Before you buy the story that any industry or job deemed “green” is the key to economic prosperity, take a minute to read today’s Carolina Journal column by Locke Foundation President John Hood. He explains the key findings of a new study by researchers who delved into the “green” issue. The results may surprise you – or maybe not. From Hood’s column:
Yes the authors said that “special interests†were behind the green-collar hype. Don’t be so shocked. There’s always someone behind these terminological fads – an author, journalist, huckster, or bailout-seeker – who stand to gain from their widespread acceptance.
Here are the seven key points made in the paper:
• No standard definition of a green job exists.
• Predictions of green-job creation include many administrative, clerical, and regulatory-compliance positions that have little to do with producing goods and services for production.
• Most predictions of green-job creation are fanciful, based on faulty economic models and dubious assumptions.
• By promoting more jobs instead of higher productivity, “green jobs†programs actually encourage low-wage employment in less desirable conditions.
• By discouraging workers in particular communities, states, and countries from focusing on what they are best at, “green jobs†programs will make people poorer, not wealthier.
• Government mandates are an ineffective means of encourage the efficient use of resources.
• Many of the technologies assumed in “green jobs†programs can’t be productively employed at the scale envisioned by their advocates.
Remember these findings the next time an elected official or “green” jobs advocate tries to sell you on a plan to “invest” heavily — that means spend and mandate via law or regulation — in a pet project they’ve decided to deem “green.”
