About two years ago I got into a discussion with someone who consulted state and local politicians and businesses about the economies in southern states, including North Carolina. I expressed to him then my concern that the South is overvalued because the native workforce does not have the education and skills needed for current jobs and jobs of the future. In other words, North Carolina does not have a sufficient number of people with the skills needed by companies in today's global economy, and is not producing enough high school and college graduates with the skills needed to fill the needs of an increasingly technologically-oriented workplace. This deters firms from moving to NC, and those companies that have already moved operations to the state will find it increasingly difficult to find a sufficient number of skilled workers in order to maintain its operations.
My friend disagreed, arguing that you can always move people to the state. Yes, and I'm sure that works best for many positions--a company will find more qualified people and insource them to the job. But for the vast majority of rank-and-file jobs, if a company has to hire outside the local area, it becomes less and less profitable to operate in a given location. This is one reason companies have plants in different locations, some of them with global operations.
Here is an example of what I am talking about from about seven years ago after Toyota decided to build a new North American plant in Woodstock, Ontario rather than in the U.S.
Several U.S. states were reportedly prepared to offer more than double [the $125 million] subsidy [offered by the Canadian and provincial governments]. But Fedchun said much of that extra money would have been eaten away by higher training costs than are necessary for the Woodstock project.
He said Nissan and Honda have encountered difficulties getting new plants up to full production in recent years in Mississippi and Alabama due to an untrained - and often illiterate - workforce. In Alabama, trainers had to use "pictorials" to teach some illiterate workers how to use high-tech plant equipment.
"The educational level and the skill level of the people down there is so much lower than it is in Ontario," Fedchun said.
Today's Triangle Business Journal confirms my argument.
In 2011, 38.6 percent of young adults in North Carolina held at least a two-year degree. That’s below the national average of 40.1 percent.
“North Carolina needs a bigger and more talented work force to succeed, but the demands of the 21st century will not be met without a high-quality 21st century education,” Merisotis says.
I disagree with this recommendation.
That means creating new models of financial support for students and developing new higher education and business and finance models. A new system of credentials and credits would be created that focuses on learning and competencies rather than time spent in the classroom.
You can always lead a horse to water, but you can never force it to drink. We increased significantly the mass credentialing of people with college diplomas for nearly sixty years now, ever since the Soviets launched Sputnik. It has not proven a worthwhile investment. And the incentive to spend time with training and learning new skills will only get worse as long as the safety net for those who refuse becomes more and more like a hammock, decreasing the cost to not attaining higher skills. Furthermore, we continue raising generations of kids with an entitlement mentality, who feel entitled to whatever they want for little to no effort, and who lack an understanding of what it means to create true social value. (Can anyone say "Service learning"?)