OECD countries post great recession

[rishab dhar]

Have a look at this article hat shows performance of labor markets of these OECD countries post great recession.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/14/business/economy/14charts.html

 

[bigbadwolf]

The NYT is full of drivel. From the article:

While many countries have started to recover ...

and:

Unemployment grew faster in the United States than in Britain, but Britain has shown little improvement while the United States has begun to recover.

The writer's a moron. And the NYT disseminates disinformation.

 

[rishab dhar]

Well the article may be disseminating disinformation, as I am not in the position to comment on either of these countries - I am not part of their workforce and haven't tried looking for a job in those countries.

However, I would like to point out that it may be true, as I read in some article (I guess FT) that UK is doing much worse than US, because the sector that was hardest hit by the recession was Banking and Financial Services, which is not as labor intensive as other sectors; hence, the rise in unemployment rate could never catch up with that of US; also, since this sector in UK has been hit the hardest, UK still is not able to make a serious dent into unemployment data, and the GDP growth rate continues to lag most of OECD countries, save PIIGS.

Now if the things mentioned in the above paragraph are true, I guess US is in-fact doing better than UK. At-least the latest GDP numbers, fall in unemployment rates, inflation rates, stock market performance (compare any Index - Dow, Nasdaq, S&500, Russell - with FTSE), and so on do point to that. Also, I think the writer only wanted to compare relative performance of these two economies- because these are the two things being talked in this context, and in that, I do agree that UK is doing worse than US. Now if any person uses his/her own benchmarks of a recovery/robust economy, it would be quite wrong.

As an example, I might even say that Most of Asia, including India, is at best limping, because my benchmark is China.However, most often than not, the benchmark being assumed is either US or Europe.

Similarly, I might even say that it is totally rubbish that Apple is doing well, because my standard for measuring performance is Baidu. However, in this case, the benchmark, usually assumed, is either big tech giants ,such as Microsoft/Google, or Nasdaq.

Therefore, it is absolutely essential to understand that in what context the Author is talking.

 

[Andy D.]

I'd be interested to see what the quality of the jobs are though that have helped cut the unemployment figures.
There was some talk recently that the fast food chains were providing a lot of the new employment positions.

Unfortunately the article doesn't go into much detail.

 

[rishab dhar]

The NYT is full of drivel. From the article:

While many countries have started to recover ...​

If you can prove that this statistic is wrong, please present facts.

I could find ample to substantiate that author is in fact right in saying

While many countries have started to recover, in only one major one, Germany, has unemployment declined to a level lower than it was in September 2008.

http://www.businessinsider.com/german-unemployment-falls-2011-4

Joblessness fell more than expected (again) in Germany, while the headline unemployment rate of 7.1% remains tide with the best level since reunification in 1992.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/01/germany-jobless-idINLDE7100TE20110201

oblessness in Germany fell more than expected in January to leave the unemployment rate at its lowest level since March 1992, data showed, fuelling hopes that consumer spending will help underpin the country's economic recovery.

 

[rishab dhar]

I'd be interested to see what the quality of the jobs are though that have helped cut the unemployment figures.

I agree with you on this account - the article does not mention what kind of jobs are being created; however, I would say that having a job, even at MCD, is better than being unemployed.

 

[Andy D.]

would say that having a job, even at MCD, is better than being unemployed.

Yep agreed.

 

[bigbadwolf]

Yep agreed.

About 1m people applied for these McJobs, so they agree that a McJob is better than nothing. But it's not much of a choice if they have to choose between no job and a McJob that doesn't even pay the bills. The few jobs that are being created in the US are along the lines of these McJobs, while employment continues to hemorrhage in other areas. The important point to recognise is that there is no "recovery." In this respect the perceptive Charles Hugh Smith is bang on target in yesterday's blog post.

 

[rishab dhar]

Conversely, if there is no recovery, then fewer people should eat out; more people should cook food at home.

But, as it is, MCD is in fact hiring, and unless it were selling more, it wouldn't hire more people.

How low can pay get? $20k/annum, which I think is still good enough. People who don't earn a million don't die; they learn and know how to make ends meet.

I live in India, where there might be even more income disparities, and I always find people cribbing that they don't earn enough money to pay my bills and own a house -I need a house in a well off area, central AC etc etc, even though they earn 300k to 400k rupees/annum, but many of these people forget that many of the maidservants etc who work at their homes barely make 2-3k rupees/month and still meet their ends. Reason - they don't travel by cars (they travel by the cheapest bus); they don't buy house/apartment in upmarket areas; they don't run AC's (they run fans and sometimes even get by without them -at temperatures exceeding 45 degrees Celsius )

FYI the rentals in even shabby places for 1 bedroom apartments are close 2k/month in Delhi, in decent areas it could go as high as 6-7k/month, and in upmarket areas 10-12k, but still people know how to meet ends in India. I have seen 5 people living in a 1 bedroom apartment.

Therefore, to judge, from your point of view or by your living standards, whether the others will be able to meet ends is totally wrong.