More unemployment and lower wages: Coronavirus crisis dimming the prospects of young people in Spain

Europe / Spain / 05/20/2020 / Author: Miguel Ángel García Vega / Source: https://english.elpais.com/

Half of all job losses since the start of the outbreak have happened to adults under the age of 35, who experts say will face the brunt of the economic fallout from the pandemic.

he coronavirus crisis has stunted the prospects of hundreds of thousands of young people in Spain. While youth is frequently defined as the prime of one’s life encompassing a career, getting a place to live, love and heartbreak, children – for those who choose to have them – studying, traveling, making mistakes, suffering and regret, around 6.5 million Spaniards who were between 20 and 29 in 2008 and are now between 32 and 41 might well focus only on the list’s negatives.

This generation, which represents 14.2% of the population according to Spain’s National Statistics Institute (INE), is facing their second global economic crisis in only 12 years; the economic downturn of 2008 and now the pandemic. Ed è súbito sera. “And suddenly, the night,” as the Italian poet and Nobel Prize winner Salvator Quasimodo put it. No one can deny the rapidly descending gloom.

In April, unemployment among those aged 25 to 29 – the hardest hit demographic – rose by 13.1%. And in the first quarter, unemployment for those under 25 was 33%, two and a half points higher than the last quarter of 2019. The figures released in April paint a bleak picture. Half of job losses ­– around the 460,000 – since the start of this crisis have been among the under-35s.

Without doubt, instability has come at the worst possible moment. The youngsters who entered the labor market in the middle of the financial crisis between 2008 and 2013 are being hit just when they were starting to get on their feet. “The impact will be huge because young people are starting out in an already very vulnerable situation, characterized by impermanence, and have not yet finished footing the bill of the previous crisis,” says María Ángeles Davia Rodríguez, professor at the University of Castile-La Mancha. “The cost of this bill will depend largely on levels of job security in the face of the pandemic. That is, whether the person can continue to telework or whether they will be faced with intense social contact when they go back to work.”

The consulting firm CEPR Policy estimates that currently only 25.4% of jobs in Spain can safely be done from home – a percentage that could rise to 43% when restrictions are scaled back to a minimum. “There is a divide between young people who are privileged to have jobs that can be done remotely, such as those working in finance or computer science, and those who work in catering or retail with face-to-face contact [with the public],” says David Grusky, director of the Stanford Center on Poverty and Inequality at Stanford University. “These are new forces of injustice.”

Every generation has been defined by traumatic events, which generally generate fear and uncertainty. They are events that change the way people understand the world, and affect the way in which they make decisions and take risks. “Entering the labor market in times of recession has dire and persistent consequences on the wage trajectory of young Spaniards. Its repercussions can last up to a decade,” says Nuria Rodríguez-Planas, professor at the City University of New York.

Along with her colleague Daniel Fernández-Kranz, Rodríguez-Planas has laid out her research on this phenomenon in the article The Perfect Storm: Graduating during a Recession in Segmented Labor Market. “Regarding university graduates, there is a 6.4% reduction [in wages] on average in the first 10 years if the person enters a labor market with 18% unemployment instead of 10%,” she says.

In other demographics, the fallout is worse, with those who have completed high school being hit by a reduction in wages of 10% and those with vocational training, 12.5%.

In April, the number of people unemployed under the age of 25 rose by 31,262 compared to the previous month

Meanwhile, experts from CaixaBank Research say that between 2008 and 2016, the average salary for workers between the ages of 20 and 24 fell by 15%, while those aged 25 to 29 lost 9% of their income.

These figures meant life projects, such as independent living and starting a family, were put on hold; historically, it has been shown that economic insecurity reduces fertility and delays home-making.

Other reports such as Youth Unemployment in Spain, published by the journal Papeles de Economía Española (or Papers on the Spanish Economy), analyzed the lives of young people who are now aged between 36 and 40 – a demographic that, despite having gone through the initial stages of the recession between 2005 and 2012, should have had their lives on track by 2020. Instead, there was something akin to “boomer envy” – a concept coined by novelist Douglas Coupland in the book Generation X, which addresses inequality and the McJobs era of the 1990s in the United States.

According to Maria Ángeles Davia, the study found that the probability of becoming unemployed was significantly higher among those who had lost their job before the age of 30. And the stigma was more intense the longer their experience of unemployment lasted during their youth.

It is reasonable to assume that the frustration of the millennials who are now in that age bracket will be even greater as they have also had to bear the burden of the wage cuts that followed the 2011 labor reforms. “They must feel as though they will never see economic security in their lifetime,” says Markus Gangl, professor of sociology at Goethe University in Frankfurt, Germany.

According to Jason Dorsey, president of the consulting firm The Center for Generational Kinetics, “they’re going to lose wages, jobs and career prospects while older workers try to keep going for longer, thereby limiting future job offers. They will also have to bear much of the tax burden that pays for older people’s benefits.”

Generational comparisons

Deep down, thousands of young people feel that other generations have taken the best and placed barbed wire around the rest. Many envy their parents, who could retire at the age of 60. But that era has long gone. Now, around 60 million jobs in Europe are in jeopardy. The future, according to the McKinsey consultancy firm, will consist of a reduction in paid working hours, a flood of temporary contracts, and permanent lay-offs. And it is young people once more who will be in the eye of the storm as seven million jobs employing 15 to 24-year-olds could go.

“It could be worse if European governments introduce new austerity measures in the coming years to cope with the budgetary pressure created by the crisis,” says Michele Raitano, professor of political economy at the University of La Sapienza in Rome. “And we already know what that means: worse conditions for workers and deep cuts to social spending.”

There is an urgent need to protect jobs. Every job saved keeps productivity and consumption up, reduces dependence on the state and has a positive effect on health and wellbeing. The numbers of job losses must be brought down. It is not enough to flatten this curve. In April, the number of unemployed people under the age of 25 rose by 31,262 compared to the previous month. That’s close to an 11% hike in a country where youth unemployment has held at 40% in some areas, particularly the south, even during prosperity. “The situation of young people was already difficult before the crisis and now they have begun to form part of structural unemployment; that is, chronic unemployment,” says Raquel Llorente Heras, professor of Economics at the Autonomous University of Madrid.

Threats

With thousands of young people on temporary contracts, the threat of what’s around the corner is very real, particularly with regard to how things will play out after the state of alarm. At the end of the coronavirus lockdown, it is possible that “there will be a significant loss of temporary employment,” says Llorente.

So what’s the answer? “One option would be a minimum income that would act as a springboard to access the labor market,” proposes Rafael Doménech, head of economic analysis at BBVA Research. “But it should be designed so that the young person does not come to depend on it, and it should be temporary.” No matter what its dimensions, almost everyone agrees with Llorente that it is “necessary.”

Younger sections of the population must be protected, especially in a world where health and economic crises will become more frequent. According to the International Labor Organization, youth unemployment increased by 7.8 million between 2007 and 2009, while the decade before it had grown on average by just 191,000 per year.

“They [young people] are the least affected by the virus, but will be the most exposed to the economic fallout from the pandemic,” says Stefano Scarpetta, director of employment, labor and social affairs at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). “In the second phase of the crisis and beyond, attention will have to be paid to how we tackle this inequality through policies that target its source – for example, loopholes in social protection systems and low-skilled youth.” As Jordi Fabregat, a professor at Madrid’s Esade Business School, says, people between 30 and 35 without a good education “are in for a hard time.”

The Covid-19 crisis has interfered with the end of the school year in Spain and complicated access to the labor market for thousands of young people who should graduate or finish their studies this summer. Nobody knows for sure what impact this will have on their future. The situation brings to mind a line from Gabriel García Márquez’s One Hundred Years of Solitude: “The world was so recent that many things lacked names.”

But, according to Carlos Martín, head of the economic department for the CCOO labor union, shattering the expectations of Spain’s youth can be avoided. “We must raise taxes to bring Spain’s fiscal contribution into line with the European average, eliminate the immense flexibility of temporary contracts, which leads to instability, and guarantee access to housing to end the ‘postponed existences’ experienced by the young and the not-so-young,” he says. His proposals include ceilings on rents, taxing empty properties, restricting tourist apartments and creating a protected pool of public housing for rent.

Meanwhile, lawyer Antonio Garrigues Walker believes that things have a way of working out. “Sensationalism should be regarded as practically a crime at the moment,” he says. “I am an optimist. Human beings, particularly young ones, are very resilient and have always been able to adapt. There will have to be changes but not that many. Humanity has lived through other pandemics and got over them.”

That resilience is also flagged up by Josep Mestres, an economist at CaixaBank Research. “Young people are the ones who are suffering the lowest rates of infection and could be the group that returns to work first, making them part of the solution,” he says. “Besides, this is a generation that can adapt very well to the structural changes that are coming, such as teleworking and new technology.”

There is also a chance that, in the current climate, countries will return to factory production, supply chains and certain basic industries, particularly those related to the health sector. No one in Europe wants China to continue manufacturing 80% of its antibiotics, for example. “We are going to recoup our production network and this will give young people professional opportunities,” says Roberto Scholtes, head of strategy at the global financial firm, UBS Spain. “I am hopeful.”

All generations rise and fall and in between, there is an unspoken pact that they will prosper – that each generation will enjoy a better life than the last. To break this pact is to return to the twilight years of the Middle Ages or the 19th century’s Old Order. “If you can’t promise people that their lives will be better, then why should they support the system?” asks Grace Blakeley, a 26-year-old English economist, citing a view shared by millions of young people under 35, especially those in southern Europe, who are facing their second world recession in just 12 years.

The breakdown of this social pact leads to radicalization, populism and confrontation between generations. Economic misery leads to more economic misery. Low wages now lead to low wages later and, eventually, to tiny pensions. Meanwhile, unemployment is becoming structural in Spain.

Division

“The confrontation [between generations] partly exists already,” says Rafael Doménech of BBVA Research. “Statistics are beginning to show that during the 2008 crisis the incomes that best evolved were those of older people while those of the young worsened, which has generated a divide.”

According to Gonzalo Sánchez, president of accountancy firm, PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), “to address this generational tension, we need to create jobs. Nobody in society can be at peace without a job, especially young people.”

Emilio Ontiveros, president of International Financial Analysts (AFI), disagrees: “One of the consequences of the crisis is growing social tension. But I don’t see a war happening between generations. What I do see is a more entrenched response to the system. Young people will not be against the system but they will strongly defend public sectors such as health and education.”

According to Carlos Martín, from Spain’s CCOO union, “there is a class conflict rather than a generational one. The economic elite has a vested interest in substituting one for the other to safeguard their status quo and avoid fiscal, labor or real estate readjustments that would cut their profits in a structural way. That’s why they propagate ideas such as, the old are robbing the young of their rights and to avoid this pensions need to be cut; or those on permanent contracts are robbing the rights of those on temporary contracts – mainly the young – and the solution is to reduce redundancy packages. No one should be in any doubt ­– the sons and daughters of the elite will not see their expectations diminished but redirected.”

The same cannot be said for Spain’s less privileged youth who were already suffering a 30% unemployment rate before the coronavirus crisis.

English version by Heather Galloway.

Source and image: https://english.elpais.com/economy_and_business/2020-05-18/more-unemployment-and-lower-wages-coronavirus-crisis-dimming-the-prospects-of-young-people-in-spain.html

Comparte este contenido:

Slavoj Zizek: Epidemics are like wars, they can drag on for YEARS

By: Slavoj Zizek

We should stop thinking that after a peak in the Covid-19 epidemic things will gradually return to normal. The crisis will drag on. But this doesn’t mean the situation is hopeless.

In the Marx Brothers’ comedy Duck Soup, Groucho (as a lawyer defending his client at a court) says: “He may look like an idiot and talk like an idiot but don’t let that fool you. He really is an idiot.” 

Something along these lines should be our reaction to those who display their basic distrust of state orders and see the lockdowns as a conspiracy of the state power which uses the epidemics as a pretext to deprive us of our basic freedoms: “The state is imposing lockdowns which deprive us of our freedoms, and it expects us to control each other in how we obey this order; but this should not fool us, we should really follow the lockdown orders.”

One should note how calls to abolish lockdowns come from the opposite ends of the traditional political spectrum. In the US, they are propelled by libertarian Rightists, while in Germany, small Leftist groups advocate them. In both cases, medical knowledge is criticized as a tool of disciplining people, treating them as helpless victims who should be isolated for their own good. What is not difficult to discover beneath this critical stance is the stance of not-wanting-to-know: if we ignore the threat, it will not be so bad, we’ll manage to pass through it…

The US libertarian Right claims lockdowns should be eased so that people will be given back their freedom of choice. But what choice is it?

As Robert Reich wrote: “Trump’s labor department has decided that furloughed employees ‘must accept’ an employer’s offer to return to work and therefore forfeit unemployment benefits, regardless of Covid-19… Forcing people to choose between getting Covid-19 or losing their livelihood is inhumane.” So yes, it is a freedom of choice: between starvation and risking your life… We are in a situation similar to that which occured in British coal mines in the 18th century (to name just one) where doing your work involved a considerable risk of losing your life.

But there is a different kind of admitting ignorance which sustains the severe imposition of lockdowns. It’s not that the state power exploits the epidemics to impose total control – I more and more think there is a kind of superstitious symbolic act at work here: if we make a strong gesture of sacrifice that really hurts and brings our entire social life to a standstill, we can maybe expect mercy.

When will this epidemic end and what will happen afterwards?

The surprising fact is how little we (including the scientists) seem to know about how the epidemics works. Quite often we get contradictory advice from authorities. We get strict instructions to self-isolate in order to avoid viral contamination, but when the infection numbers are falling, the fear arises that, in this way, we are just making ourselves more vulnerable to the expected second wave of the viral attack. Or are we counting on the hope that the vaccine will be here before the next wave? But there are already different variations of the virus, will one vaccine cover them all? All the hopes for a quick exit (summer heat, fast spread of herd immunity, vaccine…) are fading away.

One often hears that the epidemics will compel us in the West to change the way we relate to death, to really accept our mortality and the fragility of our existence – out of nowhere a virus comes and our life is over.

This is why, we are told, in the East, people are taking the epidemics much better – just as a part of life, of the way things are. We in the West less and less accept death as part of life, we see it as an intrusion of something foreign which you can indefinitely postpone if you lead a healthy life, exercise, follow a diet, avoid traumas…

I’ve never trusted this story. In some sense, death is not a part of life, it is something unimaginable, something that shouldn’t happen to me. I am never really ready to die, except to escape unbearable suffering. That’s why these days many of us focus every day on the same magic numbers: how many new infections, how many full recoveries, how many new deaths… but horrible as these numbers are, does our exclusive focus on them not make us ignore a much greater number of people who are at this moment dying of cancer, of a painful heart attack? Outside the virus, it’s not just life, it’s also dying and death. What about a comparative list of numbers: today, so many people got the virus and cancer; so many died of the virus and of cancer; so many recuperated from the virus and from cancer?

One should change our imaginary here and stop expecting one big clear peak after which things will gradually return to normal. What makes the epidemics so unbearable is that even if the full catastrophe fails to appear, things just drag on, we are informed that we reached the plateau, then things go a little bit better, but… the crisis just drags on.

As Alenka Zupančič put it, the problem with the end of the world is the same as with Fukuyama’s end of history: the end itself doesn’t end, we just get stuck in a weird immobility. The secret wish of all of us, what we think about all the time, is just one thing: when will it end? But it will not end: it is reasonable to see the ongoing epidemics as announcing a new period of ecological troubles – back in 2017, the BBC portrayed what might be waiting for us due to the ways we intervene in nature: “Climate change is melting permafrost soils that have been frozen for thousands of years, and as the soils melt they are releasing ancient viruses and bacteria that, having lain dormant, are springing back to life.”

Eventual rise of Singularity

The special irony of this no-end-in-view is that the epidemics occurred at a time when pop-scientific media were obsessed with two aspects of the digitalization of our lives. On the one hand, a lot is being written about the new phase of capitalism called ‘surveillance capitalism’: a total digital control over our lives exerted by state agencies and private corporations. On the other hand, the media are fascinated by the topic of direct brain-machine interface (‘wired brain’).

First, when our brain is connected to digital machines, we can cause things to happen in reality just by thinking about them. Then, my brain is directly connected to another brain, so that another individual can directly share my experience. Extrapolated to its extreme, wired brain opens up the prospect of what Ray Kurzweil called Singularity, the divine-like global space of shared global awareness. Whatever the (dubious, for the time being) scientific status of this idea, it is clear that its realization will affect the basic features of humans as thinking/speaking beings. The eventual rise of Singularity will be apocalyptic in the complex meaning of the term – it will imply the encounter with a truth hidden in our ordinary human existence, i.e. the entrance into a new post-human dimension.

It is interesting to note that the extensive use of surveillance was quietly accepted: drones were used not only in China but also in Italy and Spain. As for the spiritual vision of Singularity, the new direct unity of the human and the divine, a bliss in which we leave behind the limits of our corporeal existence, can well turn out to be a new unimaginable nightmare. From a critical standpoint, it is difficult to decide which is worse (a greater threat to humanity), the viral devastation of our lives or the loss of our individuality in Singularity. Epidemics remind us that we remain firmly rooted in bodily existence with all the dangers that this implies.

We will have to invent a new way of life

Does this mean our situation is hopeless? Absolutely not. There are immense, almost unimaginable troubles ahead, there will be millions of newly jobless people, etc. A new way of life will have to be invented. One thing is clear: in a lockdown, we live off the old stocks of food and other provisions, so the difficult task is now to step out of the lockdown and invent a new life under viral conditions.

Just think about how what is fiction and what is reality will change. Movies and TV series which take place in our ordinary reality, with people freely strolling along streets, shaking hands and embracing, will become nostalgic images of a lost past world, while our real life will look like a variation of Samuel Beckett’s late play called Play where we see on stage, touching one another, three identical grey urns; from each urn a head protrudes, the neck held fast in the urn’s mouth…

However, if one takes a naïve look at things from a proper distance (which is very difficult), it is clear that our global society has enough resources to coordinate our survival and organize a more modest way of life, with local food shortages compensated by global cooperation, and with global healthcare better prepared for the next onslaughts.

Will we be able to do this? Or will we enter a new barbarian age in which our attention to the health crisis will just enable old (cold and hot) conflicts to go on out of the sight of the global public? Note the reignited cold war between the US and China, not to mention actual hot wars in Syria, Afghanistan, and elsewhere, which function like the virus: they just drag on for years and years… (Note how Macron’s call for a world-wide truce for the time of the epidemic was flatly ignored.) This decision which way we take concerns neither science nor medicine; it is a properly political one.

Source and Image: https://www.rt.com/op-ed/487713-slavoj-zizek-epidemics-covid/

Comparte este contenido:

South Africa’s deficient education system

South Africa  /News 24

South Africa’s deficient education system is the single greatest obstacle to socio-economic advancement, replicating rather than reversing patterns of unemployment, poverty, and inequality, and effectively denying the majority of young people the chance of a middle-class life.

This emerges from a report, ‘Education the single greatest obstacle to socio-economic advancement in South Africa’, published by the Centre for Risk Analysis (CRA) at the Institute of Race Relations (IRR).

Set against data showing high rates of urbanisation – reflecting a common yearning for better-paying jobs, and a shot at middle-class life in a city – as well as a marked shift in the structure of the economy towards high-skills sectors, the research at once underscores the vital importance of education, and the devastating impacts of its most chronic deficiencies.

A new approach to schooling is urgently needed, according to author of the report, CRA director Frans Cronje, and should focus on achieving much higher levels of parental involvement and control, rather than bureaucratic control.

«On the strength of our experience and analysis», he says, «the quickest way to a much-improved education system would be to greatly strengthen the scope for School Governing Bodies and communities to control schools and exert their influence in the interests of their children».

The report acknowledges that much, in fact, has changed for the better in recent decades.

Positive outcomes include the fact that pre-school enrolment has soared by 270.4% since 2000, setting a much better basis for future school throughput, that the proportion of people aged 20 or older with no schooling has fallen from 13% in 1995 to 4.8% in 2016, and that the proportion of matric candidates receiving a bachelor’s pass has increased from 20.1% in 2008 to 28.7% last year.

The good news doesn’t end there.

Higher education participation rates (the proportion of 20–24 year olds enrolled in higher education) have risen from 15.4% in 2002 to 18.6% in 2015, with university enrolment numbers climbing 289.5% since 1985 and more than 100% since 1995.

The ratio of white to black university graduates was 3.7:1 in 1991, narrowing to 0.3:1 in 2015, and the proportion of people aged 20 and older with a degree has increased from 2.9% in 1995 to 4.9% in 2016.

But, in just short of a dozen bullet points, the grimmer side of South African education is laid bare:

  • Just under half of children who enrol in grade one will make it to Grade 12;
  • Roughly 20% of Grade 9, 10, and 11 pupils are repeaters, suggesting that they have been poorly prepared in the early grades of the school system;
  • Just 28% of people aged 20 or older have completed high school;
  • Just 3.1% of Black people over the age of 20 have a university degree compared to 13.9% and 18.3% for Indian and White people;
  • Just 6.9% of matric candidates will pass Maths with a grade of 70% to 100% – a smaller proportion than in 2008 (bearing in mind that, once the near 50% pre-matric drop-out rate is factored in, this means that around three out of 100 children will pass Maths in matric with such a grade);
  • The ratio of Maths Literacy (a B-grade Maths option) to Maths candidates in matric has changed from 0.9:1 in 2008 to 1.5:1 in 2016;
  • In the poorest quintile of schools, less than one out of 100 matric candidates will receive a distinction in maths;
  • In the richest quintile, that figure is just 9.7%;
  • Just one in three schools has a library and one in five a science laboratory;
  • The Black higher education participation rate is just 15.6%, while that for Indian and White people (aged 20–24) is 49.3% and 52.8%; and
  • The unemployment rate for tertiary qualified professionals has increased from 7.7% in 2008 to 13,2% today.

Author Frans Cronje notes: «The data makes it clear that education or the lack thereof is the primary indicator that determines the living standards trajectory of a young South African.

«In the second quarter of 2017, the unemployment rate for a tertiary qualified person was 13.2% – less than half the national average of 27.7%. Likewise, the labour market absorption rate for tertiary qualified professionals was 75.6% in 2017 as opposed to just 43.3% for the country as a whole.»

Three factors were particularly worrying.

«The first is the poor quality of Maths education. A good Maths pass in matric is in all probability the most important marker in determining whether a young person will enter the middle classes. While Maths education is poor across the board, the quality is worse in the poorest quintile of schools, leaving no doubt that school education is replicating trends of poverty and inequality in our society.»

The second is the low rate of tertiary education participation among black people.

Cronje warns that «it is futile to think that significant middle-class expansion, let alone demographic transformation, will take place as long as the higher education participation rate remains at around 15% for Black people».

The third is the «still very high» school drop-out rate.

«Just over half of [the] children will complete high school at all. In an economy that is evolving in favour of high-skilled tertiary industries and in which political pressure and policy are being used to drive up the cost of unskilled labour, this means that the majority of those children are unlikely to ever find gainful employment,» Cronje writes.

Putting these three concerns together, «you cannot escape the conclusion that the education system represents the single greatest obstacle to socio-economic advancement in South Africa».

«It replicates patterns of unemployment, poverty, and inequality and denies the majority of young people the chance of a middle-class life,» Cronje concludes. «The implications speak for themselves.»

– Morris is head of media at the Institute of Race Relations (IRR).

Fuente: https://www.news24.com/Analysis/south-africas-deficient-education-system-20180507

Comparte este contenido: