If the government is going to help people who have lost jobs in aged or transitioning industries get back to work, how should they do so? This post suggests that the default answer is retraining. Makes sense on the surface. After all, if a metal worker can no longer work as a metal worker because all the metal worker jobs are gone, then we can help him by teaching him how to do something else. This is far better than simply shipping him a check for staying at home and doing nothing, thereby creating dependence and stealing his dignity.
The point the author makes, though, is that such training does not work. To train a parcel of workers for non-existent jobs only builds often crushed hope and does not actually solve the problem. Her suggestion is one of subsidizing companies with real work to hire and train people for real jobs. I can see problems with this as well, but it is an interesting discussion, one which Christians need to be a part of.
Rebekah
The kind of retraining he references is a bad idea–I would concur on that assessment. I met a displaced worker on an airplane who was being retrained after her factory closed, and the industry she was being retrained for didn't sound very hopeful.The private sector and foundation community is getting involved in intelligent planning for retraining of displaced workers–and general planning for gaps in the workforce.They're connecting the government, industry, and the training sector, so that everyone involved in the process is communicating knowledge, so they know where the existing worker gaps are, and where the gaps will be 5, 10, and 15 years down the road.The worst thing to do for a worker is to train someone for a job that they won't be able to find.