Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
Photographed a couple weeks ago in Fort Wayne, Indiana. This city's unemployment rate is nearing 30%, no one is hiring anyone, except these Cash For Gold places that are actually paying people to do nothing but hold signs. Crazy!
This kid is only 19 and has a 3 week old baby that he's working to help support. His work ethic is admirable; most of us would not dress as Superman and hold a sign in 90+ degree heat all day. Many of us couldn't physically do it even if we wanted to. He seemed like a nice guy, it sucks he couldn't find a better job. He deserves one more than many of the people I know who do have them. I am thankful that I am finally making enough to live and do not need to go begging for work in this city.
Last edited:
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
The BLS is lying. More layoffs have been announced this week here and the jobs, like all that have been lost, paid middle class incomes. The ones the government claims are being 'created' pay $8 an hour. That is not job creation, its welfare case creation; shifting the burden of income for citizens from employers to the state.
robklurfield
eclipse
in Orlando last month... shot from a moving car
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
Memphis (Blake) posted on my facebook a couple of photos he shot in Memphis of guys doing this too. Must be all over!
robklurfield
eclipse
absolutely contagious from what I see.
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
I suppose a lot of unemployed are selling off their jewelry and these places have sprung up to buy it, likely for pennies on the dollar.
robklurfield
eclipse
social darwinism in action. not a pretty sight (unless you own a bank).
wgerrard
Veteran
There is much truth in that. Many or most of the new jobs that have been created for the past decade or so have been those low wage so-called service sector jobs, i.e., fast food and Walmart. Adding to the misery, many of those employers provide few benefits and often keep people in part-time status, albeit at 39 hours a week, so they won't have to pay any benefits at all.
I grew up in the midwest. I really don't like going back to visit. Towns are shrinking and disappearing, along with their residents' hope. Few people seem to be taking any initiative to do anything about it, choosing to just wait for some giant corporation to open a big factory to replace the one that closed up. (That's broadbrushed, based on my experience. Maybe Fort Wayne is different. I hope so.) Sadly, that's not going to happen. Those days are gone for those cities. GM and Delco and Ford and Raytheon and whoever aren't coming back.
I live outside Raleigh, N.C., an area that has continued to grow during the recession. (Raleigh is now larger than Cincinnati, St. Louis or Minneapolis.) Besides the fact that it's got better weather than Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, etc., this area is awash in universities, high-tech, big pharma, and medical research. If you have the right academic background, you can do well here. Heck, the place even has 3000 people making a living coding video games.
But, if you don't have that academic background, if you just have a high school diploma, you're probably looking at one of those $8 jobs. That's especially true in the rural parts of the state.
My best advice to people in those fading industrial towns in the midwest is the advice I give my relatives: leave.
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
Bill,
I agree. I'm not sure what the people here can do about it though. Start small businesses and work for yourself, but that costs money and if you don't have any....plus even if you have money or can get a loan to start a business, who is going to patronize you when no one else in town has any money?
Part of the problem here is cultural too. Businesses like the ones you describe in North Carolina simply so not want to locate in a place where the people, even if educated, are by and large racist, extremely religious (this seems to go hand in hand with racism), hate foreigners, look down on people whose education is in intellectual areas like history instead of purely vocational areas like nursing or pharmacy, believe that money is the sole determinant of a person's worth, distrust science, and have no desire to learn about or know about the world beyond. This is Indiana. I have tried explaining this to people here and they don't want to hear it. I've lived in other areas where the culture is more open-minded and the economic prospects in such places are just night and day different.
The split second my son graduates from high school, we're outta here. I miss Santa Fe. Meanwhile, I am having fun photographing the decline of the Fort Wayne area while I earn my living from out of state patrons. Gracias a Dios para el internet!
I agree. I'm not sure what the people here can do about it though. Start small businesses and work for yourself, but that costs money and if you don't have any....plus even if you have money or can get a loan to start a business, who is going to patronize you when no one else in town has any money?
Part of the problem here is cultural too. Businesses like the ones you describe in North Carolina simply so not want to locate in a place where the people, even if educated, are by and large racist, extremely religious (this seems to go hand in hand with racism), hate foreigners, look down on people whose education is in intellectual areas like history instead of purely vocational areas like nursing or pharmacy, believe that money is the sole determinant of a person's worth, distrust science, and have no desire to learn about or know about the world beyond. This is Indiana. I have tried explaining this to people here and they don't want to hear it. I've lived in other areas where the culture is more open-minded and the economic prospects in such places are just night and day different.
The split second my son graduates from high school, we're outta here. I miss Santa Fe. Meanwhile, I am having fun photographing the decline of the Fort Wayne area while I earn my living from out of state patrons. Gracias a Dios para el internet!
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
The funny thing is that here in the midwest, the people suffering the most ARE the educated. They're simply not wanted here by employers. Every year, Indiana University and Purdue University graduate about 2000 new BA holders from the campus they share in Fort Wayne. Only a handful will ever earn enough to support themselves in even the most minimal way. Most, unless they immediately leave town, never move from their parents' house, or if female, they marry a man who works in a factory (there are still a fair number of good factory jobs here) and become an overeducated housewife. Most of the women I went to school with are housewives now. Sad! A few yrs ago the career services office at the campus admitted that fewer than 3% of their grads EVER find a job making more than $10 an hour (the bare minimum one can live on here, and then only if one eats sparingly) unless they leave Indiana at which point the success rate of their grads goes to 95%. They estimated that almost a third of their grads NEVER find ANY job, not even a low-pay one, because local employers just don't want them. I can believe that. I applied for more than 800 jobs and got ONE interview before I moved away to New Mexico and I have several friends who have spent years applying for jobs without even one interview.
I wonder how widespread that phenomenon is across the country?
chambrenoire
Well-known
"Mark Dice tries to sell $1100 one ounce gold coin for $50; no takers"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gk5aRIz17fk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gk5aRIz17fk
wgerrard
Veteran
In a sense, what's going on is the reversal of the great migrations from the south decades ago into the factories of midwestern towns like Fort Wayne, Toledo, Dayton, Detroit, etc. Just as people who could afford to leave moved northward years ago, their descendants are moving southwards and westwards, if they can afford it.
The area I am in is prosperous because, first, it is lucky, and second, because some decisions made 40 or so years ago have paid off. It's fortuitous that a number of universities exist within a few minutes of each other. It's fortuitous that the climate is pleasant (excepting August, and today: high of 99). It wasn't fortuitous when political and business leaders from neighboring cities set aside a great big chunk of real estate and began lobbying businesses who could take advantage of the academic resources to move here. Simultaneously, they persuaded state government to invest in education so the locals could find work at these new places.
IBM was one of the first, perhaps the first, to move here, shifting a facility from upstate New York. I believe a key factor was the willingness of employees to move here, especially when they saw the low cost of housing and how far their salaries would go. Granted, moving employees in from another state is not the same as hiring the locals. But, move enough people making $80,000 and up into an area and the product and service demands they generate will create more than a few jobs.
However, Fort Wayne and the other places have some strikes against them. They lack the attractions -- climate and academic -- of this place. And that's in addition to the cultural issues you mentioned. Can anyone imagine employees of a techie business in California happily moving to Indiana or Ohio? The business would not even consider it, because they know their employees would balk.
Also, what I see when I go back to visit is that local leaders, political and business, seem to think that the way to a prosperous future is to replicate the past. That is, if the jobs disappeared when GM and Delco closed down, then the solution is to bring in mirror image replacements: big industrial facilities that employ thousands of people in lifetime unionized jobs.
Of course, that's not going to happen. Those cities need to look at the assets they still have. They need to stop bickering about problems that get in the way of the biggest problem: creating jobs. And, frankly, they need to understand that their cities are, at best, going to shrink down to a much smaller stable population.
Last edited:
Olsen
Well-known
Chris,
It is sad to see these pictures. Even frightening.
Now unemployment is increasing over here as well. In Norway, among the richest parts of Europe, unemployment is, officially 3,7%. While it really is more like 12,5% - which is triple to what we are used to. And increasing.
In Spain, official unemployment rate is something like 20% while in reality it is 27% since the potential workforce should be close to 30% of the total population. Using the same method on determining unemployment in USA it will be about the same: 27% - possibly even 30%. So, claiming that US unemployment is only 9,9% is just laughable.
What is typical for Spain is that an employee is looked upon as a cost. Not as an investment, which is more predominant here in North Europe. But that seems to be changing here too.
What could be done in USA, though, is to grant employees 5 weeks holiday, by law, which is common here in Europe. To keep up production the work force would have to be expanded by some 10 - 15% of today's workforce, some 14 - 20 million employees, which could easily be absorbed today.
Or why not simply increase the wages of the employees in protected sectors? Like food & beverage, hotel & restaurants, defence. It would be far more sensible than 'dropping cash from a helicopter', as Bernanke recently (jokingly) suggested.
Just as frightening is the surge for gold.
After the last Euro-drop this is a trend here in Europe too. Gold shops pop up all over the place. Which shows that neither Americans nor Europeans trust their currencies. They have no reason to. There simply isn't enough money around to cover the budget deficits of the 20 richest countries in the world. It has to be printed up. Which will reduce these currencies value towards gold. Quite a few talk of a currency crash with gold hitting values like 7,000 $ per ounce. Think of that before you trade in your wife's necklace at one of these shops.
It is sad to see these pictures. Even frightening.
Now unemployment is increasing over here as well. In Norway, among the richest parts of Europe, unemployment is, officially 3,7%. While it really is more like 12,5% - which is triple to what we are used to. And increasing.
In Spain, official unemployment rate is something like 20% while in reality it is 27% since the potential workforce should be close to 30% of the total population. Using the same method on determining unemployment in USA it will be about the same: 27% - possibly even 30%. So, claiming that US unemployment is only 9,9% is just laughable.
What is typical for Spain is that an employee is looked upon as a cost. Not as an investment, which is more predominant here in North Europe. But that seems to be changing here too.
What could be done in USA, though, is to grant employees 5 weeks holiday, by law, which is common here in Europe. To keep up production the work force would have to be expanded by some 10 - 15% of today's workforce, some 14 - 20 million employees, which could easily be absorbed today.
Or why not simply increase the wages of the employees in protected sectors? Like food & beverage, hotel & restaurants, defence. It would be far more sensible than 'dropping cash from a helicopter', as Bernanke recently (jokingly) suggested.
Just as frightening is the surge for gold.
After the last Euro-drop this is a trend here in Europe too. Gold shops pop up all over the place. Which shows that neither Americans nor Europeans trust their currencies. They have no reason to. There simply isn't enough money around to cover the budget deficits of the 20 richest countries in the world. It has to be printed up. Which will reduce these currencies value towards gold. Quite a few talk of a currency crash with gold hitting values like 7,000 $ per ounce. Think of that before you trade in your wife's necklace at one of these shops.
Last edited:
wgerrard
Veteran
Olsen, I'm not sure how you are calculating unemployment levels, but it is a fact that jobless levels in the U.S. are higher than the official figures. Those figures are derived from the number of people applying for unemployment benefits. Not every person who loses a job applies for the benefits, and the benefits lapse if you remain unemployed long enough. These long-term unemployed are very difficult to count.
I'm not sure how practical it is to expect employers to look at employees as investments, when most people change employers every several years. In the past here in the U.S., a blue collar worker who hired on at an industrial plant in the midwest would join the union and could safely plan on spending 25-30 years with that company. And, of course, that meant the company had reasons to consider its employees as investments.
But, those jobs are gone in many places, and not coming back. Workers assume they cannot remain with one employer for years and years, but that they will need to seek better jobs and better wages by finding new employers. Employers benefit because their wage costs are lower. I.e., a workforce of relative newbies costs less than a workforce of veterans. They argue: Why should we invest in an employee when he is just going to quit and go elsewhere? We are not interested in increasing an employee's skills when odds are he won't use those skills for us, but for our competitors.
I understand your point about mandatory 5 weeks holiday. However, I'm not sure it would be warmly received here. Employers and their conservative political allies would attack it as an indirect tax (being forced to pay people not to work). Employees who depend on routinely working overtime would argue that they would lose money, that their pay during the 5 weeks would not include the overtime they normally earn. Finally, many Americans wouldn't know what to do with 5 weeks of vacation time. They certainly couldn't afford to go anywhere, and they wouldn't find the notion of sitting at home for the duration very attractive.
More important, however, is that many jobs have been lost in the industrial midwest because entire factories have closed, not because they continue to operate with a reduced workforce. That is, the factories didn't lay off workers, they simply disappeared. Many of those factories were dependent on or linked with the American auto industry, which is in the process of being permanently downsized. Many of the workers they used to employ are middle-aged blue collar homeowners with little or no chance of finding comparable new incomes. At best, some of them will find the $8 an hour jobs, a Chris says. The remainder are people who are often in their 50's who have had their lives tossed upside down. Their future work prospects are dismal.
Re: Gold -- Folks here aren't investing in gold so much as they are selling off gold jewelry and trinkets to raise cash. If you need to sell some old jewelry to get cash for the mortgage payment, you aren't in a position to invest in anything. Just the reverse: You're cashing out your assets.
I'm not sure how practical it is to expect employers to look at employees as investments, when most people change employers every several years. In the past here in the U.S., a blue collar worker who hired on at an industrial plant in the midwest would join the union and could safely plan on spending 25-30 years with that company. And, of course, that meant the company had reasons to consider its employees as investments.
But, those jobs are gone in many places, and not coming back. Workers assume they cannot remain with one employer for years and years, but that they will need to seek better jobs and better wages by finding new employers. Employers benefit because their wage costs are lower. I.e., a workforce of relative newbies costs less than a workforce of veterans. They argue: Why should we invest in an employee when he is just going to quit and go elsewhere? We are not interested in increasing an employee's skills when odds are he won't use those skills for us, but for our competitors.
I understand your point about mandatory 5 weeks holiday. However, I'm not sure it would be warmly received here. Employers and their conservative political allies would attack it as an indirect tax (being forced to pay people not to work). Employees who depend on routinely working overtime would argue that they would lose money, that their pay during the 5 weeks would not include the overtime they normally earn. Finally, many Americans wouldn't know what to do with 5 weeks of vacation time. They certainly couldn't afford to go anywhere, and they wouldn't find the notion of sitting at home for the duration very attractive.
More important, however, is that many jobs have been lost in the industrial midwest because entire factories have closed, not because they continue to operate with a reduced workforce. That is, the factories didn't lay off workers, they simply disappeared. Many of those factories were dependent on or linked with the American auto industry, which is in the process of being permanently downsized. Many of the workers they used to employ are middle-aged blue collar homeowners with little or no chance of finding comparable new incomes. At best, some of them will find the $8 an hour jobs, a Chris says. The remainder are people who are often in their 50's who have had their lives tossed upside down. Their future work prospects are dismal.
Re: Gold -- Folks here aren't investing in gold so much as they are selling off gold jewelry and trinkets to raise cash. If you need to sell some old jewelry to get cash for the mortgage payment, you aren't in a position to invest in anything. Just the reverse: You're cashing out your assets.
Last edited:
Olsen
Well-known
Unemployment is such a 'political' figure that just any nation/government tries to keep it down. By all means. Researchers say that the potential work force of a 'western' style modern society is 2/3 of the population, give and take a few pro sent up or down depending on age demographics. The potential work force of USA is - at least, 200 million people, with such a young population. How many are actually employed? 140 - 145 million? Of which only about 100 million have a salary high enough to pay tax!
Relative to the total population nations like Japan and Norway will have a slightly lower potential work force, due to a fast aging population. But still the official unemployment figure, 3,7%, here in Norway is way off the mark. My estimate is more like 12,5%, which is my moderate estimate. - It could well be higher. The rest is stuffed away in a range of social programs or simply forced into retirement. Just to keep the employment figures up. But here in Norway everybody with an income more than 72.000 NOK 11,250 $ pay taxes. Regardless if it is a salary, a pension or social security.
Relative to the total population nations like Japan and Norway will have a slightly lower potential work force, due to a fast aging population. But still the official unemployment figure, 3,7%, here in Norway is way off the mark. My estimate is more like 12,5%, which is my moderate estimate. - It could well be higher. The rest is stuffed away in a range of social programs or simply forced into retirement. Just to keep the employment figures up. But here in Norway everybody with an income more than 72.000 NOK 11,250 $ pay taxes. Regardless if it is a salary, a pension or social security.