Squirrel!!!
By Walter Russell Mead
The jobs numbers are out for March, and
they’re a doozy: only 88,000 new jobs were added, with unemployment inching
down to 7.6 percent. That may not sound so bad until you look at the context.
This figure is significantly down from the 268,000 jobs added in February, and
is far more dire than the 200,000
jobs economists expected. Unemployment was down—barely—and
was due to almost half a million people
leaving the workforce.
The New
York Times’ story
puts the figures against a grim backdrop:
“It’s important to look at the types
of jobs that are being created because those jobs will directly affect the
fortunes and challenges of households and neighborhoods as well as the course
of the recovery,” said Sarah Bloom Raskin, a member of the Federal Reserve
Board, in a recent speech. [...]
Ms. Raskin also expressed concern
about temporary-help jobs, which account for a growing share of total
employment.
Usually an
increase in temp hiring is considered a good thing, at least at the start of a
recovery, since it indicates that employers are thinking about taking on
permanent workers. So far, though, employers seem to be sticking with those
temporary contracts.
“Temporary help
is rapidly approaching a new record,” said Diane Swonk, chief economist at
Mesirow Financial, who noted that there was also a rapid increase in temp
hiring during the boom years of the ‘90s. “That of course means more
flexibility for employers, and less job security for workers.”
Perhaps most
distressingly, millions of workers who want full-time work still can find only
part-time work, and their missing work hours do not count toward the official
unemployment rate.
Some of these
trends mentioned in the Times article look like they might be
influenced by Obamacare: companies don’t want to add full time job slots when
they incur health care liabilities. It appears that, despite all the
comforting words from the administration that the “smart tax hikes” and
brilliant Obamacare plans are creating the most fabulous business environment
since the invention of fire, actual businessmen are still hesitant to invest
actual money in the American economy.
We are, however,
thrilled that we don’t have a Republican in the White House, because if we did,
the press would be incessantly yammering about this bad news until we were all
sick of it. As it is, they are likely to say as little as possible about what
appears to be a massive failure of economic policy and go back to covering the
really important issues, like gay marriage.
If a Republican
president got very busy on social issues at a time of economic stagnation and
disappointment, there would be earnest hand-wringing of the “What’s
Wrong with Kansas” variety about how American rubes were being diverted from
their true economic interests by the skillful manipulation of emotionally
charged social issues and identity politics. This would be taken as a sign of
the cynicism of the ruling party and the clueless credulity of the hypnotized
voters.
Fortunately, we
aren’t going to have to listen to any of that depressing rhetoric now. Social
issues are good and important; economic questions like jobs and incomes and
growth are a distraction from the real business of the people.
http://tinyurl.com/d5hstn4
No comments:
Post a Comment