The FT Discovers 'Jobs' are a Thing
The Financial Times, in what appears to be a moment of profound economic insight, suggests that this time, the dynamics of job creation really could be 'different'. Penned by Mohamed El-Erian, the piece highlights a purported divergence between a 'cooling' US labour market and robust GDP growth. This, we are told, is driven by three catalysts, though the specifics remain behind a paywall,
conveniently shielding the argument from common scrutiny. Curiously, the FT's newfound fascination with the 'job market' neglects a rather consistent historical pattern. Back in the 1970s, as global capitalism faced stagflation and declining profit rates, policymakers didn't lament a 'cooling labor market'; they initiated a brutal assault on unions and worker power, leading to the sharp decline in
real wages from the 1980s onwards, a trend documented by the Economic Policy Institute. When capital is squeezed, labour is always the first to feel the chill, irrespective of GDP figures. One might wonder why a 'strong GDP growth' that doesn't translate into broad-based employment or wage increases isn't immediately flagged as a systemic failure, rather than a novel economic phenomenon. It takes
a certain kind of chutzpah to frame the impending precariousness for workers as 'different', as if the relentless pursuit of profit hasn't consistently decoupled corporate health from worker wellbeing for decades. The exact same arguments circulated prior to the 2008 financial crisis, when the financial sector boomed while Main Street suffered. This isn't about difference; it's about distraction.