Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Bush's future at risk in executive suites - Newsweek's Samuelson

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
question everything Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-10-04 05:23 PM
Original message
Bush's future at risk in executive suites - Newsweek's Samuelson
This election may be settled less in voting booths than in countless executive suites where hiring decisions are made. The irony is inescapable. An administration accused of being rabidly pro-business stands threatened by business – more precisely, firms' reluctance to add jobs.

(snip)


Few economists predicted the poor job growth. Theories abound. It's said that companies have become more productive by mastering new technologies. CEOs won't hire until they're convinced the recovery will continue. Efficient firms displace the inefficient.

"Offshoring" is the latest villain. Hordes of high-paying software and service jobs have supposedly left for India. The news coverage of this has been a bit on the sensational side. A New York Times headline warned: "No job is safe, unless it's at the nursing station." (The story didn't justify the headline.)

(snip)

Politically, little of this matters. In recent polls, "job loss" ranks with "terrorism" as the nation's most-important problem, says Andrew Kohut, director of the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. Worse for Bush, he says, the anxiety seems greater than justified by the unemployment rate, which was 5.6 percent in February. In late 1983, the unemployment rate was still 9 percent but consumer confidence was about where it is today. What explains the exceptional worry?

Possibly age – those graying baby boomers. The median age of the labor force is now about 40; it was 35 in 1982 and 37 in the 1990-91 recession. Older workers have more obligations (children, mortgages) and less flexibility. Their job skills, though more developed, may limit their choices. Even people with jobs may worry more about losing them. Compounding their anxiety is this: in 1982, about one-fifth of the unemployed were on temporary layoff; they didn't have to find a new job. Now, only about one in eight is on temporary layoff.

(snip)


Find this article at:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20040310/news_1e10samuels.html


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC