Quote:
Originally Posted by Porsche-O-Phile
Another factor that becomes very real to a lot of folks in an economic downturn, and is ignored COMPLETELY by the government is "underemployment".
For example, let's say a college-educated professional with 10 years of management experience gets laid off. To make ends meet, he/she takes a $8 an hour job flipping burgers because it's all that's available and the only place in town that's hiring at all, at any price. Technically, by the government's definition, he's not "unemployed" but is sure as hell underemployed, possibly able to only (barely) make a housing payment but certainly not to pay for outstanding loans, credit cards, car payments, insurance costs, gas costs (especially today), utilities, health care, etc. They're also probably not getting benefits anymore.
This is a very real problem in economic downturns and is COMPLETELY ignored by the statistics as reported.
My wife went through a situation very, very similar to the above back in 2002, so I do know a thing or two about this.
|
Indeed. Some companies have experimented with a "skill based" compensation system. They pay a worker for the contributions they COULD make. If the worker is in a position that fails to utilize their most valuable skills, the company is basically losing money. It motivates managers to use their skill inventories more strategically.
Unfortunately I see no clear way of encouraging this kind of efficiency better than the "market forces" you love so dearly (yes, I like market forces too but I just don't place Carte Blanche faith in them like you do).
Yes, America could be more efficient. And maybe, we will NEED to.