| Source: Continuous Improvement Associates http://www.exponentialimprovement.com/cms/jobsmar09.shtml Social Issues Data sources at end of page. Summary Notes: Irrational belief in the infallibility of the "free market" and "free trade" has led to devastating offshoring of good-paying manufacturing and IT jobs. This has undermined the US economy, leading to its collapse. Nationally, policies continue to be a disaster for Mfg Jobs, IT Jobs, and Advanced Technology Products "trade". I explain why both stimulus and trade policy reform are necessary. The accompanying undermining of US wages is largely responsible for The 9/22/08 Economic Crisis ... collapsing demand has inevitably led to a collapsing economy. Yes, financial fraud and speculation precipitated the debacle, but the economy has become more and more unstable as U.S. wages have been systematically undermined. All this is of course, according to "conservatives," all Obama's fault though he's only been in office a little over two months. On the "banking crisis," conservative historian and proponent of a McCain presidency, Niall Ferguson, had this view, 4/26/09: Ferguson also agreed with advice offered by Paul Krugman (an "unprecedented" event, by Ferguson's own admission) that the "only way to deal with these big insolvent institutions is to take them into temporary conservatorship, let's use that lovely euphemism not nationalization, as happened with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, institutions that they quite closely resemble anyway. It's going to happen; we're going to end up doing this. And you restructure them." Unfortunately, Obama is not doing this even though he's being charged with taking over the banks and being a "socialist." As with Bush's Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson before him, Obama's Tim Geithner is bailing out the banks with few, if any, strings attached. That's the banks controlling government, not the government controlling the banks; that's fascism, not socialism. Looking at the graphs below, is there any wonder that the U.S. economy is in shambles thanks to "free trade" offshoring? Examples of what "trade" policy has produced: Tent Cities in LA 3/16/09, Cities Deal With a Surge in Shantytowns 3/25/09. Obama's stimulus is necessary, but not sufficient, and will fail unless the "trade deficit" is addressed ... and so far it doesn't appear that it will be. As Uchitelle wrote: "... imports, entering the country in ever greater quantities, will slow any expansion by siphoning sales from domestic producers." The Rock and the Hard Place: Obama needs the Chinese to keep buying U.S. treasury bills to fund necessary stimulus to address the short-term cyclical recession; therefore he can't upset them by confronting them on "trade" issues. But because Obama won't address "trade" issues that have caused a long-term secular economic decline, the stimulus will fail. Bummer. Damn. We are so screwed. See the section below that uses the equation for GDP to explain why both Stimulus & Trade Policy Reform are necessary. The Graph below showing Manufacturing Jobs & Trade Agreement History illustrates that the rapid loss of manufacturing jobs has been since China got PNTR. But the growth of manufacturing jobs stopped back in 1980 (that's 28 years). Comparison of Percentage of Manufacturing Jobs Lost
Comparison of Percentage of IT Jobs Lost
Woe is Colorado Springs ... it just gets worse. In Jan Mfg job loss was 44.9% and IT loss was 48.3%.
US Job Growth has nowhere near kept up with Population Growth ... especially as jobs have been lost. The gap is over 11.3 million jobs. There are now 5.8 million fewer jobs than in Nov 07 (it was 4.9M last month). Persons who have another job hold about 7.6 million existing jobs; that's 5.5% of employment (see the "multiple jobholders" graph at the bottom of Employment & Unemployment and BLS site for the latest). Population increasing ... jobs dropping like a rock:
You read that Jobless Rate Hits 8.5% After 663,000 Jobs Lost in March, but that's non-farm, payroll jobs. The actual number of jobs lost is 861,000. See the "Seasonally Adjusted Employed" Feb to Mar delta at Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey. These are the numbers used for the chart above.
Manufacturing Jobs & Trade Agreement History Here's a graph, suggested by Paul Carson and first included last month, showing average U.S. manufacturing jobs for each year along with 'trade-related' agreements. Note the downhill slide began in the 80s with the U.S. giving China Most Favored Nation status. But it really went over the cliff when the U.S. granted China Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR). That coincides with the real cliff in the loss of manufacturing jobs. A coincidence? I don't think so.
The graph shows that the rapid loss of manufacturing jobs has been since China got PNTR. But the growth of manufacturing jobs stopped back in 1980 (that's 28 years).
National IT Job Trend. Bummer, people who lost their manufacturing jobs retrained for these jobs. But somehow the US needs 65,000 H-1B visas to import workers because there's a shortage?
Colorado Manufacturing Job Trend ... also accelerating downward.
Colorado IT Job Trend ...
Colorado Springs Manufacturing Job Trend ... also accelerating downward ...
Colorado Springs IT Job Trend. Think about this: 46% of Mfg and 49% of IT jobs lost from Colorado Springs. Read about this in the corporate media?
Colorado Non-Farm Jobs Trend. Colorado would need another 312,532 jobs to have kept up with population growth (this was 295,000 jobs last month). Colorado has lost 61,100 jobs since Aug 08. That's 14,700 CO jobs lost in Feb ... see the chart below for jobs lost by month.
Note that NAFTA, China PNTR, and China into the WTO have been on the forefront of massive borrowing to support the "trade" deficit. The "trade" deficit was growing exponentially through 2006. It's no surprise that that's over; no exponential increase can be sustained. The graph shows that the trade deficit began its major climb in 1996 following NAFTA in late 1994 (that's 14 years). It would have been sooner, also in 1980 (that's 28 years), had Reagan's Plaza Accord not devalued the dollar.
The U.S. had a $38.4B surplus in 1991. The ATP "trade" balance in 2008 was -$55.6B, a deficit much larger than the surplus in 1991. This is the "progress" the U.S. has made thanks to the "free traders" that have undermined the U.S. economy? We've been told that the US is going to let others (e.g., China) do the low-tech manufacturing and the US is going to retain high-tech manufacturing. So much for that; it's not true. It should be no surprise that students aren't attracted to high-tech education. It's difficult subject matter ... and high-tech jobs are disappearing.
Here's the monthly ATP trade balance trend since 2006 with a linear least-square fit showing the overall downward trend. Note that from Nov to Jan the ATP balance has been less negative by $5.9B. Why is that? It was because exports fell by $3.3B and imports fell by $9.2B; So the ATP balance wasn't improving because exports rose. It was because imports fell more than exports. That's because the U.S. economy is failing. Feb data has been added to the graph below since this page was published ... exports rose by $198M and imports fell by $317M. ATP balance remains negative, but less so for the last three months.
While there's concern that the Official Unemployment Rate (U3) rose to 8.5% in Mar (it was 7.6% in Jan & 8.1% in Feb), there should be even more concern. What I call the "Real Unemployment Rate" is 21.8%. Do not dismiss this as absurd. John Williams (Shadow Government Statistics) has his SGS-Alternate Unemployment Rate last month at 19.1% ... my estimate isn't all that much different. From his March 6, 2009 Flash Update:
His Employment and Unemployment Reporting primer is educational. My "Real Unemployment Rate" number includes those extra who are classified as "Not in labor force, but Persons who currently want a job" to the government's U6 statistic. It also adds those needed to keep up with population growth ... see the gap at the 4th figure from the top ... that's now 11.3 million persons. For explanations of these numbers see Unemployment: Official, Effective, Real. For the real-life impact see There's no 'free market' for Labor. Ever wonder why the official poverty rate in America is between 12% and 13%? It's no coincidence.
US Unemployment Level - Official vs. Actual There are now more like 39.4 million persons unemployed in Feb09 compared to the official U-3 number of 13.1 million and U-6 number of 24M. None of this counts the underemployed. In 2006 there were 36.5 million people in poverty; no wonder.
Uchitelle's numbers in the article referenced above, Economy Falling Years Behind Full Speed, are dire, but they're an underestimate:
His 15.6% is U-6, which also doesn't count everyone and doesn't include jobs needed to keep up with population growth. The 24M is the number of people the U-6 15.6% represents. It's more like 39M!!! Concerned yet? Data Sources:
© 2003 Continuous Improvement Associates Top of Page |
















