Solution to unemployment problem?

[Annoynymous]

Unemployment problem is one of the biggest problems of the 21st century. It means an adult person, typically 18-65 years old are not participating in any economic activity. Recently a study has been conducted to figure out the current number of unemployed person around the world. It illustrated that every one in five person in the world is currently unemployed. So among the 20% unemployed people, a significant number of people are educated. It is the responsibility of every government to address this issue effectively. The United Nation had adopted many policies such as MDG and SDG in the last few decades but that didn't solve the problem entirely. So all the government should take a fresh look at the problem and come up with a more sustainable solution.

What do you guys think about it? It has affected many families, so do you have any experience with that?

[silene]

Unemployment is indeed a serious problem - for employees. However many businesses actually like a certain level of unemployment because competition among job applicants helps keep wages down. Also business starts worrying about skills shortages when employment is high, and start lobbying the government for more immigration. I'd say when there is more than about 10% unemployment there's a risk of social unrest as people excluded from the economy lose faith in the system and protest. People start supporting more 'populist' parties for example. 

[Annoynymous]

@silene I think unemployment problem has many dimensions and two of the most important dimensions are personal and social aspect.

From the personal point of view, unemployment is a disaster. An unemployed person fails to support himself/herself financially, therefore making it hard for him/her to survive in the world. Then comes the social aspect, because the society also has a responsibility to take care of that unemployed person. Most third world societies couldn't care less about the wellbeing of an unemployed person. They are just too much unconscious to do so and lacks in capability as well. On the other hand, in a developed society, an unemployed person can get unemployment benefits as the society takes responsibility of that person. It can also be problematic because then there is a fear of rising dissatisfaction among employed people because they have to take the indirect burden of unemployed person.

Lastly, i do not think giving unemployed people some benefits because of their unemployment is a sustainable long term solution. It may work in short term, but ultimately it serves the purpose of band aiding the wound without actually taking care of it.

So i think the government must address this issue head on by creating more jobs instead of settling down with short term solution or no solution at all.  

Edited January 24, 2020 by Annoynymous

[Hatfort]

It is a big problem. The machines and computers do the work that years ago was done by a lot of people and this is getting further. As jobs fell in the primary sectors, there has been a lot diversification in the service, leissure and entertainment areas, which is fine, but has not made up for it. People need money to buy stuff, it's how we work, whether we like it or not.

My take is simple. Share the work, let people work less and have more leissure time, we will live better and the money spend in leissure will make more money to the creators and business owners and will produce more jobs for the people. It would be a good catch 22 situation.

[silene]

I agree with you that unemployment benefits are intended as a short term income until the person can get their career back on track. I've been unemployed myself for a long time. In most countries unemployment benefits afford a pretty basic lifestyle. But how to create more jobs presents us with the classic right wing vs left wing versions of economics. Right wing says, we should free up the entrepreneurs and business from the constrictions of tax & govt rules so they can expand their business via the free market and create more jobs as a 'trickle-down' effect to the poorer in society. Left wing says that govt should keep tax high so they can invest in public sector infrastructure which creates jobs and public assets. I don't have an easy answer except to say that extremes of either approach are unbalanced and we need a combination, the best of both worlds.

@Annoynymous   "an unemployed person can get unemployment benefits as the society takes responsibility of that person. It can also be problematic because then there is a fear of rising dissatisfaction among employed people because they have to take the indirect burden of unemployed person."

People may think this but actually benefits are just a nationalised insurance scheme. You pay your premiums while you are in work and receive benefits when you aren't. If my car is stolen and I need to claim on the insurance, am I being a burden on the other customers of the insurance company? Hardly, if the insurance actuaries have done their job well there should be enough money in the pot to pay for the risks.

Yes, the economy is changing, developed countries are becoming more service oriented and mechanised.  Production shifts to cheaper wage countries. Jobs get lost and we need to get creative to make new jobs.  My own country can't grow enough food for all our people, as we're so urbanised and highly populated now. So we have to find other jobs and export enough stuff to buy food. Same with energy.

@Hatfort   "My take is simple. Share the work, let people work less and have more leissure time, we will live better and the money spend in leissure will make more money to the creators and business owners and will produce more jobs for the people. It would be a good catch 22 situation."

Interesting. On the one hand, there isn't a fixed amount of work which needs doing, apart from our basic survival needs on the Maslow Pyramid; we can create as many goods & services as we can find customers for. On the other hand, if we are content with what we have there's no duty to carry on working just to feed economic growth for the sake of it. But I regret that society becomes ever more monetised and privatised, we have lost much of the old bartering and sharing. You need an ever higher income just to get by.  I have a shed full of tools produced in factories for money, many of which I only use occasionally, my neighbours have the same. We could all save money, work, and jobs by sharing them but we don't because we are so individualised.

As an aside, I used to have a friend who was happy being on the dole, he said he was fining society for being so corrupt! A joke perhaps but I never had a good argument against him