Regarding individuals - yes, we have to continuously improve our value and as someone once said we have to learn to "thrive on chaos." Sadly, our public educational system, our politics and our modern popular culture has failed to prepare and guide our population to the kinds of career fields, skills, geographic locations and continuous improvement behavior that are "valued in the market" -- our global, ever-changing technological labor marketplace.

Regrading unions - while it may not sound like it, the significance of this recommendation is huge. The number one concerns U.S. employers have with union are the burdens they place on efficiency and operations.

In today's globally competitive marketplace here and aboard, employers have to be in a position to meet customers' expectations increasingly faster, better and cheaper. Unions -- in an effort to save jobs, reduce stressful change on workers -- resist technological labor-saving and work process improvements at every opportunity. Union supported "restrictive work practices" are the "heavy costs" the authors are referring to.

Regarding government - the authors are suggesting that government should focus on helping workers keep pace with the rapidly advancing needs of today's modern workplace, help displaced workers with re-training for the jobs that are actually needed and with re-location assistance to where the jobs are actually located.

The authors are suggesting that emphasizing income maintenance (unemployment payments) that encourages workers to remain in declining employment sectors or to remain in depressed geographic regions -- in the hopes that their high paying jobs will return -- is a mistake.

Regarding employers - employers have to do their part to make their businesses competitive and help their workers keep-up with the changing needs of a global economy.

Your additional thoughts or questions?