Six weeks, five New
York Times pieces on employment.
What did they say?
The headline of the April 21st “Why ‘Find Your
Passion’ Is Such Terrible Advice” didn’t match what Stephanie Lee wrote, which
was that “we’re pretty bad at most things when we first try them.” I don’t agree with the theory she cited that
“our interests are relatively fixed and unchanging” – my life has been a
roaring counterexample – or that passions will be extinguished without immediate
success. People with excessive expectations
are generally those unenthusiastic anyway, and it is a perfectly valid choice
to choose or accept a dull or unfulfilling work career for its value in
supporting passionate activities elsewhere.
Ernie Tedeschi wrote a good summary of a positive trend in
April 24th’s “Americans Are Seeing Highest Minimum Wage in History
(Without Federal Help).” The largest problem
with the likes of a national $15 level is that in many parts of the country people
can do well on less, but that does not mean that those in Manhattan or Hawaii
cannot decide on a higher base rate there.
Per Tedeschi, 29 states and Washington, D.C, along with a “surge” in
smaller governments, now mandate more than the national $7.25, and 89% of
Americans paid the lowest legal amount are getting more. While I do not support minimum wages, as market
conditions require that workers are paid what they will accept, Seattle
lawmakers are far more justified in accommodating constituents in their own
expensive city than imposing destructive hikes on small Texas towns.
“Behind the Numbers:
How the Jobs Report Comes Together,” by Patricia Cohen on May 3rd,
is a good reader on what goes into those usually first-Friday figures. Not everyone sees that only one hour of
weekly payroll effort makes someone “employed,” knows that in order to be
“unemployed” one must look for work within the previous four weeks “regardless
of any government benefits received,” recognizes that the “labor force”
comprises only those working and those unemployed as here, and understands the
significance of the employment-population ratio and the labor force
participation rate. Cohen mentions the
two monthly data collection efforts feeding these numbers, the “Household
Survey” and the “Establishment Survey” targeted to individuals and businesses
respectively, and touches on seasonal adjustment which is used because times of
the year differ.
May 27th’s “It’s 2059, and the Rich Kids Are
Still Winning” is the first of a set of scenarios provided by “science fiction
authors, futurists, philosophers and scientists” presented in opinion article
form. Here an eminent figure in the first
category, Ted Chiang, considered the limitations of DNA enhancement, that
unless we have a pure meritocracy (exceedingly unlikely in 40 years) “genetic
interventions” such as improving intelligence will not, as long as social and
class factors are critically important, get us equality between those of
different races, income, or anything else.
That is a real point, and while such technology may push us further to
the real nature of human beings, it will not level outcomes across all groups,
and intelligence for scientists, as with great height for NBA centers, may
continue to be necessary for success but not at all sufficient. Expect to see more from me on this series.
David Brooks, on the same date, followed up his tempting but
irritating “weavers” column with “The Welfare State Is Broken. Here’s How to Fix It.” An improvement from advocating that people
surrender their whole lives to American social-network efforts or conjure up
opportunities to “make a difference” in one of the most rejecting fields there
is, this time Brooks puts the onus on social service organizations to work
together and focus on the related problems of individual families. I take issue with his characterization of
poverty as longer lasting now than in the past – when I was growing up, poor
meant you might not have nearly enough food for years on end – but his
documented idea of “life teams,” handling everything from immediate financial
and employment crises to teaching more constructive choices, is a good one,
along with giving isolated people, especially older ones, the chance to join
groups which are “part social club, part concierge service and part self-help
cooperative.”
Next week, I will review the latest unemployment
figures. They will show a large piece of
what is happening with our economy, but, per the above, not all.
No comments:
Post a Comment