And in the tech field (which the article and responding posts were about) jobs have dramatically increased during the time frame in question. We were talking about tech jobs, you injected your little bit about factory jobs.
Erm, no. TLW mentioned that we needed to transition from the jobs we've lost to other nations into tech jobs. I mentioned, in response, the Atlantic article talking about how "we'll all just work tech jobs" hasn't panned out.
But it did so by repeating the same flawed "all jobs created by US companies overseas are jobs lost domestically" argument. That's what I was pointing out. The article did not support the claim you were making (or did so using a poor premise).
Liberals obsess over "outsourced" tech jobs in India, while failing to recognize that the total number of tech jobs in the US has increased over the period of time in question.
Well, no. By in large, "liberals" are more concerned about losing jobs to other nations in general.
No. I'd say that liberals are more concerned about making it look like we're losing jobs to other nations in order to avoid the larger problems with our job market. We aren't "losing jobs" to India in the tech fields Joph. Those claiming this use the same false statistical analysis methods I mentioned above (assume every job created in another country was lost to the US). But that growth in other areas is just that: Growth in other areas. It does not significantly impact the job market here.
Call me when the number of manufacturing jobs lost to other nations is smaller than that amazing increase in tech jobs, ok? Or maybe just cover your ears and holler that it doesn't matter so stop talking about them.
Do you know what's preventing even more growth of tech jobs in the US? Qualified people. I'm serious. The problem is that some people want to protect unskilled or low skilled jobs, while simultaneously making it impossible for those jobs to be competitive here. That's the factory worker that you argue wont be able to shift to an in-demand tech job btw.
What do you think we should do though? That same person will *never* be productive working in a factory in the US either. Not so long as we keep our current set of regulations which make such workplaces incredibly expensive to operate. So you'd rather we spend massive amounts of money subsidizing whole industries to pay the higher costs of doing business which we created just so we can protect workers who can't find other jobs that are more useful and cost effective?
At least "shift them into some sort of tech job" is workable and for those who do find work in those areas, they are productive rather than anti-productive. I'll point out that you haven't provided any sort of alternative solution, much less explained how the Democrats policies will somehow magically save us. We can't just keep using government money to protect industries from competition. It doesn't work in the long run. What it does do, however, is make the labor gap worse.
Manufacturing has been leaving the US for over 30 years. To suggest that this is some new problem that just popped up in the last handful of years and made our economy a mess is pretty ridiculous.
at which it's been leaving skyrocketed
in the last decade. In fact, under the last president, the US saw sustained shedding of manufacturing jobs during a non-recession period for the first time and it was a loss as significant as that from previous recessions. That is, in fact, a "new" problem.
No. It's not. The difference is that Bush and the GOP have been less willing to spend government money to prop up those failing industries. That's not the same thing. The economic effects have been there and been growing for decades. It's not like manufacturing magically got cheaper in other countries and more expensive in the US just in the last decade Joph. Not that much more.
Can you point to any policies of the Bush administration (other than *not* spending money to protect those jobs) that caused this? It's a natural market force. We will only hurt ourselves by fighting against it. If we want manufacturing jobs to come back to the US, we have to change the things that make manufacturing jobs in the US not cost effective. And subsidies and bailouts are *not* the answer. That's just putting a bandaid over the problem and pushing it onto the next guy.
If the conservative solution to move forward into new jobs is wrong, then what is the right answer? Do you have one? Cause if you don't...