A curious question was posed the other day. It’s a big question: How much of the workforce actually creates wealth or produces a tangible product?
In good times, little effort is put into such questions since things are rolling fairly smoothly for most people. It is only when job availability sours and money becomes a little harder to come by that the head scratching starts and the fingers start to point at perceived waste.
Columnists and pundits from coast to coast are seemingly free to roll out concepts that otherwise would be shared in like-minded circles only. Immigration, free-trade, unionism, and a host of other excuses shield Canadians from the reality of the present situation. Just as General Motors and Chrysler have had a come-uppance, so too must government and our expectations of it.
Our friend with the question about production got an answer from us a few days later in the form of a farm analogy that might be lost on some readers. We’ll try to explain it, with apologies if it is a little off the mark.
Early tractors ran on gas and fuels that were easily ignited by spark plugs. The introduction of diesel engines made for a stronger, more powerful motor – but their size and compression made them difficult to start. So, gas motors – easily started and warmed up, were used to help turn over the larger diesel engine and bring it to such a speed that the motor started and stayed running. Those little engines were called pup-motors. Eventually, advances in diesel technology allowed them to start on their own, leaving pup-motors a thing of the past.
At present, the wealth creating portion of our economy is running on something comparable to a pup motor. Its size and number of participants is rather small when compared to the behemoth that it feeds and has to start.
Statistics can be fluid, but at present around 40% of the population works in some capacity for the public (government) sector. Another 10% covers the unemployed and others who, through no fault of their own, are incapable of working. That leaves about 50% of the population to work in the private sector. Those numbers do not, in themselves, ensure the creation of wealth.
The writing has been on the wall for some time that there is an economic imbalance in North America. Consider the tried and used phrases such as “information economy” and “service economy.” As manufacturing plants were idled and more goods were purchased offshore, politicians soothed worries with those phrases. Perhaps this economic downturn serves as a marker for what is to come if some balance in wealth creation is not restored.
Value and cost rationalization, overlooked for years because it was the path of least resistance, needs to return. In fact, comments in this week’s Newspaper by a guest speaker at a recent event indicate to us that competing interests are emerging to a point where maybe a real debate can take place. Dr. Simon Davidson pointed out to our reporter that efforts to get new funding for mental health issues for children and youth is difficult since ever increasing staff and benefit costs supplant programming development. It’s not that anyone is to blame, but there is an imbalance.
It seems to us that the present economy relies far too heavily on entrepreneurship and small business to pay the bills. Like a pup motor, that can only go on for so long before the big engine it helps to start and run needs to evolve.
