http://www.economist.com/agenda/displayStory.cfm?story_id=1985889 I think the productivity gains in the US are a product of the job cuts, and a tech boom in the US. I believe it is long term, with many jobs out-sourcing to the Chinese, and Mexicans. Less jobs will be available, and as Americans work harder to keep there jobs and get paid less for it. The economic damage in the long term would be brutal. With national debt going up, with the average American down on the economy. A jobless economy is not good news to Bush. I think tech has a role to play as well, as there is a increasing amount of automation in the job sector more can be done is less time. Is the US headed in the direction of Japan with jobless growth, and deflation?
Side note Remember that the flip side is that Americans work too hard. This is not intended as a counterpoint to the topic, but an accompaniment. Whether it's violence in schools, poor educational results, sex and drugs among youth ... one should not be surprised to find in the parenting a wrongly-oriented prioritization of time allocation. I knew many a kid in high school and junior high who only ever talked to their parents when they were in trouble. Otherwise, mom and dad were too busy. And I pointed out elsewhere today that the 80's children of greed are the ones coming to political and power shortly. We'll see what it brings. :m:, Tiassa Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
American's _do_ work too hard. The average American works over 2000 hours a year. The average German more in the 1500 hour range. American business some gets away with it, while in Europe the average is more like 1700. But America is own by the businesses so we should all be thankful to have jobs. But if no one had jobs, who would buy the goods? Revive the Middle class and the economy will boom again. Giving money to the rich doesn't help and money to the poor just makes them less in debt. Middle class when moneyed buys long term goods like cars, houses, etc while the lower class buys mostly beer and pays down the credit cards. I think the Europeans are more productive during there work hours because they aren't burnt out. Americans and all there extra work need to work more because they are less productive due to over work. I was my most productive the weeks leading up to my sabbatical (8 weeks vacation once every 7 years) because I knew the time off was coming. Now that I am back, I am less productive hour to hour because its a marathon and I don't know when the race will end.
But America is own by the businesses so we should all be thankful to have jobs. But if no one had jobs, who would buy the goods? Due to Globalization the non-essential jobs will be going, going, gone. Americans net worth will begin to level off and eventually fall, due to the redistribution of wealth that is going on. Why would I have a factory in the Ohio Valley, which cost crazy amounts, when I can have one in the Pearl Delta? Thus in order for Americans to compete for jobs Americans have to lower there wage standards. The only hope for the individual now is to have a trade, or a essential job. Otherwise government jobs. Who would buy the goods? Easy the Chinese. Middle class when moneyed buys long term goods like cars, houses, etc while the lower class buys mostly beer and pays down the credit cards. That wasn't a stereotype noPlease Register or Log in to view the hidden image! , anyways I agree 100%. Now that I am back, I am less productive hour to hour because its a marathon and I don't know when the race will end. When your job moves to Thailand. And Douger you never answered my question... are u Axis Kast?
More on Americans and work habits From the Atlanta Journal-Constitution: Gimme a break! Americans need more time off (AJC) It's a pretty grim situation. As unemployment numbers continue to baffle the experts, we see a glimpse of the reason why. Americans are trained to simply shut up and work. Our economy does not support our human endeavors, our human endeavors are dedicated to the health of our economy. As one aerospace engineer in Seattle explained: "If you try to take a couple of your vacation days, you get told no, so your only recourse is to call in sick ... and risk getting management mad and becoming a potential candidate for termination. What happened to families and the reason we go to work to begin with?" Meanwhile the article speaks to improved profits and productivity among American companies that have instituted mandatory-vacation policies: profits doubling at a financial services group in Salem, Oregon; a janitorial firm in Cincinnati saw a 15% rise in profits. Studies dating back to the 1920s support this trend, including one that showed seven 50-hour work weeks would expect no greater productivity from an individual employee than seven forty-hour weeks. And as we add to that the estimate that job stress costs companies directly $150 billion a year, an issue hardly new but oft-ignored rises through the mists: - It's things like this that compel bleeding heart leftists to see cruelty in the businessman. It is things like this that compel the Anarchist to find commerce senseless, institutions antiprogressive, and laws detrimental. Productivity, profits, among the watchwords of smart business, are ignored by business leaders everywhere for an antiquated dominion that seems bent on adding to its own problems. It's vicious, properly vicious in the sense of vice. It seems an addiction to dominion and self-conscious comparison. We sit and listen to business leaders explain this or that job cut or benefit retraction as being good for the long term, it will protect the company, and that will protect jobs, and you don't hate jobs, do you? And here we see those adjustments being made in a fashion apathetic of industry trends, established behavioral and productivity research, and even the company's own stated goals. In the end, the rich get richer, the poor get poorer, and the people caught in between, a strong but diminishing number, are working harder to pick up the slack. Just once I want to hear the company tell it's investors, "The cuts being instituted are expected to save $100 million annually, though they will cost us $20 million in lost time, $40 million through benefit outflow, and $50 million in lost production for a net savings of negative $10 million dollars, which we can then write off and blame on the Democrats." Just once. In other news, SmartPros released an editorial concerning the results of Monster's 2003 Work/Life Balance survey, which suggested that as many as 80% of Americans are unsatisfied with their jobs: Something that strikes me curiously about Taylor's perspective is that it puts the onus of change on the workers, when it seems to be that they are powerless. It is not the workers who choose unwise layoffs and cutbacks, it is the workers who choose to continue feeding their families instead of risk all in a Republican-ruined job market for a little slice of happiness. After all, it's greedy to think about our happiness at the stake of feeding our children. But even in better times, it's difficult for Americans to escape the work-bug. Perhaps the sappy faux-liberalism of the Clinton years provided some minor relief, but I'm still not sure. In many families, most of the second income was devoted to paying for childcare; it was not what we might describe as an efficient way. But I disagree with Taylor insofar that while the worker does need to seek satisfaction and balance, the task is generally beyond them. Hell, they have a hard time getting the things the company tells them they're entitled to. In a bad job market, how can they be expected to drop their job and go seeking another that isn't there? (As an aside, for some reason, 9/11 strikes me as apropos. As the smoke still clouded the horizon, Hollywood elite poured forth their hearts and asked working Americans to contribute to the relief fund. Some stars just barely beat the rush to the obvious questions about why the rich were asking working Americans to put up so much cash without having posted their own contributions. American wealth always look to working America to do things for itself and others, regardless of whether or not they are empowered to.) I also wanted to consider an idea that terrorized Americans in the 1990s: the idea that government should be run like a capital enterprise has been taken too far in this country. In thee 1990s, people proposed that schools should be reoriented so that they could stop drawing red ink. Excuse me, but how do you make a school profitable? Sell out education. Whether it's Coke and Pepsi sponsoring minor health crises in order to secure marketshare among American students or cutting back "unprofitable" activities like art education, the pesudo-privatization of schools has hurt their mission in society. Likewise, meeting Constitutional requirements has proven difficult in privatized prisons; Sodexho-Marriott pulled its bid for providing food service to a prison after they realized that there was no way in hell they could make any money. It was a stockholder's nightmare. And so, lastly, we look at law enforcement. Arianna Huffington charged last summer that the War on Drugs played a vital role in creating the conditions that contributed to the 9/11 security failures. As she wrote it, Did The Drug War Claim Another 3,056 Casualties On 9-11? And as we hear, American law enforcement and intelligence agents were stretched thin. They were overworked. The important stuff that told us 9/11 was coming simply hadn't been gotten to yet. An August 4, 2003 commentary by Rich Tucker points to a few more examples: That Americans work too hard is a badge of pride for some, a malicious fiction according to others. Yet it is also a demonstrable reality as various agencies appeal to understaffing and overwhelming workloads to explain their inefficiency: - Law enforcement - Public schoolteachers - State social workers - US troops in Iraq (normally I would leave this one alone, but it serves the point so damn well ...) - The Judiciary (this is politics more than it is money, especially at the federal level, but we might still examine the results of piling high caseloads on judges at all levels) - Private companies - Lastly, perhaps most importantly, families Working too hard is part of a myth of the importance of commerce which affects every American. It is a tremendous and subtle influence with devastating and often blinding effects. Most Americans are trained such that when they look around and see the damage, all they can think of is to grab some more coffee and get back to work. And in the end, for all my international neighbors, I submit that this is a huge part of the apparent American apathy. It's a major reason people don't have time to devote large amounts of thought to the ballot box, a major reason they simply elect the same kind of officer over and over again despite their laments to God on high for some kind of change. God helps those who help themselves? Hardly. God need not heal a toe upon which a brick has not been dropped. The sad thing is that if it was just about money, we would have figured out these issues a long time ago. Two cents and then some .... :m:, Tiassa Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Excellent post Tiassa... as usual. But also you have to look at the personal detrement that this increased workload has on the individual. Sick days have shot up here in Canada (Canada is not much better than the US). With wages in some industries going down, and corporate mal-fiances alas Enron. Americans are being played around like a cheap French whore. Now about the things about schools and the like in the US. Well see here in Canada (or Canukistan) we have free healthcare, free schools publicly funded public and catholic schools, etc. Yet our governments federal and provincial have surpluses? Odd isn't it, also what I find down right laughable about the US is California. Privatize the electricty grid and go into deficit for it. Was that privitization supposed to do the opposite effect? 60% of the US budget is allocated to the DoD. Says a lot.
