|
7 myths about green jobs By Andrew P. Morriss, William T. Bogart, Andrew Dorchak and Roger E. Meiners Myth 1: Everyone understands what a
"green job" is. According to the studies most commonly quoted, green jobs pay well, are interesting to do, produce products that environmental groups prefer, and do so in a unionized workplace. Such criteria have little to do with the environmental impacts of the jobs. To build a political coalition, "green jobs" have become a mechanism to deliver something for members of many special interests in order to buy their support for a radical transformation of society. Committing hundreds of billions of dollars to promoting something lacking a transparent definition cannot be justified. Myth 2: Creating green jobs will boost
productive employment. These green jobs studies mistake any position receiving a paycheck for a position creating value. Simply hiring people to write and enforce regulations, fill-out forms, and process paperwork is not a recipe for creating wealth. Much of the promised boost in green employment turns out to be in non-productive - and expensive - positions that raise costs for consumers. These higher paying jobs that fail to create a more eco-friendly society dramatically skew the results in both number of green jobs created and salary levels of those jobs. Myth 3: Green jobs forecasts are reliable. The forecasts for green employment in these studies optimistically predict an employment boom that will take us to prosperity in a new green world. The forecasts, which are sometimes amazingly detailed, are unreliable because they are based on: a)
Questionable estimates by interest groups of tiny base numbers in employment, Myth 4: Green jobs promote employment
growth. Green jobs estimates promise greatly expanded (and pleasant and well-paid) employment. This promise is false. The green jobs model is built on promoting inefficient use of labor. The studies favor technologies that employ large numbers of people rather than those technologies that use labor efficiently. In a competitive market, the factors of production, including labor, are paid for their productivity. By focusing on low productivity jobs, the green jobs literature dooms employees to low wages in a shrinking economy. The studies also generally ignore the millions of jobs that will be destroyed by the restrictions imposed by governments on disfavored products and technologies. Myth 5: The world economy can be remade by
reducing trade and relying on local production and reduced consumption
without dramatically decreasing our standard of living. The green jobs literature rejects the benefits of trade, ignores opportunity costs, specialization, and fails to include consumer surplus in its welfare calculations. This is a recipe for an economic disaster. Even favored green technology, such as wind turbines, requires great expertise largely provided by foreigners. The twentieth century saw many experiments in creating societies that did not engage in trade and did not value personal welfare. The economic and human disasters that resulted should have conclusively settled the question of whether nations can withdraw inside its borders. Myth 6: Government mandates are a
substitute for free markets. Green jobs supporters want to reorder society by mandating preferred technologies and expenditures through government entities. But the responses to government mandates are not the same as the responses to market incentives. We have powerful evidence that market incentives prompt the same resource conservation that green jobs advocates purport to desire. For example, the rising cost of energy is a major incentive to redesign production processes and products to use less energy. People do not want energy; they want the benefits of energy. Those who can deliver more desired goods and services by reducing the energy – and thus the cost of production – will be rewarded. On the other hand, we have no evidence to support the idea that command and control regimes accomplish conservation. Myth 7: Wishing for technological progress
is sufficient. The green jobs literature's preferred technologies face significant problems in scaling up to the levels they propose. These problems are well documented in readily available technical literature, yet are resolutely ignored in the green jobs reports. At the same time, existing viable technologies that fail to meet the green jobs supporters' political criteria are simply rejected out of hand. This selective technological optimism/pessimism is not a sufficient basis for remaking society to fit the dream of planners, politicians or special interests who think they know best, despite empirical evidence to the contrary. To read this paper in its entirety, download it here.
|
|
Return to Environmental Update Return to Homepage 
Roubidoux
True tales of the Huckleberry Finn type adventures of a boy who journeys from
delinquency in California to Southern culture in the Missouri Ozarks. Although told
through the eyes of a twelve year old who never grows old, much of the real life
adventure is emotionally timeless with appeal to all ages. Brutally honest at
times but never off colored.
A sample from Roubidoux may be read here.
The book may be ordered here.
 Do you know that your body is naturally acidic which makes you susceptible to all manner of unhealthy conditions and illnesses? By making your body alkaline instead of acidic you mitigate these potential health problems. One way of doing this is to drink alkaline water. The above machine is called the "Athena" and makes tap water into pure, clean alkaline water. It's rather expensive, but it's the best in the world. Isn't your health worth it? Click here to learn more and order it.
|
