What does ‘job creation’ reallymean?

I’m one of the 38 percent of Americans not in the labor force, but am still amused by politicians’ promises of “job creation.”

All numbers herein are from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (bls.gov), which really likes statistics. For example, there are 156 million “non-institutionalized” Americans working today, at a non-farm average of 34.5 hours per week.

It would be an amazing coincidence if the amount of work necessary to be done in a society exactly matched what all employable people working 40 hours a week could provide. And it would be impossible that the skills necessary exactly matched the skills available.

We used to work from sunup till sundown, seven days a week. After the Industrial Revolution we could either still work long days and make more, or if we didn’t need more, work shorter days. Time-saving devices are continuously being introduced: robotics, scanners, diagnostic tools, etc., all make things quicker.

Labor-saving is continuously shifting skill needs. We don’t need as many switchboard operators and mail sorters, but at least twomajor new employment sectors arose. Naturally leisure-time industries grew, and sure enough the “leisure”sector is up, according to the BLS. Also, according to the BLS, there is continuous growth in the sector which designs, develops and markets these time-saving devices, primarily computer and information technologies.

One popular sector seems saturated: Accounting is down, according to the BLS. We now each seem to have all the financial advice and service we need. It’s not like making more widgets to sell. And with online banking, we need fewer branch personnel.

But we’re living longer and have time to experience more medical conditions. The health care and medical sectors are up, according to the BLS: hospitals, in- or out-patient care, specialists, nursing homes, rehabs, etc. There’s lots of room here. But not medical insurance. Here, like the financial sector, people only need one each.

A new job sector might be construction, because our bridges, highways, grids and pipelines are deteriorating. Is this what theymean by “job creation”? Maybe, but it requires funding, logically an addition to the gasoline tax. But many politicians stupidly signed away their ability to legislate with a no-tax pledge.

Or do theymean getting manufacturing jobs back by requiring or incentivizing manufacturing here rather thanMexico or China? Maybe. This would be great for Dayton and all of the Midwest, but it might interfere with “free enterprise.”

Or are they talking about training? Because all sectors in demand require extensive specialized up-to-date preparation. We already can’t fill the computer and IT jobs we’re creating.

Or conversely, are politicians talking about a shorter workweek, so that work necessary to be done can be spread among more willing workers? That average work week of 34.5 hours is decreasing, according to the BLS. So we’re already demonstrating that there isn’t currently enough work to keep everyone busy 40 hours a week.

There’s no natural law that says work and workers have to be in balance.