Thanks Keith,

The information used in Kevin Drum's article is about the US labour market, 
which has seen a long-term shift from manufacturing, essentially factory, jobs 
to service jobs.  Service jobs do not, of course, only take place in tall 
office buildings, ever so many of them occur at ground level in places like 
coffee shops, eateries and stores selling the kinds of clothing and other goods 
that empowered women need if they are working in tall buildings.  Women are 
much better at such jobs and more appealing in them than men.

The world is indeed now very different from that contemplated by Friedman and 
Keynes and indeed anybody who has been around as long as you and I have.   In 
the 1950s, the women I went to university with were expected to take courses 
like home economics and learn skills that would be useful to them in the home 
and the non-working community.  One woman on campus was taking engineering and 
provided men, and probably some women too, with something to joke about.  But 
then along came the 1960s and '70s and whoosh the male dominated world was 
turned on its head.  Ever so many of the women who graduated then didn't even 
give a thought to being a housewife.  They had been trained for work and that's 
where they went.  Service organizations like daycares grew up around them.  
They were staffed almost exclusively by women.

I have no idea of where we go from here.  I'm retired and my kids have grown up 
so it's nothing I worry about.  But when I see men in their twenties or 
thirties or even forties pushing baby-strollers down the street in the middle 
of the day, I find myself yearning just a little for the good old days.  Surely 
they should be at work and their wives should be pushing those strollers, 
shouldn't they?

Ed
 
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Keith Hudson 
  To: RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION ; Ed Weick 
  Sent: Friday, February 12, 2010 11:52 AM
  Subject: Re: [Futurework] Men without work


  Ed,

  I don't know whether you wrote the last paragraph below but I can quite see 
male employment settling out lower than 80%. It's getting close to that now in 
most advanced countries and there's still a lot of jobs that have yet to be 
shaken out.

  Besides women's jobs that Kevin Drum writes about below there's also at least 
three other significant trends these days: (a) continuing automation; (b) 
increasing decline of profit margins on mass produced goods; (c) increasing 
skill gap in the newer technologies.

  This is a very different world than any contemplated either by either Milton 
Friedman or Keynes. I think they'd both be at a loss to suggest what should be 
done now, and both would also be at a loss to see what sort of economics will 
apply in the future.

  Keith

  At 08:49 12/02/2010 -0500, you wrote:

    From the Mother Jones website.
     
    Ed

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Men Without Work

    - By Kevin Drum
    | Wed Feb. 10, 2010 7:13 AM PST

    Back in the early 90s Joel Garreau wrote a book called Edge City. 
Basically, an edge city is a suburb, but it's a suburb that has the usual 
sprawl of stucco houses plus at least five million square feet of leasable 
office space. In other words, it's a self-contained community where people can 
both live and work, and until the mid-70s such places really didn't exist. 
Today they're ubiquitous. So what happened? Garreau explains:



      When I started asking developers when, exactly, they first thought it 
plausible to build quarter-of-a-million-square-foot office monoliths out in 
some cow pasture, far from the old downtowns, I found it eerie how often the 
year 1978 came up....The only thing I've discovered that begins to account for 
that nationwide pattern is that 1978 was the peak year in all of American 
history for women entering the work force. In the second half of the 1970s, 
unprecedentedly, more than eight million hitherto non-wage-earning women went 
out and found jobs. The spike year was 1978.


      That same year, a multitude of developers independently decided to start 
putting up big office buildings out beyond the traditional male-dominated 
downtown....The new advantage was proximity to the emerging work force. These 
Edge City work centers were convenient for women. It saved them time. This 
discovery was potent. A decade later, developers viewed it as a truism that 
office buildings had an indisputable advantage if they were located near the 
best-educated, most conscientious, most stable workers - underemployed females 
living in middle class communities on the fringes of the old urban areas.


    Italics mine. This passage has stuck with me ever since I first read it. 
Three decades ago employers discovered that as long as their jobs didn't 
require much in the way of physical strength - and fewer and fewer jobs did - 
women were a better employment bet than men. Since then, this has become more 
apparent with every passing year. Which brings us to the recession of 2008-09, 
as described by Don Peck in the Atlantic:



      The weight of this recession has fallen most heavily upon men, who've 
suffered roughly three-quarters of the 8 million job losses since the beginning 
of 2008....In November, 19.4 percent of all men in their prime working years, 
25 to 54, did not have jobs, the highest figure since the Bureau of Labor 
Statistics began tracking the statistic in 1948.


      ....According to W. Bradford Wilcox, the director of the National 
Marriage Project at the University of Virginia, the gender imbalance of the job 
losses in this recession is particularly noteworthy, and - when combined with 
the depth and duration of the jobs crisis - poses "a profound challenge to 
marriage," especially in lower-income communities. It may sound harsh, but in 
general, he says, "if men can't make a contribution financially, they don't 
have much to offer."


    Noted without comment, because I really don't quite know how this is all 
going to shake out. But I wouldn't be surprised if we're entering not merely a 
slow recovery in general, but an era in which the male employment ratio hovers 
permanently around 80% even for those in their prime working years. For now, 
though, just consider this some raw data.


    _______________________________________________
    Futurework mailing list
    [email protected]
    https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
  Keith Hudson, Saltford, England 

<<27350c6.jpg>>

_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Reply via email to