There are those who point out that the low geographical labor mobility weighs down Europe’s productivity and the competitiveness of its companies compared to other continents. Some suggest that the low predisposition to change of workplace hinders the professional progression of people. But it is also true that the prevailing socio-economic model in different European countries has been more humane, more equitable and more stable than, for example, in the US.
Returning home may involve some sacrifices in the form of travel time from residence to workplace, especially in the metropolises of the country. But many satisfactions are also experienced in terms of family and neighborhood coexistence.
There are those who point out that the low geographical labor mobility weighs down Europe’s productivity and the competitiveness of its companies compared to other continents. Can be.
Some suggest that the low predisposition to change of workplace for reasons of geographical distance hinders the professional progression of people. It is also possible.
But it is also true that the protectionist socio-economic model prevailing until today in the different European countries has been more equitable and more stable than, for example, in the United States.
I am not an interventionist, but the current crisis tells us that it is worthwhile to have control and forecasting mechanisms to complement the desirable interest in growth and healthy competitiveness with limits defined by the common good and not the interest of speculative minorities .
Less aggressive growth and liquid innovation, in exchange for more security and equality. However, now that fierce, deregulated capitalism has been presented to us as unsustainable and unjust, we also have to ask ourselves why low mobility affects some social groups more than others.
Why are there more “mobile” men than women? Why are “mobile” women to a greater extent single and have fewer children than mobile men? Why are university students more “mobile” than those with less education?
The answer lies in the globalization of the economy and in the changes in values among the new generations.
In a free market system and particularly in a knowledge economy, human capital becomes a main resource and, therefore, it is part of the competitive advantages of companies and nations to have the best, in terms of training. or attitude.
On the other hand, there are more and more young people, of both sexes, who are willing to give up some of the advantages of a sedentary life in exchange for learning about new social environments and the experience of progressing professionally from the change of employment. Although the new occupation is located in the antipodes of the place of birth.
What seems clear is that if there is an interest in geographical mobility, it can be stimulating, because of what it represents for personal and professional growth.
On the other hand, if geographic change is the only alternative to survival, we should see that it does not always affect the most vulnerable groups and that other indigenous options may exist.
Nomads or sedentary. For me the important thing is that each person can freely choose their option and with equal opportunities.