This rant has long warned, and worried about, the signs that the U.S. is becoming a two tier economy, e.g., the Mega Rich and the rest of us. The evidence of history is that this growing dichotomy can only have a bad, really bad, out come.
Now we have evidence that there is a third tier forming in the economy, e.g., the permanently unemployed. The only reason the unemployment rate has fallen lately is because of all the people who have given up even looking are no longer counted.
This piece in today's New York Times provides numbers and does a good job of spelling out the problem.
It also includes one piece of outrageously bad advice. The kind that only economists who have never had a real job could offer. The authors suggest that fifty something year old unemployed people should take all their life savings and start a new business.
The facts are that FOUR OUT OF FIVE new businesses FAIL within in the first five years. And that fact has been absolutely consistent for over 70 years, and in good times and bad times.
Anyway, here is the good part of the article.
The Human Disaster of Unemployment
By DEAN BAKER and KEVIN HASSETT
THE American economy is experiencing a crisis in long-term unemployment that has enormous human and economic costs.
In 2007, before the Great Recession, people who were looking for work
for more than six months — the definition of long-term unemployment —
accounted for just 0.8 percent of the labor force. The recession
has radically changed this picture. In 2010, the long-term unemployed
accounted for 4.2 percent of the work force. That figure would be 50
percent higher if we added the people who gave up looking for work.
Long-term unemployment is experienced disproportionately by the young,
the old, the less educated, and African-American and Latino workers.
While older workers are less likely to be laid off than younger workers,
they are about half as likely to be rehired. One result is that older
workers have seen the largest proportionate increase in unemployment in
this downturn. The number of unemployed people between ages 50 and 65
has more than doubled.
The prospects for the re-employment of older workers deteriorate sharply
the longer they are unemployed. A worker between ages 50 and 61 who has
been unemployed for 17 months has only about a 9 percent chance of
finding a new job in the next three months. A worker who is 62 or older
and in the same situation has only about a 6 percent chance. As
unemployment increases in duration, these slim chances drop steadily.
The result is nothing short of a national emergency. Millions of workers
have been disconnected from the work force, and possibly even from
society. If they are not reconnected, the costs to them and to society
will be grim.
Unemployment is almost always a traumatic event, especially for older
workers. A paper by the economists Daniel Sullivan and Till von Wachter
estimates a 50 to 100 percent increase in death rates for older male
workers in the years immediately following a job loss, if they
previously had been consistently employed. This higher mortality rate
implies that a male worker displaced in midcareer can expect to live
about one and a half years less than a worker who keeps his job.
There are various reasons for this rise in mortality. One is suicide. A
recent study found that a 10 percent increase in the unemployment rate
(say from 8 to 8.8 percent) would increase the suicide rate for males by
1.47 percent. This is not a small effect. Assuming a link of that
scale, the increase in unemployment would lead to an additional 128
suicides per month in the United States. The picture for the long-term
unemployed is especially disturbing. The duration of unemployment is the
dominant force in the relationship between joblessness and the risk of
suicide.
Joblessness is also associated with some serious illnesses, although the
causal links are poorly understood. Studies have found strong links
between unemployment and cancer, with unemployed men facing a 25 percent
higher risk of dying of the disease. Similarly higher risks have been
found for heart disease and psychiatric problems.
The physical and psychological consequences of unemployment are
significant enough to affect family members. The economists Kerwin
Charles and Melvin Stephens recently found an 18 percent increase in the
probability of divorce following a husband’s job loss and 13 percent
after a wife’s. Unemployment of parents also has a negative impact on
achievement of their children. In the long run, children whose fathers
lose a job when they are kids have reduced earnings as adults — about 9
percent lower annually than children whose fathers do not experience
unemployment.
We all understand how the human costs can be so high. For many people,
their very identity is their occupation. Few events rival the emotional
strain of job loss.
IT seems clear that neither political party was prepared to deal with
the crisis of long-term unemployment. In spite of the severity of the
downturn, there was a general expectation that the economy would bounce
back, as it had after previous downturns.
Some countries that were more familiar with long-term unemployment,
notably Germany, were much better prepared to deal with the fallout from
the crisis. The German government aggressively pushed work-sharing
measures. This meant that instead of workers’ being laid off and
receiving unemployment benefits, the German government helped companies
keep employees, working fewer hours, on their payrolls by subsidizing
their wages with the money saved on unemployment benefits.
The result of this policy is that Germany’s unemployment rate is now
lower than it was at the start of the downturn, even though its growth
has been no better than ours.
Thankfully, there is some effort to learn from this model. The recent
bill that extended the payroll tax cut included a provision that covered
the cost of work-sharing programs in the 23 states that already had
them as part of their unemployment insurance systems, and it helped
other states start such programs. This should slow job destruction in
those states, which will improve chances for all workers seeking
employment. From now on, the first line of defense during a recession
should be to expand work sharing rather than simply extend unemployment
benefits.
But these changes come late, and we must get much better at sending a lifeline to those who are hardest to reconnect.
In the United States and elsewhere, government training programs have a
mixed record at best. Some people have suggested that the unemployed be
encouraged to start their own businesses, and entrepreneurship is one
valid option for some. But given that most new businesses will fail, it
may not be the best advice to tell older workers who have lost their
jobs to also put their savings at risk to start a new business.
Clearly, an improving economy will help some, but those who have been
out of work for an extended period have a difficult time finding jobs
for many reasons. They are more likely to be discouraged, more likely to
have seen their skills wane, and more likely to be seen as a risk by a
prospective employer.
Policy makers must come together and recognize that this is an
emergency, and fashion a comprehensive re-employment policy that
addresses the specific needs of the long-term unemployed. A policy
package that as a whole should appeal to the left and the right should
spend money to help expand public and private training programs with
proven track records; expand entrepreneurial opportunities by increasing
access to small-business financing; reduce government hurdles to the
formation of new businesses; and explore subsidies for private employers
who hire the long-term unemployed. Those who hire for government jobs
must do their share, too: managers who are filling open positions should
be given explicit incentives to reconnect these lost workers.
Every month of delay is a month in which our unemployed friends and neighbors drift further away.
No comments:
Post a Comment