A good problem to have

[xxlt]

(06-21-2017, 09:26 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: With so many of our posts and articles shared in this forum being of the negative variety, it was nice to see a news article showing that there are areas of the US more good paying jobs than people to work them.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/in-this-part-of-the-midwest-the-problem-isn%E2%80%99t-china-it%E2%80%99s-too-many-jobs/ar-BBCY3Aw?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartandhp

According to Wikipedia there are 3144 counties or county equivalents. According to the linked article 73 have an unemployment rate below 2%, like the county featured. 73/3144 is just over 2%. So in 98% of the counties the unemployment rate is higher, sometimes dramatically so (and of course unemployment numbers from the DOL are always artificially low). But that is some great news and some first class cherry picking to find it.

In other great news, in 2% of America's 616,000 plus restaurants nobody got food poisoning today! In the other 98% (over 603,000) at least one person got food poisoning! Isn't that great news? Most folks would say, "No!" I just made that up, but the point is 2% of the counties (some doubtless very small like the featured one) having low unemployment is not great news.

Oh, and what is the solution to the low unemployment rate in the county highlighted in the article? Probably per the article the biggest employer will leave - more great news!?

Yours truly,
Nattering Naybob of Negativity

[Vas Deferens]

(06-21-2017, 01:47 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I am currently writing a policy memo, so I am in wonk mode.

Engage WONK MODE!

[xxlt]

(06-21-2017, 02:54 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: Engage WONK MODE!

I am pretty sure he meant to say WANK MODE.

[Belsnickel]

(06-21-2017, 03:02 PM)xxlt Wrote: I am pretty sure he meant to say WANK MODE.

Sometimes they alternate. Researching policy can be stressful.

[SunsetBengal]

(06-21-2017, 02:07 PM)xxlt Wrote: According to Wikipedia there are 3144 counties or county equivalents. According to the linked article 73 have an unemployment rate below 2%, like the county featured. 73/3144 is just over 2%. So in 98% of the counties the unemployment rate is higher, sometimes dramatically so (and of course unemployment numbers from the DOL are always artificially low). But that is some great news and some first class cherry picking to find it.

In other great news, in 2% of America's 616,000 plus restaurants nobody got food poisoning today! In the other 98% (over 603,000) at least one person got food poisoning! Isn't that great news? Most folks would say, "No!" I just made that up, but the point is 2% of the counties (some doubtless very small like the featured one) having low unemployment is not great news.

Oh, and what is the solution to the low unemployment rate in the county highlighted in the article? Probably per the article the biggest employer will leave - more great news!?

Yours truly,
Nattering Naybob of Negativity

Well, the entire point of the OP was to point out that there are indeed areas of the United States where good paying jobs are available, and not enough people to work them.  "But, that's only 2% of all counties in the United States!", makes no difference in the point of the post.  Perhaps if some of the people struggling to attain work in some of the more downtrodden regions would go to where the jobs are, then it could be a win-win. 

Need an example?  In the post depression mass farm exodus, A LOT of people from the South migrated to the factories of the Midwest. 

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(06-21-2017, 11:34 AM)Au165 Wrote: If there are 100 job openings and you take them from other companies, there are still 100 jobs open simply at another company, unless those jobs aren't back filled of course. In a lot of cases the issue is finding people qualified to do them, and that doesn't even mean skills needed for the job, it can be those with a drivers license, no felonies, can pass drug test, or is willing to work the schedule required.

In your carrier example, with 600 people now looking for work in that area there will be a surplus of workers to fill unfilled jobs. The problem is people don't necessarily want to move to where the jobs are, and frankly some can't for the amount of pay their skill set will garner them even if they move. This is where you get in trouble and why some areas lack jobs, especially "unskilled", while others have surpluses of them.

Understood and agree. However, my point was how do we know these jobs are as good as claimed?

[SunsetBengal]

(06-21-2017, 05:18 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Understood and agree. However, my point was how do we know these jobs are as good as claimed?

Well, the article talked about machinists.  I'll give what I believe to be a fair analogy.  A skilled machinist in small town Midwest can provide the same quality of life as an engineer in a metropolitan suburb.  How do I come up with this?  I have experience in a machine shop, and I currently work with many engineers in a firm in a small metro area.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(06-21-2017, 05:54 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Well, the article talked about machinists.  I'll give what I believe to be a fair analogy.  A skilled machinist in small town Midwest can provide the same quality of life as an engineer in a metropolitan suburb.  How do I come up with this?  I have experience in a machine shop, and I currently work with many engineers in a firm in a small metro area.

If you were a machinist in that area and the companies profiled in the article offered a better job, would you take it or would you stand pat?

I know that's a hypothetical you can't really answer without being in that situation and weighing the pros and cons of each. But, I would guess most people would opt for the job which is better. So it makes me wonder how good those "good" jobs are.

If the jobs are as good as described and the companies can't even pay candidates to go to school to become machinists, I think that indicates another problem with manufacturing jobs. The manufacturing jobs have disappeared due to automation or shipped overseas. Potential employees may have lost confidence in the long term outlook for manufacturing jobs based upon the last half century.

[SunsetBengal]

(06-21-2017, 07:44 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: If you were a machinist in that area and the companies profiled in the article offered a better job, would you take it or would you stand pat?

I know that's a hypothetical you can't really answer without being in that situation and weighing the pros and cons of each. But, I would guess most people would opt for the job which is better. So it makes me wonder how good those "good" jobs are.

If the jobs are as good as described and the companies can't even pay candidates to go to school to become machinists, I think that indicates another problem with manufacturing jobs. The manufacturing jobs have disappeared due to automation or shipped overseas. Potential employees may have lost confidence in the long term outlook for manufacturing jobs based upon the last half century.

A lot of people just simply won't move from where they live.  When my tradesman business went down with the recession, I was one of the few that I can speak of that moved on.  I still know guys that haven't bounced back, or have reluctantly taken lesser jobs on crews, because they won't move from where they live.  As far as machining goes, it does take some skills, as well as a personality and mindset to follow a project through, overcome obstacles, with great attention to detail.  Not everyone can do it well, but the basic intelligence and education required really isn't that much. 

As far as long term outlook?  Do you see any decline in demand for orthopedic devices in the near future?

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(06-21-2017, 09:05 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: A lot of people just simply won't move from where they live.  When my tradesman business went down with the recession, I was one of the few that I can speak of that moved on.  I still know guys that haven't bounced back, or have reluctantly taken lesser jobs on crews, because they won't move from where they live.  As far as machining goes, it does take some skills, as well as a personality and mindset to follow a project through, overcome obstacles, with great attention to detail.  Not everyone can do it well, but the basic intelligence and education required really isn't that much. 

As far as long term outlook?  Do you see any decline in demand for orthopedic devices in the near future?

As the article pointed out, the companies are having trouble filling jobs, in part, because baby boomers are retiring. Which also means baby boomers are at the age where they are more likely to need orthopedic implants. Baby boomers are starting to reach their 70s so I would expect the demand for orthopedic implants will hit its peak within the next decade and then demand will die off. Pun intended.

[xxlt]

(06-21-2017, 04:40 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Well, the entire point of the OP was to point out that there are indeed areas of the United States where good paying jobs are available, and not enough people to work them.  "But, that's only 2% of all counties in the United States!", makes no difference in the point of the post.  Perhaps if some of the people struggling to attain work in some of the more downtrodden regions would go to where the jobs are, then it could be a win-win. 

Need an example?  In the post depression mass farm exodus, A LOT of people from the South migrated to the factories of the Midwest. 

The article in the OP also, if I recall, never defined what a good paying job was at the knee factory. It is quite possible people do not wish to incur the expense of relocating for a $10 an hour job. A factory job which at some point, btw, may make you a consumer for what they make - replacement knees.

I've recently heard several managers and business owners who clearly make substantial incomes whine that people just don't want to work - they have "good paying jobs" they can't fill. Again, these are jobs that pay $9-$10 an hour. That is an inadequate subsistence wage and not a "good paying job." Some people are just really out of touch and fail to realize that when they are earning $80,000 - $120,000 and up and don't have to worry about money that the person earning $10 an hour can't pay rent, eat, and their Obamacare payments. But rather than adjusting their wage or advocating for fair wages they look down their nose at people who don't want to work.

It is interesting to learn that you see the migration the Great Depression forced as a win-win feel good story. You might want to read or re-read The Grapes of Wrath. Just a thought. Or maybe the migrations forced by wars in Syria and Afghanistan today, and in Vietnam, Korea, and Europe in previous generations were feel good win-win outcomes too.

[xxlt]

(06-21-2017, 03:55 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Sometimes they alternate. Researching policy can be stressful.

Remember George Costanza talking about salsa and seltzer?

Did he say that guy was a real wonk or a real wank?

You do your wonking after your wanking?

Or is it the other way 'round?

[*michaelsean*]

The article states people can start at $50,000 a year and move up from there.