Regarding the persistence of the global unemployment rate despite continued strong global GDP growth, is there any possibility that this is due to a unique -- and hopefully temporary -- situation characterized by millions of people precipitously moving from nominally "employed" status in relatively undeveloped regions to "unemployed" status in boom areas of rapidly developing countries, especially China and India?
According to this article,
In 1980, the global workforce consisted of workers in the advanced countries, parts of Africa and most of Latin America. Approximately 960 million persons worked in these economies. Population growth -- largely in poorer countries -- increased the number employed in these economies to about 1.46 billion workers by 2000.
Population growth -- largely in poorer countries -- increased the number employed in these economies to about 1.46 billion workers by 2000.
Could it be that we are demanding too much of globalization by expecting it to reduce the global unemployment rate in the face of this this sudden, and exceptional, explosion in the labor force, which was not, in and of itself, caused by globalization? (Which does beg the question: What are all the factors behind this enormous growth in the number of workers globally?)
Perhaps the thing to remark is not that steady growth has not reduced the global unemployment rate, but rather that it has been able to keep it stable despite the huge numbers of people who have been pouring into the world labor pool.
If so, can we imagine a point in the future, hopefully not too far off, where these giant migrations settle down and the global economy settles into a "steady state" where consistent growth does translate to decreasing numbers of unemployed?
(This is not a plea for continued growth at all costs: I am aware of its other severe drawbacks, in particular, the environmental kind as well increasing political tensions over scarce natural resources. I am just inquiring about one possible explanation for the unchanged global unemployment rate despite global growth.) Truth unfolds in time through a communal process.
millions of people precipitously moving from nominally "employed" status in relatively undeveloped regions to "unemployed" status in boom areas of rapidly developing countries
World employment and working poors figures
The main focus of my diary is not on unemployment, but on poverty. The figures show that globalisation has partly succeeded in reducing extreme poverty, but not more. The very high level of inequality has a consequence: the biggest part of the wealth created goes to the top richest percentiles, and the lower percentiles remain in deep poverty with little prospect for improvement.
An example: in China, Shanghai has an HDI almost the same as European countries, whereas countryside areas are at the same level as some of the poorest African countries.
Inequality in China:
What is interesting in Freeman's article is that he shows the asymmetry in the capital/labour relationship created by the entry of the millions of workers from the former communist countries on the global market, and thus the necessity to find global social answers. "Ne te courbe que pour aimer..." René Char
