[Outcast_Searcher]

Or maybe if we worked together and utilized effective global examples we could do better, even with less money, or maybe not have to accept less money?

Fareed Zakaria did an interesting show a couple/few weeks back in one of his "GPS - Putting America Back to Work" specials on CNN. He showed several examples of cooperative ventures where a combination of laws penalizing companies for layoffs, companies and/or universities working together to fund pools of research and/or worker training, and a (very un-American) idea of settling for a lower living standard in exchange for a short work week were all discussed. These examples were in various European and Scandanavian countries.

For example, in Germany (as I recall) they REALLY REALLY don't want to lay people off, as the company has to pay the first 38 months of the (substantial) unemployment benefits. So they train the workers to have at least THREE technical job skills as part of their normal paid job training -- AND they have a REAL jobs bank shared by many companies where they work hard to find employees to trade jobs based on differing skill bases, etc.

Strong apprenticeship programs were another theme. College students got their tuition paid (they work part time as part of going to college to get tech training), companies got good workers who developed good skills, and very often got loyal and competent workers to hire full time once they graduated. I don't recall what country this was for - perhaps Germany again.

For another country, corporations were allowed to utilize research efforts of university research -- which were funded jointly by a group of corporations and the government. So instead of the government idiotically picking (say) Solyndra to receive a huge wad of cash only to promptly go bankrupt -- companies take the risk -- but have access to the research to crank up businesses with new technology and employ skilled people. This arrangement costs less and has far less risk than each company funding its own research center. The government gets less unemployed to care for.

I believe Denmark was cited for the shorter work week idea. Since medical care and many other things are largely socialized, it is easier to earn a living wage for those with moderate skills.

I see ideas like this that are PROVEN to work, and apparently well, and I wonder -- WHY can't WE try things like this? Don't like some? Pick one or two, or try some variant. Instead we seem to bumble along with the same stupid stuff that doesn't work, get empty promises (from both sides) that things will get better without any meaningful plan or specifics, and, at most, switch parties as though THAT will fix things.

Or -- we invent our own new Frankenstein monster like Obamacare, as heaven forbid we actually have a simple, proven effective plan or hybrid that has shown to work elsewhere.

Are we so stupid or entrenched that it's hopeless, and we're just our own worst enemy? As a taxpayer, I'd LIKE to try some of these things -- if done properly, they just might help!

[Plantagenet]

in Germany (as I recall) they REALLY REALLY don't want to lay people off, as the company has to pay the first 38 months of the (substantial) unemployment benefits....

Yes---Spain and France and Italy and Italy also have this wonderful sounding policy. Unfortunately it has very negative unintended consequences. Companies don't want to hire any new young people because once they do they can't lay them off. So they don't hire anybody.

This policy is one of the reasons that Spain has over 50% youth unemployment. Its the reason Italy has 36% youth unemployment and France has 25% youth unemployment. Even Germany has 9% youth unemployment.

If you want more jobs, the last thing you should do is enact a law that makes it impossibly hard to lay people off.

[vision-master]

So planted, look @ our hisstory........ Day's of strong unions equalled a booming economy, now today with 'right to work' taking over, the economy is in the dumpster - explain that?

[Pops]

I see the US as having move way out of the mainstream. The German model of apprenticeship seems like a great public privat partnership,

The German concept is simple: After students complete their mandatory years of schooling, usually around age 18, they apply to a private company for a two or three year training contract. If accepted, the government supplements the trainee’s on-the-job learning with more broad-based education in his or her field of choice at a publicly funded vocational school. Usually, trainees spend three to four days at work and one to two in the classroom. At the end, the theory goes, they come out with both practical and technical skills to compete in a global market, along with a good overall perspective on the nature of their profession.

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/20 ... h-to-youth

So what is the problem here? The problem of course is the company is on the hook for the cost of training. How many times lately have we heard "Oh, we have lots of jobs to fill at our company, but no one is qualified."

Or maybe the problem isn't qualifications at all, look at this breakdown:

To secure talent for hard-to-fill positions, half of employers of all sizes are planning to hire and train workers who don't have experience in their particular industry or field. Thirty-one percent are planning to cross-train current employees while 19 percent are targeting talent from competitors. Nearly two-thirds are willing to stretch incentives, such as offering flexible hours (25 percent), higher salary (22 percent) and remote work options (15 percent).

Only 20% are willing to pay more money for the people who have the skills they want. I don't understand that. And only half of employers are willing to spend money to train people for the jobs they need filled. That's someone else's' job - not the government though, that would raise taxes.

[Plantagenet]

Some students in the US could benefit from German-style apprenticeships, but the average educational level in the US is far below that of Germany.

Just look at the dropout rates for Germany to compared to other countries. About 65% of high school students in Mexico drop out. In the USA, the number is around 25% of US high school students drop out, while only about 6% of German high school students drop out. AND comparative testing shows that even for the students who don't drop German students are FAR superior in their mathematical skills to those in the USA or Mexico.

The much higher drop out rates and overall poor academic performance in places like Mexico and the USA make it difficult for countries like the US or Mexico to adopt the German system of vocational education and apprenticeship training. You can't put a US or Mexican high school dropout, or even a low-performing US student into technical training and expect them to perform at the same level as better educated and more highly skilled German students do.

[vision-master]

Why not, after all it's an apprenticeship program.

[jdmartin]

Well, I'm a little late to the dance, but I still want to take my turn at a do-see-do

Outcast & Chris have really added some great conversation to this entire mix. Quite refreshing.

Thoughts, in no particular order:

1. It's fallacious thinking to state that the "War on Poverty" has been a failure or had little effect. Anyone who visited Appalachia or some of the worst inner cities in the early 1960's can easily tell you otherwise. What we've done is moved the bar on poverty from starving & atrocious infant mortality to worn out cars and old TV's. That is progress.

2. The German model of job sharing is a fantastic model, one that absolutely should be considered in the US. The lack of stability in the US system of employment doesn't favor it, however. The German federal system is not equal to the US federal system, where states trip over themselves to offer the lowest possible price, destroying one state's economy for an ever-shrinking share of economic output by stealing other state's employers.

3. There are a lot of jobs that need doing. A new CCC or WPA for the chronically unemployed would do wonders for providing skills, training, mental health (it's devastating to be long-term unemployed), and eventually lead workers back into the private marketplace.

4. Everyone should be willing to sacrifice to get the debt paid down. The military would be a good place to start - and I'm ex-military, so I've seen some of the waste in person. Slice the outsourced contractors out, just for starters. When I was in, servicemen/women did nearly every job, cheaper and with more pride.

5. Without doing something about the trade gap between the US and Asia (primarily), all of this is pissing into the wind. Everyone cannot be a physician or a rocket scientist. Someone has to sweep floors and take out the trash, and those people ought to be able to make a decent enough living to be willing to do it voluntarily.

6. The US has reached a state where an entire class of people are going to be permanently unemployed. Either the labor pool needs to shrink by going back to 1-earner households, or we might as well be prepared for constant states of unrest.

[SeaGypsy]

Tying employers to their employees in the fashion of Germany would be a disaster for the US economy. This system & versions of the same across the rest of Europe, evolved over decades since WW2. Trying to put such in place now the horse has thoroughly bolted would not work.

[ROCKMAN]

Good news for those folks who don't like Walmart because they are so big: "Walmart will close 269 stores worldwide, including 154 in the United States. The closings will affect 16,000 workers globally and 10,000 in the United States."

Well, maybe not the greatest news for the 10,000 Americans losing their jobs and will have to compete with each other for what opening there might at McDonalds. Guess you can't make everyone happy.

[Plantagenet]

... in Germany (as I recall) they REALLY REALLY don't want to lay people off, as the company has to pay the first 38 months of the (substantial) unemployment benefits. So they train the workers to have at least THREE technical job skills as part of their normal paid job training -- AND they have a REAL jobs bank shared by many companies where they work hard to find employees to trade jobs based on differing skill bases, etc. ….

Sounds great in theory.

An unfortunate side effect of these laws making it very hard to lay people off is that companies then become very reluctant to make new hires. The unemployment rate is MUCH higher in Spain, Italy, France etc. then in the USA because the companies won't hire new permanent workers. Instead, they prefer to hire only part-time temporary people for a week or so.