There’s
been so much talk in both political and business pages about the Trans-Pacific
Partnership, or TPP, that it got me to thinking about Pittsburgh’s increasingly
smaller part in this larger and, for most, unsettling economic world order.
These
far reaching economic partnerships are both credited with and condemned for
broadening product and labor markets, with the result that both products and
workers are further exposed to market forces.
But these international trade agreements are nothing new. Trade pacts have always been concomitant with
the actual trade. Or maybe trade pacts
were just realized in different guises than today. Whether between Great Britain and China,
Arabia and Africa, Portugal or Spain and the Americas – who knew if it was a
trade pact or a police action or enslavement?
However characterized, contracts were drawn up and pathways of goods and
people were established.
My
concern here is how will Pittsburgh survive in this new global market, [same as
the old global market, to paraphrase The Who]; one that shifts the rewards of
income ever more quickly among producers.
We’ve all read the articles about income inequality and how higher
incomes are going to better educated workers in “knowledge industries”. One disconcerting item often noted about these
industries is that they create employment in the hundreds, or low thousands at
best. The era of heavy industry or
consumer goods production that employed tens of thousands with decent wage
rates has moved away from America to cheaper labor continents. And still America continues to lose at an
astounding rate those types of jobs that require large number of workers,
skilled or otherwise, engaged in a large production [I don’t want to limit this
to “manufacturing”] enterprise. Gone are
the days when one company can supply enough jobs to build a whole town in
America, Silicon Valley burgs notwithstanding.
Adding
to this outlook is a piece recently featured on CNBC’s Web site where one well-regarded
investor proffered that artificial intelligence will make “most” current jobs
“obsolete”. Robotics has a lot to do with that and Pittsburgh will hopefully
continue to develop that expertise cluster.
But more generally, I believe the only real growth in employment will
come from those jobs that can only be provided by one human being to another. Medical research, health care, education, and
to a lesser extent what are known as business services such as legal,
accounting and sales. Yes, oil and gas
production provided a boost to Pittsburgh’s and the nation’s economy recently,
but it has also declined almost as quickly due to its cyclicality. And jobs in software development have been a
boon to a number of local economies but aside from over-developing the Bay
Area, Boston and Seattle, the increase in GDP is again, so uneven, that these
industries seem to be drivers of the new income inequality.
Pittsburgh
needs and deserves a more well-balanced economy and one that provides employment
in areas that will generate higher incomes to more workers. Many careers that are characterized as
“creative” industries, while injecting elements of excitement into the local
scene, are not those on which to raise a family or build an economic
engine. I hope Pittsburgh’s leaders in
education, healthcare and government see the distinctions among various job
creation project in light of the larger, much larger, and very rapidly changing
global economic landscape.
To
echo a recurring theme of my own and so many others, and as the only idea I can
think of to end this piece, I have to note that educational attainment seems to
be the key to income and quality-of-life development. More discussions on that topic to come.