Uk Unemployment Problem Essay

UK Unemployment Problem What are the root causes of unemployment in uk? How can we fix the unemployment problem? How can be jobs created? Who can create jobs? How can be the economy grown? What are the main causes of unemployment? The effects of Globalisation. Has the internet killed the jobs of many people? How can Uk increase the competitiveness in the world arena? Reforms and recommendations. http://tutor2u. net/economics/revision-notes/a2-macro-unemployment. html How have developments in technology affected employment? Think back 25 years to before the microchip was as prevalent as it is today.

Technology has shifted employment in major ways. It has made it easier to do some labour intensive jobs with fewer hours. It has created huge employment in tech industries all over the world. It has allowed the internet to facilitate employment without as many physical boundaries. It has allowed time shifting of activities. http://uk. answers. yahoo. com/question/index? qid=20090613052854AAajvop Each new generation brings the reemergence of many of the fears of the past, requiring the repetition of old explanations to put them to rest.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

Today there is a renewed concern that technological advancement may displace much of the manufacturing (and other) work force, creating widespread unemployment, social disruption, and human hardship. For example, in 1983 the Upjohn Institute for Employment Research forecast the existence of 50,000 to 100,000 industrial robots in the United States by 1990, resulting in a net loss of some 100,000 jobs. [1] Barry Bluestone, perhaps foremost among today’s gloomy economists, is also worried about the future. He argues hat “capital hypermobility” requires that America “reestablish the social safety net and extend the range of the regulatory system to make that net even more secure. “[2] Harvard’s Robert Reich completes the theme that government must act by arguing that America’s industrial policy “is the by-product of individual corporate strategies whose goals may have little to do with enhancing the standard of living of Americans. ” He further states that our current industrial policy creates jobs that are “lower-skilled and routine, eventually to be replaced by robots and computers. [3] What are we to make of all these claims and predictions and the rhetoric that surrounds them? Conservative economic thinkers tend to disparage persons who fear the rapid advance of technology by labeling them “Luddites. “[4] This term is both unfair and inaccurate. The real Luddites, of the early 1800s, were uneducated working people who destroyed textile machinery and other symbols of advancing technology, which, despite their efforts, were to move the broad spectrum of humanity above the subsistence level for the first time.

Today’s proponents of economic activism are typically not of the working class and are usually quite well educated. Nobel laureate Wassily Leontief, who gave the keynote speech for the National Academy of Engineering at its 1983 symposium “The Long-Term Impact of Technology on Employment and Unemployment,” cannot fairly be called a Luddite, yet he expressed concern about what he saw as technological advancement’s undesirable distributional effects across income groups. 5] (R. H. Mabry is professor of finance at Clemson University. A. D. Sharplin is professor of management at Northeast Louisiana University. ) In part, opposition to technology springs simply from a more or less visceral fear of scientism, which is often taken to imply the dehumanization of humankind. [6] Mainly, though, the warnings heard today are thoughtful and well intentioned, even if often in error or somewhat self-serving.

Flatly in error are those that predict no more jobs for a very large sector of the population as a result of advancing technology, creating a massive problem of involuntary unemployment. It is not at all clear that a large number of jobs are about to be destroyed; even if they were, such long-run unemployment as would occur would certainly not be involuntary. Rather, it would take the form of even shorter workdays, shorter work-weeks, and fewer working members in the family, as it has throughout our history.

Some who correctly anticipate that technological change may produce short-run employment-adjustment problems overstate those problems. They also often fail to mention that the short-run unemployment that occurs is primarily the result of artificial imperfections–a lack of competition–in certain labor and product markets. The amount of short-run unemployment created by advancing technology, as well as the amount of howling (or lobbying), is directly related to the degree of artificiality in the particular labor markets affected.

It will be argued below that the workers harmed by technological advancement are those who have been receiving wages in excess of the amount they would receive in a fully competitive labor market. In other words, they have been receiving economic rent. It will be further argued that those workers remain unemployed when displaced by technology because they seek to regain their former employment or seek employment in another industry that pays excessive wages. In other words, they are unemployed because they are rent seekers. Finally, the effects of slow and rapid technological change will be discussed.

The rate of change can serve as a basis for reasoned debate of some of the legitimate social concerns facing our society as a result of technological advancement, given the institutional imperfections already existing in the labor market. http://www. cato. org/pub_display. php? pub_id=934 How has Globalization affected economic development? Globalization has positively affected economic development all over the World. Most poor countries that started proceeding towards globalisation have witnessed faster economic growth, reduction in economic poverty, growth of employment, rise in living standards.

World economic growth has been consistently high since the pace of globalisation gathered momentum in the last decade. The advance economies have been able to maintain low rates of inflation and decent rates of economic growth even at the very high levels of GDP they enjoy per capita. However, with BPO and unabated high consular spending, advanced open economies increased their imports from developing and poor countries, resulting in high growth of employment and output in such countries, though employment growth was slightly hurt in countries like the USA.

With globalisation, technology and capital transfers to emerging countries with low incomes like China, India, Sril Lanka, Pakistan, Vietnam, Russia, Poland, Brasil, Egypt and other countries, the growth in ouput, productivity and employment in these countries has been phenomenal. Despite the rapid rise in crude oil prices inflation has been low in most of the countries. The incidence of poverty in China and India that together account of over one-third of the World population has reduced substantially, The per capita income of the Chinese and the Indians have increased significantly (7. %- 9. 5% per year) during the last decade or so. China runs a very huge current account surplus. Though the difference in standards of living of citizens in rural and urban areas in both these countries have increased, in absolute terms average standard of living of both rural and urban population have continued to increase. Economic development processes has been strengthened so much by globalisation that many Asian countries today hold substantial current account surplus and enjoy the position of lender in the international market.

The currencies of these countries have appreciated. The market pricing power of the vested interests like local monopoly/ oligopolistic producers in globalizing economies have weakened for the consumers to benefit. Not only has trade between the developed and underdeveloped countries have increased, the trade among underdeveloped countries have also increased rapidly. Many emerging country companies have started investing abroad in factories and service sector firms even as foreign investment in emerging countries continue to rise fast.

From 1981 to 2001, according to World Bank figures, the number of people living on $1 a day or less declined from 1. 5 billion to 1. 1 billion in absolute terms. At the same time, the world population increased, so in percentage terms the number of such people in developing nations declined from 40% to 20% of the population. with the greatest improvements occurring in economies rapidly reducing barriers to trade and investment; yet, some critics argue that more detailed variables measuring poverty should be studied instead].

Furthermore, the above figures do not take monetary inflation of the dollar into account between 1981 and 2001 and are therefore not an accurate assessment of a relative global increase in economic prosperity. The percentage of people living on less than $2 a day has decreased greatly in areas effected by globalization, whereas poverty rates in other areas have remained largely stagnant. In East-Asia, including China, the percentage has decreased by 50. 1% compared to a 2. 2% increase in Sub-Saharan Africa. Income inequality for the world as a whole is diminishing.

As noted below, there are others disputing this. The economist Xavier Sala-i-Martin in a 2007 analysis argues that this is incorrect, income inequality for the world as a whole has diminished. Regardless of who is right about the past trend in income inequality, arguably absolute poverty is more important than relative inequality. If everyone lived in abject absolute poverty, then relative income inequality would be very low. Life expectancy has almost doubled in the developing world since World War II and is starting to close the gap between itself and the developed world where the improvement has been smaller.

Even in Sub-Saharan Africa, the least developed region, life expectancy increased from 30 years before World War II to about a peak of about 50 years before the AIDS pandemic and other diseases started to force it down to the current level of 47 years. Infant mortality has decreased in every developing region of the world. [13] Democracy has increased dramatically from there being almost no nations with universal suffrage in 1900 to 62. 5% of all nations having it in 2000. 14] Feminism has made great advances in areas such as Bangladesh through economically liberating and empowering women with jobs] The proportion of the world’s population living in countries where per-capita food supplies are less than 2,200 calories (9,200 kilojoules) per day decreased from 56% in the mid-1960s to below 10% by the 1990s. [15] Between 1950 and 1999, global literacy increased from 52% to 81% of the world. Women made up much of the gap: female literacy as a percentage of male literacy has increased from 59% in 1970 to 80% in 2000. [16] The percentage of children in the labor force has fallen from 24% in 1960 to 10% in 2000. 17] There are similar increasing trends toward electric power, cars, radios, and telephones per capita, as well as a growing proportion of the population with access to clean water. [18] The book The Improving State of the World also finds evidence for that these, and other, measures of human well-being has improved and that globalization is part of the explanation. It also responds to arguments that environmental impact will limit the progress. Others, such as Senator Douglas Roche, O. C. , simply view globalization as inevitable and advocate creating institutions such as a directly-elected United Nations Parliamentary Assembly to exercise versight over unelected international bodies. Supporters of globalization are highly critical of some current policies. In particular, the very high subsidies to and protective tariffs for agriculture in the developed world. For example, almost half of the budget of the European Union goes to agricultural subsidies, mainly to large farms and agricultural businesses, which form a powerful lobby. [19] Japan gave 47 billion dollars in 2005 in subsidies to its agricultural sector,[20] nearly four times the amount it gave in total foreign aid. [21] The US gives 3. billion dollars each year in subsidies to its cotton sector, including 25,000 growers, three times more in subsidies than the entire USAID budget for Africa’s 500 million people. [22] This drains the taxed money and increases the prices for the consumers in developed world; decreases competition and efficiency; prevents exports by more competitive agricultural and other sectors in the developed world due to retaliatory trade barriers; and undermines the very type of industry in which the developing countries do have comparative advantages.

Tarrifs and trade barriers, thereby, hinder the economic development of developing economies, adversely affecting living standards in these countries. [23]Although critics of globalization complain of Westernizaion, a 2005 UNESCO report[24] showed that cultural exchange is becoming mutual. In 2002, China was the third largest exporter of cultural goods, after the UK and US. Between 1994 and 2002, both North America’s and the European Union’s shares of cultural exports declined, while Asia’s cultural exports grew to surpass North America.

Globalization has various aspects which affect the world in several different ways such as:Industrial (alias trans nationalization) – emergence of worldwide production markets and broader access to a range of foreign products for consumers and companies Financial – emergence of worldwide financial markets and better access to external financing for corporate, national and subnational borrowers Economic – realization of a global common market, based on the freedom of exchange of goods and capital.

Political – political globalization is the creation of a world government which regulates the relationships among nations and guarantees the rights arising from social and economic globalization. Informational – increase in information flows between geographically remote locations Cultural – growth of cross-cultural contacts; advent of new categories of consciousness and identities such as Globalism – which mbodies cultural diffusion, the desire to consume and enjoy foreign products and ideas, adopt new technology and practices, and participate in a “world culture” Ecological- the advent of global environmental challenges that can not be solved without international cooperation, such as climate change, cross-boundary water and air pollution, over-fishing of the ocean, and the spread of invasive species. Many factories are built in developing countries where they can pollute freely.

Social – the achievement of free circulation by people of all nations Transportation – fewer and fewer European cars on European roads each year (the same can also be said about American cars on American roads) and the death of distance through the incorporation of technology to decrease travel time. [clarify] Greater international cultural exchange Spreading of multiculturalism, and better individual access to cultural diversity (e. g. through the export of Hollywood and Bollywood movies).

However, the imported culture can easily supplant the local culture, causing reduction in diversity through hybridization or even assimilation. The most prominent form of this is Westernization, but Sinicization of cultures has taken place over most of Asia for many centuries. Greater international travel and tourism Greater immigration, including illegal immigration Spread of local consumer products (e. g. food) to other countries (often adapted to their culture) World-wide fads and pop culture such as Pokemon, Sudoku, Numa Numa, Origami, Idol series, YouTube, Orkut, Facebook, and MySpace.

World-wide sporting events such as FIFA World Cup and the Olympic Games. Formation or development of a set of universal values Technical/legal Development of a global telecommunications infrastructure and greater transborder data flow, using such technologies as the Internet, communication satellites, submarine fiber optic cable, and wireless telephones Increase in the number of standards applied globally; e. g. copyright laws, patents and world trade agreements. The push by many advocates for an international criminal court and international justice movements.

First, the market economy is the only arrangement capable of generating sustained increases in prosperity, providing the underpinnings of stable liberal democracies and giving individual human beings the opportunity to seek what they desire in life. But a market economy, for all its virtues,depends for its existence on a strong, effective, but limited, state, one that underpins property rights, ensures macroeconomic stability, promotes competition, ensures education and basic health and, when it intervenesdoes so with the grain of market forces.

Such a state needs to regulate effectively, but with a light touch. Yet research by the World Bank shows that developing countries often regulate more heavily than developedcountries, even though their administrative systems are both more ineffective and vulnerable to corruption. Second, individual states remain the locus of political debate and legitimacy. Third, it is in the interest of both states and their citizens to participate ininternational treaty-based regimes and institutions that deliver globalpublic goods, including open markets, environmental protection, healthand international security.

A regime governing the movement of peoplewould also be useful. Such global institutions would play a useful role. They need to be protected from their critics. But their legitimacy andeffectiveness derive from the states that are their members. Fourth, such regimes need to be specific, focused and enforceable. Fifth, the WTO, though enormously successful, has already strayed toofar from its primary function of promoting trade liberalisation. Theagreement on trade-related intellectual property was a great mistake, forexample.

Inevitably, it has encouraged people to try to introduce labourstandards and environmental standards within the WTO – a potentiallydangerous development. The arguments for a single undertaking thatbinds all members need to be reconsidered, since that brings into thenegotiations a large number of small countries with negligible impact onworld trade. Far more important is bringing the proliferation ofpreferential trading arrangements under control. These distort trade andundermine the global trading system. Sixth, the case for regimes covering investment and global competition isalso strong.

But o would be best to create regimes that include fewercountries, but contain higher standards. Seventh, it is in the long run interest of countries to integrate into globalfinancial markets. But they should do so carefully, in full understandingof the huge risks. Eighth, in the absence of a global lender of last resort, it is necessary toaccept standstills and renegotiation of sovereign debt. Ninth, official development assistance is far from a guarantee ofsuccessful development. But the sums now provided are far too small,just over a fifth of a per cent of the gross domestic product of the donorcountries.

The case for increasing such assistance and for focusingassistance on the poorest developing countries is very strong. But aidshould not be so large that it frees a government from the need to raisemoney from its own people. Tenth, countries should learn from their own mistakes. http://sg. answers. yahoo. com/question/index? qid=20071021221418AAuqpEs Proposal More exports less imports. Invite the millionaires and billionaires all around the world to invest in Uk. Encourage the rich elderly people to create more job opportunities.

Because they don’t need excessive money in the late stage of their life. Increase the agricultural production in Uk and other Uk territories. So don’t need to depend on other countries for food and other essentials. Upgrade the standards and competitiveness of educational institutions which are great source of UK economy. Encourage the entrepreneurs to invest in green technology and create jobs. Tax reductions for millionaires and billionaires if they create more job opportunities Increasing the trade and commerce ties with other nations to create more job opportunities for fellow UK citizens.

More and more companies are employing machines instead of human beings to increase their profit.. For E. g. Sainsbury, WH Smith use machines to sell their goods so no cashiers needed . Encourage them not to do so Promoting and proliferating English language and culture to every major cities in the world. Trade and commerce is a source to upgrade ties with other nations. Make sure the business people pay their fair share to the government. Some people have excessive amount of wealth but some others starving and don’t have any jobs.

Encourage the wealthy people to create more job opportunities. Offering aid packages to the companies which are really struggling. Introduce new schemes to encourage successful university graduates who on their own or with their mates in partnership create small business firms and create jobs. Limiting the usage of technology where jobs are killed by certain man made technologies. Encourage the fellow citizens to be more patriotic to the nation. Improving the moral and ethics of fellow citizens. Motivating and rewarding the people who create jobs.

x

Hi!
I'm Edwin!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out