posted 19 February 2006 02:21 AM
Friday's Report on Business in the Globe and Mail reports under the headline "Hold the McJobs: Canada's High-end Employment Boom" that last year Canada lost 120,000 manufacturing jobs and 43,000 sales and service jobs, but gained 113,000 jobs in management. Does anyone else see a problem here?
From: Fortune favours the bold | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
Privateer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3446
posted 19 February 2006 04:23 AM
On the surface, this looks dysfunctional. I'd like to hear an economist try to explain this.
From: Haligonia | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
Euhemeros
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11067
posted 19 February 2006 02:12 PM
My long held suspicion is that such numbers are largely made up or extrapolated.
From: Surrey | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
robbie_dee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 195
posted 19 February 2006 02:21 PM
The expression "too many chiefs, not enough indians" comes to mind.
From: Iron City | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
posted 19 February 2006 03:00 PM
As it happens, when I saw this thread, the one below it is "Telus ships non-core jobs overseas" which could explain the increase in management level positions in Canada. I'd have to read the Globe ROB to comment further.
From: British Columbia | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
"We won't give you a raise this year, but we've changed your job title from Migrant Farm Worker to Mobile Organic Resource Extraction Engineer!"
From: Hanging out at http://babblestrike.lbprojects.com/ | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
prowsej
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 798
posted 10 March 2006 10:05 PM
The statistics in the article do show that wages are increasing, but 1. They are not seasonally adjusted 2. We're at the high point of the business cycle
More than that, the article is directly contradicted by this one: http://www.businessedge.ca/article.cfm/newsID/11950.cfm and the article that I'm citing cites a study that does a better job of putting the numbers in historical perspective
[ 10 March 2006: Message edited by: prowsej ]
From: Ottawa ON | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
Makwa
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10724
posted 10 March 2006 10:53 PM
quote:Originally posted by robbie_dee: The expression "too many chiefs, not enough indians" comes to mind.
Am I the only one that finds this phrase problematic?
From: Here at the glass - all the usual problems, the habitual farce | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
Sineed
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11260
posted 10 March 2006 11:13 PM
I don't think I would have used that particular metaphor myself, personally.
From: # 668 - neighbour of the beast | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
deBeauxOs
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10099
posted 10 March 2006 11:17 PM
quote:posted by Makwa: Am I the only one that finds this phrase problematic?
It may be, given that the North American concept of democracy is roughly based on the First Nations complex and equalitarian political systems, then perhaps the origins of the expression "too many chiefs, not enough indians", may have once had positive historical meaning.
But it is more likely that it was 'borrowed' and given a pejorative twist, by Eurocentric folks aka "those who speak with forked tongue", this expression being still, IMHO, quite relevant and appropriate.
[ 11 March 2006: Message edited by: deBeauxOs ]
From: missing in action | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
Email this thread to someone!
posted 19 February 2006 02:21 AM
