Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A natural consequence of shifting or reallocating Capital.
The federal poverty level is an average of the State poverty levels for the 48 contiguous States.
Thanks to bad government and stupid voters.
You've benefited quite handsomely, as evidenced by the fact that you're typing on your computer and using the internet.
Good. An educated electorate is a good thing.
Neither the federal government, nor States, nor cities have done anything to help create jobs in the 5th Level Economy, which is Research & Development.
You should have entered the 5th Level Economy in the mid-1990s, but you failed to shift any Capital and it wouldn't have mattered anyway, since you didn't have enough STEM graduates.
You still don't have enough STEM graduates and what you do have is of low quality.
Shifting Capital by altering tax laws to encourage start-ups for R&D would go along way to alleviate your economic problems.
The 5th level economy concept is deeply flawed. STEM includes engineers, who need to gain experience working on real things before they will ever useful contributors to R&D.
I see lots of start-ups on both coasts and a few in between. IMHE, the vast majority startups fall in these areas: 1. social interaction ("next great facebook!" "yeah, you and 1000 others"), 2. new (expensive) tech fad gadget added to (cheap) mundane item ("everbody will need a networked "smart" toaster oven for a $1000" *pretty sure not grandpa*, or 3. some sort of commercial intermediation ("you can get products XYZ here" *yeah pets.com comes to mind*. Actual improvements by startup in fields like material science, pharma, or physical engineering fields are rare.
The reality is that at this point full-on factory industrialization from raw materials to finished product is what is needed. An economy built on service providers is just foolish.
When I think of Carrier shutting down its Indianapolis operations, I think "deindustrialization" and not in a positive way.
Good paying jobs leaving for Mexico.
It would be well and good if every country was on the same playing field in terms of environmental laws, OSHA programs, wages etc.
But that's not the case. So how does an American earning $20 an hour compete with a Mexican earning $16 a day?
I agree with one of the posters who said we need an national industrial policy to encourage and keep industrial jobs here.
Mexico is just a stopover point. Once the powers that be decide that Mexican workers aren't cheap enough production will be moved to (Africa, Russia, Myanmar? ). Remember Korea in the 80's?
Mexico is just a stopover point. Once the powers that be decide that Mexican workers aren't cheap enough production will be moved to (Africa, Russia, Myanmar? ). Remember Korea in the 80's?
And you right there, see one of the negative consequences of deindustrialization.
Mexico is just a stopover point. Once the powers that be decide that Mexican workers aren't cheap enough production will be moved to (Africa, Russia, Myanmar? ). Remember Korea in the 80's?
The thing with Africa would be lack of developed infrastructure. Mexico has it; much of Africa doesn't. Travelling from one part of Africa to another takes forever unless you fly. You need to get your products to market somehow. Until there's a decent road system in much of west Africa, don't expect them to send very many products across the Atlantic no matter how cheap their labor is.
Also their political instability is a problem. Vietnam, India, Bangladesh, China, etc... are politically stable. You won't get much foriegn investment if your country is constantly under a travel warning.
India and Bangladesh were colonized by Britain and got British infrastructure development. Ditto China. Vietnam had France. West Africa had zip, the Europeans in Africa mostly exploited people, raw materials and animals.
Just think over the past 25 years, U.S.-manufactured goods exports more than quadrupled.
One big cause for higher unemployment is 50 years ago, it took about 1/3rd of working people to produce the food in this country. Today it is 1.5% to produce much more food. That is a lot of jobs needed to replace the food production jobs that are no longer around.
Another big factor, is the percentage of women that were housewives, and the husband was the bread winner. Today most families are a two working person household, and that was a lot of new jobs that have to be produced.
Population has taken a huge jump in this country in the last 50 years, which has put more people into the work force, and the need for more jobs.
The United States Industries are increasing, and we are not seeing deindustrialization as so many think.
Now the problems in manufacturing. Jobs have decreased largely due to automation. Example: Today they make way more cars in the U.S. but use about half the number of workers they did years ago.
At the present time, employment is increasing again or so we are lead to believe and they say trends are up for increasing employment in manufacturing.
Last edited by oldtrader; 08-01-2016 at 02:23 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.