Nic, great link. Thanks for that. Interesting that Friedman quotes a retired diplomat from a country that's been pretty good about keeping its people in line.
I'd need to read the original piece, but I'd beg to differ that democracies are failing. You can't call the Eurozone a failed democracy if the democracies that comprise it are still healthy. You can, however, say that some convenient amalgamation of countries is not working. And to say democracy is broke in this country is a stretch. It works perfectly well: we may not like that wild back-and-forth/ADD results we see in big elections, but the system works.
That said, I'm really intrigued by his "big lies" logic. It's true and it's disturbing. Now if the president stands up tomorrow night and says "government can't solve all your problems and if you're been unemployed for more than two years, you might want to rethink your location, career, assumptions, skillset and act accordingly" well then that would be an historic speech!
But it won't happen. A liberal politician can't stand up and repudiate his base's core assumptions in the same way a conservative politician can't stand up and repudiate big business. It's career-i-cide.
Meanwhile, the rest of us out here in the real world soldier on.
I think that no matter what Obama says it will be criticized to high waters.
Since we are quoting opinions from today's sages, I offer another one, that of Tom Friedman in the NYT. He ain't a super-sage, but he sure sounds good, and the president should heed his advice: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/07/opinion/friedman-the-whole-truth-and-nothing-but.html?ref=opinion
Responding to IBM221 and a little thread in Mac_Droz's comments: Point taken. I do think as many people in the workforce as possible should always strive to move up the value chain, but some people are really good at one thing. Let's take manufacturing (IBM221's shoe factory reference). We've offshored manufacturing because it supposedly can be done cheaper. But when you do that, you lose the tight feedback loop you had when you owned the factory.
As I went around the Midwest this summer on the first leg of the Drive for Innovation, I was struck at how many of the systems companies I met have manufacturing close by. Most did it because they work too quickly to sit around and wait for prototypes to come back from China and they want excellent Q/A that only comes from overseeing your factory or your manufacturing partners directly.
So, there's hope that we'll get back in the manufacturing game and that's always good for employment.
How about Federal loan guarantee to those U.S. solar firms in the Obama government? Look at this Solyndra LLC, it had obtained a $535 million federal loan guarantee in 2010. But now, it declared that they would be filing for bankruptcy. What could be the reason behind? Article same subject is [url=http://www.newsytype.com/10807-solyndra-bankruptcy]Government-supported Solyndra declares bankruptcy[/url] .Financial management is really crucial and risky in an organization considering it's asset, liabilities and income. The SWOT analysis can identify its annual performance and can determine possible strategic solutions either for survival or for dissolution in the business industry.
Interesting comments... One thing I do not agree whenever I listen to the discussion like this is that all these people that loose jobs because of the new technology will go back to schools and learn new trades... Being engineer I am not against the technology at all. I'm just saying that it is easy to say that being an engineer or a politician - real life is more harsh - most of these people will start drinking and enrol on social welfare. Start wondering how many of the kids of these people will get a proper education? Who is going to be their role model? Drunken dad? Not-reading-books mum? In all our greed we forget one basic think - to be proud of the work we do, no mater what the job is. Being proud of the work gives great boost to your kids. We have too many non-skilled people with no perspectives and no motivation and still we're creating more high-skilled jobs.
Look at the last riots on London - that is the society of the future - no skills, no motivation, just pure greed - just like their role models: politicians and celebrities. And there are more of them then us...
Think of newer and newer technologies. The population goes up regularly. NAturally every one need a job. New applications is the only solution. The new applications not to replace the older ones. Probably in the areas of agriculture, power generation, fuel and all other kind of consumables.Where ever there is a shortage of resources many jobs can be created to fill them up.
Too much 'micro management' of businesses by Government has never worked. I doubt if we would have ever stepped foot on the Moon if President Kennedy and his administration attempted to manage the project to the degree that existing and proposed regulations today hamper business. Set the large goals, and get out of the way as well as paving the way is what government should do if they really want to create jobs.
There is always a problem when governments attempt to set social policy by regulation.
Of course there are legitimate roles for government to play in the areas of consumer protection against fraud, consumer and worker safety, and broad environmental issues such as ensuring a clean (and protected) water supply and proper disposal/clean up of toxic materials.
Many of the laws on the books in these areas could be simplified or even eliminated in some cases, and would work a lot better if they were enforced instead of just piling on layer after layer.
The answer is get realistic,
do a statistic of jobless folks, education level etc.
If most of them lower than high school then create some shoe factory, green job won't fix.
don't fool yourself, not all americans can do analytical stuff.
you invest in a group of low IQs and expect them to compete in hi-tek , it simply won't work.
I like the term... "Embrace destruction". This is a way to boldly go forward. To embrace destruction of the old in order to welcome the new.
This also reminds me of measuring our age not by the years we have lived but by the dreams we have. The desire to keep on, and the projects that we´re working on.
Start ups are the answer... we have to re'invent ourselves and by doing so, we´ll be finding the answers and solutions to the current demands. I couldn´t agree more. Let´s see what the President will say...
As we unveil EE Times’ 2015 Silicon 60 list, journalist & Silicon 60 researcher Peter Clarke hosts a conversation on startups in the electronics industry. Panelists Dan Armbrust (investment firm Silicon Catalyst), Andrew Kau (venture capital firm Walden International), and Stan Boland (successful serial entrepreneur, former CEO of Neul, Icera) join in the live debate.