument, here's some real-politik: "fuck the poors" works well enough when the poor are actually poor. Less well when the people being systematically fucked over have significant social esteem, education, and economic means. See: the American Revolution.
    - lostmsu 5y ago
      I don't see an ethical argument going against what I said in the parent comment. Here's a non-hypothetical scenario: Boeing lays off thousands of mechanical engineers in Greater Seattle Area. What do you suppose the local government has to do exactly to find jobs in mechanical engineering for them? What does it have to do with ethics?
  - KaiserPro 5y ago
    So you're saying that instead of optimizing for the job I am qualified for and have experience of, I should move to somewhere where the labour market is more subdued, and move to an industry where I have no experience?
    - lostmsu 5y ago
      Basically, yes. Local (and global) market only has so many positions for a specific profession. If there are more qualified people, than positions, you are out of luck and might need to do exactly what you described.
jedberg 5y ago
But where are all these jobs? Aren't they mostly in the already impacted cities?
- mbesto 5y ago
  https://www.bls.gov/charts/job-openings-and-labor-turnover/opening-industry.htm https://www.bls.gov/charts/job-openings-and-labor-turnover/o... https://www.bls.gov/charts/job-openings-and-labor-turnover/opening-hire-seps-region.htm https://www.bls.gov/charts/job-openings-and-labor-turnover/o... Considering there is no regional specific trends and the highest % of jobs are actually in white collar jobs (pro services, healthcare, etc.), I think its fair to assume this data represents the whole of the US...no matter where you live.
  - jedberg 5y ago
    Yes, it’s for the whole US, which tells us nothing useful for this debate. If there were 10,000,000 jobs in NYC and 1 job in Kansas or 10,000,000 jobs in Kansas and one in NYC, the graphs would look the same. So they tell us nothing.
    - mbesto 5y ago
      > So they tell us nothing. You should re-read my comment - I was inferring this was the case (to your point) based on the regional numbers. It's not perfect but it's indicative. I didn't have the time to dig into more data. > If there were 10,000,000 jobs in NYC and 1 job in Kansas or 10,000,000 jobs in Kansas and one in NYC, the graphs would look the same. These numbers are irrelevant anyway because they're always going to be correlated in some way to local population (thus per capita is important here) You should also check housing prices in states like Kansas, they're all through the roof - https://www.zillow.com/ks/home-values/ https://www.zillow.com/ks/home-values/ - in other words people aren't magically leaving these places for major metros (people follow jobs). Anyway took some digging but here is some data that explains it better: https://balancingeverything.com/states-with-the-best-job-market/ https://balancingeverything.com/states-with-the-best-job-mar... For example - Ohio has 231k openings compared to NY's 345k with a fraction of the overall population. So, no, leaving a major metro doesn't mean there "aren't any jobs". Quite the opposite actually. This has been talked about endless in media for the last 12 months, so it's no surprise the data supports it.
JaimeThompson 5y ago
Do you have links that show the typical pay for those jobs?
- mbesto 5y ago
  No but see my link above, a large plurality of jobs are professional services and healthcare, which if you read any "these jobs pay the highest" article it's usually those two sectors.
mateo411 5y ago
You are correct that there are a record number of jobs. However, the person you are responding is talking about the economic situation in the UK. I'm pretty sure those links to the Fed reports do not characterize the economic situation in the UK, because that's not their purview. The housing and job situation in the UK is much more difficult than the US.
KaiserPro 5y ago
Yes, but are they high paying, high security jobs?

by mbesto 5y ago

throwawaygh 5y ago

Presumably OP means a job in their profession, not employment generically.

lostmsu 5y ago
In the current system not everyone is entitled to a job for their profession. People should get used to it.
- uncomputation 5y ago
  > People should get used to it. Historically, this line of thinking never ends well.
  - lostmsu 5y ago
    That's true, but it is also true, that this is (at least partially) a self-imposed problem. Many people are giggling when they hear about a liberal arts graduate who struggles to find a descent job, but they never think the same might apply to their profession too.
- throwawaygh 5y ago
  So instead of optimizing for efficient allocation of labor and capital, we should instead optimize for the short-term benefit of the landed gentry class? Seems like a likely path to either economic ruin or political revolution. Probably both. Since you don't seem like you're be sympathetic to an ethical argument, here's some real-politik: "fuck the poors" works well enough when the poor are actually poor. Less well when the people being systematically fucked over have significant social esteem, education, and economic means. See: the American Revolution.
  - lostmsu 5y ago
    I don't see an ethical argument going against what I said in the parent comment. Here's a non-hypothetical scenario: Boeing lays off thousands of mechanical engineers in Greater Seattle Area. What do you suppose the local government has to do exactly to find jobs in mechanical engineering for them? What does it have to do with ethics?
- KaiserPro 5y ago
  So you're saying that instead of optimizing for the job I am qualified for and have experience of, I should move to somewhere where the labour market is more subdued, and move to an industry where I have no experience?
  - lostmsu 5y ago
    Basically, yes. Local (and global) market only has so many positions for a specific profession. If there are more qualified people, than positions, you are out of luck and might need to do exactly what you described.

jedberg 5y ago

But where are all these jobs? Aren't they mostly in the already impacted cities?

mbesto 5y ago
https://www.bls.gov/charts/job-openings-and-labor-turnover/opening-industry.htm https://www.bls.gov/charts/job-openings-and-labor-turnover/o... https://www.bls.gov/charts/job-openings-and-labor-turnover/opening-hire-seps-region.htm https://www.bls.gov/charts/job-openings-and-labor-turnover/o... Considering there is no regional specific trends and the highest % of jobs are actually in white collar jobs (pro services, healthcare, etc.), I think its fair to assume this data represents the whole of the US...no matter where you live.
- jedberg 5y ago
  Yes, it’s for the whole US, which tells us nothing useful for this debate. If there were 10,000,000 jobs in NYC and 1 job in Kansas or 10,000,000 jobs in Kansas and one in NYC, the graphs would look the same. So they tell us nothing.
  - mbesto 5y ago
    > So they tell us nothing. You should re-read my comment - I was inferring this was the case (to your point) based on the regional numbers. It's not perfect but it's indicative. I didn't have the time to dig into more data. > If there were 10,000,000 jobs in NYC and 1 job in Kansas or 10,000,000 jobs in Kansas and one in NYC, the graphs would look the same. These numbers are irrelevant anyway because they're always going to be correlated in some way to local population (thus per capita is important here) You should also check housing prices in states like Kansas, they're all through the roof - https://www.zillow.com/ks/home-values/ https://www.zillow.com/ks/home-values/ - in other words people aren't magically leaving these places for major metros (people follow jobs). Anyway took some digging but here is some data that explains it better: https://balancingeverything.com/states-with-the-best-job-market/ https://balancingeverything.com/states-with-the-best-job-mar... For example - Ohio has 231k openings compared to NY's 345k with a fraction of the overall population. So, no, leaving a major metro doesn't mean there "aren't any jobs". Quite the opposite actually. This has been talked about endless in media for the last 12 months, so it's no surprise the data supports it.

JaimeThompson 5y ago

Do you have links that show the typical pay for those jobs?

mbesto 5y ago
No but see my link above, a large plurality of jobs are professional services and healthcare, which if you read any "these jobs pay the highest" article it's usually those two sectors.

mateo411 5y ago

You are correct that there are a record number of jobs. However, the person you are responding is talking about the economic situation in the UK. I'm pretty sure those links to the Fed reports do not characterize the economic situation in the UK, because that's not their purview. The housing and job situation in the UK is much more difficult than the US.

KaiserPro 5y ago

Yes, but are they high paying, high security jobs?