And what happened to the president’s jobs plan? That’s right. You can’t pass anything that would help Americans under a Democratic president while the GOP has any ability to sabotage it.
Interesting that Lisa and the ilk never noticed how many people back in the “W” days were taking jobs at much lower pay, or taking 2-3 jobs to “break even”, but “unemployment” stayed down, well not really.
7.6% isn’t fantastic, but it’s below the 8% all the repubtards said Obama couldn’t lower. But, it isn’t just the White House, not even “W” who should be blamed, but the combination of a Congress that has too long handed “corporate America” a free pass, to pass jobs overseas.
Just reading about one of our major aviation “job contributors”, looking to Mexico, or points south, rather than in the U.S.. Ah, patriotism.
Just more apologists for the Destructer of the American Dream.Barry knew that Obama(non)Care would cost trillions and cost people their jobs. It’s just part of his plan to expand socialism and force Everbody to become dependent on the governments “generosity” as they dole out our allowance each month.
The Fed’s monthly report concluded that the “downside risks” were reduced. Housing is coming back. The stock market is up. Profits are at record levels. The sequester cuts haven’t sabotaged growth. Consumers feel more confidence.
Only one problem with all this. The economy can’t recover if the people don’t. Official unemployment has drifted down to an abysmal 7.6 percent but largely because people are dropping out of the workforce.
There are still over 20 million people in need of full time work. The employment rate — the percentage of the population in the workforce — hasn’t budged from recession levels. At current rates, the U.S. won’t return to the pre-recession 5 percent unemployment rate until 2022 — and even at that level, American families were losing ground.
Corporate profits are up, but wages aren’t. Wages are now at the lowest percent of the economy on record. The median wage hasn’t budged this century. College and non-college grads are now losing ground. The good jobs that were lost are being replaced by low wage and part-time jobs. Young people are starting out behind, unemployed or underemployed at ruinous high rates. Our Gilded Age inequality is getting worse, with the top 1 percent pocketing all of the rewards of growth.I
When Clinton was president, people had jobs. Unemployment was down. Income taxes were slightly higher. The economy soared. There was a projected budget surplus. Crime was down. Inflation was down. -And Republicans HATED it. HATED it. And they vowed never to allow it to happen again. -And their success at preventing such horror continues today.
Surely it makes sense to create a health care plan that every employer must offer to its full time employees. Oh wait, how about not offering medical coverage to part timer’s but hire more people so it can be said there was job creation. It’s so ironic it’s almost funny.
“Government, business and education need to work together.”
Actually, it seems to me that there lies the problem.
Government and industry are in bed together, and together, they’ve destroyed the education system, replacing it with a propaganda machine.
We were much ‘freer’ when government was not working with industry, but was regulating it – which is their job. We were much freer with a literate population.
Let’s go back to separation. When we had that, we counted for something. Now we count only as we become exploitable, which sooner or later we all do.
sigh Vent, talking to you is sometimes like arguing with a brick wall. It’s becoming increasingly counter-productive. “Employees are not the beneficiaries of profits,” Then what is gain share? What are year-end bonuses? My father owns a C-Corp and distributes the profits of the business to his employees. This company I work for (a fortune 500 company) pays bonuses, and provides raises to the employees based on the performance of not only the employee, but also of the business overall. Hate to say it, but you’re wrong on this one." The corporation is it’s own entity. It’s allegiance is to it’s own survival."And in its survival, its owner (especially amongst S-Corporations and sole-proprietors) is especially interested in its continued prosperity. You have partisan in your eye, Vent. You are confusing Corporations as “people” holding the ability to express free speech with the concept that corporations are an entity that performs a service or creates a good for a fee. It is made up of people, and its owner (in the aforementioned business types) is vested in the performance of that business.“Corporations in the real world couldn’t care less about shareholders”It’s not that they care or don’t care about their shareholders. They have an obligation to them, in the form of dividends. If they perform poorly, people downgrade their stock and the business’ net value retracts. If they perform well, posing good profit lines, their value increases. They post profits, and they issue dividends. Etc. So yes, they do have to earn a profit for their shareholders, because those shareholders expect returns on their investment.Regarding your Bain Capital comment, you again are taking a partisan slant on a specific issue. I have never heard of a business owner (especially startups) creating a business, mortgaging their home, risking their entire future just for the sole purpose of going bankrupt. You are making a silly argument based on a select few examples of a Capital Investment firm trying to get a return on its investment on a company that is at risk of going belly up. You are only taking the negative, and ignoring the positive. You forget that those businesses that they attempted to rescue were going to go out of business on their own without Bain’s intervention. Don’t treat me like a child, Vent. It’s unbecoming. Unless you have something productive to say, instead of trying to discount my information as invalid, I’m going to have to say this will be my last reply to you.
ARodney almost 11 years ago
And what happened to the president’s jobs plan? That’s right. You can’t pass anything that would help Americans under a Democratic president while the GOP has any ability to sabotage it.
Dtroutma almost 11 years ago
Interesting that Lisa and the ilk never noticed how many people back in the “W” days were taking jobs at much lower pay, or taking 2-3 jobs to “break even”, but “unemployment” stayed down, well not really.
7.6% isn’t fantastic, but it’s below the 8% all the repubtards said Obama couldn’t lower. But, it isn’t just the White House, not even “W” who should be blamed, but the combination of a Congress that has too long handed “corporate America” a free pass, to pass jobs overseas.
Just reading about one of our major aviation “job contributors”, looking to Mexico, or points south, rather than in the U.S.. Ah, patriotism.
ConserveGov almost 11 years ago
Just more apologists for the Destructer of the American Dream.Barry knew that Obama(non)Care would cost trillions and cost people their jobs. It’s just part of his plan to expand socialism and force Everbody to become dependent on the governments “generosity” as they dole out our allowance each month.
ConserveGov almost 11 years ago
Really? Maybe Barry and his rich friends, but….
The Fed’s monthly report concluded that the “downside risks” were reduced. Housing is coming back. The stock market is up. Profits are at record levels. The sequester cuts haven’t sabotaged growth. Consumers feel more confidence.
Only one problem with all this. The economy can’t recover if the people don’t. Official unemployment has drifted down to an abysmal 7.6 percent but largely because people are dropping out of the workforce.
There are still over 20 million people in need of full time work. The employment rate — the percentage of the population in the workforce — hasn’t budged from recession levels. At current rates, the U.S. won’t return to the pre-recession 5 percent unemployment rate until 2022 — and even at that level, American families were losing ground.
Corporate profits are up, but wages aren’t. Wages are now at the lowest percent of the economy on record. The median wage hasn’t budged this century. College and non-college grads are now losing ground. The good jobs that were lost are being replaced by low wage and part-time jobs. Young people are starting out behind, unemployed or underemployed at ruinous high rates. Our Gilded Age inequality is getting worse, with the top 1 percent pocketing all of the rewards of growth.I
braindead Premium Member almost 11 years ago
When Clinton was president, people had jobs. Unemployment was down. Income taxes were slightly higher. The economy soared. There was a projected budget surplus. Crime was down. Inflation was down. -And Republicans HATED it. HATED it. And they vowed never to allow it to happen again. -And their success at preventing such horror continues today.
carandken almost 11 years ago
Yikes-It’s 6:45 am and you folks are already writing this drivel.Suggest some decaf and a nice walk in the park.
Jonni almost 11 years ago
Surely it makes sense to create a health care plan that every employer must offer to its full time employees. Oh wait, how about not offering medical coverage to part timer’s but hire more people so it can be said there was job creation. It’s so ironic it’s almost funny.
Justice22 almost 11 years ago
I take it you would have followed the outsourced jobs to China and India?
d_legendary1 almost 11 years ago
“…weekly average of 345,000 newly unemployed last month.”
By your numbers unemployment should have rose, not declined.
Hawthorne almost 11 years ago
“Government, business and education need to work together.”
Actually, it seems to me that there lies the problem.
Government and industry are in bed together, and together, they’ve destroyed the education system, replacing it with a propaganda machine.
We were much ‘freer’ when government was not working with industry, but was regulating it – which is their job. We were much freer with a literate population.
Let’s go back to separation. When we had that, we counted for something. Now we count only as we become exploitable, which sooner or later we all do.
Wraithkin almost 11 years ago
sigh Vent, talking to you is sometimes like arguing with a brick wall. It’s becoming increasingly counter-productive. “Employees are not the beneficiaries of profits,” Then what is gain share? What are year-end bonuses? My father owns a C-Corp and distributes the profits of the business to his employees. This company I work for (a fortune 500 company) pays bonuses, and provides raises to the employees based on the performance of not only the employee, but also of the business overall. Hate to say it, but you’re wrong on this one." The corporation is it’s own entity. It’s allegiance is to it’s own survival."And in its survival, its owner (especially amongst S-Corporations and sole-proprietors) is especially interested in its continued prosperity. You have partisan in your eye, Vent. You are confusing Corporations as “people” holding the ability to express free speech with the concept that corporations are an entity that performs a service or creates a good for a fee. It is made up of people, and its owner (in the aforementioned business types) is vested in the performance of that business.“Corporations in the real world couldn’t care less about shareholders”It’s not that they care or don’t care about their shareholders. They have an obligation to them, in the form of dividends. If they perform poorly, people downgrade their stock and the business’ net value retracts. If they perform well, posing good profit lines, their value increases. They post profits, and they issue dividends. Etc. So yes, they do have to earn a profit for their shareholders, because those shareholders expect returns on their investment.Regarding your Bain Capital comment, you again are taking a partisan slant on a specific issue. I have never heard of a business owner (especially startups) creating a business, mortgaging their home, risking their entire future just for the sole purpose of going bankrupt. You are making a silly argument based on a select few examples of a Capital Investment firm trying to get a return on its investment on a company that is at risk of going belly up. You are only taking the negative, and ignoring the positive. You forget that those businesses that they attempted to rescue were going to go out of business on their own without Bain’s intervention. Don’t treat me like a child, Vent. It’s unbecoming. Unless you have something productive to say, instead of trying to discount my information as invalid, I’m going to have to say this will be my last reply to you.