Our fragmented society has fallen away from the sense that we are all in this together. Isn’t it time for all Americans to ensure, by means of public-private endeavors, that wealth, rather than merely further enriching the already extremely well-off, circulates throughout our entire economic system?
ANDREW G. BJELLAND
Salt Lake City
The writer is professor emeritus of philosophy at Seattle University.
Readers React
In the short term, Prof. Andrew G. Bjelland is right: Certainly it is imperative that the government — either with or without a partnership with private industry — create jobs by improving the nation’s infrastructure, Works Progress Administration-type projects, national service and all the rest. But that is just a temporary fix. We are only on the cusp of major developments in the fields of robotics and artificial intelligence that within a generation or so will require us to completely rethink the structure of society. What will happen when there are no more low-paying jobs and when many higher-paying jobs also disappear? Right now, at the dawn of A.I. and smart robots, we are already seeing the disappearance of enormous numbers of manufacturing and even service jobs. When was the last time you reached a live telephone operator when you called a company? Today there are algorithms that can do a perfectly good job of investing, analyzing weather patterns and medical results, even writing news articles.
Our society must come to terms with the fact that people will have to be given the means to a happy, healthy and productive life without paid jobs. Are we close to that point? It’s a major cultural upheaval that we need to prepare for, and it’s coming all too soon.
MICHAEL SPIELMAN
Bronx
Creating jobs for people with limited education and skill sets is incredibly challenging. Andrew G. Bjelland’s suggestion of a Works Progress Administration-like program is on the right track. But the question is how to get it through a Republican Congress. Since Republicans have said for years that the rich are the “job creators,” I suggest that we put this notion to the test. Congress could establish a program that provides tax credits to individuals and companies that sponsor training and a job for individuals. The jobs must be 1) in an area with the longest and highest rates of unemployment; 2) for a minimum of one year; and 3) given to individuals who have been unemployed for at least six months.
STEVE MIZEL
Lewisville, N.C.
One of the best ways to create jobs is to not eliminate them in the first place. “No layoff” policies — either formal or in practice — allow roughly 20 American companies to preserve jobs in manufacturing (Nucor Steel, Lincoln Electric), retailing (the Container Store, Wegmans), travel (Southwest Airlines) and technology (SAS). Another method to maintain jobs is furloughs — unpaid or partially compensated leaves.
During the Great Recession, Honeywell used furloughs worldwide to maintain its work force so it would be ready for the recovery. The result? A more than 20-point lead in total stock returns between 2009 and 2012 over General Electric, the nearest competitor. Innovative, practical business leaders recognize the benefits of job preservation for companies, employees and society.
SANDRA J. SUCHER
Boston
The writer is a professor of management practice at Harvard Business School and is working on a book titled “Layoffs — The Cure That Kills: How Layoffs Are Destroying Companies and the Proven Alternatives Managers Need to Know.”
While arguing, rightly, for infrastructure investment as a reliable way to address the country’s unemployment and underemployment problems, Mr. Bjelland repeatedly counsels, but without any evidence of its efficacy, a “private-public partnership.” Thankfully, the case for “private-public” partnerships in infrastructure revitalization has been widely debunked, including by your own Paul Krugman in his blog (nytimes.com, Nov. 19). Mr. Krugman asks the obvious question: Why should private investors both raise the money and build the projects, instead of the government borrowing and directly spending money on infrastructure projects?
Mr. Krugman discredits a self-serving assertion made by privatization boosters — that private investment avoids incurring additional public debt — by looking at the long term, most compellingly the toll road example: “If the government builds it, it ends up paying interest but gets the future revenue from the tolls.” Therein lies the folly of handing over key public functions to private, profit-driven corporations.
JAMES THINDWA
Chicago
The writer is a board member and contributing writer at In These Times magazine.
Free trade and globalization have left too many Americans with no jobs or low-paid jobs, while corporate executives and investors have done quite well. It really is time to give back and help the millions of willing workers who are part of the backbone of this nation but are existing in desperate employment situations. Creating good jobs is fundamentally dependent on stimulating domestic business start-ups and expansions as well as expanding public works.
Equally important is preparing people for those jobs. Companies used to train workers; they need to resume those programs. Public schools and colleges need to acknowledge that graduates want jobs, and work with corporations to gear more of their curriculums to job readiness. Cities and states with job training programs should make those programs more dynamic by working with employers to meet their ever-evolving skill needs.
DON CARLSON
Boston
The writer is a former management consultant.
There are a number of initiatives that can easily be taken to connect unemployed or underemployed workers with existing jobs:
1. Help people move to where the jobs are. Towns in coal country are not suddenly going to develop a lot of jobs, so offer very low-interest loans to people who are willing to move — either to individuals themselves or to companies and municipalities looking for workers.
2. Provide real job training — and a clear route from training to an actual job.
3. Provide robust internet connections in underserved areas. Back office operations are a natural fit for small towns as long as they have broadband access.
There are, of course, longer term initiatives that deserve support. At the top of the list is education. Well-educated citizens can be easily retrained and can prosper in new roles.
It’s long past time for us to help those who have lost their jobs as a result of globalization and changes in corporate and political cultures. It’s up to us all to make it happen.
MARGARET G. McGARRAHAN
Berkeley, Calif.
The Writer Responds
Americans once united behind federal programs that created jobs, served human needs and greatly increased productivity. A striking example: In 1934 less than 11 percent of American farms were on the grid. Thanks to Rural Electrification Administration projects, by 1942 nearly 50 percent of farms had electric power — close to 100 percent by 1952. Couldn’t a similar effort today do for renewable energy what the R.E.A. once did for electrification? Or, as Ms. McGarrahan suggests, extend broadband to underserved areas?
I focused on public-private partnerships because, after a Republican sweep, that is the only type of job creation likely to be offered. I agree with Mr. Thindwa’s and Mr. Krugman’s critique, and personally have always believed direct federal funding makes more sense. Mr. Spielman addresses a serious concern. Artificial intelligence will render many human workers obsolete. The G.O.P. congressional leadership is fast-tracking Reaganomic “solutions” — privatize, deregulate, reduce taxes, etc. — and avoiding this issue.
National service provides a partial solution: By inculcating problem-solving skills, by encouraging interaction with a broad range of people, and by establishing invaluable networks, such service humanizes individuals and bonds communities. Youthful enthusiasm abounds: Hundreds of thousands of talented young people apply to AmeriCorps each year. Because of a lack of funding, only about 75,000 actually serve. The example of Israel, where national service is mandatory, indicates that we could do much better.
I believe that Republican reliance on Reaganomics will further diminish the prospects of American workers. Corporations will continue to exploit artificial intelligence, and will continue creating jobs for robots, computers and offshore employees. The enhancement of shareholder value and executive compensation will remain the chief objectives of corporate enterprises. Workers’ interests will be enthusiastically sacrificed to secure these goals. Unemployment will likely increase, and underemployment will become an established fact of American life.
ANDREW G. BJELLAND
Salt Lake City