January 17, 2008
The Politics of Job Retraining
Steven Landsburg, a University of Rochester economist, may be right, in theory, that pols shouldn’t pander to unemployed people demanding job retraining, says Seth Weinberger. But “in theory, communism works,” too, writes Weinberger. So much for theory.
“In terms of pure economic efficiency,” writes Weinberger, “and maybe even morally, it might not make sense to compensate the losers from globalization. But from a political perspective, it is imperative that we do so, if only to be able to maintain public and political support for expanding free trade.”
Alex Kafka | Posted on Thursday January 17, 2008 | PermalinkComments
Previous: An Undercover Prof and the Clueless Students
Next: Law Schools and the Social Sciences
There is more to life than money and efficiency in accumulating more.
If we do not provide jobs retraining we will not have the workers in certain industries such as health care that are needed for retiring boomers (if they are able to retire). Same reason we need immigrant labor to pay into Social Security.
On top of this the idle and jobless are ones that might have nothing better to do than create havoc for those that have been fortunate to maintain their jobs.
“Losers from globalization”? hardly, these are hard working people.
— Not a Socialist, but a pragmatist Jan 17, 03:55 PM #
The big churn eventually causes us all to develop our knowledge and skills or risk becoming unemployed. Most job retraining that the state and federal government pays for is for persons who have few academic credentials or few relevant job skills. By helping an adult get a GED, associate degree, bachelors degree or employability skill credential not only helps an individual stay employed, but helps a city, county, or state enhance its economic development potential. Economic development and job development raises all boats – at least until the next technological innovation.
— Barry Ballard, Capitalist Jan 17, 06:38 PM #