It’s Labor Day weekend in a presidential election year, so we’re bound to hear lots of oratory about jobs. “The American people are still asking ‘where are the jobs?’ ” House Speaker John Boehner said earlier this week at the Republican national convention. “We created 200,000 brand-new good-paying jobs!” Vice President Joe Biden said in a Midwest campaign speech aimed at the auto industry.
Everyone wants to be a job creator. But in this economy, some jobs are created more equal than others. Since mid-2009, when the financial collapse bottomed out and the economy began its fitful recovery, the private sector has added 4.5 million jobs, with net increases in each of the last 29 months. In July alone, according to the US Labor Department, the private sector added 163,000 jobs, mostly in manufacturing and health care.
Comments
fyi Renee, public sector jobs costs the tax payers, ptivate sector jobs don't.
fyi migh, public sector jobs outsourced to the private sector cost taxpayers too, and sometimes they cost more than public sector jobs.
fyi mecn1, outsourced public sector jobs cost the taxpayer less because they don't come with the liability of government pensions and government grade health coverage. Nonetheless, the article was talking primarily about public sector jobs eliminated, not outsourced.
This present day devaluing of public sector jobs is self defeating. The bugaboo in some of the public's mind is who is paying the salary. Because a government worker is paid by taxes somehow this becomes a punching bag for their own economic distress. Employers, if they are worth their salt, do not decry what they pay their employees since they know they can not run their businesses without them and also know without government services for that matter(police, fire, road maintenance to name a few) . Also hidden from view is that businesses usually only serve a small slice of the population and therefore the mechanics of how a company, shop, or service is managed is not available for review. However public employees are under scrutiny of all state citizens. Their incomes when revealed become a source of jealousy even if their training, years of experience, and efforts justify it. Forgotten is the electorate's contribution to have such services as police, courts, education, standards of safety, transportation is performed by working stiffs or professionals as they are in the private sector. And government employees spend their money, the multiplier effect mentioned in the article. Corruption is a sidebar for both the public and private sector. It can be better concealed in individually owned companies as opposed to public scandal. So it is the visibility of the public sector that makes it a target whose employees do their job on the same level as what is called "the outside world." When people are down on their luck or do not understand what the price of societal structure means they complain. Some of those complaints about certain individuals are certainly justified and they should face the consequences. When it happens in non government sectors it should be the same, but is usually more out of the public eye. Reform and correction of misuse of supporting funds, fine, but vilifying fellow citizens a waste of time and amounts to shooting yourself in the foot.
There has always been a trade-off between wages and job security (with the help of public sector unions) as well. In times of bubble expansion, public sector workers are accepted because they make less money and provide needed services. But in a down economy, all of a sudden threir wage stability and benefits are now not OK. Now those who made that choice to lock themselves in to wages and benefits are the bad guys. Primitive tribal stuff.
The underlying issue here isn't whether certain jobs are expendable, the real underlying issue for some people is the fact that people are expendable. Not all people are worthy. Some people look at govt. and government programs and say, hey that does "me" no good why am I paying for it. For example you have 10 people on disability and two are scamming the system, one part of our population simply says, "end the program" it's not our job, it's not our problem. Get a long line at the DMV and then they'll say hire more people. The bottom line for these people is that it is all about how things effect them and only them. These are the people who occupy today's Republican Party, their motto is "it's all about me" everyone and everything else is expendable. It is the culimination of the "me" generation. Now it was not always like this in the Republican Party and it certainly isn't the core belief of "conservatism". Public sector jobs represent the nation, the community, these folks don't care about these things. They care about themselves. It is not an evil "selfishness" about themselves, it is a delusional belief of their own supremacy over the vissictudes of life. They did it. For them there is no connection between themselves and the greater world. It is in reality a paucity of spirit, a lack of respect for life. In their own world the only thing not expendable is them.
This comment has been removed.
Public sector jobs, at base, are aimed at improving the common good. Sure, there are some places where that can be disputed. And unfortunately human nature is such that some imperfections always exist. But in general, government jobs improve everyone's life. To the extent that America has built an infrastructure that is so attractive that it is drawing immigrants, both legal and illegal, from around the world, clearly there is benefit to society from the public sector. America's strength does not simply come from the private sector. Too many activities, such as public health, national parks, education, and so forth, would simply not survive in the dollar-crazed private market. We need the public sector for the fabric of our society, not just to give jobs to people who could not survive elsewhere.
Public sector workers are also demonized because they have retained some of the decent salaries and benefits that used to be standard in the private sector. The more the right can disparage and privatize public work, the more they can minimize workers' rights, salaries and benefits. The public sector/ private sector divide contributes to polarization, pitting lower and middle class workers against each other, giving the upper class more power and wealth.
Correct, because when Republicans drive down the wages and benefits of public sector workers in a down economy, it sets the new miserable standard for everyone later.
This comment has been removed.
Love it: "Why is a tennis pro at a private club any more useful to the economy than an elementary school gym teacher?"
You do know that public sector jobs are paid for by taxes, right? And that tax revenue fell, a lot, in the recession? And that retaining all those jobs, while good for the employment rate would've made the deficit that much worse? Those 600,000 jobs cost the taxpayers $50,000,000,000 or more per year not counting the cost of future pensions. They are quite different from private sector jobs in this regard. When you consider the tax revenue from these jobs and the consumer spending by these workers as contributing back to the economy you have to account for the fact that these kinds of employees will always cost us more than they give us back. Their services may very well give us back greater value in non-revenue related terms but their salary is a liability, not an asset on the balance sheet. In my opinion, this story would be better balanced if this basic accounting was included. It doesn't make a teacher, firefighter or policeman any less valuable to society but it adds the fiscal reality to the conversation. A half percent swing in unemployment entirely in jobs that the private workers have to pay for with their taxes and funded from deficit spending that their grandchildren will be paying for 50 years from now isn't the same improvement in unemployment as private sector jobs by a long shot. A robust, growing private sector, on the other hand, creates more income and more tax revenue so the public sector ranks can grow with the economy.
So if your house happens to catch fire the week after tax revenues have gone down because of a down economy, what is your suggestion as to who should help you? Would you like the fireman still to be on duty? And who's paying for that? Another example, would you like to be able to walk into a restaurant and have some confidence that you're not going to walk out with a food borne illness? How about walking outside and knowing that you're not going to get bitten by a mosquito and die from a virus? What about knowing that the processing of the very water you use to brush your teeth is safe? This list could go on for pages. We have a situation in which frustrated people needing a job have now identified as enemies the absolute wrong group of people. Public sector employees are not the problem. Let's start looking at the allocation of money to places like defense contracts. Defense contractors are, strictly speaking, in the private sector, even though they are sucking up the lion's share of the tax dollar.
Keep proving her point, slewisma. State and federal employment is way down under Obama: "[T]he Obama years shaped up as an era of huge cuts in public employment compared with previous experience. If public employment had grown the way it did under Bush, we’d have 1.3 million more government workers, and probably an unemployment rate of 7 percent or less." See "American Austerity" [ http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/25/american-austerity/ ].
Loth, if you don't understand why private sector jobs are a LOT more important than public-sector jobs, then you have no business here influencing the editorial page of a major newspaper!!! Public-sector jobs are NOT a valid indicator of a healthy economy! Your ignorant socialist fantasies need to go!
This isn't a horse race. The point is that public sector is needed.
This comment has been removed.
If you didn't know crime and fire (both numbers and intensity) have declined for the last, several, decades, sure you might imagine there's a "problem" with fewer police and fire jobs. If you didn't know that technology has improved the productivity in virtually every private sector business (reducing many unnecessary positions) you might think something was "wrong" with fewer government, paper pushing, positions. If you didn't read the Globe you might not have read about Boston public "works" employees who never show up to "work". You might also not know of public housing czars who make $300,000. But Loth asks what's the difference between a tennis pro's job and a public sector job? Well, a tennis pro won't have a job long if he doesn't perform or if there is no demand for his position. Yes, the same salary a pro makes and public worker makes may have the same economic appearance but one position has to perform a job well to keep it, the other? Likely all many public employees have to do is keep their supervisor happy (like the ones "asked" to give Lt. Governor Murray a campaign contribution by the housing czar). At least the effective pro adds to the happiness and fitness of the population. Sinecures don't even achieve that.
Fraud, corruption and over-bloated salaries are worse in the private sector. There's just less transparency. If you don't know that, I suggest you incorporate those facts in to your world view. That was the point of this article.
"Fraud, corruption and over-bloated salaries are worse in the private sector. There's just less transparency." You're kidding right? There's more transparency in the private sector because there are plenty of reasons for employees, clients, competitors, investors and "regulators" to uncover it and profit from it. Over-bloated salaries may occur but they don't last long without performance in the private sector. There may be much higher peaks of bloat but the average public sector employee has a much better deal, these days, than a private sector doing a comparable job. Where, exactly, is the "tranparency" that occurs, virtually EVER in the public sector? The Globe "uncovers" a handful of outrageous ripoffs, occaisionally, usually AGES after they've gone on. You didn't read about the probation department scandal? How many other scams go on because NO ONE in the public sector has an incentive to blow the whistle on them because they benefit by them? I suggest you incorportate THOSE facts in your "world view", regardless of the point of the article.
"HHK" When you mention Bulger or Finneran you are speaking the exception and not the rule. In addition I don't consider pols to be public sector employment. People like to think they hire their pols but the truth is they merely buy their pols after a long and tedious sales pitch. However, at bottom I was speaking to a world view, one that says "I the individual alone get credit for what I have done" and everyone else and everything else unless it impacts upon me is expendable. To a certain degree I believe that is true at a personal level, it is however not true at a societal level at an economic level. There just as when I was a soldier the individual is subsumed by the greater good. I am very much an individualist and have paid a pretty steep price for it. I don't however think a world full of "me's" would be a great place. The world needs culture, social interaction, society needs a consciense, a respect for the whole. I think today's Republican Party regretfully lacks tha,t a generalized statement I know, but in general their philosophy lacks conscience.
This comment has been removed.
This comment has been removed.
I'm pretty happy that I'm near the end of an honorable 30+ year career of community policing. When I was a young man and held up my right hand to take my oath of office, no one ever mentioned that the rewards I earned for my service would come under near constant attack near the end of it. I would love to see some of my kids follow my footsteps into what could be a great career of public service, yet I strongly caution them against it. People who are justifiably angry about their own economic situation seem to blame teachers, fire fighters and cops - the result is evident in Wisconsin where there is a race to the bottom of economic misery for all of us who perform the work that keeps our economy moving and our citizens safe.
As a cop, I've been shot at repeatedly, stabbed several time and had three surgeries to repair injuries sustained in the line of duty. I buried some of my dear colleagues way before their time. I don't write this to seek sympathy, merely to illustrate that many of us left our blood on the field without hesitation - we all understand that this is what can happen within our profession. In closing, I ask respectfully not to be equated with the likes of the very few who abuse and game the system.
All gave some - some gave all.
You should be proud of the work you have done as should each person who has served their community in one form or another. Unhappily today there are people who believe, libertarians in particular, that you are unneccessary. In fact it is a reflection of how well you do your job. They sit in relative safety, their neighborhoods safe, secure because you were there. They however in not seeing you, not requireing your assitance, think they don't need you. Never having been in combat, in danger, not needing to have someone have their back, they believe they are the masters of their world. Seemingly unaware that others have paid the price for that world to exist. Have a good retirement as an old soldier I respect your dedication to the whole.
This comment has been removed.
Public sector jobs - si! Public sector unions - non!
"HHK" You are right in the sense that the two issues intersect, but I still think you are picking out a particular group to make a generalization, but I don't necessarily disagree with you.