How to end all unemployement overnight

[brandon]

How To Fix the Jobs Problem (http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/fix-jobs-problem140.html)

by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.


All this talk of unemployment is preposterous. Think of it. We live in a world with lots of imperfections, things that need to be done. It has always been so and always will be so. That means that there is work to be done, and therefore always jobs. The problem of unemployment is a problem of disconnect between those who would work and those who would hire.

What is the disconnect? It comes down to affordability. Businesses right now can't afford to hire new workers. They keep letting them go. Therefore, unemployment is high, in the double-digits, approaching 17% or more. Among black men, it is 25%. Among the youth, it is 30% or higher. And the problem is spreading and will continue to spread so long as there are barriers to deal-making between hirers and workers.

Again, it is not a lack of work to be done. It is too expensive to pay for the work to be done. So ask yourself, what are those things that prevent deals from being made?

Let me list a few barriers:

...Read the rest at http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/fix-jobs-problem140.html


Also the CFL sucks

[Zippyjuan]

Communist Russia officially had no unemployment- yet there were many people who did not work. It is not possible to get rid of all unemployment. There are always people unable or unwilling to work or those in transition between jobs. Getting rid of taxes or minimum wages will not get rid of all unemployment. If I am a company making cars and can only sell 100 cars a year I am not going to hire more people than it takes to make those 100 cars- no matter how many tax breaks or incentives you give me. If you can get more people to buy more cars from me, then I will need more people.

[brandon]

True, but usually people unable or unwilling to work or those in transition between jobs are not counted as unemployed.

Usually unemployment only considers those seeking work but unable to find a job.

[erowe1]

I love this line at the beginning:

We live in a world with lots of imperfections, things that need to be done. It has always been so and always will be so. That means that there is work to be done, and therefore, always jobs.

Protectionists commit the same fallacy when they talk about exporting jobs overseas or illegal immigrants taking Americans' jobs, as though there's some finite pool of work to be done and when somebody does some of that work that leaves less left over for everyone else to do.

[sratiug]

I love this line at the beginning:


Protectionists commit the same fallacy when they talk about exporting jobs overseas or illegal immigrants taking Americans' jobs, as though there's some finite pool of work to be done and when somebody does some of that work that leaves less left over for everyone else to do.

You are saying there is an infinite amount of money available to pay for the work to be done?

[brandon]

You are saying there is an infinite amount of money available to pay for the work to be done?

You don't need an infinite money supply. You just need to increase the velocity of money.

[sratiug]

You don't need an infinite money supply. You just need to increase the velocity of money.

How does hiring a foreign worker increase the velocity of money in my town?

[erowe1]

You are saying there is an infinite amount of money available to pay for the work to be done?

No. Any amount of money works just fine.

[erowe1]

How does hiring a foreign worker increase the velocity of money in my town?

Increasing the amount of goods and services that can be purchased with an existing money supply just decreases the amount of money required to purchase each of those goods and services (i.e. their price). The result is a net increase in the wealth (i.e. actual stuff we want) of your town while the total amount of money used in transactions that transfer that wealth from person to person remains constant.

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

I love this line at the beginning:


Protectionists commit the same fallacy when they talk about exporting jobs overseas or illegal immigrants taking Americans' jobs, as though there's some finite pool of work to be done and when somebody does some of that work that leaves less left over for everyone else to do.

When Jesus perceived that the *multitudes had been fasting for three days, with their fasting being of the spiritual variety -- the kind of fasting that happens when people don't feel hungry or thirsty because of grief, sorrow and anguish -- He felt burdened to feed them. While his disciples told the multitudes to go home and do something responsible in order to feed themselves, Jesus told them to remain where they stand and to recline on the ground like the rich people do.
When thinking about this, I like to think of the movie Gandhi and how the Indian elite had assembled to lounge reclining back during that particular part of the movie gathering together to listen to some political speeches notably Gandhis.
*In contrast to the more intimate designation of "people," multitudes denotes the Gentile nations while Christ Himself represents the "necessary tyranny" over them.

[Zippyjuan]

No. Any amount of money works just fine.
so we can end unemployment on 25 cents a day?

[dannno]

How does hiring a foreign worker increase the velocity of money in my town?

By creating products and services for others to buy as well as adding his own demand for goods and services.

[dannno]

so we can end unemployment on 25 cents a day?

No, you end it on whatever amount is agreed on by two people and stop the government from dictating wages at all.

Not everybody has a mortgage. There are kids and relatives who live with their family and don't need to make a lot of money. Some of these people are willing to work for less money and less hours, but the government makes it illegal for the transaction to take place.

Allow these people to work, then allow them to go out and buy goods and services in the economy and we will improve our overall economic conditions. The government disallowing this to take place hurts everybody.

[Zippyjuan]

What about an employer who replaces that mortgage paying worker with one they pay $5 to? Is this better for the economy? The mortgage paying worker spent more money on other things in the economy than the person getting paid less to do the same job will. This is the effect we have seen from exporting high paying manufacturing jobs to China and India.

[erowe1]

What about an employer who replaces that mortgage paying worker with one they pay $5 to? Is this better for the economy?

If both employees are equally productive, then of course it's good for the economy. That would mean that the employer could get the same amount of output at less cost and be able to use the difference to produce other stuff, and the mortgage paying worker would then (provided he doesn't want to be unemployed) also be put to work either with that same employer or someone else at whatever rate of pay he can command for his productivity. The net result is more total production to be enjoyed by that population. The dollar figures that get attached to the products and factors of production themselves are not what matters.

[dannno]

What about an employer who replaces that mortgage paying worker with one they pay $5 to? Is this better for the economy? The mortgage paying worker spent more money on other things in the economy than the person getting paid less to do the same job will. This is the effect we have seen from exporting high paying manufacturing jobs to China and India.

The cost to produce goes down so the prices on the goods go down. Everybody benefits, except the person who needs to find a new job. But the good news is that there is more money to be re-invested in the company to expand so that they can produce more goods and more people can then enjoy those goods. This creates even more jobs. As this effect is applied across the board, prices of all goods and services drop so that they become affordable to the workers.

The reason why our production has gone overseas is because our currency is overvalued due to being the reserve currency of the world. That means that it doesn't matter if we are better at producing certain goods and services than India or China, because we as workers are demanding pay in currency that is overvalued.

[Zippyjuan]

If the wages I got were cut in half because somebody got the same job at half the wage, I am no longer spending the money I would have at other businesses- the barbershop, the hardware store, the grocery store. Now their sales are down and they will need less labor so they cut employes or their hours. Now those people in turn have less money to spend in similar places. There are ripple effects throughout the economy. We are seeing this today as the bursting of the housing bubble caused a major shrinkage of the entire economy- not just in the housing market.

[dannno]

If the wages I got were cut in half because somebody got the same job at half the wage, I am no longer spending the money I would have at other businesses- the barbershop, the hardware store, the grocery store. Now their sales are down and they will need less labor so they cut employes or their hours. Now those people in turn have less money to spend in similar places. There are ripple effects throughout the economy. We are seeing this today as the bursting of the housing bubble caused a major shrinkage of the entire economy- not just in the housing market.

No, in a free market what happens is that prices on everything fall. You can't afford to pay the Barber $16, so he loses business until he drops his prices to $10. But guess what? He is OK with that because your old job was producing sausages and your barber LOVES sausages and because of the recent wage cut, the price of sausages have been reduced drastically. The barber also rents a 1-bedroom above the shop, and the landlord has reduced rent because wages are falling and he doesn't want to lose tenants. So again, the barber is OK with lowering his prices on haircuts so that you can afford them. Everybody drops their prices and things become more affordable for everyone. What screws everything up his the government trying to prop-up prices. There is no logical reason why we should want high prices on things, we want lower prices, on everything, so that more things become affordable for everybody.

[Zippyjuan]

The barber's rent on his shop didn't go down. His bills didn't go lower. The landlord does not care until he loses his tenant for non- payment which means that the barber is out of business and he can't find a new tenant before the rent on the property gets reduced. Has your landlord reduced your rent because of the housing crash? Electricity. Property taxes. Food. If twenty people at my job were either replaced or had their wages cut and ten were his customers, he may be forced out of business. Just so that you can buy your sausage cheaper. Is the barber better off? He lost more money in business than he saved on the price of the sausages. If I spent $20 on a haircut every two weeks, how much sausage would he have to eat in a week to make up the busness he lost by my not being able to afford to go to him anymore?

The company I work for is not necessarily going to pass along his lower costs to the customers in lower prices. At least some will be retained as higher profits. If it is a corporation, then the extra money they earn may go to share holders. Does Ford lower the prices on their cars if their stock price goes up? If I am a shareholder myself do I go out and spend more because the price of the stock went up? No and no. The benefits in this case of lower wages did not lead to lower prices or economic stimulus.

[torchbearer]

The barber's rent on his shop didn't go down. His bills didn't go lower. Electricity. Property taxes. Food. If twenty people at my job were either replaced or had their wages cut and ten were his customers, he may be forced out of business. Just so that you can buy your sausage cheaper. Is the barber better off? He lost more money in business than he saved on the price of the sausages. If I spent $20 on a haircut every two weeks, how much sausage would he have to eat in a week to make up the busness he lost by my not being able to afford to go to him anymore?

The company I work for is not necessarily going to pass along his lower costs to the customers in lower prices. At least some will be retained as higher profits. If it is a corporation, then the extra money they earn may go to share holders. Does Ford lower the prices on their cars if their stock price goes up? If I am a shareholder myself do I go out and spend more because the price of the stock went up? No and no. The benefits in this case of lower wages did not lead to lower prices or economic stimulus.

competition for customers lowers prices.