Just how many jobs are affected is unclear; there are no definitive statistics. Economist Harry Holzer of Georgetown University thinks the unemployment rate might be closer to 8 percent than today’s 9.1 percent if most of these jobs were filled. That implies up to 1.5 million more jobs.

Economist Prakash Loungani of the International Monetary Fund estimates that 25 percent of unemployment is structural; that’s more than 3 million jobs. A recent survey of 2,000 firms by the McKinsey Global Institute, a research group, found that 40 percent had positions open at least six months because they couldn’t find suitable candidates. …

Some highly specialized jobs are inherently hard to fill: say, a transportation engineer fluent in both Chinese and English (a real-life example).  …

In any dynamic economy, constant changes in technologies, products and companies naturally create gaps between skills available and skills wanted. But today’s gaps seem to transcend this. A survey for the National Association of Manufacturers in 2009, near the recession’s nadir, found that a third of companies still faced shortages. These were largest for engineers and scientists and among aerospace, defense and biotechnology firms.

Theories abound as to what’s gone wrong. For skilled blue-collar jobs, high schools have de-emphasized vocational training, community colleges often aren’t well-connected to local job markets and union apprenticeship programs have withered, says Anthony Carnevale, director of Georgetown’s Center on Education and the Workforce. Another theory is that Americans are less willing to move to take jobs. The McKinsey study reports that, in the 1950s, one in five Americans moved every year; now it’s one in 10. “Work is more mobile than workers,” says Camden.

Michael Spence, a 2001 Nobel laureate in economics, has his own explanation of structural unemployment – a mismatch between the "nontradable" side of the economy (goods and services such as healthcare and hospitality that are consumed where they are produced) and the "tradable" side of the economy (which includes manufactured goods that are exported).

[S]everal factors will depress [nontradable] sectors. Government budget woes, a likely leveling-out of the dramatic growth in health-care consumption, and a permanent reduction in domestic consumption as asset prices reset downward and debt-financed purchases are reduced, will all have effects in the short-to-medium term. …

While finance, consulting, computer design and managing complex international businesses all fueled job growth for 20 years, these gains were matched by declines in the manufacturing jobs held by the middle class. The very things that propped up our tradable sectors through the export market - high growth rates in emerging economies and a more educated consumer class in those countries - have challenged middle-class U.S. employees on the job front. Emerging markets are now increasingly moving up the value chain with improved skills, and it's likely that higher-paying jobs - including design and even product development - will move abroad in ever greater numbers. …

A stimulus package that temporarily restores elements of precrisis demand is unlikely to generate the escape velocity needed to get out of the jobs hole. Nontradable job growth can't mask the declines in the tradable sector any more. The structural problem demands a structural answer.

Rebuilding the employment engine requires shifts in policy and process. On the policy side, we must expand the scope of the tradable sector. A short list of steps would include investments in infrastructure and education reform that emphasizes teaching productive skills, for example in advanced manufacturing sectors. Tax reform should aim for simplification and the elimination of biases against domestic investment for our multinational firms. It should also aim to help raise savings rates so we can finance our own investment. A value-added tax with an exemption for exports would enhance competitiveness. An energy policy focused on efficiency and security would create opportunities for investment and growth.

† Hate Crime or Home-Grown Terrorism? Either Way, CAIR Doesn’t Care: The Internal Revenue Service has stripped the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) of its tax-exempt status, which means that donors can no longer deduct contributions to the group. CAIR, an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas-financing prosecution, was one of 275,000 groups losing tax-exempt status for repeatedly failing to file Form 990 detailing donations, other income, operating expenses, and names of directors and key staffers and how much they were paid, reports The Investigative Project On Terrorism:

CAIR had been a non-profit on its own, but in 2007, the IRS approved a separate tax-exempt CAIR Foundation. The foundation never filed any subsequent reports. Both the foundation and CAIR national are on the purge list.

CAIR has 30 state chapters throughout the country, many of which have their own non-profit designations which remain active.

While the IRS believes most of the organizations stripped of status have shut down, those still operating can apply for reinstatement. Meanwhile, CAIR's web site continues to solicit donations by touting them as tax deductible two weeks after the IRS issued the list and notifications were sent to all 275,000 purged groups.

Donors still could deduct the money on their tax returns if CAIR is reinstated between now and April 15. All the purged organizations have 15 months to seek reinstatement. But it is unclear whether CAIR will file the required papers or whether their explanation about past reporting failures will be enough to satisfy the IRS. …

To regain its exempt status, CAIR must file the missing three annual reports, along with a new application for exempt status. Finally, it must explain why it failed to file the 990s for three consecutive years and explain any new procedures which will ensure future compliance.

† Media Irrelevancy – A Self-Inflicted Wound: Mediaite’s Lizzie Manning “spent a lot of time reading through Sarah Palin’s pretty much completely uninteresting emails last week” that “proved that she was running a functional government,” but was particularly touched by the e-mail she wrote before the birth of her son Trig, because “[i]t’s not very often that you see anyone discussing the issues Palin does in that email”:

In reading Palin’s opinions on her child and special needs children in general, it struck me that these aren’t things that we hear about very often, or really at all, in the media. Yet, 15% of the world’s population is disabled. Where are the stories about these people?

The only stories we hear about in the media are shocking and sensationalist. For example, this man recently made news for forcing a mentally disabled woman into prostitution. Stories of violence and mistreatment of the handicapped are what are making the news. Are they completely horrible? Absolutely. They turn my stomach every time I see them. But they don’t directly address the bigger issues that the handicapped are facing in America, which essentially boil down to a lack of federal funding.

Many insurance companies exclude certain disabilities from coverage because they expect that the state will pick up the costs. So, when states make cuts to programs that support the disabled, the families of the disabled have to pick up the tab. Health care without insurance is not cheap and generally speaking, those who are handicapped suffer from more health problems than the average person. …

In addition, there are obvious stigmas attached to being handicapped; physical limitations, medical problems and a host of other issues. But perhaps the biggest issue the disabled are facing is that they lack a voice. The media isn’t covering their stories in the way that they should. There are not nearly enough advocates for the handicapped. …

The disabled won’t get the support they need until they have multiple voices on their side. The media can help with this: we all need to become more comfortable discussing disabilities. Only then will we gain the capacity to confront the issues and change them.

† Why The Electric Car Will Be A Nonstarter (second item): After 20 years of manufacturing lithium-ion battery-powered electric-vehicles in Norway, Think Global has filed for bankruptcy, having been on shaky ground since being spun off by Ford Motor Co., which owned the company from 1999 to 2003, Los Angeles Times reports:

A court-appointed trustee will manage the company in the interests of creditors, the company said in a statement. …

The all-electric, zero-emission cars can travel 100 miles on a single charge, using lithium-ion batteries made in Indiana, Think said.

But with a price tag above $30,000, the tiny urban car has had to compete against other clean-tech vehicles such as the Nissan leaf [sic] and the Chevrolet Volt. Just a few months ago, Think began delivering its first vehicles to the U.S. and had planned to expand the rollout later this year.

A North American subsidiary based in Dearborn, Mich., is not included in the bankruptcy, though the trustee will eventually decide the unit's fate.

In May, the U.S. federal government purchased 116 electric vehicles – some of them Think Cities – for distribution to 20 agencies, including the U.S. Department of Energy and Department of Defense.

† What It’s Like To Live In The Bronx: Bronx-born history buff Hank Stroobants is “hopelessly in love” with his Williamsbridge roots. Having retired as a counselor at the Borough of Manhattan Community College, he spends his days speaking at local schools and conducting walking tours of the area around E. 233rd Street, where he grew up. Because of his efforts, a neglected, graffiti-covered WWI monument has been restored and the 32 servicemen from The Bronx it commemorates have been properly honored for their sacrifice, reports the New York Daily News:

When [East Bronx History Forum] President Bill Twomey encouraged each member to do something that would help preserve their neighborhood's history, Stroobants decided to adopt the Williamsbridge Memorial Monument on Bronx Blvd. …

In 2008, the city Parks Department cleaned it up and added a brick walkway. Since the cleanup, Stroobants claims that the monument "takes care of itself," but he still makes daily visits to make sure it continues. And so far, it has.

This past Memorial Day, in an attempt to give more attention to the Bronx Blvd. monument, Stroobants enlisted the help of Boy Scouts for a wreath-laying ceremony.

With about a dozen people in attendance, the Scouts recited the Pledge of Allegiance, read the names of the fallen listed in the monument, sang "God Bless America" and tied a wreath of flowers around the structure's base.

Stroobants never married or had children. He lives in Yonkers but says, "I'm a Bronx boy, I'll always be a Bronx boy."

† Updates To Previous Posts (fifth item, BAM To DOJ: KSM In NYC Is DOA): Brig. Gen. Mark Martins, a Harvard Law School graduate who is commander of the Rule of Law Field Force in Afghanistan, has been appointed chief prosecutor in the Office of Military Commissions, and will try Khalid Sheik Mohammed and four co-defendants who were re-charged last month for their roles in the September 11, 2001, attacks, The Washington Post reports:

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. reluctantly returned the prosecution of Mohammed and the other defendants to the military after the Obama administration’s plans to hold a trial in federal court in New York ran into fierce congressional and local opposition.

Military prosecutors also recently charged Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, one of 15 high-value detainees at the U.S. military detention center, with murder, terrorism and other violations of war in connection with the October 2000 attack on the USS Cole in Yemen.

With the administration unable to prosecute Guantanamo detainees in civilian court because of congressional opposition, there are likely to be a significant number of military commissions at Guantanamo. An interagency task force that examined the cases of all Guantanamo detainees had recommended that 36 should be prosecuted in federal court or military commissions. …

Administration officials have said that they want to pick up the pace, and Army insiders said Martins is a driven officer who has served with distinction on sometimes punishing assignments.

† Updates To Previous Posts (last item, Is Hasan A Crazy Terrorist, Or A Terrorist Crazy?): In his review of "Jihad Joe," by Intelwire.com  founder J.M. Berger, New York Times national security reporter Scott Shane includes this nugget suggesting that the Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan was not the first avowed jihadi inducted into the U.S. Army:  

J. M. Berger’s “Jihad Joe,” a sober, factual account of the Americans who have been lured to the cause of religious violence, offers a useful reminder that this phenomenon is nothing new, long predating the Sept. 11 attacks. At least two Americans were at the siege of Mecca by extremists in 1979, often viewed as the beginning of modern violent jihad. One was present at the creation of Al Qaeda in 1988, according to Berger, a journalist and terrorism researcher who runs the Web site Intelwire.com.  …

“Jihad Joe” describes how a handful of zealots gradually shifted their focus from Bosnia and other objectives overseas to the United States.

Especially striking is the story of Ali Mohamed, the former Egyptian Army officer who, before moving to America, was recruited by Ayman al-Zawahri, the eventual second in command of Al Qaeda. After being rebuffed in his attempt to infiltrate the C.I.A., Mohamed enlisted in the United States Army in 1986 and soon became a trainer for elite Special Operations troops at Fort Bragg.

Sgt. Mohamed, who spoke English, French and Hebrew in addition to Arabic, hardly bothered to hide his views, stating in a military training film that as a Muslim he was obligated to impose Islamic law everywhere. When the F.B.I. finally searched his California home in 1998, they found Qaeda manuals and intelligence reports, coded letters and instructions on making explosives, Berger says.

† Updates To Previous Posts (penultimate item, Dutch Dhimmitude): Dutch MP Geert Wilders, who heads the populist Freedom Party, was acquitted of inciting hatred of Muslims, Reuters reports in a news article that’s riddled through and through with editorializing (the court ruling “may strengthen his political influence and exacerbate tensions” and “could embolden Wilders further”) and snarky slams (“recognizable by his mane of dyed blond hair”) meant to delegitimize Wilders and his victory:

Wilders, 47, is one of the most outspoken critics of Islam and immigration in the Netherlands.

His Freedom Party is now the third-largest in parliament, a measure of support for its anti-immigrant stance, and is the minority government's chief ally. But many of Wilders' comments - such as likening Islam to Nazism - are socially divisive.

The presiding judge said Wilders' remarks were sometimes "hurtful," "shocking" or "offensive," but that they were made in the context of a public debate about Muslim integration and multi-culturalism, and therefore not a criminal act.

"I am extremely pleased and happy," Wilders told reporters after the ruling. "This is not so much a win for myself, but a victory for freedom of speech. Fortunately you can criticize Islam and not be gagged in public debate." …

Farid Azarkan of the SMN association of Moroccans in the Netherlands said he feared the acquittal could further split Dutch society and encourage others to repeat Wilders' comments. …

Minorities groups said they would now take the case to the United Nations Human Rights Committee, arguing the ruling meant the Netherlands had failed to protect ethnic minorities from discrimination.

"The acquittal means that the right of minorities to remain free of hate speech has been breached. We are going to claim our rights at the U.N.," said Mohamed Rabbae of the National Council for Moroccans.

Wilders, who has received numerous death threats and has to live under 24-hour guard, argued that he was exercising his right to freedom of speech when criticizing Islam.

† Updates To Previous Posts (eighth item, Multiculturalism: Jihad By Other Means): In this New York Times op-ed, University of Chicago assistant professor of law Aziz Huq, whose "teaching and research interests include constitutional law, national security law, and federal courts" makes a not-so-veiled threat that the Department of Justice must vigorously opposes state laws banning Sharia law in U.S. courts or the result will be “a significant threat to national security”: 
 

[T]he bans would deprive Muslims of equal access to the law. A butcher would no longer be able to enforce his contract for halal meat - contracts that, like deals for kosher or other faith-sanctioned foods, are regularly enforced around the country. Nor could a Muslim banker seek damages for violations of a financial instrument certified as “Sharia compliant” since it pays no interest.