When will the labor market recover?

[POed_Ex_Repub]

Anyone have a good theory? State a date and supporting argument for these two cases:

If a dem is elected president, the labor market will recover on XXX because...

If shrub steals another one, the labor market will recover on XXX because...

[greatauntoftriplets]

1. It will take years.

Too much damage has been done to the labor market.

[lcordero]

2. labor market? recover?

Never.

http://www.prospect.org/print-friendly/print/V12/7/reich-r.html

The dirtiest little secret about the Roaring Nineties is that average working families gained almost no income, while their health care costs soared. From 1986 through 1997 (the latest year for which detailed IRS data are available), the average income of the richest 1 percent of Americans rose 89 percent, to $517,713. During these same years, the average income of the bottom 90 percent of Americans rose 1.6 percent, to $23,815. (These figures, not incidentally, are after all federal income taxes were paid.)

The labor market still hasn't recovered from the Reagan/BushI recession/depression.

[ferg]

3. temporary recovery in 2004

Greenspan, Bush, and the Republican Congress are pulling out all the stops in trying to get some jobs in 2004.

I think there's a decent chance it'll happen. You can live off credit cards for a short term.

After the election, though, we're hosed.

[whathappened]

4. ah yes

the job recoverey , let me look into my ball and see what it says , opps , have all the good jobs left this country for parts unknown , mabe if a dem is elected , they mite put a tax on all these products that are made for us over sea's , that we ourselfs use to make here at home , maybe they could come back if these fat cat's would have to make up the diff in taxes to cover the lost of jobs , if a freep is elected . look for more lost of jobs

[TreasonousBastard]

5. The only thing that will bring it back...

will be new industries. Everything we do now has been stripped to the bone and normal expansion won't lead to new jobs.

All that high-tech glitz of the past 10+ years has now matured and everyone's in the same boat as car and washing machine makers.

We can spend a lot of money rebuilding the infrastructure, cleaning the rivers, and all sorts of other things, but that's not much better than the old CCC and stopgap at best for job creation.

We need a new domestic industry that will grow and make vast amounts of money. I have no idea what it will be, but think back to what the Apple II started.

Someone will come up with something that will break out and create a whole new way of doing things. And we won't know until it happens. You just can't plan things like that.

What I fear is that our R&D is drying up. Everyone's playing it safe milking the old technologies for what they're worth and not allowing a true open marketplace.

[On the Road]

8. Even in the Early 90s, People Were Asking for Months:

"Where are the jobs? When will we reach the end of this wave of corporate downsizing?" The economy ended up recovering too little, too late. I still remember Bush Sr, a the end of the campaign, futilely shouting "Thee percent! Those are great numbers!"

Based on past experience, Greenspan may have turned the key at the right time but the engine is still turning over without catching. May be too little, too late again.

In 1992, telecom and the early internet were in full growth mode, real estate was picking up steam, and Wall Street was starting another boom. This time, it's difficult to see where these new jobs are going to be added. There are no major growth industries. Nothing to compare to any of those sectors.

Manufacturing jobs are still being lost. But this time its also software, help desk, and call center jobs. The scariest thing to realize is that there probably IS a surge in hiring in stateside jobs, but it's being negated by an equal number off jobs which have been offshored. The gaint sucking sound has gotten louder in the last 12 years.

[lcordero]

11. Yes, a "new industry" that will also be outsourced

[Yupster]

13. Exactly right Treasonous One

We have always exported our jobs to other lands.

However, we never cared very much because there were always new industries for us to work at instead. The problem now is that the rest of the world is catching up to us in the thinking department and I'm not so sure that we can bank on being the ones to invent all these new industries as we have in the past.

If nothing is done, we will see our standard of living drop because if we can't do stuff better than anyone else can do, then there is no reason for our standard of living to be any better than theirs.

What can be done about it?

We need to spend our money on research and development, areas which may lead to breakthroughs in industry or new inventions. We need to spend more money on pushing our brightest minds and students. We need to provide money and ability to people who are able to take large risks and try new things and make new products.

Sadly, on all these things, I see us going mostly in the opposite direction.

Most teachers will tell you about the problem of teaching to the lowest kids in the class to get them by the standardized exams.

If you invent a new drug, just assume you will be sued out of business the first time something goes wrong.

Anyway, I'm not very hopeful.

I think our standard of living will drop for a while, as will the standards of living of western Europe. Maybe the Indians or Chinese will pick up the ball and run with it for awhile.

[ramapo]

6. When there's a new direction

There are so many things that need to be done in this country, many infrastructure related.

So when we have leaders who:
Get mass transit projects started
Move us to solar/wind and other alternative energy sources
Really do something about the inner cities and other poverty stricken regions

We need jobs that actually accomplish something, not just serve burgers.

[Must_B_Free]

7. CLinton had it right

get money to the middle and bottom and they can afford to buy things.

[mitchum]

9. When pigs fly...

back from offshore

[Blue_Roses]

10. Clinton was a progressive

President who looked to the future and not back 20 years. I remember in one of his state of the union addresses that he wanted every family to be able to have a computer--at a time when computers were just starting to heat up.

Clinton was open to new ways of doing things, not keeping us "stuck" in the old, used-out, 1980's type of thinking. Bush can't do this. This is one of the many reasons he is so unqualified for this job. He maintains his "status" with the help of fundamentalist who have been preaching their tired ol' song and dance for years. Add with that a little help from his rich fat cat friends and he manages to keep up the facade.

We need a progressive President who looks to new ideas constantly if we are ever gonna see job recovery.

[Charlls]

14. Clinton was a bit of an outsider...

However i think its generally felt that Clinton was a bit of an outsider into the Washington political elite, which maybe was a fair source of the simpathy he aroused. Being so, he had a freedom/openness of view to new alternatives that way plainly closed to his chamaleonically republican-disguised dem pals.

There is no one with those aptitudes on the horizon right now...

[Kathy in Cambridge]

12. My local news announced IBM creating 50,000 new jobs, BUT

only 4,500 will be in US!

It was on my CBS affiliate, I'm looking for a link on their website.