Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

Companies are always hiring, even in a depression (or Economics for the ignornant)

Recs

21

September 11, 2009 – Comments (18)

There is always a scarcity of labor. Always.  It is an economic fact of life.  Why?  Because those greedy businessmen are motivated by profit.  Assuming the guy you hire isn't  a complete waste of space, he should bring in more nickels than you shell out for him.  Socialists call this labor exploitation. The rest of us call this cooperation.

So why do we have unemployment in the first place? After all, nearly every single government legislation is aimed at curbing the excessive profits of the inefficient and unregulated free market.  At least, that's what they tell their economically illiterate voters.  If the businessman is driven by excessive profits, and he is by a nature an exploiter of labor, shouldn't there always be full employment??   Why would the evil capitalist pig ever leave a soul unemployed if he could extract just one more penny from their helpless, sweet, perfect souls?

Obviously, there must be something preventing the capitalist from hiring all the employees he would like.  For starters, he may not have any more money to hire a new employee.  He may not find an employee that matches the skill level he requires.  Most importantly, there may be several layers of government bureaucracy and regulations that he may have to fulfill which make it impossible to hire someone new and stay in business.

So can we have lots of people hiring even during a Great Depression?  Absolutely.  There are always people hiring.  That will always be the case, unless the government destroys social cooperation completely and just starts giving orders to everyone. 

David in Qatar

 

 

18 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On September 11, 2009 at 2:17 PM, prose976 (< 20) wrote:

Just go to:

www.monster.com

www.dice.com

http://hotjobs.yahoo.com

www.jobcentral.com

www.collegerecruiter.com

www.careerbuilder.com

www.hound.com

www.career.com

www.indeed.com

www.simplyhired.com

www.net-temps.com

...to name a few.  There is no shortage of jobs ladies and gentlemen.  The recession may be real in some sense, but there are PLENTY of jobs to be had out there.

 

Report this comment
#2) On September 11, 2009 at 2:21 PM, catoismymotor (32.76) wrote:

I think too many people are focused on jobsa that "pay enough". Right now for the unemployed the issue is to get a job and worry about the key to the executive washroom later. I know. I've been there.

Report this comment
#3) On September 11, 2009 at 2:22 PM, SkepticalOx (99.43) wrote:

Government regulations also makes it hard to fire under-performing employees. This increases the risk of hiring a new employee and is a huge disincentive. It also makes it a pain to replace a lousy employee with a potentially more deserving replacement.

Report this comment
#4) On September 11, 2009 at 2:26 PM, catoismymotor (32.76) wrote:

#2 - I meant to say don't be as picky as you used to be. The key is to have money coming in that will help slow or halt the flood of cash rushing out of your savings. Sometimes you have to get what you can get and work your way up from there. It is hard, but harder without any income. Again, I've been there. Many of us have.

Report this comment
#5) On September 11, 2009 at 2:31 PM, SkepticalOx (99.43) wrote:

#2 - I think one of the problems in the US and Canada (I'm Canadian) is that too many people think they are entitled to good-paying jobs just because they were lucky enough to be popped out of their mothers in these countries.

Report this comment
#6) On September 11, 2009 at 2:35 PM, russiangambit (29.29) wrote:

> Obviously, there must be something preventing the capitalist from hiring all the employees he would like. 

May be there is overcapacity in the given field, and barriers to entry for other similar fields.

Report this comment
#7) On September 11, 2009 at 2:37 PM, kdakota630 (29.57) wrote:

SkepticalOx

You may have a point, but personally (and I'm Canadian as well), I think most young people (myself included back in those carefree days) simply have a poor attitude, and think they're better (and worth more) than they actually are.  Now that I own a (very) small business, I see the same thing in the vast majority of people who come to me looking for work.

Report this comment
#8) On September 11, 2009 at 2:38 PM, PeteysTired (< 20) wrote:

I wonder...if we didn't have minimum wage laws and the Federal Reserve could stop inflation, then would recessions end quicker?

It seems to me that during recesssions, businesses would be able to lower prices to help spur demand and use the lower wages to keep margins. It also seems that inflation, prevents prices from falling unless they are forced to buy cutting workers.

Who knows....maybe I am all wet :) 

 

Report this comment
#9) On September 11, 2009 at 2:39 PM, ocsurf (< 20) wrote:

People need to suck it up and swallow their pride and just get their ass to work for the time being. Who cares if you're overqualified. Get off unemployement and get to work!!

Report this comment
#10) On September 11, 2009 at 3:17 PM, guiron (20.35) wrote:

Who cares if you're overqualified

A lot of places won't hire you if you're overqualified.

Report this comment
#11) On September 11, 2009 at 3:17 PM, guiron (20.35) wrote:

After all, nearly every single government legislation is aimed at curbing the excessive profits of the inefficient and unregulated free market

It's hard for me to take you seriously after this ridiculous straw man.

Report this comment
#12) On September 11, 2009 at 3:25 PM, guiron (20.35) wrote:

I wonder...if we didn't have minimum wage laws and the Federal Reserve could stop inflation, then would recessions end quicker?

How does that work for people earning minimum wage? Can you afford a wage cut at that point?

A lot of supply-siders seem to forget that real people are involved in these calculations. Drop minimum wage, and you pull the rug out from the lowest wage earners, which has cataclysmic effects when you're at that income level.

Anyway, sounds like you pulled that out of someplace dark. Can you back that concept up with anything more than conjecture?

Report this comment
#13) On September 11, 2009 at 3:51 PM, SkepticalOx (99.43) wrote:

#12 That depends. Setting minimum wage at a higher point than equilibrium suggests (without minimum wage) could mean that businesses would have to fire other employees to be able to maintain the wage rate. So unemployment or wage cut?

Report this comment
#14) On September 11, 2009 at 3:52 PM, catoismymotor (32.76) wrote:

This proves that any article or blog can start a heated debate.

Report this comment
#15) On September 11, 2009 at 3:57 PM, SkepticalOx (99.43) wrote:

#15 Cato... Um, especially if it's a politically-themed one.

Report this comment
#16) On September 11, 2009 at 3:59 PM, hsaunder (< 20) wrote:

prose976 wrote:

Just go to:

www.monster.com

www.dice.com

http://hotjobs.yahoo.com

www.jobcentral.com

www.collegerecruiter.com

www.careerbuilder.com

www.hound.com

www.career.com

www.indeed.com

www.simplyhired.com

www.net-temps.com

...to name a few.  There is no shortage of jobs ladies and gentlemen.  The recession may be real in some sense, but there are PLENTY of jobs to be had out there.

****

Yep there sure are. Now I wanna see you get one, especially if none of those openings is even close to the one that you left behind when your job was off-shored...

Report this comment
#17) On September 11, 2009 at 4:04 PM, PeteysTired (< 20) wrote:

guiron

Doesn't inflation hurt the poor just as hard as a wage cut?

If prices and wages can move downward together it seems  more of a wash.

Sorry, but I don't even know what a supply sider is.

Report this comment
#18) On September 11, 2009 at 4:16 PM, Melaschasm (53.80) wrote:

Why rush out and get a new job, when the government is going to pay you a large portion of your wages for a year?

For parents who would have to pay for daycare if they get a new job, they often have an economic incentive to stay unemployed as long as possible, since a job would be a pay cut, even at the rate of their old job.

For people who do not like their jobs, sacrificing a small amount of material wealth to gain a large amount of free time is a good deal.

The three main groups of people who do not have an economic incentive to wait a few months before looking for work are:

1.  Those who can still be part of the upper 1/3 of wage earners.  For these people the unemployment cap is so low that they would be trading a huge amount of earnings for the extra free time.

2.  Those who need, but do not have access to an alternative insurance source, such as having an employeed spouse.

3.  Those who do not value free time as much as earning a little bit more than unemployment pays.

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners


Advertisement