Sep 18, 2009
Sometimes it is important to establish what you’re not saying before you say what you are saying, lest bad feelings set in before understanding. This is especially true in delicate matters and tough times—both of which apply here. After religion and politics, there is nothing more sensitive to discuss than the economy, especially when so many are suffering.
I do not mean to imply by what follows that unemployment is good. In fact, I bristle at economists who suggest that the economy is healthier with less than full employment. I understand the theory, but the concept of feeling more at ease when a few people are unemployed seems mean-spirited. I am also not suggesting making lemonade out of lemons. Being out of work is more serious than a momentary disappointment that can be easily turned into gladness with a good attitude.
I am not suggesting by what follows that households with two working parents are deficient or driven any more by greed than households with only one working parent. I recognize that this circumstance is not always a choice. Certainly, I do not mean to imply that any individual should stay home unwillingly. Likewise, I am not suggesting that working to one’s full potential and dedicating oneself to one’s work are in themselves wrong. Moderation must be tempered by the positive benefits gained by society and the individual when the human drive kicks into overdrive.
But, we cannot ignore that things have changed. Having spent the past quarter century warning us of the inflationary dangers of dipping below the level of "full employment," economists are now suggesting double-digit unemployment may be with us for a while. While Mr. Greenspan, largely retired from his lifeguard position, has little to worry about personally given his age, we may need to adjust our lifestyles, dreams and job searching strategies accordingly. This may be especially difficult for us middle-agers who have spent our adult life in one type of economic circumstance, namely prosperity.