Service jobs and the economics of job retention

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by ElectronGuru, Oct 21, 2013.

  1. ElectronGuru, Oct 21, 2013
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2013

    ElectronGuru macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2013
    Location:
    Oregon, USA
    #1
    The problem with politics is all the politics. But in among the posturing (which is about deciding who's idea everyone has to follow), we learn things. In among one such conversation, I noticed that the jobs most Americans are likely to be doing (now and into the future) are those that literally cannot be exported.

    Quoted from another thread:

    Studying this chart, the only job category (1 out of 30) that is exportable (and even then not entirely) is customer service rep. In every other, the job has to be done locally. You simply can't pay someone in China or Bangladesh to help patients, bust tables, unload ships or cut down trees that are located here.

    A job that is lost is a job no one is willing to pay for or pay as much for. So the jobs we have left, fall into a few (loose) categories:

    specialized skill - especially those jobs that change faster than can be replicated elsewhere or are more advanced

    protected - by a variety of laws and lawmakers

    manufacture with natural advantage - we can make it cheaper because of cheap water, lumber, natural gas

    manufacture of large items - products to large to be imported economically

    production of perishable items - products to delicate to be imported economically (restaurants and food factories)

    owned - you own the company and decide not to replace yourself

    locally necessary - the chart above


    I'm sure I'm leaving important examples out, but my point is the same. Locality was not the parameter of this chart, it's only about popularity. But locality has become so important, its now the cause of popularity.

    Put another way, the majority of Americans are now (or are soon to be) doing jobs, not because we are better or more efficient than other countries doing the same jobs, but that these jobs are impossible to do elsewhere.
     
  2. anonymouslurker macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 16, 2012
    #2
    I find it extremely difficult to believe that there is not a single technological field in that list.

    Without any qualifiers (i.e. "Top 30 non-technical job growth", etc), just that alone would make this list suspect in my eyes.
     
  3. localoid macrumors 68020

    localoid

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2007
    Location:
    America's Third World
    #3
    Well, here's a 25 page pdf for your reading enjoyment: Occupational employment projections to 2020

    One thing to keep in mind. More than 1/2 of all jobs in the U.S. only require a HS degree (or less).
     
  4. elistan, Oct 21, 2013
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2013

    elistan macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Location:
    Denver/Boulder, CO
    #4
    Maybe I'm missing something, but the BLS doc on page 97 (the doc starts on page 84 :) so page 14 of the PDF) says growth of retail salesperson positions will be +706,800 from 2010 to 2020. But the chart says 1,958,700? Why such different numbers? OH! I think I get it now. The chart says "growth and replacement." I guess they're including turnover. So nearly 2 millions new people in retail, but only 706k actual new positions.

    So if there were only one "Official Court Jester" position in the US, and somebody new got the job every 60 seconds, this chart would count that as 5256k "job openings" over ten years.

    I'm not sure if that alters things about whether it supports your point or not, but something to keep in mind.

    anonymouslurker the numbers of the sort you're looking for are on page 89 (6 of the PDF) of the BLS report. 778k new computer and mathematical related positions added between 2010 and 2020. The largest of those is "Software developers, applications" at 143k.

    Here are the job categories sorted but number of new positions.
    Computer/math stuff is 12th.
    Code:
    2010 National Employment Matrix title			10 Employment	20 Employment	10->20 #	10->20 %	Median wage
    00–0000 Total, all occupations 				143,068.2	163,537.1	20,468.9	14.3		$33,840 
    43–0000 Office and administrative support 		22,602.5	24,938.2	2,335.7		10.3		$30,710 
    29–0000 Healthcare practitioners andtechnical  		7,799.3		9,819.0		2,019.7		25.9		$58,490 
    41–0000 Sales and related  				14,915.6	16,784.7	1,869.1		12.5		$24,370 
    31–0000 Healthcare support  				4,190.0		5,633.7		1,443.7		34.5		$24,760 
    47–0000 Construction and extraction 			6,328.0		7,735.2		1,407.2		22.2		$39,080 
    25–0000 Education, training, and library 		9,193.6		10,597.3	1,403.7		15.3		$45,690 
    39–0000 Personal care and service 			4,994.7		6,331.4		1,336.6		26.8		$20,640 
    53–0000 Transportation and materialmoving  		9,004.8		10,333.4	1,328.7		14.8		$28,400 
    13–0000 Business and financial operations 		6,789.2		7,961.7		1,172.5		17.3		$60,670 
    35–0000 Food preparation and servingrelated  		11,150.3	12,242.8	1,092.5		9.8		$18,770 
    49–0000 Installation, maintenance, andrepair  		5,428.6		6,228.7		800.2		14.7		$40,120 
    15–0000 Computer and mathematical 			3,542.8		4,321.1		778.3		22.0		$73,720 
    37–0000 Building and grounds cleaning andmaintenance  	5,498.5		6,162.5		664.0		12.1		$22,490 
    11–0000 Management  					8,776.1		9,391.9		615.8		7.0		$91,440 
    21–0000 Community and social service 			2,402.7		2,985.0		582.3		24.2		$39,280 
    33–0000 Protective service 				3,302.5		3,667.0		364.5		11.0		$36,660 
    51–0000 Production  					8,594.4		8,951.2		356.8		4.2		$30,330 
    27–0000 Arts, design, entertainment, sports,and media  	2,708.5		3,051.0		342.5		12.6		$42,870 
    17–0000 Architecture and engineering 			2,433.4		2,686.2		252.8		10.4		$70,610 
    19–0000 Life, physical, and social science 		1,228.8		1,419.6		190.8		15.5		$58,530 
    23–0000 Legal  						1,211.9		1,342.9		131.0		10.8		$74,580 
    45–0000 Farming, fishing, and forestry 			972.1		952.6		-19.4		-2.0		$19,630 
    
     
  5. anonymouslurker macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 16, 2012
    #5
    Thanks for that explanation, it makes a lot more sense now if it includes turnover.
     
  6. ThisIsNotMe macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2008
    #6
    Why? Progressive policies have forced all of those jobs overseas.
     
  7. localoid macrumors 68020

    localoid

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2007
    Location:
    America's Third World
    #7
    Actually... no, it wouldn't.

    See: Estimating Occupational Replacement Needs

    See above.
     
  8. ElectronGuru thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2013
    Location:
    Oregon, USA
    #8
    There are two challenges for me in the original data. The first is that these are projected job openings. Imagine you're in 11th grade, sitting with a guidance counselor and he puts that chart in front of you. These are the fields with the most (numeric) opportunity. These are the jobs most people entering the job market will end up with. There will simply be more new jobs cleaning bedpans than hard drives.

    The second is collar or class. I've worked tech most of my carrier. When thinking of tech relative to other jobs, we usually compare it with other white collar jobs. Compared with law or medicine or MBAs, IT is massive. Compared with sales clerk or waitressing or auto repair, IT is smaller. Combined with the growth needed to make that chart, and it's less surprising.


    Yes. These aren't the jobs that IT and children of IT workers will be taking. These are the jobs that are replacing factory jobs. These are the jobs that will go to the children of people who used to put things together.
     
  9. splitpea macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    Location:
    Among the starlings
    #9
    Because overall very few people are actually employed in technology, tech jobs are among the highest percentage growth fields, but not the fastest-growing fields by total number of jobs being added.
     
  10. jnpy!$4g3cwk macrumors 65816

    jnpy!$4g3cwk

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2010
    #10
    Can you explain exactly how progressive policies forced all of those jobs overseas?
     
  11. G51989 macrumors 68030

    G51989

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2012
    Location:
    NYC NY/Pittsburgh PA
    #11
    Links and sources, otherwise your just full of it.
     
  12. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #12
    Only in America could the word "progressive" be a pejorative.
     
  13. Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #13
    Money grubbing, maximized profit, "I deserve it, screw you" corporate leadership in combination with globalization holds substantial blame for the situation.

    I'm more fearful for of the future of the U.S. than I have ever been.
     
  14. VulchR macrumors 68020

    VulchR

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    Scotland
    #14
    And perhaps the UK....
     

Share This Page