WaxWorks
|
Monday, February 23, 2004
Don't Forget Grimace!
First, there was the comment by Bush's top economist that "outsourcing" jobs abroad was "probably a plus for the economy in the long run."
It's clear that certain areas of the country, certain politically important areas, have lost manufacturing jobs during Bush's reign. And those jobs aren't coming back. So how is Bush going to show job growth to people in states like Michigan and Ohio, where those losses have been particularly acute?
Well, in that same report as the "outsourcing comment," there's now there this nugget:
Is cooking a hamburger patty and inserting the meat, lettuce and ketchup inside a bun a manufacturing job, like assembling automobiles?
That question is posed in the new Economic Report of the President, a thick annual compendium of observations and statistics on the health of the United States economy.
The latest edition, sent to Congress last week, questions whether fast-food restaurants should continue to be counted as part of the service sector or should be reclassified as manufacturers. No answers were offered.
In a speech to Washington economists Tuesday, N. Gregory Mankiw, chairman of the president's Council of Economic Advisers, said that properly classifying such workers was "an important consideration" in setting economic policy.
Counting jobs at McDonald's, Burger King and other fast-food enterprises alongside those at industrial companies like General Motors and Eastman Kodak might seem like a stretch, akin to classifying ketchup in school lunches as a vegetable, as was briefly the case in a 1981 federal regulatory proposal.
But the presidential report points out that the current system for classifying jobs "is not straightforward." The White House drew a box around the section so it would stand out among the 417 pages of statistics.
"When a fast-food restaurant sells a hamburger, for example, is it providing a 'service' or is it combining inputs to 'manufacture' a product?" the report asks.
"Sometimes, seemingly subtle differences can determine whether an industry is classified as manufacturing. For example, mixing water and concentrate to produce soft drinks is classified as manufacturing. However, if that activity is performed at a snack bar, it is considered a service."
Here's Rep. Dingell's response to Bush:
I am sure the 163,000 factory workers who have lost their jobs in Michigan will find it heartening to know that a world of opportunity awaits them in high growth manufacturing careers like spatula operator, napkin restocking and lunch tray removal.
Dingell goes on to state:
I do have some questions of this new policy and I hope you will help me provide answers for my constituents:
Will federal student loans and Trade Adjustment Assistance grants be applied to tuition costs at Burger College?
Will the administration commit to allowing the Manufacturing Extension Partnership to fund cutting edge burger research such as new nugget ingredients or keeping the hot and cold sides of burgers separate until consumption?
Will special sauce now be counted as a durable good?
Do you want fries with that?
Finally, Dingell concludes by noting that Commerce Secretary Evans announced the creation of a new Assistant Secretary for Manufacturing last September, but, now five months later, the position has yet to be filled:
I do, however, know of a public official who would be perfect for the job. He has over thirty years of administrative and media experience, has a remarkable record of working with diverse constituencies, and is extraordinarily well qualified to understand this emerging manufacturing sector: the Hon. Mayor McCheese.
Comments:
Post a Comment
