[besson3c]

What do you guys think about Clinton's suggestion offered here for filling 5 million vacant jobs by identifying them and getting unemployed people the training to fill them?

He gets into this towards the end of this clip:

Exclusive - Bill Clinton Extended Interview Pt. 1 - The Daily Show with Jon Stewart - 9/16/2010 - Video Clip | Comedy Central

[mduell]

Any details on the breakdown of those 5M jobs?

Are the unemployed smart enough to fill those 5M vacancies? This interactive graph (from last November) shows small gains (and small absolute values) in unemployment of smart people.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by mduell 

Any details on the breakdown of those 5M jobs?

Are the unemployed smart enough to fill those 5M vacancies? This interactive graph (from last November) shows small gains (and small absolute values) in unemployment of smart people.

That part I don't know. He was proposing paying for training these people. How this would work I don't know exactly, but I suppose his thinking was that getting those people employed would pay itself off in terms of the cost of training them.

I think the more interesting part is just creating a list of these jobs nationally and connecting the unemployed to these jobs. I would imagine that it might be hard to conduct an exhaustive search of different job types outside of your locale, although I could be wrong about that (I've never had to search for anything but IT jobs).

[Kerrigan]

This sounds like a very slick idea, but does it actually make sense? The entire problem with the recession is that there are not enough jobs being created to keep up with the demand of a growing workforce.

There are plenty of qualified (indeed, overqualified) people looking for jobs; and when a position opens up, the competition is keen. There is no need for a government program to train workers just so they can put in job applications to compete with a hundred other applicants with equal or better training.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Kerrigan 

This sounds like a very slick idea, but does it actually make sense? The entire problem with the recession is that there are not enough jobs being created to keep up with the demand of a growing workforce.

There are plenty of qualified (indeed, overqualified) people looking for jobs; and when a position opens up, the competition is keen. There is no need for a government program to train workers just so they can put in job applications to compete with a hundred other applicants with equal or better training.

Clinton's argument is that there are 5 million jobs right now sitting vacant because employers can't find qualified candidates.

[smacintush]

I'm happy that at least Jon Stewart kept his stupid mouth shut for most of that, except where he knelt down and sucked Willy's c*ck for a moment.

First of all, I think that there are a few questions:
1. Where is he getting this data from and is it actually accurate?
2. What are the actual reasons these jobs aren't being filled?
3. How long are these jobs actually sitting vacant?
4. How much would this cost?

Assuming his numbers are accurate, here are the potential problems I see:
1. Three weeks? Many jobs, especially those requiring special training or higher education, can take more than a few weeks to fill. They may take months.
2. Experience. How many of these employers really want someone that is newly trained with NO experience in the job? Perhaps in that industry at all.
3. What happens when all this money is spent and many or most of these newly trained, zero experience people don't work out? Now you have cost a company who is likely already wary and weary from the economy, money in the form of lost productivity and undeserved wages, and those people will have to be replaced. You essentially have the same problem you did before. Do you keep the program going?
4. These people who filled these jobs may likely be trained in other areas already but are out of work. What happens when the economy turns around and the kinds of jobs these people once held open back up? You have essentially time shifted your problem. Do you now start training people for these jobs as well?
5. It is corporate welfare. You are using government money to either pay the company directly to train people who will inevitably enrich the company, or you are paying a college or vocational school money which will inevitably enrich companies.
6. It is the use of government revenue to ease the burden on companies to incentivize the hiring of employees which is an admission of the value supply-side economics.
7. Insert usual rant about taxes, role of government, entitlements, spending etc..

[ebuddy]

Sounds like a cross between Monster.com and a trade school. Why would we pay for someone to do something they don't wanna do?

[Wiskedjak]

Everyday, my RSS feed for Core77 fills up with US job openings in product and software design. I can only assume that corresponds to job openings in engineering and software development at the same companies.

From the perspective of my career, there are many job opportunities in the US, but the ones that I see are certainly not jobs that someone with only minimal training could fill.

[Buckaroo]

As usual, i think Bill Clinton is on drugs.

Thousands Line Up Downtown For 175 Jobs at Canarsie BJ’s
Brooklyn Eagle, Bay Ridge Eagle Brooklyn, NY :: daily paper in Brooklyn

Thousands line up for Tanger Outlets job fair in Mebane
Thousands line up for Tanger Outlets job fair in Mebane :: WRAL.com

[Big Mac]

smacintush said it all. . .

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by smacintush 

Assuming his numbers are accurate, here are the potential problems I see:

Here's the thing though- you approach this like a rational adult, asking valid questions and expecting actual DETAILS, not just smearing on some cheap lipstick and getting out the kneepads for whatever some political hack comes out with.

Too many people don't do DETAILS anymore, and certainly rational questions aren't all the rage. If it doesn't fit on a bumper sticker, the left doesn't want to know anything about it.

So it's back to jobs being created at the whim of political hacks who've never even held positions in the private sector, let alone created a job. Details about actual companies, actual positions being filled, actual jobs needing to be done, people having the money to actually pay someone to do those jobs, people knowing that investments will actually pay off, leading to *gasp* success, and therefore further rounds of "You're greedy! Now we get to take X Y and Z from you..."

All those pesky details like that are old hat. Plus they won't fit on a bumpersticker, so screw it.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by smacintush 

I'm happy that at least Jon Stewart kept his stupid mouth shut for most of that, except where he knelt down and sucked Willy's c*ck for a moment.

First of all, I think that there are a few questions:
1. Where is he getting this data from and is it actually accurate?
2. What are the actual reasons these jobs aren't being filled?
3. How long are these jobs actually sitting vacant?
4. How much would this cost?

All of these questions and the potential problems you listed are basically what I'm interested in exploring. I just thought it was an interesting idea, I haven't had a chance to look into the details yet, nor am I claiming that this idea is anything more than interesting.

[Snow-i]

Why would we need to government to do this?

There are THOUSANDS of staffing agencies that do similiar functions. We don't need entitlements for job training. Most of those "jobs" you're seeing in the IT and software development fields are contract positions - short term and bound to open up again when the need arises.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Didn't you get the memo? Big Government can do ANYTHING and EVERYTHING!

Well... except for operate itself with a shred of efficiency.

But besides that... ANYTHING and EVERYTHING!

[jadjad]

If you enter a search for the jobs that Clinton states as being available, guess what? Very few results that are relative. I'm always pessimistic when I hear any statement that states that jobs are available for the taking. If Clinton has the list and locations, he should produce the results. Commercial and industrial companies have stated the same. If it's not a secret, why not advertise them? Can someone help point me in the direction of the source? Would appreciate it. Thank You, JAD