Skilled Workforce in the United StatesOn January 28, 2014, President Barack Obama delivered his attention-grabbing State of the Union address on many of the issues he would try to resolve as president. He was able to do this by highlighting many issues currently facing the American people, including the Medicare law and reducing the national deficit. However, perhaps the most critical point that President Obama would like to highlight in his speech would concern the creation of manufacturing innovation institutes in the United States. These establishments would be learning institutions that would teach manufacturing workers certain skills that would set them apart from foreign competition. According to President Obama, this would significantly reduce the displacement of manufacturing jobs and dramatically lower the unemployment rate in the United States. However, the Obama administration's plan will not allow these facilities to be used to significantly lower the unemployment rate because; the additional training provided to workers by these establishments increases their earning potential making them less desirable to manufacturing companies, and these establishments would provide an influx of skilled workers in certain industries, thus saturating the market and leading to even higher unemployment. Therefore, an attempt to lower unemployment rates in the United States would be best served by a plan in which sanctions were imposed on industries that ship their manufacturing labor to foreign factories. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay To fully understand the issue, it is important to closely analyze the text of President Obama's speech and make clear the reasons why he approved this plan. President Obama began this portion of the speech by providing some background regarding the importance of reducing unemployment in manufacturing when he said, “Listen, China and Europe are not sitting on the sidelines; and neither should we. We know that the nation that focuses on innovation today will own the global economy tomorrow. This is an advantage America cannot give up. Federally funded research helped uncover the ideas and inventions behind Google and smartphones. And that's why Congress should repair the damage done by last year's cuts to basic research, so we can unleash America's next great discovery." (State of the Union, 6) Obama used this vague statement to convey the importance of his next message, however far more important were the strategic action points he addressed that would help these manufacturing institutions grow and prosper . An important aspect of this plan that President Obama addresses is his hope to partner these plants, such as the one just opened in Youngstown, Ohio, with certain federal industries in order to provide business to the newly opened plants. President Obama and these supporters believe that this would provide substantial support to the plant industry, thus enabling their success. Another important aspect of this aspect of President Obama's State of the Union is a networking plan that would allow these establishments to work together to achieve common success. These are just some of the factors that the Obama administration believes will allow these plants to succeed and rejuvenate industrial production in theUnited States. Following President Obama's State of the Union address, he gained widespread support for this plan. Supporters of the plan include Senator Sherrod Brown of Cleveland, who claims that this plan will “bring jobs back to America” (Carpenter, 3). Other supporters of this plan have cited its ability to create jobs by matching it with the manufacturing needs of industries such as the Department of Defense. Furthermore, President Obama and his supporters have often cited the Youngstown, Ohio, plant and its landmark success as justification for opening many of these plants in high-unemployment areas of the United States. In response to the State of the Union address, Pennsylvania legislator Martin Causer expressed his delight at the possibility of one of these manufacturing facilities being built in his Congressional district when he stated that “rural areas have the opportunity to be brought back to life by these plants, an influx of manufacturing jobs can do wonders for an area.” (Carpenter, 4). While they are right that opening these manufacturing facilities could have dramatic economic repercussions for an area, the Obama administration and others who support this plan overlook the extreme ineffectiveness of this plan on a national scale. Despite the numerous benefits of the Obama administration's aforementioned manufacturing recovery plan highlighted by liberals like Causer, this plan will not lead to a significant decrease in unemployment rates. The reason for this is that, although President Obama's plan has the potential to ensure the success of industrial plants, this will not correlate with success in reducing unemployment of US workers. One of the main reasons for this is that the additional training provided to workers by these factories increases their earning potential making them less desirable to manufacturing companies. While the plant itself provides jobs for those who currently work there, the primary value of the plant according to President Obama lies in its ability to provide skilled American labor. This comment explains the main problem with this plan in that allowing those who work in the plant to become skilled producers would absolutely not lead to less displacement of manufacturing jobs since most manufacturing jobs are performed by unskilled workers. Thus the Obama administration's plan would not alleviate the displacement of manufacturing jobs because the jobs outsourced are much more likely to be jobs that could be completed by unskilled workers. Rather, a dramatic increase in skilled labor would actually lead to an increase in industrial jobs being sent to other nations. This irony stems from the fact that the most common reason industrial jobs are sent overseas is not because the foreign workforce is more skilled, but rather that they receive lower wages. Therefore, by creating a larger skilled workforce, which according to US laws must increase their earning potential, President Obama's main goal in using these facilities actually has the opposite effect. Congressman Tim Ryan expressed his doubts about the effectiveness of this plan when he stated that “by increasing the earning potential of the industrial workforce of the United States, President Obama is hindering them” (Skolnick, 2). He then went on to state that “if these plants continue to be built and produce skilled workers, the jobsthey will continue to be deported abroad at an alarming rate.” (Skolnick, 2). Of particular concern are Congressman Ryan's fears that this plan may actually have a negative impact on unemployment rates due to the creation of a large skilled workforce. For example, the “National Current Employment Statistics” recently released by the U.S. Department of Labor outlines a disturbing trend that helps explain the concerns of people like Congressman Ryan. One of these statistical trends is the fact that almost 60% of unemployed skilled workers towards the end of 2013 were unskilled workers. (DOL) This is important because it shows how much of the unemployment problem stems from a lack of jobs for unskilled workers. This obviously could not be solved by plants like the one in Youngtown as they hope to introduce a class of skilled workers into an environment that has no need for them. In response to this claim, supporters of the Obama administration's plan for these factories argue that by creating this class of skilled workers, it would provide them with a skill set that would allow them to escape the 60 percent of unemployed unskilled workers. However, another set of statistics from the Department of Labor sheds a revealing light on whether this method of thinking is actually beneficial to these unemployed workers. For example, another piece of employment statistics shows that less than 4% of skilled jobs in the United States were available at any time during fiscal year 2013 (DOL, 1). This is critical because it shows how factories like the one in Youngstown are creating a class of skilled workers in a market where there is simply no need for their labor. Furthermore, the Obama administration would surely position the factories themselves as a source of available work for this newfound skilled workforce; however, these factories with these government contracts are simply taking business and therefore jobs away from other skilled labor factories that currently held these government contracts. This is a particularly troubling issue surrounding the Obama administration's plan for factories like the one in Youngtown, Ohio. Another troubling issue that may arise as a result of President Obama's plan to establish more of these government plants is that these plants will provide an influx of skilled workers in certain industries, thus saturating the market and leading to even higher unemployment among the unskilled workers. That is, the increase in skilled workers created by these manufacturing institutions will actually harm the nation's economic recovery as too many skilled producers will compete for far more skilled manufacturing jobs. Thus, by helping these workers acquire better training, this would also allow them to cost themselves unemployment. Therefore, while Obama's plan would most likely succeed in creating a new class of skilled workers, there are other possible options that could better ensure that this class of skilled workers is able to find stable work. While it is easy to decipher the problems within the Obama administration's jobs plans, a much more challenging task comes from developing a plan that can actually significantly reduce unemployment rates in the United States. One action plan that would have a significant effect in reducing unemployment rates in the United States would be to.