Compare these three articles from Thomas Friedman, David Brooks, and Paul Krugman. They are all about the issue of jobs in a globalized world; Friedman and Brooks both discuss an article from The Atlantic about manufacturing in America. Krugman refers to a Times article about why iPhones are manufactured in China instead of America. For your purposes, answer the following questions:
1. What’s the author’s main point about jobs and the future of the American economy?
2. What do the authors seem to agree and disagree about?
3. What does each author propose America should focus on as a solution? [This is the most important question, but you’ll have to answer the first two well to get this one right.]
4. Which author do you agree with, and why? If you don’t agree with any of them, what do you think we should focus on instead?
POST your response online. I will also accept this assignment written and in class, but question 4 in particular may invite a response from your classmates.
(A sidenote: The Atlantic’s article is incredibly interesting and quite well-written, but very long and too detailed for us; HOWEVER, BJ and anybody else interested in cars or other manufacturing industries will be interested to read at least parts of it. It also has some very interesting commentary on the interaction between social and economic forces in our society (that’s way less boring than it sounds, and it’s mostly at the beginning and end). The New York Times article Krugman discusses is also fascinating.) POST your response online. I will also accept this assignment written and in class, but question 4 in particular may invite a response from your classmates.
1. What’s the authors’ main point about jobs and the future of the American economy?
ReplyDeleteThe authors’ main point is that you can’t just be an average worker anymore. You have to have something special to you that make you stand out form the rest, something that makes you more valuable than the others. Also his point on the economy is that soon China will do more and more manufacturing for the USA, because of the example of how they were able to assemble thousands of workers within several days to build thousands upon thousands of Apple I phones.
2. What do the authors seem to agree and disagree about?
The authors agree that in order to get a job nowadays you have to have an education or else you’ll get replaced. But they seem to disagree on some cause of not being able to get employed. Thomas explains that the reason why you can’t get a job is simply because you can’t be an average person to earn an average lifestyle, because if your just average there will soon be a machine that will replace you. David Brooks believes that unemployment is the because of the lack of support systems available to everyone. On the other hand Paul Krugman thinks that accessibility is because for unemployment, US companies think that China is a good place to set up. For example if you need a million screws there is a manufacturer just down the street same with gaskets and other products. The USA doesn’t have that kind of ease to accessibility to common products but China does.
3. What does each author propose America should focus on as a solution? [This is the most important question, but you’ll have to answer the first two well to get this one right.]
Thomas seems to infer that America needs to ensure everyone here to a post-high school education. But David mostly talks about single mothers who can’t get a higher education simply because no one is there to help them, so having help and support for single parents would greatly help with employment. Paul believes that America should focus on bring companies back into the US to create “clusters” or “synergy” to help support each other like China has with products readily available just a “block away”.
4. Which author do you agree with, and why? If you don’t agree with any of them, what do you think we should focus on instead?
I agree with Paul simply because I believe that if we can create a healthy industrial environment that more companies would want to come to the USA and set up shop here. This will mean more jobs and more money flowing into the US with would improve the economy overall.
1. Thomas Friedman: I think Friedman’s point about jobs and the future of economy is that there will be a lot less jobs out there because electronics can take their place for a lot less pay. Most people barely have a high school diploma and have easy jobs that an object like the Presto can easily take.
ReplyDeleteDavid Brooks: Brooks point is that many people have family issues that happen and what not and they can’t always get the education they need. Most jobs require things that we learn in college and school that help us make the job easier and understandable but when he was talking about Parlier and her not having the education needed to do certain jobs she could be good at, it’s pretty sad that she can’t learn those things as easily any longer. We need more jobs that more people can do with less education since the numbers continue to increase.
Paul Krugman: His main point is that most of our companies in the US actually have manufacturing factories in other countries, especially China and that takes away a lot of job opportunities for us.
2. The authors seem to agree that there are many factors out there that eliminate a lot of jobs for people in the US. They think that we need more jobs here and other educational things to help make it easier. They disagree on the fact that having jobs here will have to make the pay larger unlike in China where wages are very little.
3. Friedman: America should push itself to become greater than ever and try harder to succeed at more things.
Brooks: America needs to create certain classes or lessons at jobs to teach workers with less education how to do jobs in order to get higher up in the work place.
Krugman: Doesn’t really talk about what America should do. But possibly move the factories from China to the US.
4. I think I mostly agree with what Friedman said about how we need to get higher educations in order to keep our jobs and be replaced by electronics and what not. So many people just drop out of school and assume they can find a reasonable job, but soon enough, they can be replaced so quickly and they don’t even know it. It’s better to just get a good education and find a job that can’t have you be replaced as easily.
1. The point that all these authors are making is that you can't just be that average worker with an average education anymore, that average is dead; instead now you have to have some kind of special skill that makes you stand out and better than others. That is true for Friedman and Brooks, however, Brooks focuses specifically to families, broken families and broken homes. The girl he uses as an example had a dad who killed himself in a drunk driving accident finished high school well, but had a child in her senior year then split up with her baby's father. On her own she was not able to afford childcare and school so she couldn't complete her college dreams, as a result although she has the drive and right attitude she can never really get a better job or more money without the college education. This story isn't a single person but many others. And Krugman makes a point of while American companies have lots of workers in example, the Apple company, the workers and factories are not all in the US mostly in China, this is counterproductive because it takes away job opportunities for American workers witch is the counter effect of what the US government and economy needs.
ReplyDelete2. All the authors agree that there aren't enough jobs in the US for American workers. However they disagree somewhat on what needs to be done in order for the number of jobs to increase, one is more or higher education another is that there needs to be more manufacturing companies here in America.
3. Friedman says that America needs to push harder, and that more people need to work towards getting higher education and therefore more people will have jobs that are also higher end, after all that is where most of the jobs are now. Brooks whose article is about the single mothers/ parents who cannot do more for themselves due to their misfortunes, and how action must be taken to help these people out to get the help they need in education and finance. Finally Krugman believes that companies need to move manufacturing plants back to the US to give more US citizens work, and more things will be being produced from America not China or some other overseas country.
4. I agree with all of them on some level, a combination of everything they say together would be the solution. However, the author I agree most with is Krugman, and the reason is that I do believe that America has based too many manufacturing companies overseas and instead of helping us it's hurting us although it may be cheaper. The truth is that American companies need to be creating more jobs for Americans, not Chinese people or anybody else . I agree with Friedman on the point that Americans do need to push for higher education, and with Brooks on the point that these broken families, single mothers need more help so that they too have a fair chance to earn a higher education and a higher place in the working world.
1. The authors main points are that jobs are being taken from the average worker. New technology and globaliztion is taking over a lot of jobs that humans used to do. The articles talked about how one can't just be average, they have to go above and behind these days to get a job. For example, if someone works in a factory, a new piece of technology could be made and take that persons job. To stay in the company, they would have to learn new skills and move up to a high job, work harder, and be determined to keep their job.
ReplyDelete2. I think the authors agree that america's economy and jobs are going downhill. Each article mentioned jobs being lost and harder to find. I think they disagree on what the actual solution should be, and which factors are helping/hurting the problem.
3. Friedman's main solution is that people should be educated. He wants a bill to be passed that people need to have a post high school education.
Brooks thinks Obama needs to make some aggressive changes. He says tax cuts, more enomic and social mixing, jobs and colleges working together, and new systems to help the people and government both benefit.
Krugman wants more jobs for american citizens. Less jobs sent to china, and more over here.
4. I agree with brooks and krugman. I think the government and Obama need to start making new ideas and system to benefit the people. I also think big companies such as apple, microsoft, and others should have more jobs in America
1. the authors main points are that Americans have to work harder to achieve their goals especially because machines and foreign people are getting more jobs and Americans have lower education opportunities.
ReplyDelete2. the authors seem to agree that there is a continuous decrease in jobs in America and to get jobs you have to have higher education. They disagree with the educational approach Thomas thinks that there should be a bill for every one to have a post high school education David talks about how people like Maddie Parliers / with kids should get educational help for them and their kids while Paul talks about how did not talk much about education.
3. (Thomas Friedman) suggests that there should be a new bill that will allow Americans to have a post high school education.
(David Brooks) thinks that America should "focus on economic freedom with social structure and more competition with more support".
(Paul Krugman) thinks we should bring factories to America and out of china to supply more Americans with jobs
4. I agree with some of what all of them said but especially friedman and David because they talk more about how education and jobs are linked with each other because the higher your education the better jobs you will have which I think is true
1. I think the authors main point is that as technology advances jobs are becoming less available. You no longer can be an average worker. Also that jobs are not moved to china just because of lower wages but also because other factories that produce what a company needs is near.
ReplyDelete2. The authors all seem to agree on the fact that the work force is only going to become more competitive and that a successful economy needs a supportive environment.
3. David Brooks thinks the solution to the economy would be more economic freedom, social structure, and more competition with more support added. He suggested locating plants in the US after simplifying tax code, cut rates, regulations, lenient foreign policy, and balanced budget. He also suggested successful training programs and for colleges and employers to have better coordination. Thomas Friedman thinks that a solution would be to pass a GI Bill that ensures Americans education after high school in order to stay above average. Paul Krugman thinks that a successful company depends on the synergy between the cluster of companies and not an individual.
4. I agree with David Brooks because he not only suggests that there be more support such as training programs and better coordination between colleges and employers. He recognizes both economic and social forces.
Friedman’s point is work will be much harder to find thanks to above average cheap foreign labor, robotics, software, and automation.
ReplyDeleteBrooks point is getting a job as a single parent is hard due to the lack of community support and women’s wages will continue to grow.
Krugman’s point is America is at a loss with having factories overseas. Chinese people are easily finding jobs while we can’t find any.
Friedman agrees that new technology has been eating jobs forever, and always will.
Brooks disagrees with democrat candidates. He says the candidates “no longer emphasize early childhood education and community-building.” Which he thinks we should.
Krugman disagrees with Mr. Daniels assertion about job creations. Yeah Steve Jobs created more jobs for people. Unfortunately, almost none of those people are American...
Friedman proposes “passing some kind of G.I. Bill for the 21st c. that ensures every American has access to post-high school education.”
Brooks proposes “successful training programs like Job Corps, better coordination between colleges and employers, better treatment for superstar teachers, more child care options and better early childhood education.”
Krugman proposes that “entrepreneurs need a supportive environment, and that sometimes government has to help create or sustain that supportive environment.”
In conclusion:
I agree with Krugman 100%. Entrepreneurs need a supportive environment, and that sometimes government has to help create or sustain that supportive environment. Maybe we should start having factories in our country. Of course it’s going to be expensive for the companies building them. But sometimes we need to sacrifice some things in order to move on. Although I’m pretty sure it won’t happen. Air pollution is a big thing for Americans.
LATE WORK
ReplyDelete1.The authors are trying to point out that there's a reason behind why people are unemployed or being paid so poorly. Either technology is replacing human labor, the teachers in school teach poorly, or it's the president's fault.
2.A good education that will teach you special skills will give you the opportunity to live the American Dream.
3.
Friedman: Provide better education that will help the people learn special skills in order to be eligible for better jobs.
Brooks: Provide more companies to rise, so more jobs can be provided to people.
Krugman: The government needs to support the rise of entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurs like Steve Jobs.
4.I would have to agree with Friedman. Education is important because it will provide you with skills that you can use in the real world. That's the philosophy I've been taught by not only my parents, but also my good friends.