Structural Pains

Tyler Cowen provides the following graph,

Cowen shows that job growth for the unimpaired sectors has almost returned to pre-crisis levels, suggesting that our unemployment problem resides squarely of those who used to work in the structurally impaired sectors.

I might be asking a stupid question, but is this information supposed to tell us information that we do not already know?

  • Mattheus von Guttenberg

    I might be asking a stupid question, but is this information supposed to tell us information that we do not already know?

    The Austrians would be already aware of this evidence, but it might come as genuinely new information to economists not aware of structural problems – in other words, all Keynesians.

    • Jonathan Finegold Catalán

      I think that the Keyynesian position is a little bit more nuanced, but I really don’t see why it’s so hard to accept/see. Even on a very limited scope, unless you re-inflate the housing sector, some of the housing jobs that existed before will never exist again, so this necessitates employment in a new sector of the economy (one larger than it was before).

      I agree with you. I just don’t see why anybody would have to see the issue from an “Aunstrian lens,” since the problem seems so blatantly obvious.

      • Mattheus von Guttenberg

        One would hope that it were “that obvious.”

        Unfortunately, I still hear people talk about repeal of Glass Steagal as the crux of the recession.

  • Joseph Fetz

    This seems to be more common sense than any real economic insight.

    • Inspector Fu

      It’s not common, so it’s not common sense. Austrian economics describes economies better than any other school of thought, yet it is Keynes that is pervasive.