I Wear Pants;440670 wrote:There are very few good guys in DC. And very few will come from the Dems, and Reps in this next election. Not the Tea Party, Libertarians, or the supposed all important Independents can change that either.

The definition of insanity is to keep repeating what you are doing expecting a different result. We either continue the insanity or shake up this country like never before. I disagree with you in that we need Tea Party involvement, Constitutionalists, and Libertarians if we have any hope of continuing on as we were designed. Otherwise, we have spit it out and developed into something completely different. This will not happen without a fight. Was it Jefferson that said a little revolution now and then is a good thing? Whoever said it was brilliant.

It was Jefferson I believe. I wasn't saying that we don't need different opinions and ways of doing things but instead trying to say that I believe the current Tea Party, Libertarians, Constitutionalists, etc to be more of the same in a different shell.

And the winning number of uneplymnet stats is: The Labor Department reports Friday that the unemployment rate stayed steady at 9.5 percent last month, with 71,000 private sector jobs created which was less than forecasts by many economists. Overall employment fell by 131,000 jobs in July, as the government continues to unload Census workers, a move that offset the gains in private business hiring.

I hope more Obama Support become unemployed ..... jump on the sword Chump

Why would business hire right now?

Corporate profits are phenomenal right now, and as long as they can keep getting more for less out of the workers they presently have shareholders will be just fine with no hiring taking place.

Producitivity gains were through the roof last year, wages were flat year over year, and business was able to pocket the profit. The "jobless recovery" works for corporate America because it keeps a lid on wages, keeps them from having to really offer perks anymore, and allows them to basically get alot more work out of people without having to pay for it.

I am sure there are many of you on salary who have seen you're department thinned out, and you're work load increase to make up for it without the corresponding bump in pay commiserate with the new amount of work you're taking on. I know there are exceptions where it is great for people, but by and large what I have seen is that people are being asked to do more and with less resources, for the same or less money.

We are a capitalist system and in no way am I saying it's wrong to do, but no matter who is running the government business is not going to give back profits to hire people for the sake of hiring. If they can make it work by squeezing harder, they will, as it is better for the bottom line.

Only when demand shows up from somewhere that ultimately overwhelms the ability of a firm to meet it with it's current head count will business start hiring. Until then they will enjoy the heft profits.

The sad fact is what's good for America isn't necessarily good for business, and what's good for business isn't necessarily good for America.

Belly35;443488 wrote:And the winning number of uneplymnet stats is: The Labor Department reports Friday that the unemployment rate stayed steady at 9.5 percent last month, with 71,000 private sector jobs created which was less than forecasts by many economists. Overall employment fell by 131,000 jobs in July, as the government continues to unload Census workers, a move that offset the gains in private business hiring.

I hope more Obama Support become unemployed ..... jump on the sword Chump

Are you saying that you hope people who support Obama lose their jobs (in bold)? Can't really tell because of your grammar. If so, how very kind of you.

I don't want Obama supporters unemployed -- although I'm pretty sure a good number of them already live off government checks of some kind.

However, I DO want to see Obama's staff ALL become unemployed...as soon as possible.

It seems that when you have one party control both Congress and the White House, probems occur. When you have each party control one or the other, it seems to work better (at least it should I.E. when Clinton was in office).

Writerbuckeye;444262 wrote:However, I DO want to see Obama's staff ALL become unemployed...as soon as possible.

November 2012 is on the horizon.

It's on the horizon all right, but who do you put up against him?

Newt? His history with wives will keep him out.

Palin? When the going gets tough the Barracuda quits.

Romney? Not my opinion but not enough trust in a Mormon to get him elected.

Maybe Rudy or Sanford or Bobby J. can ride in to save the day. Wait a minute, they're not exactly electable either.

Just who do you have?

stlouiedipalma;446141 wrote:It's on the horizon all right, but who do you put up against him?

Newt? His history with wives will keep him out.

Palin? When the going gets tough the Barracuda quits.

Romney? Not my opinion but not enough trust in a Mormon to get him elected.

Maybe Rudy or Sanford or Bobby J. can ride in to save the day. Wait a minute, they're not exactly electable either.

Just who do you have?

My top 3:
1. Chris Christie
2. Mitch Daniels
3. Mitt Romney

I'm really liking Mr. Christie in NJ. No holds barred, take no prisoners, standing up to the teacher's unions, standing up to gangsters, and standing up for taxpayers gets my vote. We need tough leaders willing to stand up to special interests and political classes.

Christie could be a player, but he'd better be careful standing up to the gangsters. Standing up to special interests is a commendable trait but nearly every politician on the national stage has cozied up to some special interest or another at some time. If he could stay clear of that he could be a contender.

2012 is probably still a little early for Christie, despite his rockstar status. If Bam gets re-elected, he'd be a shoo-in for 2016.

Things will improve enough by 2012 to drag Bam across the finish line for a 2nd term. If they don't, then one only needs to look at the last poll that has him losing to everyone on the above list, including Palin.

stlouiedipalma;446141 wrote:Just who do you have?

Jan Brewer

There was no fucking recovery … some of you buy into what the media feeds you and the socialist Administration lies.
Wake the fuck up and go outside and look for yourself. Go ask a business owner what happening. Ask a shop keeper ask anyone in the private sector of business…..

The Public Servant and his band of Asshole are killing America Business and Small Business.

I when to a conference at Walsh College two weeks ago ….. the fucking IRS never showed and the programs like HIRE is a joke. Who the fuck is hiring anyone. The idea that if you hire someone unemployed you get a tax brake.. Read the fucking fine print it a joke. Oh wait you get a tax brake of 6% off the employee tax but fucking Healthcare is going to cost 8% do the math assholes. Over half the people there where bankers wonder why … they have no idea what the hell to do. Nobody would answer question nor was there any place during the conference to ask question … Why because they wanted to leave the campus alive.
Line of credit are cut, loans are difficult, federal funding is complicated and those in office have no fucking clue on how to receive money..
They say they are for Small Business …smoke screen for more government spending on worthless special interest groups.

Bailout for teacher, government employees, banks, unemployed ….but where the fuck is the free bailout to small business, manufacturing and companies doing new development and research on new product…. To build America
I have over $175,000 in development and research and need additional $100,000 to create new jobs and introduce my product …..
I would not need this $100,000 if my line of credit would have not been cut… I would have taken the risk myself …..



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/09/AR2010080906080.html

http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20100810-707762.html

I’m sorry for cussing …very much out of character
I get very up-set and angry when I see good people losing their jobs and people who put a life time of dedication of service having difficult times and business associates failing ……
I have seen a lot in my life and have seen and experienced failure because of my own personal faults. The Obama Administration is an anchor around my and small business neck, consumer confidence is so low and the fear in owners voices translate to caution of investing in themselves.
As a businessman I was able to have some control over my and my company future and would take that risk….but now we are controlled by the banks, government and out of control regulation….
This is not the Proud America I once knew …

Belly35;447533 wrote:I’m sorry for cussing …very much out of character
I get very up-set and angry when I see good people losing their jobs and people who put a life time of dedication of service having difficult times and business associates failing ……
I have seen a lot in my life and have seen and experienced failure because of my own personal faults. The Obama Administration is an anchor around my and small business neck, consumer confidence is so low and the fear in owners voices translate to caution of investing in themselves.
As a businessman I was able to have some control over my and my company future and would take that risk….but now we are controlled by the banks, government and out of control regulation….
This is not the Proud America I once knew …

Welcome to wonderful world of Jobless recoveries Belly. For all the bellowing about how anti-business Obama is, corporate profits have never recovered faster or more robustly. All you have to do is look at the earnings numbers from last quarter to see that profits are surging largely acorss the board.

Sadly though about 20 years ago some how business recovery and increasing profits became decoupled from job growth, as shareholders have laregly sent the message to big business to grow profits through cost cutting measures rather than top line revenue growth.

The result is that companies sit on mountains of money and don't hire. It is good for shareholders, as well as management because they get better bonuses and shareholders get better dividends or stock price appreciation.

There was a time in the country a few generations ago that companies took great pride in avoiding layoffs at all costs even in tough financial times. Now companies can't reduce "head count" fast enough in order to keep profits high. Outside of small mom and pop businesses workers have just become a faceless head count number as opposed to a real person.

It makes me sad in a way because while we have always been a capitalist country, there was a time far more consideration was payed to the human element of business decisions than we see now. American corporations had a loyalty to this country and its people that has disappeared in a global business environment of cost cutting at all costs. The idea of a jobless recovery was ludicrous 25 years ago, as businesses couldn't grow in an environment of high unemployment like we have now.

For better or worse, things have changed in this country and I don't think it matters who is in charge. As long as business can make money without hiring, they won't. I have heard quite frequently lately the idea that this is "the new normal", which is not something pleasant to think about if true.

There has most definitely been a recovery. Just not the type that will see jobs. As Iggy said, look at the earnings reports for the past few quarters. They are swelling. Why would companies hire if they can keep making large profits without the extra employees?

Spike in layoffs feeds fear of faltering recovery

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100819/ap_on_bi_go_ec_fi/us_economy

Looks like we'll have to spend another $800 Billion to keep the economy humming and unemployment from going higher than 8%...I mean 10%...maybe 12%.

believer;456465 wrote:Spike in layoffs feeds fear of faltering recovery

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100819/ap_on_bi_go_ec_fi/us_economy

Looks like we'll have to spend another $800 Billion to keep the economy humming and unemployment from going higher than 8%...I mean 10%...maybe 12%.

There you go again herr believer, confusing your opinion against the facts.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/jul/13/george-will/will-obama-said-stimulus-would-cap-unemployment-8-/

Bigdogg;456478 wrote:There you go again herr believer, confusing your opinion against the facts.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/jul/13/george-will/will-obama-said-stimulus-would-cap-unemployment-8-/

So...they presented a document, in this case a graph that showed how unemployment would not rise above 8%. You and the link are in denial that it was a promise. Well...it was used to SELL the damn plan wasn't it? In evidence proceedings, it would be called an exhibit as it was used to persuade the debate as to whether the stimulus should be passed or not. DO NOT claim it was now a "projection" and it really didn't count as we have all painfully learned it DID NOT WORK. Do not be a revisionist and George Will was DEAD ON in July with his assessment. It failed. Stealing money and redistributing it to pay off unions, trial lawyers, and ACORN will never permanently spur economic growth.

Let's try Plan B since Plan A sucked.

BGFalcons82;456489 wrote:So...they presented a document, in this case a graph that showed how unemployment would not rise above 8%. You and the link are in denial that it was a promise. Well...it was used to SELL the damn plan wasn't it? In evidence proceedings, it would be called an exhibit as it was used to persuade the debate as to whether the stimulus should be passed or not. DO NOT claim it was now a "projection" and it really didn't count as we have all painfully learned it DID NOT WORK. Do not be a revisionist and George Will was DEAD ON in July with his assessment. It failed. Stealing money and redistributing it to pay off unions, trial lawyers, and ACORN will never permanently spur economic growth.

Let's try Plan B since Plan A sucked.

Maybe their crystal ball was broke? You do understand what a projection is don't you....I guess not.

Bigdogg;457028 wrote:Maybe their crystal ball was broke? You do understand what a projection is don't you....I guess not.

I sure do as it is part of my profession. I have to project costs, sometimes to the hundreths of cents within unit pricing, in order for my organization to remain in business. If they were so unsure about it, then they should have used a range of percentages. Although that doesn't sell as well as, "Pass my plan by tomorrow or we'll all go to hell in a handbasket. Check out this graph...see if we don't do this, then unemployment will go above 9%. Don't bother reading the thousand+ pages, just trust me that it will work." OK, I paraphrased a little, but that was the message.

You posted it was an opinion and not factual, when in reality, it was presented as factual. Americans were somewhat extorted into standing down against the Stimulus package and now people are mindfully upset that it didn't work. The defenders of the faith are now saying it was too small, it didn't go far enough, and we need to do it again x 2. There is no money left to spend. There are no bullets left in Keynes' gun. The answer to this stagnation and malaise is to turn capitalism and free market enterprise loose, get government the hell out of the way, stop dreaming up new taxes and regulations with each breath, and let Americans go to work to turn this around. The ellitists in Washington are stopping growth, not inspiring it.

Bigdogg;457028 wrote:Maybe their crystal ball was broke? You do understand what a projection is don't you....I guess not.

It was what they EXPECTED to happen -- and told us so, repeatedly.

Weasel all you like, but the PERCEPTION was that if we passed this massive spending plan as Obama told us, we'd not see employment rise above 8 percent. That's what the plan was sold on, like it or not.

No Monday morning QBing is allowed on this one.

Writerbuckeye;457096 wrote:It was what they EXPECTED to happen -- and told us so, repeatedly.

Weasel all you like, but the PERCEPTION was that if we passed this massive spending plan as Obama told us, we'd not see employment rise above 8 percent. That's what the plan was sold on, like it or not.

Absolutely correct and the BHO's willing allies in the leftist press gleefully supported the wasteful and useless spending by exacerbating that perception.

I've mentioned this before, but bears repeating........ had a Prof in college who made a lasting impression on all when he talked about the U.S. capitalistic system being a giant Monopoly game.......i.e., one or few winners and everyone else lost. Thats true with todays system. Those who think that business is always right and business must be accomodated are in for some major surprises in the future. People will not accept a Monopoly game as the system. But thats what we currently have.

Watch out !