Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

Interesting... I've heard "It's not the lack of jobs that's the problem, it's the lack of demand. We're out of demand." before, but didn't think I'd ever hear "we have too many jobs"...


sort by: page size:

It comes from the number of jobs unfilled. And yes we do have this problem.

It's not due to lack of jobs, at least not in a simple way.

Reportedly, there are simultaneously more open positions than companies can fill with qualified candidates, at the same time as many qualified candidates struggling to find open positions they can fill.

I think that may be true, even though it sounds paradoxical.

The result is still inequality, cost of living peoples and people getting squeezed.

But adding a bunch more of the same jobs won't fix it, if the problem isn't caused by lack of jobs.


How do you know that there won't be enough jobs?

What about when there aren't enough jobs?

There are jobs, plenty of jobs, and yet somehow no one filling those roles.

Never mind that they're underpaying... or that we lost half a million people in the labor force...


Anything that seemingly violates supply and demand is a scam. Another way to say "The jobs are too few" is to say "The CEO's are too many"

because there's a limited supply of jobs

This doesn't make sense. Not enough workers but demand for their work output goes down? They can't both be problems.

Gee. Maybe there is a labor shortage.

That may well be true (FWIW I agree that it's a problem and it's getting worse), however, that's not a "labor shortage" or low supply of labor, eh?

>>Second, it also assumes that the real problem is a shortage of jobs when the problem is actually a shortage of people capable of doing jobs where it makes economic sense to employ a person.

As someone who holds a degree in economics, I can tell you with absolute certainty that the problem is not a lack of people who are capable of doing the jobs, but rather a lack of demand for the products and services that the said job would provide.


There’s our labor shortage

Maybe the problem is that there's less and less need for most types of workers.

We have a global population steadily lurching toward 8 billion. And, the richest of us seem to need less and less. And, that's coupled with aggressively commoditized global services industry that is providing more and more value for less and less cost.

Seems like major equilibrium shift waiting to happen.


Don’t forget, there’s a “labour shortage”.

You should notice who says there is a shortage: employers. And what they mean, is that they can't find enough people to hire, meaning that few people satisfy their hiring criteria. This does not mean that few people apply, it means that their hiring process eliminates almost anyone.

> If there are many job openings, but little actual hiring, then there is no real demand.

Or there is demand but inadequate supply. I've heard several people on HN talk about their companies having openings, getting 10 times the resumes that they did in 2007, but seeing significantly fewer qualified applicants overall.


I suspect instead a wage shortage, not a lack of people to hire.

I never know what to think about reports on labour demand anymore, I have heard "there are no jobs", "there are lots of jobs", "noone is working", simultaneously all year.

I guess it all comes down to who is saying it. I guess most of the time it's the fact that the jobs are crap, but employers don't want to shift the social contract that creates the apparent contradiction, but who knows.


Really, not enough applicants?

That's a choice. Pay more, and will might give up our contracts. Maybe..

next

Legal | privacy