Future of Stock Market Investments and Jobs

Stock markets are places for investing money with the expectation that stock values will increase over time.  If the values increase, a person can withdraw their money from the stock markets at a later date and realize a substantial increase in wealth.  That increase in wealth is a share of the profits the companies listed on the stock markets are able to earn.  Those profits, in turn, are dependent on the total increase in wealth that the whole economy has produced.  Thus, the long term growth in stock market values depends on the long term growth of sharable real wealth. 

The historical trend in sharable real wealth growth is strongly related to the long term growth in the consumption of energy by humans.  It has also been strongly dependent on the ability of producers of wealth to discard waste cheaply and avoid paying for the damaging unintended consequences of expanding wealth production.  For sharable real wealth to continue to grow, both the energy trend must continue and the downside costs to producing wealth must continue to be cheap.  Energy production can certainly continue to expand, but the downside costs of using that energy to produce more sharable wealth are rapidly rising because managing climate change damage, resource depletion, ecosystem destruction, and popular anger is taking a bigger and bigger bite out of total wealth production.

If we are not already at the end of the era of expanding real wealth production in the world-economy, we are getting close.  As a result, the stock markets have or are about to enter a cul-de-sac from which there is no escape in the foreseeable future.  Middle class people around the world are making more and more demands on their governments to protect their wealth from extreme weather events, resource depletion, ecosystem destruction, and civil unrest, and to restore the wealth they have already lost to those destructive forces.  In these circumstances, company profits cannot grow as fast as they did in the past unless real wealth production increases more rapidly or the demands from middle class people are not met.  Accelerating wealth production also accelerates climate change, resource depletion, ecosystem destruction, and popular anger.  It rapidly adds to the costs of managing all the damage, especially popular anger (via policing and military spending).  On the other hand, assigning a greater share of the wealth being produced to meeting the demands of middle class people has to cut into the profits of the companies listed on the stock markets.  Down either path lies the stagnation of profits and the resulting stagnation of stock values. Down either path are real losses for the world’s middle classes.

Various governments are grappling with this stock market cul-de-sac by coupling an immediate reduction in middle class and working class standards of living with promises of great times yet to come.  In the U.S., the Trump administration is taking this short term fix to its extreme – inflicting immediate economic pain and possibly inducing a recession that will wipe out wealth for millions of middle class and near middle class families while calling the economic pain necessary medicine that will pay off handsomely for Americans. 

Much of the wealth loss is showing up, and will continue to show up, in the deteriorating wages, benefits, and conditions of work.  Attacking unions and reducing U.S. federal government jobs and programs is undercutting standards of work, workplace safety, wages, and benefits, all of which give companies more wiggle room for protecting profit rates for a while longer.  So does reducing taxes and regulations on corporations and the wealthy.  The Trump administration strategy may help corporations and investors avoid hitting the brick wall at the end of the stock market cul-de-sac for a few more years, but the collision is inevitable.

Fading Middle Class Jobs and Decline of Representative Democracy

The institutions of representative democracy and middle class jobs are deeply entwined, so much so that the diminishing of one is accompanied by the diminishing of the other.  This entwinement is rooted in the rise of middle class populations in Europe and North American over the course of the Industrial Revolution (roughly 1700s through 1900s).  The rising affluence of those middle class populations shifted the balances of power between and among ruling class populations and middle class populations and gave rise to the formation of new nation-based political coalitions. 

When the Industrial Revolution kicked off in England in the early 1700s (with the invention of a usable steam engine), achieving affluence became available to a growing proportion of England’s population.  Expanding populations of owners of capital, agricultural lands and new industries and expanding populations of agricultural, manufacturing, industrial, service, and government workers created new flows of income and new and expanding stocks of modern wealth.  Demands for and conflicts over the expanding flows of income and wealth spread and intensified.  Representative democracy was an institutional compromise among the ruling classes and the emerging classes of middle affluence worker/consumer populations.  The royalty gave up a bit of their claimed total control of wealth and the rising middle class populations obtained institutional mechanisms for redressing grievances and making demands.

As the wealth producing technologies and cultural practices of the Industrial Revolution spread to the Americas and then other parts of the world, the world’s middle class populations formed, diversified, and grew in more and more nations, eventually to include populations of high wage industry, government, and science workers.  Popular demands for participation in the high level decisions about producing and distributing wealth came with those trends.  Middle class populations that formed in the world’s colonies not only agitated and fought for representative democracy institutions they also agitated and fought for national independence.  By the middle of the 20th century, demands for representative democracy were global and almost every government on the planet claimed to be a representative democracy, even though many of those claimed democracies were clearly shams and worse.  Despite the growth of popular demands for participation in government decision making, well functioning representative democracies never became the dominant forms of government for the world’s people. 

The Accumulating Costs of Representative Democracy

As middle class populations gained representational footholds in national governments, the costs for maintaining well functioning representative democracy institutions increased and increasingly fell on ruling class populations.  The expenses tied to assembling representatives and paying their salaries and expenses are not a problem for ruling class populations.  Those costs are easily passed along to the middle and poverty class populations in a nation.  Rather, the major expenses for ruling class populations are the income and wealth redistributions required to maintain the contentment of the very large populations of middle and poverty class populations represented in the institutions of government while still holding onto sufficient control over wealth production and distribution institutions (including government institutions) to ensure that their shares of income and wealth meet their growing expectations for income, accumulated wealth, domestic and geopolitical power, and status enhancement.  Satisfying these two competing worlds of expectations is enormously costly, so only the more affluent nation-based ruling class populations have been willing to tolerate a functioning representative democracy for very long.[1]

The Decline of Representative Democracies in the 21st Century

It is widely observed that the institutions of representative democracy are in trouble, not only in the weaker nations where they have always been fragile, but now in the affluent nations of Western Europe and North America.  Given the association of the growth of middle class populations (and the increasing affluence of those populations) with the spread of representative democracies since the 1700s, this should not be surprising.  The world’s middle class populations are no longer growing and most of the existing middle class populations are no longer obtaining real improvements in their standards of living.  A growing number of those populations are experiencing net losses of income and wealth.[2]  The response of many in those populations is not unusual in the history of the modern world-economy: a turn against the time consuming practices of democracy and to the promises of a quick restoration of income and wealth growth made by proponents of authoritarian rule.  Needless to say, the spread of those promises is paid for by the ruling class populations that have only tolerated the institutions of democracy and now see that if they actively and successfully subvert popular belief in democracy, they won’t have to.  

Just as the Great Depression intensified conflict over incomes and wealth that resulted in governmental upheavals (e.g., the New Deal in the U.S. and fascism in Germany, Italy, Spain and elsewhere in Europe), the expanding domain of necessary expenses relative to incomes and wealth for the world’s middle class populations has intensified conflict and governmental upheavals in our own time.  However, unlike the income and wealth recoveries of middle class populations after the Great Depression and WWII and the return to a long phase of growth of middle class populations in the world, no such recoveries will happen this time. 

The Earth’s Inescapable Growth Limits and the Impoverishment of Middle Class Jobs

The period in the history of the modern world-economy we are now entering will not be like the long period of recovery and renewal from the 1950s into the 1990s.  A fundamental characteristic of middle class jobs – the growth of income and wealth faster that the rising costs of living and working and the routine deterioration of tangible wealth (homes, cars, workplaces, equipment, etc.) cannot continue for all middle class populations.  In fact, that characteristic of middle class jobs is already history for large numbers of the world’s middle class people.  The inescapable reason is that the earth-system conditions that allowed the Industrial Revolution to produce increases in incomes and wealth by exploiting earth-system processes and shunting away costs over such a long expanse of time and over so much of the earth no longer exist. 

The carrying capacity of the earth-system is finite and global economic activities are now up against some of its most formidable carrying capacity limits.  Before the last quarter of the 20th century, those limits were generally thought to be finite supplies of resources such as oil, arable land, and certain rare minerals.  We have managed to outmaneuver those kinds of limits by deploying technological fixes and can probably continue to do so for a while longer.  However, technological fixes have brought us more rapidly up against much more intractable earth-system limits: the earth-system’s slow rates of processing the vast waste flows from human economic activities (e.g., carbon, industrial chemicals, spent nuclear fuel).  Those limits are not as easily overcome through the deployment of technological fixes.  Over time, successes with such fixes will become increasingly difficult to achieve because they add to the waste flows earth-system processes already cannot handle.  Rather than decreasing the number and scale of human encounters with earth-system limits, deploying those kinds of fixes add to their exponential growth. 

The Fate of Representative Democracies

The repercussions from our encounters with the carrying capacity limits inherent in the earth-system are rapidly rising expenses relative to the incomes and wealth savings of middle class populations.  Extreme weather events, more frequent and more devastating forest fires, massive rainstorms that generate instant floods, species kill-offs due to diseases (e.g., bird flu devastation of commercial chicken populations in the U.S.), losses of arable lands, and forced adaptations to changing agriculture conditions are adding rising costs to the costs of living for everyone faster than incomes can keep up.  Inevitably, standards of living are declining for many of the world’s populations, including middle class populations.

As costs are rising, ruling class populations are forging ways to shift those costs away from themselves.  They are doing this, in part, by taking advantage of the growing insecurities of middle class populations to organized ruling class-middle class coalitions of support for authoritarian government policies.  In general, most middle class people find it very difficult to accept the reality that adapting to earth-system limits requires middle class life to have fewer modern forms of comfort and convenience and to include more physical work both on the job and at home.  Consequently, those who are finding themselves on the slippery slope downward are susceptible to the arguments for authoritarian policies that accelerate government decision making and exclude certain populations from voting, access to good jobs, and rights to government assistance programs.  As always, the leaders of ruling class populations divide and conquer by identifying populations to include and exclude using identity characteristics (race, gender, nationality, religion, residence status, dialect, etc.) and promising the included populations that they get the spoils of the ensuing political battles while the excluded take the brunt of the general decline in living standards.

All is not lost.  While middle class jobs and representative democracies are very unlikely to survive in their current forms, ruling class authoritarian governments can only protect some middle class populations from rising costs and dramatic job changes over the short term.  During that time, the excluded populations will grow and become better organized and more powerful.  The domestic and geopolitical upheavals we are now experiencing will continue and probably become more widespread and intense.  Many will be very violent (like the wars in Ukraine, Gaza and the Democratic Republic of Congo) or marginally violent (like the political skirmishes with injuries and some deaths we have seen recently in affluent nations).  Eventually, the excluded populations will become well enough positioned to counter the power of ruling populations and create new forms of democracy and new forms of work that are well aligned with earth-system limits.

[1] The world’s ruling class populations are organized into numerous industry factions and nation-based coalitions.  The more affluent of those nation-based coalitions are the ones that have tolerated representative democracy institutions most successfully.  Being the most economically successful, they have been more inclined to accept the high costs required for representative democracies to function well.  Less affluent nation-based ruling class coalitions strenuously and often violently resist representation concessions because such concessions threaten their smaller shares of global income and wealth.

[2] Restoration phrases like Build Back Better and Make America Great Again recently used in political campaigns in the U.S. are not just political slogans, they are acknowledgements that middle class conditions of life are not meeting expectations. 

Our Era of Chronic Inflation and Ongoing Job Deterioration

Inflation is “a gradual loss of purchasing power that is reflected in a broad rise in prices for goods and services over time.”[1]  It is a market economy phenomenon that arises when demand for goods and services exceeds the supply of those goods and services.  Rising incomes can offset some or all of the purchasing power loss, but not everyone in a population will get sufficient income growth to do so.  Political tensions inevitably grow as inflation persists and more people lose purchasing power.

In the long history of the capitalist modern world-economy, periods of inflation have been generated by supply chain disruptions that cause the expansion of production to fall behind the expansion of demand — disruptions usually caused by economic and shooting wars, by production encounters with food production or mineral extraction barriers (e.g., exhaustion of crop lands, depletion of deposits of coal, oil, or other critical resources), and occasionally by a pandemic or labor shortage.  However, in time wars and pandemics end and technological breakthroughs and mineral deposit discoveries restore the growth of resource inputs into production.  Supply side growth catches up with demand side growth.  

In the past, restoring the balance between supply and demand worked because the carrying capacity of the earth-system could handle intensified extraction of minerals, intensified harvesting of plants and animals, and intensified dumping of pollutants into the air and water without generating destructive phenomena that most humans could not escape.  As populations grew and more powerful technologies were developed and implemented and mass marketing transformed more and more of the world’s people into consumers with unlimited appetites for everything modern, the expansion of production capacity could generally keep pace with or catch up with and sometimes outpace the growth of demand.  The relationship between supply and demand cycled through periods of imbalance and balance. 

That capacity in the capitalist modern world-economy for governments and capitalists to restore balance following a period of imbalance came to an end in the late 20th century.  Human activities finally pushed the the earth-system beyond its carrying capacity limits.

Chronic Inflation

The capitalist modern world-economy has entered into a unique era of processes and trends that interact to form two conjunctural forces that make inflation chronic.  The key processes and trends in this conjuncture are continuing world population growth, expected to reach 10.3 billion in the 2080s,[2] continuing consumer and business demand growth as all of the world’s people continue to aspire to western middle class lifestyles, the intensifying development of mineral extraction and food and shelter production technologies as producers race to keep up with growing demand, and the accelerating impingement of the earth-system’s carrying capacity limits on production expansion.  One conjunctural force is the combination of population growth with consumption aspirations built into middle class cultures and constantly reinforced by global marketing campaigns.  The other conjunctural force is the accelerating rise in living costs generated by the mutually reinforcing interactions between the world’s production activities and the carrying capacity limits of the earth-system.  Every increase in production brings with it an intensification of costly repercussions from the earth-system[3] and further stimulation of unrelenting demand growth.  In the other direction, the growing number and intensity of costly repercussions from the earth-system create political pressures to accelerate the development and implementation of technologies intended to reduce costs and ameliorate damages, while still satisfying popular expectations for lifestyle improvements.  This is a vicious cycle of systemic destructiveness that is now driving inflation and will not relent for decades.

More and More Bad Jobs

In this era of chronic inflation, the only way to rebalance supply and demand is to bring down demand so that the production of goods and services does not have to continue to expand and consequently intensify the costly repercussions from the overtaxed earth-system.  In theory, this could be done equitably.  However, the capitalist modern world-economy is a strongly top-down social-system; inequalities of wealth and power are enormous and growing.  The wages and working conditions of working people and the economic protections for the poor are already being diminished by public and private institutions and will continue to be.  Moreover, and more ominously for the fate of representative democracy, the wages and working conditions of many currently middle class workers will almost certainly come under increasing attack, as the rich and their well-heeled hirelings (managers, lawyers, and politicians) take actions to protect their wealth and purchasing power from the ravages of chronic inflation. 

Of course, as inflation and adverse policies cut away at the world’s middle classes, resistance movements will grow and make stronger and stronger demands for more political accountability, limits on profits, and higher taxes on the wealthy.  Those efforts, which are piecemeal now, are being met with brutal suppression and if history is a guide, will continue to be for the foreseeable future.  The niceties of democracy will not be allowed to get in the way of the interests of the rich and their economic and political friends.  History also tells us that at some point suppression fails. As participation in resistance movements grows and global coordination among resistance movements increases, the moment of suppression failure will arrive.  For now, the global forces of suppression are powerful and growing, so that global moment of defeat for the forces of suppression is almost certainly decades away.   

[1] Jason Fernando, “What is Inflation,” Investopedia, Updated September 27, 2024.  https://www.investopedia.com/terms/i/inflation.asp.

[2] “Growing or shrinking? What the latest trends tell us about the world’s population”,  United Nations July 11, 2024.  https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/07/1151971.

[3] Such as higher costs for extracting minerals, higher costs for replacing property destroyed by extreme weather events, higher costs for maintaining the fertility of croplands, higher costs for adapting lifestyles and production activities to rapidly changing environmental and geopolitical conditions.

The Future of Work for Most of Us is Survival Work

In our memories of recent jolts to daily life, the 9/11 attacks, the 2008 financial meltdown, the Fukushima nuclear disaster, the 2004 tsunami that killed more than 230,000 people across 14 countries, the destruction of life and property by hurricane Katrina along the coast of the Gulf of Mexico, and many others, stand out.  COVID19 stands out differently.  All the others were massive jolts to particular people in particular places.  COVID19 is one of a growing wave of destructive events that will sweep over large parts of the world’s population, and sometimes everyone.  We are in the early stages of a massive wave of destructive events that will in one to two generations alter the entirety of our modern way of life.

We are used to thinking in terms of us and them, us and the weather, us and the oceans, us and other living things, yet our lives are connected to everything, literally everything, that makes up this globalized and overworked planet. Perhaps waves of extreme climate events, pandemics, and species die-offs are not the only waves of devastating events that climate change is visiting upon all living things on this planet. Perhaps even the seemingly solid earth itself is not untouchable by climate change.

A British scientist argues that global warming could lead to a future of more intense volcanic eruptions and earthquakes. And while some dismiss his views as preposterous, he points to a body of recent research that shows a troubling link between climate change and the Earth’s most destructive geological events.

…

The most solid evidence for climatic influence on geology comes from the end of the last ice age, around 12,000 years ago, says McGuire, who is a volcanologist and professor of geophysical and climate hazards at University College London. Analysis of volcanic deposits, published in the past decade by several authors, has found that this period of rapid climate change, when ice sheets retreated from much of the planet, coincided with a sudden outburst of geological activity. The incidence of volcanic eruptions in Iceland increased around 50-fold for about 1,500 years, before settling back to previous levels.

Fred Pearce, Could a Changing Climate Set Off Volcanoes and Quakes? Yale Environment 360, May 7, 2012.

The earthquakes in Turkey and Syria are another stark indicator of the future of work in 21st century.  News reports say more than 45 countries have offered to help Turkey and Syria with rescue efforts, thousands of rescue workers are on the scene, more than 21,000 have been killed and tens of thousands are homeless.  The number of people who are now unavailable to do the usual work of everyday life is small for a planetary human population of 8 billion people, but they have to be added to all the other workers being shifted out of lines of work that contribute to expanding affluence and the growth of a global middle class.  More and more workers are being drawn away to do the work of preventing, preparing for, and recovering from wars, hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, mass shootings, and other disasters.

This shift is cutting deeply into the flows of human, animal, and machine energy that are available for all the things we want.  Climate change and the impacts of a too large and still growing human population on the earth’s many ecosystems and even its geology are forging a world of work that is not the work we really want to be doing.  No end to this ongoing shift in the tasks of work is in sight.

COVID19 and the Economics of Future Work: Exposing More Workers Too Soon May Permanently Damage the Global Workforce

SOURCE ITEMS

They think that the virus may bind to receptors on endothelial cells, which are found on the inside of blood vessels, like veins and arteries. It’s possible that the virus’s presence there triggers an immune reaction to the foreign substance which results in clotting, Morro says—and it’s those clots which, if they travel to the brain, can cause stroke.

Kat Eschner, COVID-19 is causing strokes in young people and doctors don’t know why, Popular Science, April 28, 2020.

—————

But experts are warning of possible long-term effects for patients after they’ve survived the coronavirus. Doctors know now that the disease attacks many systems within the body — from the lungs and heart to the liver and kidneys, says Yale cardiologist Dr. Harlan Krumholz.

Robin Young and Samantha Raphelson, As Patients Recover From Coronavirus, Doctors Wonder About Long-Term Health Impacts, Here and Now, April 28, 2020

—————

Overall, 1419 of 1555 patients survived for >90 days, with a mean follow-up period of 5.9 years. There was significantly higher long-term mortality among patients with pneumonia than among age-matched controls.

Eric M. Mortensen, Wishwa N. Kapoor, Chung-Chou H. Chang, and Michael J. Fine, Assessment of Mortality after Long-Term Follow-Up of Patients with Community-Acquired Pneumonia, Clinical Infectious Diseases, Volume 37, Issue 12, December 15, 2003.

COMMENTS

We are all trying to figure out what policy makers should decide about revving up the world economy.  From what I am reading, even the medical experts are not sure what can be resumed safely and what can’t.  As we reopen businesses, the people we are putting at greatest risk are the very people we rely on most to make the world economy hum with success.

One thing we are learning is that young and healthy workers may not be as safe from covid19 as we and they think.  Research is suggesting that while young people may face a much lower death rate, they may be facing long-term bad outcomes from covid19, including strokes leading to long term disability and greater susceptibility to debilitation and death from other disease traumas.  Long after the covid19 infection is a distant memory, working people and the world economy may still be paying the price of increasing worker exposure to covid19 too soon.

The long run costs in health and wealth from revving the economy too quickly may considerably outweigh the short run gains. For workers who survive covid19 infection, the possible lifelong health conditions will be physically painful and emotionally traumatic.  For their families, the expenses and the lost income because of lost work time will undermine economic well being.

The long run costs to the world economy will also be high.   A world economy with a large number of health compromised workers is a world economy with rising expenses (on top of the rising expenses of caring for a growing global population of older people, many with chronic illnesses)and declining productivity.   Caring for chronically health compromised workers diverts public wealth (both taxes and contributions to charities) away from funding critical investments and funding public goods that enhance the quality of life.  Workers with compromised health are off work more often and are less productive when on the job.

In a nation like the U.S., with an aging population and dependence on the output of workers in other parts of the world, the consequences will not be good.  Not only our own workforce will be health compromised, but also the global workforce that we have come to rely on.  The productivity of workers in the poorer nations that produce so much of what we consume will have very high rates of covid19 infections now and much lower productivity going forward.  Moreover, replenishing the U.S. workforce with healthy young workers from other parts of the world as our workers age out of the workforce will be more difficult and costly.  In such future circumstances the likely economic trajectory for the U.S. is a downward spiral – less wealth to pay for health; less health to create wealth.

Lesson from COVID19: the Work of Today and Tomorrow is Constructing a Way of Life for a New and Different Historical Era

In our memories of recent jolts to daily life, the 9/11 attacks, the 2008 financial meltdown, the Fukushima nuclear disaster, the 2004 tsunami that killed more than 230,000 people across 14 countries, the destruction of life and property by hurricane Katrina along the coast of the Gulf of Mexico, and many others, stand out.  COVID19 stands out differently.  All the others were massive jolts to particular people in particular places.  COVID19 is the only one that has swept up everyone on the planet.  It is the only one that seems to be a massive jolt to the entirety of our modern way of life.

Some observers are calling COVID19 a black swan event, meaning that it is very rare, and try to reassure us that things will eventually go back to normal.  In its particulars, COVID19 is a rare event, but it is best to see it as only the biggest so far in an accelerating wave of devastating events that is sweeping across the modern world.  Each disaster in its particulars is a rare event, but they happen within and are shaped by the conditions of our modern way of life, conditions that have never existed on this planet before.  The real black swan rarity is an earth that is dominated by a species (humans) with such enormous appetites for energy and materials and space, and with such enormous powers to feed those appetites that this species is undermining the biological and social infrastructures of its own existence.  The wave of disasters that is breaking upon us is very much a part of this unprecedented black swan rarity.

COVID19 is revealing with great clarity that our capitalist world of work is all wrong for this unfolding era in human history.  Over the last several centuries the modern world of work was created to serve two interlocked priorities: maximizing the comfort and convenience of an expanding middle class and maximizing the hoarding of wealth and power by the modern version of royal families.  The global conditions in which those priorities were tenable are now gone.  On a fully populated planet bound together by transportation and communication technologies into a single societal entity where a disaster for one people becomes a disaster for all peoples and with the juggernaut of climate change growing bigger and more menacing with every month, those work priorities are no longer tenable.  It is no longer tenable to sacrifice the natural and human made infrastructures of existence in one part of the world, to subsidize the royal families and their middle class enablers in other parts of the world.  It is no longer possible for the affluent and rich of the world to escape the consequences of the conditions that the feeding of their appetites creates.

The world that capitalism made has been moving deeper and deeper into crisis for decades.  Efforts by the world’s rich and the world’s affluent to hold out for a return to better times, especially by Americans, have piled up weapons systems, piled up mountains of public and private debt, and underfunded the maintenance of vital infrastructures.  These efforts to save the conditions of historically extreme comfort, convenience, and elite wealth are futile.  Human history shows us many examples of peoples who have tried to resist the multiplication of forces that make a particular way of life no longer possible.  Those efforts always failed.  In fact, those efforts made the inevitable deaths of those ways of life more destructive and devastating and the construction of a new way to live more difficult.

The American version of capitalism, which is practiced in many parts of the world, is no longer tenable.  The priorities that now drive the world of work have to go.  They will go.  In one way or another, they will disappear.  The best we can do is to not resist the inevitable death of much of modern life, but to accept that it is happening and has to happen.  The best we can do is to thoughtfully manage the death of the American version of modern life and replace it with priorities and ways of life that reconstruct and sustain the infrastructures necessary to human existence.  Sacrifices will be made; they are already being made.  Our task is to manage the forms and distributions of those sacrifices. Failure to do so will not prevent sacrifice; it will only make it more likely that annihilating wars for survival among groups organized along the classic dividing lines of modern life will determine who sacrifices and what they sacrifice.

Green Jobs But Not Green Prosperity

SOURCE ITEMS

Our statistical analysis shows that, to avoid a climate catastrophe, the future must be radically different from the past. Climate stabilization requires a fundamental disruption of hydrocarbon energy, production and transportation infrastructures, a massive upsetting of vested interests in fossil-fuel energy and industry, and large-scale public investment—and all this should be done sooner than later.

…

Hence, if past performance is relevant for future outcomes, our results should put to bed the complacency concerning the possibility of “green growth.” There is no decoupling of growth and consumption-based CO2 emissions – “green growth” is a chimera. 

Enno Schröder and Servaas Storm, Why “Green Growth” Is an Illusion, Institute for New Economic Thinking, Dec 5, 2018.

COMMENTS

The evidence is accumulating that rapid economic growth is becoming a thing of the past, a brief moment in human history made possible by fossil fuels.  Our true earth-system energy income is the daily flow of solar power.  Briefly, we were able to jack up that energy income by using fossil fuels.  That time is ending.  The use of fossil fuels will decline, either because we choose to slow climate change and species extinctions or because continuing to overtax the earth-system’s current life producing processes slams the world-economy against the wall of massive climate and ecosystem paybacks.

For most of human history, jobs were tied to the solar energy flows.  In the affluent nations of our current world, most of our jobs are tied to fossil fuel energy income.  As fossil fuel use declines, our machine worlds (the one at work and the one at home) will have to shrink.  Our work lives will change and change again.  Slowly or rapidly, but inevitably, a transformation of the world of work and everything else about our lives is visible on the horizon.

Jobs in the Era of the Politics of Apocalypse

SOURCE ITEMS

This is a time of the politics of the apocalypse — an all-or-nothing view of the difference between winning and losing an election and of holding power or not holding it. There is no middle ground on what winning or losing means. This has been on the rise for a long time. But it has intensified of late. No one really knows how to roll it back. Politicians say that it is time for the country to come together. But on whose terms?

Dan Balz, Bomb scares and the politics of the apocalypse, Washington Post, October 24, 2018.

COMMENTS

Back in Cold War times many smaller nations tried to be non-aligned, not on either side of the conflict between the U.S. and the Soviet Union or China.  Neither the U.S. or the Soviet Union would allow that.  Political money and weapons poured into small nations to force a choice.  That was the geopolitical dynamic of conflicting ideologies and programs of all or nothing.  It was inescapable; it was unresolvable until one or the other side was beaten into submission.  After that, the world’s nations had only one choice.

This is the dynamic of the politics of apocalypse in the U.S. and across much of the world.  Decades ago, here in the U.S. many middle class Americans chose non-alignment through third party movements and political disengagement.  Back then, this was a politically affordable luxury facilitated by the continuing weakness of the extreme right wing.  But, that shift to non-alignment and disengagement gutted the moderate wings of both the Republican and Democratic parties.  The right wing was becoming less affluent and more militant while the left wing continued to enjoy much offered by middle class affluence and remained relatively passive – until it was too late.  We have now entered into a state of affairs in which non-alignment and disengagement are no longer viable choices.  The right wing has engendered a long march for all or nothing which can only be satisfied by the capitulation of the left.  To my knowledge when such apocalyptic challenges have arisen, such as the clash over control of the formation of new states in the western territories and the spread of the institution of slavery in the 1850s in the U.S., the left has never capitulated.  Nor has the right ever capitulated.  The only outcome now possible is apocalyptic victory for one side or the other.

So, what does this mean for jobs?  If you check out the employment reports put out monthly by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, you will have noticed that most job growth is in services and a big chunk of those jobs are in social services and health care.  This is to be expected.  Suicide, family crises, workplace accidents, random acts of violence, epidemics of depression, violence, and preventable diseases are to be expected in times of apocalyptic political polarization.   Overwhelming stresses drive immediate emotions to the front, short-circuiting the intellectual capacity to look down the road behind us and up the road in front of us.  People become overly oriented  to the here and now , which makes us more susceptible to ideological scammers who take advantage of emotional vulnerabilities and more limited understandings of our situations.

So, workforce growth is now being forced into two complementary paths: jobs causing destruction (both legal and illegal) and jobs assigned the work of repairing the destruction to everyday life (both paid and volunteer).  Take a look at the massive number of personnel that was deployed in Pittsburgh to deal with one event of destruction and consider the enormous volume of costly equipment involved.  Multiply  that response by a thousand times a day across the world.  Throw in the industries and business support services required to create and maintain the military and policing forces and social and health services required to respond to these destructive events.  Now allow yourself to accept that the scope of the global conflict will continue to escalate as the extreme right wing assault on democracy and human rights continues to grow, as right wing governments take control of more and more of the world’s military and policing forces, as more non-violent and violent acts of resistance are mobilized, and safe havens from the conflict continue to disappear.

The world of work is not separate from these trends.  It is being polarized right along side the polarization of our politics.  More and more our work choices are between those that create destruction and those that try to prevent destruction and those that involve repairing and replacing what has been damaged and destroyed.

All of this, of course, has to be understood in the context of the ending of the era of real growth in wealth.  That real growth was fueled by growth in the use of fossil fuels to augment human labor and to power technologies that require an intensity of energy flows that cannot be match by massing together armies of workers.  We are still pumping more and more fossil fuel energy into the world economy, but monitoring and repairing the destructive side effects (current and cumulative, environmental and geopolitical) now require the consumption of more wealth than the increase in fossil fuel use produces.   Thus the politics and jobs of apocalypse are very much the politics and jobs of a world of people trying to protect themselves from the losses of wealth that are happening all around them.  The wealth losses take many forms.  Some, like the loss of quietness in the night and open spaces where a person can seek solitude, we only notice when we try to take account.  But, the emotional toll is still very real and very costly.

The Dictatorship of Climate Change: Creating Jobs for Now and the Future

SOURCE ITEMS

A dangerous, large-scale feedback loop that promotes wildfires has emerged. Forests, woodlands and grasslands hold much of Earth’s terrestrial carbon. When they burn, more carbon dioxide is released, increasing concentrations in the atmosphere and causing land and sea surface temperatures to rise. This warming increases the likelihood of even more widespread and intense fires and exacerbates the severe weather and sea level rise we are now beginning to experience.

Don J. Melnick, Mary C. Pearl and Mark A. Cochrane. The Earth Ablaze. New York Times. August 8, 2018.

—————

Changes in the greenhouse gas concentrations and other drivers alter the global climate and bring about myriad human health consequences. Environmental consequences of climate change, such as extreme heat waves, rising sea-levels, changes in precipitation resulting in flooding and droughts, intense hurricanes, and degraded air quality, affect directly and indirectly the physical, social, and psychological health of humans.  For instance, changes in precipitation are creating changes in the availability and quantity of water, as well as resulting in extreme weather events such as intense hurricanes and flooding.  Climate change can be a driver of disease migration, as well as exacerbate health effects resulting from the release of toxic air pollutants in vulnerable populations such as children, the elderly, and those with asthma or cardiovascular disease.

Climate and Human Health, Health Impacts webpage. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. Accessed August 9, 2018.

—————

Humanity’s challenge then is to influence the dynamical properties of the Earth System in such a way that the emerging unstable conditions in the zone between the Holocene and a very hot state become a de facto stable intermediate state (Stabilized Earth) … This requires that humans take deliberate, integral, and adaptive steps to reduce dangerous impacts on the Earth System, effectively monitoring and changing behavior to form feedback loops that stabilize this intermediate state.

Will Steffen, Johan Rockström, et al. Trajectories of the Earth System in the Anthropocene. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, August 6, 2018.

COMMENTS

It is now well established that we are increasingly living under the steadily growing power of a climate change dictatorship that we brought into being.  The chance to choose a future of greater freedom is gone.  This global dictatorship will come to dominate our every waking hour and every aspect of our lives, including our work lives.  Our jobs will increasingly be the jobs forced on us by this dictatorship as it works its will on this planet with no concern for any of us.

Note that the “intermediate state” referred to in the Trajectories article is not a restoration to the cooler earth of a century ago.  It is a possible state of things that we must work hard to achieve, yet even if we bring this “intermediate state” into being, it will not be benign.  It will still inflict much ruin on our lives; it will still force us to create massive numbers of survival jobs that do not create new wealth or enhance our lives.  At best these jobs will sustain something close to the level of global human welfare we have now.  More likely, given how unwilling humans are to make proactive changes that make life less convenient and comfortable, we will not create the necessary wealth saving jobs fast enough to prevent massive losses of existing wealth.

Across the world, we can expect to see massive shifts in our work lives as the dictatorship of climate change becomes more demanding.  Just for starters, we should expect to see many more jobs in these categories of work:

  • Monitoring the conditions of the entire earth and initiating counter measures when that “intermediate state” begins to wobble in the wrong way.
  • Repairing and replacing wealth that is increasingly lost to the extreme weather events and political upheavals that will necessarily be part of a less hospitable “intermediate state” earth.
  • Population control – anger management counselors, psychiatrists and psychologists, prison guards, prosecutors, police officers, soldiers (in regular armed forces, in insurgent armed forces, and in unregulated militias and criminal organizations).
  • Medical services – to handle victims of interpersonal violence, political violence, and disease epidemics facilitated by hotter temperatures and more moisture in the atmosphere.
  • Construction – to build and maintain sea walls and levies, to reinforce existing structures against more severe stresses, to relocate homes and businesses away from flood zones, and to build border walls to check the flow of desperation driven refugees fleeing from climate change ravaged parts of the world.
  • Governmental agencies — to manage and fund the far reaching global responses to climate change crises.
  • Manufacturing — to provide equipment and supplies to facilitate all the other workforce changes taking place.

These are some of the most visible global workforce changes coming our way.  However, virtually no part of the world economy and no job will be untouched by the increasingly powerful dictatorship of climate change and the demands it is making.

 

Explaining Workforce Changes: Working with an Inclusive Perspective Looks More Promising

SOURCE ITEMS

Some years ago, skeptical scientists began to question these methods, observing, for example, that cancer cells in a petri dish behave so differently from tumors in a human body as to cast doubt on much conventional research.

Gabriel Popkin, Cancer and the artillery of physics, Johns Hopkins Magazine, Spring 2018.  Accessed March 22, 2018.

—————

The tools we use to help us think—from language to smartphones—may be part of thought itself.

Larissa MacFarquhar, The Mind-Expanding Ideas of Andy Clark, New Yorker Magazine, April 2, 2018.  Accessed May 11, 2018.

—————

Scientists have confirmed a longstanding hypothesis that Earth’s orbit is warped by the gravitational pull of Jupiter and Venus in an epic cycle that repeats regularly every 405,000 years.

Peter Dockrill, Jupiter And Venus Are Warping Earth’s Orbit, and It’s Linked to Major Climate Events, ScienceAlert, May 8, 2018.

—————

And including microbiome characteristics when predicting people’s traits, such as cholesterol levels or obesity, makes those estimates more accurate than only personal history, such as diet, age, gender, and quality of life, the study finds.

Jim Daley, Environment, Not Genetics, Primarily Shapes Microbiome Composition, The Scientist, February 28, 2018.  Accessed May 11, 2018.

—————

For another, researchers often focus their attention on just a few interesting microbes, “and people just don’t look at what the remaining things are,” Kowarsky said. “There probably are some interesting, novel things there, but it’s not relevant to the experiment people want to do at that time.”

More than 99 percent of the microbes inside us are unknown to science, ScienceDaily, August 23, 2017.  Accessed May 11, 2018.

COMMENTS

Increasingly, researchers across a variety of fields are discovering that better knowledge of our selves and our world is produced by making the units of analysis used in research more inclusive and more dynamic.  The standard entities we use in everyday language (e.g., the body, the family, the city, the nation, the ecosystem) are often not the most productive units of analysis for scientific research.  They externalize and hide much that is really part of the actual system of causation and they tend to leave the evolution of entities and boundaries over time out of consideration.

The implications of new understandings in the physical and biological sciences for the social sciences are significant.  Studying kinship groups or cities or nations in a short time frame as though such entities and time frames enclose everything that is explanatorily relevant is less likely to produce durable explanations than we have thought.  We will be better served, it appears, by embracing a more inclusive research perspective.

Most scientific research is done by starting from hypotheses with only two or a few variables, and then perhaps, adding in one or two variables at a time in a search for a still simple but sufficient explanation.  In this approach, the field of inquiry is kept as limited as possible.  The research path is from simplicity to complexity, with the assumption that a fairly simple explanation will be found.

This attempt at simplicity is not only spatial, it is also temporal.  The explanations being sought must not only be simple, they must be time proof.  This is another simplifying premise.  There is no history that must be studied; measuring variables in one short period of time is assumed to suffice for confirming or disconfirming the full range of hypothesized explanatory relationships.

This approach is desirable because simple hypothesized explanations make possible low cost research and simple policy and treatment interventions.  However, the approach brings with it a major source of confusion and controversy.  Even for a system composed of only a few variable components, the number of possible two or three variable hypotheses is quite large.  Add in a temporal dimension and the range of competing hypotheses grows even larger.  For a real world research question, the wide range of explanatory hypotheses possible invites numerous competing and contradictory explanations.  Moreover, given the evidence that research findings are quite often wrong, each researcher is also inclined to hold tight to their particular simple explanation as long as even one study seems to confirm it.  Over the long run, the multiplication of attempts at simple explanations can run up quite a tab for research funders and yet produce very disappointing explanations.

The rise of complexity theories and the increasing use of dynamic systems thinking in research suggest an alternative research approach: starting with a unit of analysis that is as spatially inclusive as seems plausible and studying it over a significant period of time seems likely to be more fruitful that the current approach.  In this approach, researchers would start with complexity and work toward simplicity, eliminating factors that can be shown to be causally inconsequential.  This approach has four advantages.  First, it aligns with the growing number of studies that show that the system totalities that matter are larger and more inclusive than we have thought.  Second, it is more likely to define a common research orientation for the many research institutes and researchers studying the same topic. Third, the inclusion of time gives researchers a better chance to learn whether a discovered explanatory system is evolving over time or is stable.  Finally, it aligns with the scientific principle that we can prove that a causal relationship doesn’t always hold, but we cannot prove that it does always hold.

For the study of workforce changes the Inclusive World Economy perspective that I have adopted (and which is derived from the World-Systems concept developed by Immanuel Wallerstein) provides the kind of system totality that probably encompasses all the possibilities for explaining changes in employment.  It also makes it easier for many workforce change researchers to adopt the same research orienting perspective even while focusing on different hypotheses.  We start with the grand hypothesis that policies, practices, and events in every part of the world and every part of nature have consequences for workforce changes in the U.S.  We add to that the premise that explanatory constancy cannot be taken for granted; it must be demonstrated, not assumed.  The shared research task is to work inward, throwing out factors that can be shown to be minimally relevant to the workforce topic being studied.  We still make use of existing research findings, but instead of looking for research that shows which variables have explanatory efficacy, we look for research that shows which variables have been found in multiple studies to have little or no explanatory efficacy.  A simple explanation is not the starting point in the search for a sufficient explanation; it is only a possible end to that search.

Widely adopting this approach would be a big shift in how we study workforce change, but it should be a fruitful shift.  A growing record of explanatory controversies and failures in the social science fields begs for a new approach, and developments in the physical and biological sciences suggest that adequate explanations for workforce changes will involve more factors and be more complex than has been assumed.  These things given, working from the inclusive and complex toward the simple should be at least as efficient in the expenditure of time and money as is the approach that now dominates the study of workforce changes and so often disappoints.