http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/06/should-public-sector-jobs-come-first/?emc=eta1
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/08/obamas-job-proposals/?emc=eta1
Paul Krugman recently called for an emergency program, perhaps a small-scale version of the New Deal's Works Progress Administration that would offer low paying public-service employment. A large share of the current stimulus package has gone to state governments, with the aim of preventing more layoffs among public sector workers and in public education. Should saving these government and education jobs be a priority? Is there a way to establish a public program quickly enough to employ the newly jobless? Would this be an efficient way to stimulate job creation?
The NY Times "Room for Debate" blog is first attached and asks some heavy hitters what they think about this issue. The responses are interesting. Read especially James K. Galbraith, an economist at UT Austin (and the son of John Kenneth Galbraith) who typically has his feet on the ground and finds some satisfaction in what we're doing to save the economy now relative to what his father advocated.
We have also attached a refreshingly brief summary of the Obama job proposals from the NY Times "Economix" blog. Within the "bullets", one can click on various perspectives of economists like Mark Zandi (much listened to and rightly so) and/or institutions with an interest in those proposals.
A moment on Galbraith: his perspective is that, as economics, the stimulus is working, but as politics, it is failing because in politics "part-way doesn't count." With 7 million jobs lost and 15 million people now out of work, people care about VISIBLE RESULTS - and they've not seen them yet. The question isn't whether we've turned a corner. It's how do we get all the way back to high employment, even in 5 years? We'd need nearly 250,000 new jobs every month for 60 months!!
So the problem isn't how best to choose between revenue sharing, infrastructure, public jobs and a payroll tax holiday. It's how to get all those things done - and also how to support small business and non-profits, to help students and to ease older workers into retirement.
There is a "Read more..." drop down that allows further review of Galbraith's comments and we strongly recommend what he has to say there about human resources and making "...no little plans."
Our fear in prior posts has been that we're back in 1937 and we haven't done enough (for those of you who are economic historians). World War II saved the economy then (with huge sacrifices) so things did not get back to growing until 1945, 8 years later. Obama's Chicago Booth School behavioral economists know that. That's why we have the new job proposals.
The American educational system needs more (and better) teachers. We can't spend too much on that. Saving a teacher's job or adding teacher jobs is "priceless". If that is any part of further stimulus, it should be applauded.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I completely agree with your last point, that we need more (and better) teachers. I also believe they deserve to have a much higher average salary than they do, after all they are the ones teaching our children.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I've had this discussion with a 2nd grade teacher friend of mine, and she told me that the problem is incentives - the majority of the "great" teachers don't go into teaching for the money, they do it because they love what they do. If you start to make it a job that people pursue for the income, I would argue that you may not attract the kind of teachers you desire.
I don't have the answer, but I believe we have to think past the money side of the incentive question, and find new ways to stimulate more (and better) teachers.
Marcelo: Thanks so much for your supportive comments. My mother taught 5th grade for 42 years and cared not at all about the money. Everything to her was about the kids! Hopefully, in some small way, my contribution to education mirror's hers.
ReplyDeleteCountries that pay teachers very well have a better education system in terms of outcomes than ours... while I agree with your fear in principle Marcello I feel the data doesn't back it up.
ReplyDeletehttp://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/09/teacher-pay-around-the-world/
That's an interesting link from that economix blog about teacher pay in various countries.
Good link, Craig.
ReplyDeleteI've thought about the teacher point some more, and I've realized that another huge flaw in the teaching system in the US (and most likely around the world) is that we focus too much on one kind of intelligence, which is "book smarts." For the people who have it, great, for those who don't, you'd better learn it.
I feel that our education system as a whole neglects to teach students relational skills. How do you interact with other people in a healthy way. I realized that I learned more about Algebra, Calculus, and the Periodic Table of the Elements than I did about psychology and people skills in school. Guess which skills I am using more today? I can tell you it's not the chemistry and physics.
Perhaps if we want to improve our educational system, we should approach it from a teaching content perspective, because that we can affect through regulation.
I should also mention, Professor Hazzard, that yes, you are one of the few teachers that I've had that I feel like your primary goal in being in school is helping students grow in both their careers and life.
ReplyDeleteThank you for your comment Marcelo - that's my goal. Two points to make here: at the higher educational levels, great students can inspire teachers who care. That is certainly true with you, Craig, Giulia, Dale Brimer before you and many of the others who read this blog. And, secondly, the experiments in the 90s in the Dallas school system with bonuses (a Ross Perot inspiration) for the ENTIRE staffs of high schools where the overall grades (audited for teachers gaming the system) of students went up, have worked - Oxy participated in the one at Hillcrest High School.
ReplyDeleteI agree both with your idea Marcello and the sentiment re: Professor Hazzard.
ReplyDeleteI think the truth is you get what you pay for when it comes to education. Sure it's great some people are willing to sacrifice otherwise great income to become a teacher.
I submit those people shouldn't have to.
Craig: Thank you for your kind support! And, I agree that teachers should be paid more. There are many ways to do that but Perot had one idea that worked.
ReplyDelete