CONNECT
Full Employment is Possible: Robert Pollin
GritTV / Video Report
Published: Sunday 5 August 2012
“When world leader companies like Caterpillar Inc. are putting the squeeze on their workers despite accruing record-setting profits; when banks are hoarding $1.6 trillion, money is cheap and government borrowing costs are at their lowest in history, there’s simply no excusing existing levels of poverty, and the poverty-level wages currently prevailing in the not-so-United States.”
Prominent economists have been expounding for months on the dire consequences of this country’s unemployment crisis. As recently as this May, Dean Baker and Ken Hassett exhorted us to pay vigilant attention. In an op-ed headlined “The Human Disaster,” they described unemployment as “nothing short of a national emergency.”
Still, the election discussion plods on with barely a nod to the criminal unemployment disaster.
For bracing relief, check out the latest from economist Robert Pollin, professor at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Pollin’s latest book, Back To Full Employment, lays out a roadmap to recovery that wouldn’t take a miracle. It wouldn’t even require a Democratic sweep this November; merely action by the Fed and a progressive movement worth its salt.
When world leader companies like Caterpillar Inc. are putting the squeeze on their workers despite accruing record-setting profits; when banks are hoarding $1.6 trillion, money is cheap and government borrowing costs are at their lowest in history, there’s simply no excusing existing levels of poverty, and the poverty-level wages currently prevailing in the not-so-United States.
There’s no excuse for 6 million people to be living on food stamps alone or for 103 million to be not getting by on wages that barely lift them above poverty (see Peter Edelman on this, if you don’t believe it). There’s no excuse, and there’s no point simply beating up on trade unions.
The world’s best president could roll back every last anti-organizing law and set organizers free to sign up every last employed American, and still the standing pool of desperate unemployed would drain worker power away. To expect otherwise is to wait for Batman.
“it’s beyond the Democrats. It’s beyond Barack Obama,” says Pollin in this interview.
Economists know how to maintain decently full employment. Coming out of the Great Depression, says Pollin, we had some basic tools. “To run an economy at a level of fundamental decency, you try to achieve full employment.” Neoliberalism, under Thatcher and Reagan, he says, “tossed it all away.”
The last time the US saw relatively full employment wasn’t in ancient history. It was at the end of the 1990s. We can do it. Pollin lays out how. What we need is a progressive movement with full employment at the spear-tip of its agenda.
6 comments on "Full Employment is Possible: Robert Pollin"
August 06, 2012 10:46am
SEE www.understandingmoney101.com
August 05, 2012 12:45pm
Cheap shot!! An entire article devoted to what could happen, but you have to buy the book to find out how!! SUCKS!! CHEAP SHOT!!
August 05, 2012 12:20pm
Our underemployment is a multi-faceted problem - and we better get busy taking care of it!!!! This is a crisis as real as the drought. We need to first outst every politician who would rather play politics than of take care of business! And then treat hunger in America as the crisis it is.
August 05, 2012 10:28am
Like it or not, there is no simple answer to the employment problems we face. There are, however, things that could be done to turn the economy around and thereby approach the "full employment" level. Several classic approaches have been proposed by the Obama administration and seen the Republicans in Congress reject them for political reasons. Passing a highway/infrastructure bill would certainly help a lot. It would many thousands of people to work at good paying jobs. Providing federal dollars to state and local governments, thereby allowing them to re-hire laid off police, fire and educational personnel would also be a major improvement. But the simple and most effective action that could be taken would be to raise the minimum wage to $10.00 per hour. This would provide a living wage to most workers. It would cause the wages of supervisors, managers, team leaders and other higher level employees to rise as well. All this additional money in the hands of those who will spend it would become the seeds of an economic boom. A boom that would lead to more and more private sector jobs. This in turn would produce the tax revenue, at all levels, to fund additional public sector jobs. The result would be "full employment." But wouldn't it also exclude many unskilled workers and young people just entering the work force? Perhaps at first, but once the growth begins to take hold, the need for additional workers would out-weight the added costs. Furthermore, with the promise of better wages, those lacking the necessary skills would be encouraged to gain those skills. The argument that the higher labor costs would reduce employment are bogus as the huge gains in productivity have not been passed on to workers. In fact, wages have slipped lower in recent years dispite these gains. The minimum wage should be tied to the CPI so as to keep it relevant. Of course, so long as the Republicans can control what comes out of Congress (as they have since 1994) there is little chance that any of this will happen.
August 05, 2012 9:52am
President Bill Clinton informed the nation that Globalization would require the US to lower its standard of living so the 3rd world (China, India, Brazil, etc.) could raise theirs.
This meant that the middle class would have to be destroyed.
Don't get your hopes up that we'll ever have full employment in this country because the filthy rich and powerful people won't let it happen.
(George W. Bush sold the tax cuts for the filthy rich by claiming that they would create so many jobs that everyone who wanted a job would have several from whch to choose. Full Employment Lie.)
August 06, 2012 8:25am
Good to see someone heaping scorn on "both" Clinton and Bush. Clinton's deregulation of the financial industry ( no, he didn't "originate this...but HE signed it into law) and his endorsement of "free trade, " much as Bush, along with the Bush tax cuts, runaway defense spending and a failure of Obama to end the tax cuts when he had the opportunity have made your scenario of "filthy rich people" quite plausible. I've been voting Democrat since '74. It ain't working so well. The Republicans have morphed into a cyclops with a myopia that is intent on taking us back 100 years. I will be voting for green party candidates. The "lesser of two evils" approach has failed rather miserably.