RE: Re: RE: BLS Daily Report
RE It's not easy to read the tenure numbers - tenure could rise in a weak job market, as people hold on to what they have, and fall in a strong one, as they feel confident about changing jobs The national numbers don't show that much of a change between 1983 and 2000 And I believe I read recently that whereas firms for many years tried to layoff older and higher paid workers (who tended to have long tenure) they often now target younger/less skilled (who tend to have lower tenure) Eric
Re: Re: RE: BLS Daily Report
Well Manitoba and other Canadian provinces seem intent on training nurses to export to the US. Poorer provinces, such as Manitoba, also pay to train nurses who consequently migrate to richer provinces such as Alberta. We do the same thing with doctors. Our local rural hospital has 2 doctors from South Africa and 1 from Poland. Saskatchewan is noted for its lack of Canadian trained doctors in rural areas. Cheers, Ken Hanly - Original Message - From: Michael Perelman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 4:39 PM Subject: [PEN-L:21814] Re: RE: BLS Daily Report The nurses do not exist in those numbers. He is grandstanding -- unless we can kidnap nurses from elsewhere. On Wed, Jan 23, 2002 at 02:28:26PM -0800, Devine, James wrote: so what does pen-l think of the following? California hospitals will need 5,000 more workers to meet proposed minimum nurse-staffing levels released Tuesday by California Gov. Gray Davis. Davis' plan requires a minimum of one nurse for every five patients in medical wards -- and fewer patients per nurse in labor and delivery, emergency rooms and critical-care units. (The New York Times, page A15). Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Re: RE: BLS Daily Report
it also encourages hospitals to kick patients out. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine Michael Perelman writes: The nurses do not exist in those numbers. He is grandstanding -- unless we can kidnap nurses from elsewhere. so what does pen-l think of the following? California hospitals will need 5,000 more workers to meet proposed minimum nurse-staffing levels released Tuesday by California Gov. Gray Davis. Davis' plan requires a minimum of one nurse for every five patients in medical wards -- and fewer patients per nurse in labor and delivery, emergency rooms and critical-care units. (The New York Times, page A15).
Re: Re: RE: BLS Daily Report
Michael, It is interesting that last week in Winnipeg there was a 'job fair' where hundreds of American hospitals sent recruiters to entice Canadian (Manitoban) nurses to the US, Texas and North Carolina were particularly prominent. We have just re-introduced a two-year registered nurse training program to address the nurse shortage here and the American states were sending up recruiters to lure our recent graduates away with signing bonuses, moving and living allowances, etc -- simply because apparently the US is unwilling to pay to train its own supply of nurses. In other words, pure exploitation of the public education system of its colonies. Have you people no shame? ;-) Paul Phillips, Economics University of Manitoba Date sent: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 14:39:35 -0800 From: Michael Perelman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:[PEN-L:21814] Re: RE: BLS Daily Report Send reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The nurses do not exist in those numbers. He is grandstanding -- unless we can kidnap nurses from elsewhere. On Wed, Jan 23, 2002 at 02:28:26PM -0800, Devine, James wrote: so what does pen-l think of the following? California hospitals will need 5,000 more workers to meet proposed minimum nurse-staffing levels released Tuesday by California Gov. Gray Davis. Davis' plan requires a minimum of one nurse for every five patients in medical wards -- and fewer patients per nurse in labor and delivery, emergency rooms and critical-care units. (The New York Times, page A15). Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
G'day Doug, It's wrong at turning points; it underestimates job creation early in recoveries, and overestimates it at peaks and early in recessions. But that's not most of the time (which you'd never know from reading PEN-L). Fair enough. But we have had evidence for well over a year (in productivity, profits, capacity utilisation, business start-ups, and equity markets) that we could be recession-bound. So BLS is right to warn us. Perhaps it should have done so in the words you use above. But I reckon my question stands, don't you? Cheers, Rob.
Re: Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
Rob Schaap wrote: Which little statistical fib. . . Doug responded: This is not a fib. I generally have a lot of respect for the data produced by the BLS. They do a very good job at trying to figure out what is going on in the economy. They occasionally do introduce adjustments to take care of biases but these adjustments are generally very well motivated. However, casual users of BLS data often fail to noted some of the details behind the series the BLS generates and, so, often misuse/misunderstand these series. For instance the BLS reacted very well, and appropriately, to the attacks made against the CPI a few years ago. They didn't do anything to their series just to respond to the political pressure put on it by congress. Eric
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
Nurses are distinctly underpaid in relation to their responsibilities -- in the hospital, they are the ones who keep you alive. maggie Jim Devine wrote: I have no complaints about PAs. When I was on the HMO, the doc's office assigned me to the PA (since they treated me as a second-class citizen). Then I went on the Preferred Provider plan and got the doc himself. He's fine, but too much into prescribing pills as a solution to all ills. I'm back on the HMO now (I've got to cut costs!) so I'm a second-class citizen again (I get sent out to get my blood checked for cholesterol rather than having it done in-house), but I wouldn't mind seeing the PA again. Many nurses complain about the high pay that PAs get, though. At 08:17 PM 02/27/2001 -0600, you wrote: Yeah, but Physicians Assistants make more, on average, than nurses and can go into practice for themselves. Also, at least for women, PAs often provide better care than MDs -- for ex., PAs are midwives and provide routine gynecological care. I went to a PA for years instead of a gyno, and she pulled me through a couple of problems the gynos couldn't identify. Also, PAs are frequently trained in abortion and can provide services in a doctors office in many places where there are absolutely no other service providers available. maggie coleman Jim Devine wrote: Some nursing jobs have been taken over by Physicians' Assistants, who are basically low-paid MDs. At 12:17 PM 2/26/01 -0800, you wrote: Part time nurses under temporary contracts are doing quite well, although hospitals are downgrading many traditional nursing jobs to have non-professionals take over. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University [EMAIL PROTECTED] Chico, CA 95929 530-898-5321 fax 530-898-5901 Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~JDevine
Re: Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
Yeah, but Physicians Assistants make more, on average, than nurses and can go into practice for themselves. Also, at least for women, PAs often provide better care than MDs -- for ex., PAs are midwives and provide routine gynecological care. I went to a PA for years instead of a gyno, and she pulled me through a couple of problems the gynos couldn't identify. Also, PAs are frequently trained in abortion and can provide services in a doctors office in many places where there are absolutely no other service providers available. maggie coleman Jim Devine wrote: Some nursing jobs have been taken over by Physicians' Assistants, who are basically low-paid MDs. At 12:17 PM 2/26/01 -0800, you wrote: Part time nurses under temporary contracts are doing quite well, although hospitals are downgrading many traditional nursing jobs to have non-professionals take over. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University [EMAIL PROTECTED] Chico, CA 95929 530-898-5321 fax 530-898-5901 Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
Re: Re: Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
I have no complaints about PAs. When I was on the HMO, the doc's office assigned me to the PA (since they treated me as a second-class citizen). Then I went on the Preferred Provider plan and got the doc himself. He's fine, but too much into prescribing pills as a solution to all ills. I'm back on the HMO now (I've got to cut costs!) so I'm a second-class citizen again (I get sent out to get my blood checked for cholesterol rather than having it done in-house), but I wouldn't mind seeing the PA again. Many nurses complain about the high pay that PAs get, though. At 08:17 PM 02/27/2001 -0600, you wrote: Yeah, but Physicians Assistants make more, on average, than nurses and can go into practice for themselves. Also, at least for women, PAs often provide better care than MDs -- for ex., PAs are midwives and provide routine gynecological care. I went to a PA for years instead of a gyno, and she pulled me through a couple of problems the gynos couldn't identify. Also, PAs are frequently trained in abortion and can provide services in a doctors office in many places where there are absolutely no other service providers available. maggie coleman Jim Devine wrote: Some nursing jobs have been taken over by Physicians' Assistants, who are basically low-paid MDs. At 12:17 PM 2/26/01 -0800, you wrote: Part time nurses under temporary contracts are doing quite well, although hospitals are downgrading many traditional nursing jobs to have non-professionals take over. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University [EMAIL PROTECTED] Chico, CA 95929 530-898-5321 fax 530-898-5901 Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~JDevine
Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: BLS Daily Report
Mark Jones wrote: Doug Henwood wrote: Hmm, well last I checked, which was year-end 1999, the SP 500 was at 2.9 times its long-term trend price (long-term defined as since 1871). So just going back to the trendline would take the index down by 2/3, to a Dow-equivalent of 3735. And, as any student of Robert Shiller knows, trend overshoots on the high end are usually followed by trend overshoots on the low end, Dow 2000 isn't an unlikely target. That's why you're calling it LongWave2000, right? But the other day you wrote that 'the worst is over', no? Short-term, I meant. I think the great bull market (1982-2000?) is basically over, though. Doug
RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: BLS Daily Report
Doug Henwood wrote: I think the great bull market (1982-2000?) is basically over Bull markets aren't usually followed by plateaux, are they? My infamous bet with poor Max was also based on a back-of-envelope calculation that the Dow would logically fall to 3k. BTW, even that would not mean 'the end of capitalist civilisation as we know it', as other soi-disant marxists reproach me wrongly for arguing. I can't say I wouldn't get my pleasure from which the pain in the City though, not to speak of wall st. What _does_ interest me is to speculate about/analyse the consequences and implications for the world [dis]order. Mark Jones
[PEN-L:12961] Re: Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
If someone said that "high school" is affordable to most Americans that would probably be found quite unacceptable. Why is it that the state's obligation to provide education to everyone who can benefit does not extend to post-secondary education?University should be free, as it is in Cuba. I don't know what the situation in Europe is but I expect in many countries tuition is less than in the US or paid for by the state. In the former USSR it seems to me I recall that students used to complain about their living expenses! Cheers, Ken Hanly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Tuition might be affordable, but in my classes I would guess the typical student works 15 to 20 hours a week. This outside work has increased enormously in the past two decades and represents the chief cause in the decline in what we can teach in a typical semester. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:2005] Re: Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
G'day Ellen and Jim, Jim writes: IMHO, the strength of the US stock market first and foremost reflects the strength of the US profit rate I get confused here. Many 1998 annual reports within the Fortune 500 pointed at DECLINING profits, no? And might we not be conflating 'core business' performance with profits made on the stock markets? I mean, if a firm spends a heap on buy backs ( other stocks, too, I s'pose) on a roaring Wall St, simply because of CEO stock options and the fact that making the widgets of yore doesn't offer the returns you can get from shares - why, wouldn't profit statements actually be reflecting Wall St (and a bubble at that) rather than underpinning it? Sorry if this is crap. I just gotta know, that's all. Cheers, Rob.
[PEN-L:2007] Re: Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
On Thu, 7 Jan 1999, Jim Devine wrote: Ellen writes: Over the last few days, I have been looking over data on wages, exports, bankruptcies, etc. in the former so-called emerging markets. International capital, it seems, is really putting the screws to the laboring classes in Asia and South America. Asian assets are on sale at rock-bottom prices; commodity prices are so low, they're practically giving them away. Is this not the triumph of capitalism? Little wonder the Dow hit 9500. IMHO, the strength of the US stock market first and foremost reflects the strength of the US profit rate, with the speculative bubble being present but secondary. Orthodox economists tend to conflate what's good for capital (the profit rate, a high stock market) with what's good for the people (the GDP and its distribution, with limited negative environmental impact, etc., etc.) So it's natural that they would make this mistake. The question is whether the high US profit rate will persist given the mess that the rest of the world is in, not to mention the dynamic problems the result when an economy enjoys (and suffers from) a high and rising profit rate. (See my 1994 RESEARCH IN POLITICAL ECONOMY paper, on-line at: http://clawww.lmu.edu/Faculty/JDevine/subpages/depr/D0.html or /Depr.html) Can the "triumph of capitalism" (or more accurately of some sectors of US capitalism) persist? It didn't after 1929, the previous period of similar capitalist triumphalism. So the question is: are we currently in the historical analogy of 1929 or of 1927? It seems, though, that US capital has found ways to benefit from the mess in the rest of the world. GE, for example, made huge purchases in Asia, which it had been eyeing and organizing for some time but had found them too expensive. The capital goods are so cheap now that even if it takes years for Asia to recover, GE will make out like bandits. And their stock will continue to soar. It's the old maxim about a crisis causing consolidation of capital, but the winners and losers were already mapped out before the crisis started. If we believe that profit rates equalize across sectors, then this banditry should create rising profitability in the US by raising the opportunity cost of investing. This would not preclude shrinkage in the "real" sector; in fact, it might even encourage it. Cheers, Tavis
[PEN-L:1992] Re: Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
Jim Devine wrote: Not to minimize the bad news concerning this reestimation, but the good news, as Dave Richardson pointed out awhile back, is that lower measured inflation rates mean that the Fed is less likely to get pressured to step on the brakes. I'm way out of touch here in southwestern Virginia this week, but it sounds like the Fed is worried about the stock market, now that the crisis period in Asia is fading. The president of the Atlanta Fed gave a speech the other day that evoked bubblish fears, though in that careful way Fedsters do. BTW, Doug, I didn't see you at the economics convention. I still owe you a beer (or four). I guess I'll have to send you a cyber-beer. 'Cause I'm way out of town this week. How's the convention? I heard there was a party for the Long Term Capital guys. Doug
Re: [PEN-L:1576] Re: Re: Re: BLS Daily report
On Tue, 15 Dec 1998, Doug Henwood wrote: Michael Perelman wrote: In response to Tom's question below, I suspect that the Bank of International Settlements may be correct in so far as they go. The norm is not for a company to remove jobs via direct investment in a facility abroad. Outsourcing is a more likely route. Outsourcing need not involve direct investment. Besides, the Bank statement is unclear if t would even pick up the direct investment that leads to outsourcing. For example, GM wants to outsource an auto part. I invest in a shop in Bolivia to make the part, but not direct investment links the change to GM's laying workers off. Well how about this? The table shows total employment in U.S. motor vehicles and equipment up 265,000 from Jan 90-Nov 98 - or 216,000 looking at just production workers alone. In parts and accessories, the numbers are +167,000 and +130,000. After declining from the 1970s into the early 1990s, motor vehicles have increased their share of total employment since. Another point - though lots of people generalize about "globalization" trends from the auto industry, it represents well under 1% of total employment. Over 7 times as many people work in finance as in motor vehicles; 10 times in health, 20 times in government, and 22 times in retail. Doug Even services are "globalized". however, overseas shares of output, employment, etc. to total national output, employment, etc. is still very small. In other words, the whole question of globalization has been perhaps overblown. Anthony D'Costa EMPLOYMENT IN U.S. MOTOR VEHICLE INDUSTRY motor MV vehiclesparts equipment accessories --total total produc total produc employment 1/70 879 683 382 30671,018 1/80 852 627 388 30490,729 1/90 737 540 373 290 108,946 2/92 804 616 414 327 108,077 11/98 1,002 756 539 421 126,775 change to 11/98 from -- number 1/70 +123 +73 +157 +114 +55,757 1/80 +150 +129 +151 +117 +36,046 1/90 +265 +216 +167 +130 +17,829 2/92 +198 +140 +125 +94 +18,698 percent 1/70+14.0%+10.7%+41.1%+37.3%+78.5% 1/80+17.6%+20.6%+38.9%+38.4%+39.7% 1/90+36.0%+40.0%+44.7%+45.0%+16.4% 2/92+24.6%+22.7%+30.2%+28.8%+17.3% % of total 1/70 1.24% 0.96% 0.54% 0.43%100.0% 1/80 0.94% 0.69% 0.43% 0.33%100.0% 1/90 0.68% 0.50% 0.34% 0.27%100.0% 2/92 0.74% 0.57% 0.38% 0.30%100.0% 11/98 0.79% 0.60% 0.43% 0.33%100.0%
[PEN-L:1576] Re: Re: Re: BLS Daily report
Michael Perelman wrote: In response to Tom's question below, I suspect that the Bank of International Settlements may be correct in so far as they go. The norm is not for a company to remove jobs via direct investment in a facility abroad. Outsourcing is a more likely route. Outsourcing need not involve direct investment. Besides, the Bank statement is unclear if t would even pick up the direct investment that leads to outsourcing. For example, GM wants to outsource an auto part. I invest in a shop in Bolivia to make the part, but not direct investment links the change to GM's laying workers off. Well how about this? The table shows total employment in U.S. motor vehicles and equipment up 265,000 from Jan 90-Nov 98 - or 216,000 looking at just production workers alone. In parts and accessories, the numbers are +167,000 and +130,000. After declining from the 1970s into the early 1990s, motor vehicles have increased their share of total employment since. Another point - though lots of people generalize about "globalization" trends from the auto industry, it represents well under 1% of total employment. Over 7 times as many people work in finance as in motor vehicles; 10 times in health, 20 times in government, and 22 times in retail. Doug EMPLOYMENT IN U.S. MOTOR VEHICLE INDUSTRY motor MV vehiclesparts equipment accessories --total total produc total produc employment 1/70 879 683 382 30671,018 1/80 852 627 388 30490,729 1/90 737 540 373 290 108,946 2/92 804 616 414 327 108,077 11/98 1,002 756 539 421 126,775 change to 11/98 from -- number 1/70 +123 +73 +157 +114 +55,757 1/80 +150 +129 +151 +117 +36,046 1/90 +265 +216 +167 +130 +17,829 2/92 +198 +140 +125 +94 +18,698 percent 1/70+14.0%+10.7%+41.1%+37.3%+78.5% 1/80+17.6%+20.6%+38.9%+38.4%+39.7% 1/90+36.0%+40.0%+44.7%+45.0%+16.4% 2/92+24.6%+22.7%+30.2%+28.8%+17.3% % of total 1/70 1.24% 0.96% 0.54% 0.43%100.0% 1/80 0.94% 0.69% 0.43% 0.33%100.0% 1/90 0.68% 0.50% 0.34% 0.27%100.0% 2/92 0.74% 0.57% 0.38% 0.30%100.0% 11/98 0.79% 0.60% 0.43% 0.33%100.0%
[PEN-L:1579] Re: Re: Re: Re: BLS Daily report
In response to Doug's points below, I would begin by saying that the motor vehical industry is very cyclical. I suspect that the increase in employment in the sector has to do to the conversion to sport utility vehicles. I did not generalize from the auto sector. I only used it to illustrate a point. Finally, the small share motor vehicles illustrates how pervasive the de-industrialization has been. The (more than) compensating growth in the service sector, has not created the same type of jobs, as you well know. I would like to know if I was correct in my initial point about the accounting for outsourcing. Doug Henwood wrote: Well how about this? The table shows total employment in U.S. motor vehicles and equipment up 265,000 from Jan 90-Nov 98 - or 216,000 looking at just production workers alone. In parts and accessories, the numbers are +167,000 and +130,000. After declining from the 1970s into the early 1990s, motor vehicles have increased their share of total employment since. Another point - though lots of people generalize about "globalization" trends from the auto industry, it represents well under 1% of total employment. Over 7 times as many people work in finance as in motor vehicles; 10 times in health, 20 times in government, and 22 times in retail. Doug EMPLOYMENT IN U.S. MOTOR VEHICLE INDUSTRY motor MV vehiclesparts equipment accessories --total total produc total produc employment 1/70 879 683 382 30671,018 1/80 852 627 388 30490,729 1/90 737 540 373 290 108,946 2/92 804 616 414 327 108,077 11/98 1,002 756 539 421 126,775 change to 11/98 from -- number 1/70 +123 +73 +157 +114 +55,757 1/80 +150 +129 +151 +117 +36,046 1/90 +265 +216 +167 +130 +17,829 2/92 +198 +140 +125 +94 +18,698 percent 1/70+14.0%+10.7%+41.1%+37.3%+78.5% 1/80+17.6%+20.6%+38.9%+38.4%+39.7% 1/90+36.0%+40.0%+44.7%+45.0%+16.4% 2/92+24.6%+22.7%+30.2%+28.8%+17.3% % of total 1/70 1.24% 0.96% 0.54% 0.43%100.0% 1/80 0.94% 0.69% 0.43% 0.33%100.0% 1/90 0.68% 0.50% 0.34% 0.27%100.0% 2/92 0.74% 0.57% 0.38% 0.30%100.0% 11/98 0.79% 0.60% 0.43% 0.33%100.0% -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University [EMAIL PROTECTED] Chico, CA 95929 530-898-5321 fax 530-898-5901
