Demand Anticipated for Jobs in Health Care, Retail

Share this article on:

What jobs will be in hot demand in the Richmond region during the next decade?
Jobs in the health care and social assistance sector and in the retail industry top the list.
For instance, the health care and social assistance sector is expected to need nearly 40,000 workers in the Richmond metro area over the next decade, according to Chmura Economics & Analytics’ JobsEQ technology platform.
About 19,000 of those jobs are needed because of growth in the health care sector, while the remainder represent positions that will be open because health care workers are retiring or moving to different occupations.
Within the health care sector, registered nurses top the list of growing occupations with nearly 5,000 more nurses needed in the region over the 10 years. About 2,000 of those nurses represent growth in the health care industry, while the remainder are a result of employees retiring or moving to different occupations.
Personal care aides, nursing assistants and home health aides round out the top four occupations in demand in the health care sector — and each of those occupations is expected to increase by more than 2,000 workers over the next decade.
The retail trade sector is second on the list of expected job openings over the next 10 years with 26,000 openings expected.
Of the expected openings in the region, about 4,000 are because the retail sector is growing. The remaining 22,000 jobs are a result of those retiring or moving to different occupations.
Retail sales positions top the list with nearly 8,000 positions to be filled, followed by cashiers at about 6,000 and stock clerks and order fillers with nearly 2,500 jobs.
And for students looking for jobs, more than 37,000 positions were available in the Richmond metro area during the past 30 days, according to the JobsEQ analytics.
More than 2,000 openings in the region were for retail sales jobs.
Registered and critical care nurses also were at the top of the list with nearly 1,500 job postings by employers in the area.
Demand also is strong for those with an information technology skill set. More than 800 job postings in the region over the past 30 days were for computer-user support specialists, and nearly 500 were for application software developers.
(This article first ran in the Richmond Times Dispatch on May 1, 2017)
chmura-100Email this author

Posted in Economy, Health Care | Comments Off on Demand Anticipated for Jobs in Health Care, Retail

Environmental Ideas Rarely Mentioned

Share this article on:

President Trump’s proposal to reduce the Environmental Protection Agency’s $8.1-billion budget by $1.6 billion was cut to an $80-million trim in the omnibus spending bill. However, the EPA funding and staff controversy will undoubtedly resume during the next budgetary battles in September.
That’s fueling consternation and con jobs in the heartland. According to press releases, funds for cleaning up the Great Lakes, eliminating lead poisoning, stopping oil pollution and “ensuring justice” for affected groups are “on the chopping block.” Community leaders, government officials, academics and activists will therefore meet May 10-11 in Chicago for a Freshwater Lab Summit, to “engage the public” and map out strategies for preserving Obama environmental staffs, budgets, programs, policies and priorities.
Women, minorities and low-income communities often “bear the brunt of environmental degradation,” say conference organizers, who plan to emphasize “rights” to clean water, “regardless of race, wealth or class.” Speakers include mayors, opponents of oil pipelines and exporting Canadian water to the United States, proponents of sustainability and “environmental climate justice,” and an expert on the role of water sharing and management in “peacemaking, diplomacy and economic equality.”
The summit promises to be lively, somewhat informative, certainly politicized, and likely to energize more of the resistance, rallies, recriminations, rabble rousing, rage, rants and riots that have dominated the U.S. political scene since the November 2016 elections.
Here are a few thoughts that speakers and attendees might want to consider, but most likely will not.
As I’ve noted previously, since EPA was created in 1970, America’s air and water quality have improved dramatically, to the point where most serious pollution concerns are rare and isolated. Cars have eliminated 98% of the pollutants that they emitted 47 years ago. Coal-fired power plants now remove 80- 90% of the mercury, nitrogen oxide, sulfur dioxide, particulates and other dangerous substances that used to come out of their stacks. Factories and paper mills have done likewise with air and water emissions.
However, as our laws, technologies, and changed corporate and citizen attitudes resolved most of the chronic environmental problems of yesteryear, EPA and the environmentalist movement set new agendas and priorities. They became ideological, politicized and determined to control what Congress, the states and citizens never intended them to regulate: lingering traces of air pollution, climate change, our entire energy and economic infrastructure, and nearly every rivulet, puddle and other waters of the USA.
The Obama EPA also engaged in illegal experiments on humans; when their results proved that microscopic soot particles are not deadly, the agency ignored the evidence. It also claimed plant-fertilizing carbon dioxide “endangers” America and must be slashed by de-carbonizing and de-industrializing the US economy, under the agency’s Clean Power Plan and social cost of carbon scheme.
It held “listening sessions” in Chicago and other cities where abundant college and other activists could easily testify, but affected miners, factory workers and farmers would have to travel hundreds of miles – and then have their stories and concerns ignored by the regulators. They simply became Collateral Damage in a war on coal and affordable energy that brought green energy poverty to millions.
In the mostly former steel town of Middlebury, Ohio, jobs and people moved out, as dependency, despondency and drugs moved in. In September 2016, this city of 49,000 had 30 heroin overdoses in one week. Many factors played a role in the decline, but EPA’s regulatory warfare was clearly one of them.
Meanwhile, Flint, Michigan’s drinking water was laced with lead, because EPA, state and local officials were too distracted to safeguard what Chicago summiteers view as a basic right to clean water. Prevention and repair funds were spent on climate change and other agendas. Fixing this serious health problem is a high Trump EPA priority; the funds are not going to be deleted, as summit organizers claim.
Out in Colorado, EPA-supervised contractors unleashed a toxic flashflood from the Gold King Mine, contaminating river water for hundreds of miles. EPA waited an entire day before notifying impacted communities. It refused to provide adequate compensation and never punished anyone.
Will the conferees offer compassion and demand environmental justice for all these regulatory victims? Will they demand accountability for the inexcusable derelictions of duty by irresponsible regulators?
When they call for action to block more pipelines, will they even mention that new pipelines are needed to bring oil and natural gas from new fields to refineries and petrochemical plants that provide the fuels and products they use every day? That new pipelines are needed to replace aging pipes that could spring leaks? Or that pipelines are much safer than railway tanker cars and tanker trucks on our highways?
Will summit speaker and Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett explain the millions of gallons of untreated wastewater and sewage that his city still discharges into Lake Michigan every year?
In the context of “drastic” budget and personnel reductions proposed for EPA, will the “unprecedented coalition of mayors and community advocates” meeting in Chicago discuss the fact that EPA simply will not require so many people or funds, now that it won’t need a massive bureaucracy to control US lands, waters, farms, factories, energy and economic development, to “stabilize” Earth’s ever-fickle climate?
Staff and funding will still be more than adequate to clean up the Great Lakes, monitor and address drinking water and sewage problems in our cities, ensure that oil and gas pipelines are built and operated safely, and enforce factory and vehicle compliance with pollution standards. Fewer funds and personnel will simply be reallocated from the grand schemes of the Obama years to real remaining problems.
Will the conference recognize that federal regulations alone cost $1.9 trillion per year – prior to the regulatory tsunami of the Obama Administration’s final three months? The eight-year Obama era alone generated over $800 billion of those annual regulatory burdens. EPA alone was responsible for well over $350 billion of the overall bill, based on 2012 data from just the first four years of the Obama presidency.
These regulations – combined with countless thousands of criminal offenses embedded in them – impose an enormous burden on every business, industry, state, community and family in the United States. They are an incalculable drag on job creation, economic growth, family budgets, and the ability of families to meet medical, nutrition, rent, mortgage, college, retirement and other needs. They have an acute and disproportionate impact on poor, minority, single parent and blue-collar families.
They deprive people of their basic civil rights and environmental justice, often for few or no benefits.
Conference participants, community leaders, lawmakers and regulators should worry less about saving the planet, and more about doing their jobs and keeping little problems from becoming big ones. Less about exaggerated, fabricated climate risks, and more about actual pollution and joblessness risks. Less about rights and demands – and more about personal and shared responsibilities.
They should especially emphasize what kids and adults must do to succeed in life: Stay in school, study hard, graduate. Minimize drug and alcohol use. Don’t join gangs or become unwed teen parents. Get and stay married. Be parents, not just sperm or egg donors. Get a job, be on time, work hard, learn new skills, and parlay that experience into better jobs. Save for college or to move into a better neighborhood. Play a positive role in making your current home, neighborhood and school cleaner, safer, better. 
President Trump’s election was an equal and opposite reaction to the excesses, abuses and failures by previous administration. Yes, elections do have consequences. The Trump election has brought new visions, agendas, directions and policies for America: rolling back costly, excessive, intrusive regulations; reducing tax burdens; devolving more power and responsibility to states and cities; telling federal agencies to focus on actual remaining problems that should be handled at that level; and persuading more people and communities to take greater responsibility for their own success or failure.
These changes will help bring jobs, opportunities and prosperity back to America. They deserve a fair hearing at the Chicago summit and elsewhere, in civil conversations that truly involve all affected parties.

Email this author

Posted in Environment | Comments Off on Environmental Ideas Rarely Mentioned

Internet Privacy – Careful How we Ask for It

Share this article on:

In another life, I founded and built a direct marketing company.  We contacted folks using names acquired from “list companies” that offered to rent to us the names of those people with similar backgrounds.   These lists were developed by companies and organizations that allowed their customer names to be used by us for our clients. Those customer names were owned by organizations and companies that rented names themselves from others to build, in turn, their own customer base.  List were also available that were considered “compiled” names of those with various demographic similarities – where they lived, income level, driver’s license holders, registered voters, catalogue buyers, etc.
We looked for lists of people who had similar interests to the issues or products our clients were promoting.  And we used reputable “mail houses” that received the names we rented and mailed the materials we drafted and printed.  We or our clients never saw the specific names unless a person responded directly to one of their appeals.  Then that person’s name and address were part of our client’s database.  
Multiple surveys showed that those who responded to direct mail appeals, or purchased items from catalogues received in the mail, enjoyed receiving these direct mail solicitations.  They could toss out those letters and catalogues they didn’t like, read those they wanted, and respond if they wanted.  Free choice!
Today the direct marketing and advertising business has exploded thanks to the marvels of the internet.  And internet advertising is much like advertising in other media – aimed at the customer potentially most interested. You can respond or not with the click of your mouse.  Free choice again!
But recently, the un-elected Federal Communications Commission (FCC), tried to “protect the privacy” of individuals by requiring broadband providers to ask customers for specific permission before collecting data to use in selling ads.  They made it sound as if an advertisers were gaining access to all sorts of private information about each of us from our broadband providers.  But this isn’t what is happening.  In actuality, the advertisers are placing ads on our computers based on the data compiled by internet providers but our names are not given directly to the advertisers.  If you or I respond to an ad, then the advertising entity (company, organization, candidate, etc.) has our name and what we purchased in their own database.
But the FCC’s proposed rules would have applied only to internet providers and not to various websites, search engines and others that collect information on all of us as well.  So AT&T, Comcast, Verizon and other internet providers would have been under these new restrictive rules but Google, Facebook and others would not.  That was clearly unfair and sends up all sorts of yellow flags.
So Congress recently stepped in and overruled the FCC and stopped these proposed new “privacy” rules from going into effect until a more reasonable, effective and fair process can be developed.  And hopefully this new approach will protect privacy as the individual might desire and not greatly hinder the growing internet industry.
And like other media that carry advertising – television and radio stations for instance – the advertising revenue is a huge part of the internet providers’ bottom line.  These advertising revenues likely keep our internet access costs lower than they would be otherwise. And that is advantageous to all of us who use the internet each and every day.
But when Congress intervened and overruled these proposed new rules which did not apply evenly to all who use data collection to advertise, some critics went through the roof. That was a typical overreaction by those who don’t seem to understand the realities.  They claimed that Congress was denying us our privacy rights which is completely inaccurate. And, these critics failed to mention that the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) remains the main regulatory agency on privacy issues, not the FCC. Congress did understand and our elected officials took action.
An even handed and reasonable method of allowing those of us who use the internet to restrict how our information is used seems like a good idea.  It would be the same as, when I was in the direct marketing business, a person checking a box off on his or her response device to not share their information with others.  Such requirements would best be voluntarily accepted by the major players in the industry.  However, if the federal government still demands involvement, then it should include the Federal Trade Commission as well as the Federal Communications Commission.  And all internet players should be part of the new rules.  Once the FTC and FCC agree on a universal system, it should be approved or cancelled by our elected Congress.  This is much too important to be left in the hands of a few appointed bureaucrats.
Email this author

Posted in Media, Regulation | Comments Off on Internet Privacy – Careful How we Ask for It

Government’s War on the Poor: Parent Plus Edition

Share this article on:

Rebecca McEvoy, a retired school teacher coping with multiple sclerosis, borrowed $84,000 under the federal Parent Plus program to help her oldest son through art and design school. When he graduated, the government expunged the debt under a law that forgives balances for borrowers deemed permanently disabled. Three years later, she and her husband Dave, also a retired teacher, turned to Parent Plus again. The couple expects to borrow another $50,000 to cover costs for a second son, as Josh Mitchell with the Wall Street Journal tells the story.
The McEvoys’ finances likely would have raised red flags with private lenders, Mitchell dryly notes. They live off modest pensions, and existing debts eat up much of their income. Odds are, they won’t be able to meet their payment obligations for the second round of student debt any more than they could the first.
As of September 2015, more than 330,000 people, or 11% of borrowers, had gone at least a year without making a payment on a Parent Plus loan. The student loan debt crisis is engulfing not only students but many parents. An estimated 41,000 Parent Plus borrowers had their checks garnished in FY 2015.
“This credit is being extended on terms that specifically, willfully ignore their ability to repay,” said Toby Merrill with the Harvard Law School’s Legal Services Center. “You can’t avoid that we’re targeting high-cost, high-dollar-amount loans to people who we know can’t afford to repay them.”
Parent Plus defaults began rising during the Great Recession. By 2011, Obama administration officials recognized that they had a problem and put tighter restrictions into place. Writes the WSJ:

But after schools argued stiffer underwriting would prevent many students from covering tuition, thus reducing college access for minorities and poor students, the administration rolled back the new rules. Research shows that restricting access to loans based on credit scores leads to lower college enrollment.

The Government Accounting Organization (GAO) estimates that taxpayers ultimately will forgive $108 billion on student loans made through the current fiscal year, says the WSJ. Colleges are the only winners here. Federal loans allow them to jack up tuition, but they suffer no adverse consequences when students or parents cannot repay the debt.
Bacon’s bottom line: Thus has the student loan program, created with the best of intentions, been corrupted: simultaneously saddling taxpayers with the cost of a massively expensive entitlement and burdening students and parents alike with billions of dollars in loans they can never repay. That’s quite a two-fer. Two… Two… Two massively destructive unintended consequences in one!
It hasn’t always been this way. Once upon a time, student loans weren’t dogged by subprime mortgage-scale bad debt. The problem arose when Uncle Sam began treating student loans as an entitlement for anyone who wanted to attend college. Refusing loans to students with no credit rating and/or parents with poor credit ratings constituted “discrimination” against the poor and minorities. Once you play the discrimination card, the debate is over.
The unintended consequence, of course, is that when poor and minority students and parents load up with debt they cannot repay, they suffer disproportionately — even when billions of dollars in bad debt are written off. Except in rare instances like Ms. McEvoy’s, student loan debt cannot be dispelled. Uncle Sam extracts its pound of flesh by garnishing wages and social security. Families living on the edge of poverty are pushed into poverty; families living in poverty are pushed into destitution.
All for what? A significant number of poor students make it through college, obtain degrees, and get good jobs that allow them to service their debt. But millions don’t. Federal law limits undergraduate federal loans to $27,000 over four years. Even when parents step in by borrowing under the Parents Plus plan, many poor students lack the resources to graduate. (The problem may be compounded by a lack of academic preparation — student loan programs apparently don’t take that into account either.) Meanwhile, millions of well-paying, semi-skilled jobs go unfilled. Washington could not have better designed a system to crush the poor if it tried.
(This article first ran in Bacon’s Rebellion on April 25, 2017)
–
bacon-90Email this author

Posted in Economy, Government Reform | Comments Off on Government’s War on the Poor: Parent Plus Edition

Manufacturing in Virginia: Producing More with Less

Share this article on:
Manufacturing often gets a bad rap.
That’s probably because the sector has declined by more than 4.9 million jobs since January 2000.
The industry also has perception issues. Who wants to work in a dirty old factory with oil on the floor and dust in the air?
But the manufacturing industry has changed — it is more high tech and offers better wages, making for a good career choice.
Manufacturing employs more than 12.6 million people in the U.S. The Bureau of Labor Statistics forecasts that figure will decline by about 900,000 in the next 10 years.
However, the sector will add about 2.8 million workers during that same period, because employees in manufacturing either are retiring or moving into new occupations.
And even though the industry is shedding jobs, output continues to grow. Since 2000, manufacturing production increased by 38 percent, or by $1.604 trillion, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Total manufacturing output for 2015, the latest data available, was $5.83 trillion.
Productivity gains are part of the reason for the decline in jobs as well as the expected future decline.
Productivity in the manufacturing industry grew an annual average 1.7 percent from 2007 through 2016 compared with 1.1 percent for nonfarm businesses.
Although high productivity means doing more with fewer workers, it also means the remaining workers are paid well.
Average annual wages for manufacturing workers was $63,907 during the 12 months that ended Dec. 31, compared with $52,291 for all industries, based on data computed by Chmura Economics & Analytics.
The manufacturing industry is similar in the Richmond region.
It employs more than 32,000 workers locally. The sector is expected to shed about 2,700 jobs during the next decade.
Yet, more than 7,000 openings will occur as employees retire or switch occupations.
The average annual manufacturing wage during the 12 months that ended Dec. 31 was $63,015, compared with $49,162 for all industries.
And what about the perception issues?
Consider touring the Rolls-Royce North America plant in Prince George County, where the company makes components for aircraft engines.
As you drive to the plant in the Crosspointe development, you pass through a well-manicured campus that would convince you that you were in an upscale office park.
Entering the nearly 300,000-square-foot plant, you see spotless floors, large machines suspended off the floors, and workers with computer skills operating the facility.
On the same campus is the Commonwealth Center for Advanced Manufacturing, a 60,000-square-foot research center jointly operated by private companies and several Virginia universities.
The environment at both facilities is far from your grandfather’s plant.

(This article first ran in the Richmond Times Dispatch on April 3, 2017)
chmura-100Email this author

Posted in Economy | Comments Off on Manufacturing in Virginia: Producing More with Less