Last Sunday’s New York
Times Magazine carried a story about how the Amtrak ride from New York City to Washington offers a
microcosm of the new American economy: at either end of the trip, prosperous
cities fueled by government and finance, and in between, struggling cities
plagued by high unemployment. This portrait represents the challenge that
confronts the second term of the Obama Administration.
The article correctly points out that the nostalgia for good-paying
manufacturing jobs, expressed so often in campaign speeches during the previous
months, overlooks the reality that “the dollar value of goods made in America
is at an all-time high of $1.9 trillion, just about even with China. The catch
is that the number of American workers needed to create all that value has
dropped steadily. In the mid-1940s, more than half of the New Jersey work force
was in factories; today around 7 percent [are].” Modern manufacturing
facilities employ “a handful of highly trained workers guiding machines that
return huge value to shareholders while all the time finding ways to produce
more goods with fewer workers.”
The writer, Adam Davidson, notes that the train ride also offers
views of shiny office buildings housing “law firms and engineering companies
and I.T. firms.” He is mistaken when he identifies the workers in these
buildings as having “nothing to do with manufacturing.” That is true for many of
these office workers, certainly, but the nation’s high-dollar-value
manufacturing industry depends on engineers and I.T. workers who apply new
technologies, as well as lawyers who work out contracts and fight patent
infringements, to keep their companies competitive.
It’s highly significant that General Motors has done a U-turn on its previous trend of outsourcing information technology
jobs, according to an article in MIT’s Technology Review. When GM’s current chief information officer came on board in
February, 90 percent of the company’s I.T. work was being done outside of GM.
Now GM plans to open four software innovation centers around the United States
and may hire as many as 10,000 workers to staff them. This shift recognizes the
fact that as manufacturing—from the design process to the assembly floor—has
become thoroughly computerized and automated, and as the automobiles themselves
have integrated many computerized components, it is expertise in I.T. that
gives American carmakers the competitive advantage over foreign firms.
Where Davidson is very much on point is his observation that
these white-collar service jobs are not as easily obtained as the manufacturing
jobs of the old economy: “For people with advanced training, the service sector
means an above-average wage, a below-average risk of unemployment and days
sitting at a desk. For those with only a high-school [diploma] or no degree at
all, far fewer jobs are available, and the ones that are pay poorly and
disappear quickly.”
During the presidential campaign that just ended, you
probably heard a lot about policy differences between the two major parties.
Many of these policies had implications for the new economy outlined in this
article: for education that will equip workers with advanced skills, for innovations
in technology that will keep us competitive, for health care that will keep us
productive at costs that are not crippling, and for infrastructure that will
allow industries to function efficiently. We voters have now chosen government leadership
that is highly divided on which policies will achieve these ends. Let’s hope
that our leaders can move past the gridlock of the past several years and find ways
to keep our industries strong without leaving behind a large segment of the
population.
No comments:
Post a Comment