The first time I saw this was in Picher, Oklahoma and the automation of the
mines.     Whole communities moved from place to place around the country
but the old way was gone.     

 

Then I went into the Arts.   The Arts were already in a fifty year
automation with electronics replacing live performers and real performing
art.     

 

Now I listen to ghosts on the radio and accept it because I'm old and can do
nothing about it.   But I do know the difference.    I do know the
difference between junk and the real thing. 

 

The movies made something that was good for a while, a new art form.
Because competing labor unions in manufacturing offered a quality of life
with retirement and healthcare, the Screen Actors Guild stepped up but then
they elected Reagan as the head of SAG and got stupid.  But before that,
after a generation of ruined actors lives, the Screen Actors Guild set up a
"residual" program that was imitated by the sports and other media and
things were good for a while.      But now the market has eaten away at
that, they can't stand black sports stars making star salaries,  and now we
have "Lean and Agile" manufacturing and temporary jobs that pay well or junk
jobs that don't.   Now profit is worth more than citizenship.    In
actuality, all Lean and Agile manufacturing is, is the academic class
structure made up of temporary projects and grades with no real
interconnectivity.    Academic vs.  Practical virtuosic education that
requires interconnectivity and a maintenance of competency.    Virtuosic
education is non linear and cyclic where regular Academia is like taking a
rode trip and learning the towns along the way only to leave them forever
once had a taste.     "Life as a journey." 

 

What will the history of the nation say about this generation of shallow
shirkers and grifters?     Will economics ever recover as an academic
discipline?     Or will this discredit it for a thousand years?      How
about the cultures that identify with it?    Will they be thought of in
history as we now thing of augury?      Will the worship affair with gold
one day be proven to have simply been a mining deal with another species who
needed it for their space ships and then didn't and left? 

 

REH

 

From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Arthur Cordell
Sent: Monday, April 01, 2013 4:54 PM
To: [email protected]; 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME
DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION'
Subject: [Futurework] Rumors of a Cheap-Energy Jobs Boom Remain Just That

 


Rumors of a Cheap-Energy Jobs Boom Remain Just That


.    by NELSON D. SCHWARTZ 

.    April 1, 2013 ny times

. 

Natural gas is used at the PPG Industries glassmaking plant in Carlisle, Pa.


These are good times for Libbey, a 125-year-old American glassmaker that
nearly went bankrupt four years ago. The company's shares have risen to
almost $20 from below $1, sales of its tableware are at a record high, and
its energy-intensive factories saved more than $5 million in 2012 as natural
gas prices fell. 

Despite all the upbeat news, however, Libbey recently announced it would lay
off 200 workers at its plant in Shreveport, La., and move some production to
Mexico as it cuts costs and discontinues several products. 

Libbey's decision is just one example of why manufacturing, for all its
renewed promise, is likely to fall far short of the claims by industry
groups that millions of new factory jobs are about to be created in the
United States because of the unlocking of abundant supplies of domestic
energy. 

"Even though the U.S. is more competitive globally, manufacturing doesn't
give you the kind of direct job creation it did in years past," said Joseph
G. Carson, director of global economic research at AllianceBernstein, a Wall
Street investment firm. "At the end of the day you still want a strong
manufacturing base, but there aren't as many people on the factory floor." 

Indeed, while the sector has added 500,000 jobs since the recession ended
and the value of what the nation's factories churn out is close to a high,
there are nonetheless two million fewer manufacturing workers today than in
2007. Ever since the early 1960s, the share of jobs in manufacturing has
been on a nearly uninterrupted downward slope, now accounting for less than
9 percent of all employment in the United States. 

The dream that a reinvigorated manufacturing sector will restore prosperity
to the middle class and bring back millions of well-paying blue-collar jobs
has made for some unlikely political bedfellows recently. 

Even as heavy industry has garnered strong support from the White House - in
his State of the Union address in February, President Obama proposed
financing 15 new centers for manufacturing innovation - a number of lobbying
groups have been promising that more drilling for natural gas will lead to a
jobs boom in dozens of industries that would benefit from cheaper energy.
They argue that if additional land is opened for exploration, especially
shale formations where hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, can increase
production, millions of manufacturing jobs that migrated overseas will
return to the United States. 

Fracking's environmental impact has made it a flash point for activists, but
the promised job gains, other than in the petrochemical industry, have been
slow to materialize. 

"It's not going to happen as fast as a lot of people think and it will be
selective," said Stephen T. Maurer, who heads up the manufacturing practice
at AlixPartners, a consulting firm. The sector may not be hemorrhaging jobs
as in recent years, he said, "but it's going to be a long, slow climb back."


For all the caution of experts like Mr. Maurer and Mr. Carson, industries
that benefit from cheaper gas have not been shy about talking up the coming
manufacturing jobs bonanza they foresee. A December 2011 report
<http://www.pwc.com/en_US/us/industrial-products/assets/pwc-shale-gas-us-man
ufacturing-renaissance.pdf> by PricewaterhouseCoopers and the National
Association of Manufacturers predicts fracking could help add one million
manufacturing jobs in the United States by 2025. 

"It definitely is a game changer for the United States," said Chad Moutray,
chief economist at the National Association of Manufacturers. "It puts us in
a position that we might not have been in a couple of years ago." 

A May 2012 study
<http://www.americanchemistry.com/Policy/Energy/Shale-Gas/Shale-Gas-Competit
iveness-and-New-US-Investment.pdf>  by the American Chemistry Council, which
represents the chemicals industry, estimated that increased gas production
could create 200,000 jobs in the broader manufacturing sector, including
several thousand in the glass industry. "It's resulting in a renaissance in
manufacturing," said Kevin Swift, the chemical council's chief economist. 

But glass industry veterans say cheaper natural gas, which is used to melt
sand into glass and is critical to the manufacturing process, isn't a game
changer in terms of jobs, however beneficial the cost savings are. Pressure
from inexpensive imports remains intense, and labor in Mexico and China is
still cheaper than in the United States. 

  _____  


References


Original URL:


http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/02/business/economy/rumors-of-a-cheap-energy-
jobs-boom-remain-just-that.html?nl=afternoonupdate
<http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/02/business/economy/rumors-of-a-cheap-energy
-jobs-boom-remain-just-that.html?nl=afternoonupdate&emc=edit_au_20130401>
&emc=edit_au_20130401

*
<http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=http://www.readability.com/articles/1j
0gr87n&t=Rumors%20of%20a%20Cheap-Energy%20Jobs%20Boom%20Remain%20Just%20That
> Facebook 
*        <http://www.readability.com/articles/1j0gr87n> Twitter 
*       Email 

*        <http://www.readability.com/articles/1j0gr87n/ajax/archive>
Unarchive 
*       Tags 

 

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

Reply via email to