Tell us more Keith. How is this different from what Sally has been saying about the effects of lean manufacturing techniques and the reduction of labor forces as an efficiency devise to stimulate the markets? How could Ford drop 20,000 laborers at the drop of a hat? Why did they choose to have such overproduction as Greider noted a couple of years ago in "One World, Ready or Not"? Meanwhile, on Wall Street it seems more a discipline device to keep the holdovers "on their toes" working 15 to 18 hour days. The society will eventually pay the price in the alienation from their children that will have to be picked up by health and human services if not the police. What really seems to make the difference is in the use of drugs, where the wealthy and up can protect their children from the Draconian drug laws while the poor go to jail. Then they have debates about how much health care they should give them in the abusive prisons.
But I believe the article is right about the waste. Was there more waste in the Soviet Union or in today's Russia when it comes to human capital? How about East Germany, today's China or in Cuba? I would never want to live there myself but if the issue is efficiency then no one gets off free and some of the more slave like states turn out to be more efficient in the use of human capital if not being very good at the distribution of material goods. I suspect it all comes down to what you consider valuable in the making of a society. REH ----- Original Message ----- From: Keith Hudson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 12:51 PM Subject: The jobless young > FWers might be interested in part of an article in a special Financial > Times supplement today, "The World's Young People": > > <<<< > The army of the jobless gets bigger still > Jonathan Guthrie > > If the world were a company, its chief executive would be dismissed for > making such a poor use of its assets. Young people are generally vigorous, > mobile, quick to learn and have long periods of potential economic > productivity ahead of them. > > But, according to the International Labour Organisation in Geneva, an > estimated 66 million young men and women are unemployed. This represents > about 41% of the world total of 160 million jobless. A scandalous waste. > > The worst affected countries are in southern Europe, Latin America, the > Caribbean, the former Soviet Union countries and Africa. In Moscow alone > there are 40,000 children and young people without work, indeed without > homes and large numbers of them live in the sewers. Among other examples > given are Italy, with 33% youth unemployment, Dominica, with 41%, Poland > with 30%, South Africa with a massive 56% and Latin America countries with > jobless levels between 36% and 66%. > > Some countries have staged successful fightbacks against a monster which > saps young people's self-belief, marginalising them economically and > socially, and contributing to criminality and generational fragmentation. > > On the upside, the Republic of Ireland's economic miracle pushed youth > unemployment down from 19 to 8% between 1995 and 1999. Similar improvements > were achieved by Spain and Hungary, which recorded reductions from 40 to > 28% and from 19 to 12% respectively over the same period. > > However, these were the exceptions to a general deterioration marked by an > 8 million increase in the army of the unemployed around the world during > those five years. > > While economic success contributed to falling jobless totals in a few > countries, relatively healthy growth in GDP did not, in general, translate > into improved youth employment. > > This augurs poorly for the 1.2 billion young people projected to enter the > labour market during the next 30 years. > > The root causes of youth unemployment are legion. They include education > systems which do little to provide work-related skills, gains in > manufacturing productivity, over-protective employment regulations and > business legislation which stifles the entrepreneurial flame in those > without the assets to back their ambitions. > > For example, one young artisan operated a workshop in a home built without > official permission on waste ground. Since the authorities do not recognise > that the artisan owns the property, he cannot raise working capital using > the dwelling as security. His "factory" could also be bulldozed at any minute. > . . . . > > ----------- > __________________________________________________________ > "Writers used to write because they had something to say; now they write in > order to discover if they have something to say." John D. Barrow > _________________________________________________ > Keith Hudson, Bath, England; e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > _________________________________________________ >
