The Associated Press: Economy loses 95K jobs due to government layoffs:
"Economy loses 95K jobs due to government layoffs
By CHRISTOPHER S. RUGABER (AP) – 2 hours ago
WASHINGTON — A wave of government layoffs in September outpaced weak hiring in the private sector, pushing down the nation's payrolls by a net total of 95,000 jobs.
The unemployment rate held at 9.6 percent last month, the Labor Department said Friday. The jobless rate has now topped 9.5 percent for 14 straight months, the longest stretch since the 1930s."
Oh yes, thats just what we need now. Uncle Sam to start laying off workers, as if the private sector wasn't 'trimming' things enough by themselves.
"Since the recession ended in June 2009, the economy has grown 3 percent, according to economists at Deutsche Bank. That's less than half the average 6.5 percent pace in postwar recoveries."
Pssst. Dear Economists, perhaps this data is a clue. The 'recession' has NOT ENDED. Things are still bleak, and with Uncle Sam booting out its workers too, the situation is only going to get bleaker. These talking-head experts should be the ones facing a pink slip, not hard working 'real work' performing employees.
"The department said the economy shed 15,000 more jobs in July and August than previously estimated.
The government also issued a preliminary estimate of its annual revision to the jobs data. The revision is made after examining unemployment insurance tax records. The department said the revision is likely to show the economy lost 366,000 more jobs that it previously thought in the 12 months ending in March 2010."
Oops, did we do a boo-boo with the government issued calculator? Thats a big number to fudge with, or were we perhaps, perchance, possibly just 'softening the blow' during the past year? I hope the mathematical genius that porked these numbers was one of the "Government layoffs", wouldn't that be ironic!
Friday, October 8, 2010
Friday, September 3, 2010
Why the new healthcare law will cost us jobs
CNN.com - September 3rd, 2010
Obama calls for improving small business climate
"President Obama cited small businesses as 'the primary drivers of job creation' and called on Congress, especially the GOP, to tackle a bill aimed at improving the climate for such enterprises.
...
There are signs the economy is improving, though. He said August saw 67,000 new private sector jobs created, while official July numbers indicated 107,000 jobs were created. In contrast, the latest unemployment numbers show joblessness rose from 9.5 percent to 9.6 percent last month."
Oh please, what utter twaddle. Things are NOT improving, a drop of 40,000 new jobs in a month is the opposite of improvement. And a 9.5 or 9.6 percent unemployment rate is definitely not a sign of improvement.
However, let us give credit to President Obama for recognizing that small businesses are the backbone of our economy. Recognizing the obvious, that is indeed high praise for a politician. Solving the problem however, appears to be beyond the capabilities of the current leadership in Washington.
First, this Congress gave us the bank bailout. Billions and billions of tax dollars were doled out to the banks. Objective: spread the money as loans and funding to encourage small business growth and thus improve the economy and create jobs.
Implementation: zero checks and balances.
Result: top bank executives give themselves obscenely large bonuses, small businesses got absolutely nothing.
Congress claims victory and goes on to throw even more money at car manufacturers, who so far, have not quite been able to produce a car that they can sell in a country that has more cars per household than most other nations on this planet. Outstanding performance from Washington thus far.
And now we have a new healthcare bill. Yet another misguided legislative blunder. With a pricetag of nearly one TRILLION dollars. We don't do things on a small scale, why stop at wasting a Billion dollars when we can just as easy throw away a Trillion dollars.
Based on a noble sentiment, this law is absolutely misguided and lacks commonsense. Yes, this country has far too many medically uninsured individuals and families. However the quality of healthcare in the US is among the best in the world. What is the problem then? In a nutshell, we have the best medical care that money can buy, that unfortunately costs too much. The concept of health insurance is two-fold; first, the financial risk is spread out across a group, and second, the insurance company is able to negotiate volume discounts for their members. Without legislative control over what the health insurance companies can do, what we have ended up with is this; doctors receive a mere pittance for preventive and routine medical care for the insured patients, which forces them to charge cash customers up to ten times the fee just to break even. Doctors are essentially running a business, between salaries to nurses/assistants/office staff, rents, supplies, and most of all malpractice insurance - what a typical General Practitioner earns each year is laughable given the amount of time and education they have to invest into their work.
Now we have this new healthcare bill, a law that forces all employers with 50 or more employees to offer health insurance to their workers, or pay a $2,000 a year fine per employee. Yet it puts no restrictions on the health insurance companies whatsoever. I happen to be in one of the first lucky (not!) small businesses that are now discovering the true nature of this absurd law. My company's health insurance policy renews each year and we just received the new rates. Our health insurance premium has a 79% increase, yes, it has almost DOUBLED in just this first year of the new healthcare law!
What are employers to do if their insurance premiums are going to shoot up each year, without any limits?
And this is WHY this new healthcare law will affect YOUR job.
First option for the small business, layoff staff to get below the 50 employee cap. Lost jobs, lost taxes, increased public assistance, no medical insurance for any workers.
Second option, refuse to buy health insurance and pay the tax of $2,000 a year per employee. This will of course reduce the company revenue, thus preventing any additional hiring or growth. And it does not provide health insurance for anyone.
The third option is most likely what most small businesses will end up doing - shut down, go out of business. Lost jobs, lost taxes, no health insurance.
Given the current limitless increases that health insurance providers are levying, it is almost inconceivable that ANY small business will be able to obey this law and remain solvent. It is just not possible.
We are effectively shutting down or downsizing small businesses. Instead of increasing hiring, we are encouraging layoffs. Instead of increasing tax revenue through increased payrolls, we are not only losing taxes but also increasing unemployment and its associated costs. Instead of providing hard working Americans with health insurance, we are laying them off and driving them into social medical programs that encourage dependence on public assistance.
So in closing, if you currently have medical insurance, be very afraid for you may not be able to afford it for long. If you do NOT have medical insurance, don't expect to get it any time soon. If you have a job, you may not have one tomorrow. If you are looking for a job, it does not bode well for you. The only jobs left will be at large corporations, not even government jobs will be safe once the tax revenue dries up due to reduced payrolls. Large corporations, of course, prefer to "outsource" work to cheaper continents. Perhaps now is a good time to learn some new languages, the day is fast appearing when one will have to leave the US in order to find a job. Or afford to see a doctor.
Obama calls for improving small business climate
"President Obama cited small businesses as 'the primary drivers of job creation' and called on Congress, especially the GOP, to tackle a bill aimed at improving the climate for such enterprises.
...
There are signs the economy is improving, though. He said August saw 67,000 new private sector jobs created, while official July numbers indicated 107,000 jobs were created. In contrast, the latest unemployment numbers show joblessness rose from 9.5 percent to 9.6 percent last month."
Oh please, what utter twaddle. Things are NOT improving, a drop of 40,000 new jobs in a month is the opposite of improvement. And a 9.5 or 9.6 percent unemployment rate is definitely not a sign of improvement.
However, let us give credit to President Obama for recognizing that small businesses are the backbone of our economy. Recognizing the obvious, that is indeed high praise for a politician. Solving the problem however, appears to be beyond the capabilities of the current leadership in Washington.
First, this Congress gave us the bank bailout. Billions and billions of tax dollars were doled out to the banks. Objective: spread the money as loans and funding to encourage small business growth and thus improve the economy and create jobs.
Implementation: zero checks and balances.
Result: top bank executives give themselves obscenely large bonuses, small businesses got absolutely nothing.
Congress claims victory and goes on to throw even more money at car manufacturers, who so far, have not quite been able to produce a car that they can sell in a country that has more cars per household than most other nations on this planet. Outstanding performance from Washington thus far.
And now we have a new healthcare bill. Yet another misguided legislative blunder. With a pricetag of nearly one TRILLION dollars. We don't do things on a small scale, why stop at wasting a Billion dollars when we can just as easy throw away a Trillion dollars.
Based on a noble sentiment, this law is absolutely misguided and lacks commonsense. Yes, this country has far too many medically uninsured individuals and families. However the quality of healthcare in the US is among the best in the world. What is the problem then? In a nutshell, we have the best medical care that money can buy, that unfortunately costs too much. The concept of health insurance is two-fold; first, the financial risk is spread out across a group, and second, the insurance company is able to negotiate volume discounts for their members. Without legislative control over what the health insurance companies can do, what we have ended up with is this; doctors receive a mere pittance for preventive and routine medical care for the insured patients, which forces them to charge cash customers up to ten times the fee just to break even. Doctors are essentially running a business, between salaries to nurses/assistants/office staff, rents, supplies, and most of all malpractice insurance - what a typical General Practitioner earns each year is laughable given the amount of time and education they have to invest into their work.
Now we have this new healthcare bill, a law that forces all employers with 50 or more employees to offer health insurance to their workers, or pay a $2,000 a year fine per employee. Yet it puts no restrictions on the health insurance companies whatsoever. I happen to be in one of the first lucky (not!) small businesses that are now discovering the true nature of this absurd law. My company's health insurance policy renews each year and we just received the new rates. Our health insurance premium has a 79% increase, yes, it has almost DOUBLED in just this first year of the new healthcare law!
What are employers to do if their insurance premiums are going to shoot up each year, without any limits?
And this is WHY this new healthcare law will affect YOUR job.
First option for the small business, layoff staff to get below the 50 employee cap. Lost jobs, lost taxes, increased public assistance, no medical insurance for any workers.
Second option, refuse to buy health insurance and pay the tax of $2,000 a year per employee. This will of course reduce the company revenue, thus preventing any additional hiring or growth. And it does not provide health insurance for anyone.
The third option is most likely what most small businesses will end up doing - shut down, go out of business. Lost jobs, lost taxes, no health insurance.
Given the current limitless increases that health insurance providers are levying, it is almost inconceivable that ANY small business will be able to obey this law and remain solvent. It is just not possible.
We are effectively shutting down or downsizing small businesses. Instead of increasing hiring, we are encouraging layoffs. Instead of increasing tax revenue through increased payrolls, we are not only losing taxes but also increasing unemployment and its associated costs. Instead of providing hard working Americans with health insurance, we are laying them off and driving them into social medical programs that encourage dependence on public assistance.
So in closing, if you currently have medical insurance, be very afraid for you may not be able to afford it for long. If you do NOT have medical insurance, don't expect to get it any time soon. If you have a job, you may not have one tomorrow. If you are looking for a job, it does not bode well for you. The only jobs left will be at large corporations, not even government jobs will be safe once the tax revenue dries up due to reduced payrolls. Large corporations, of course, prefer to "outsource" work to cheaper continents. Perhaps now is a good time to learn some new languages, the day is fast appearing when one will have to leave the US in order to find a job. Or afford to see a doctor.
Saturday, August 7, 2010
Companies hire at slow pace for 3rd straight month
"The Associated Press: Companies hire at slow pace for 3rd straight month:
Companies showed a lack of confidence about hiring for a third straight month in July, making it likely the economy will grow more slowly the rest of the year. The unemployment rate was unchanged at 9.5 percent.
Private employers added a net total of only 71,000 jobs in July, far below the 200,000 or more jobs needed each month to reduce the unemployment rate.
The modest gains were even weaker when considering a loss of government jobs at the local, state and federal levels in July that weren't temporary census positions. Factoring those in, the net gains were only 12,000 jobs, according to the Labor Department's July report Friday."
Month after month, the Labor Dept. takes us on this rollercoaster of 'jobs' 'no jobs'. The good news, the unemployment rate did not go up. The bad news, the unemployment rate did not go down. Now even the Government seems to be getting in on the action of "losing jobs", granted that most States are nearly bankrupt, but its still an atrocious bit of news. What kind of an example is Uncle Sam setting by laying off its own employees? Jobs = taxes; NO jobs = NO taxes; a simple enough formula that no one in DC seems to have a grasp on.
Companies showed a lack of confidence about hiring for a third straight month in July, making it likely the economy will grow more slowly the rest of the year. The unemployment rate was unchanged at 9.5 percent.
Private employers added a net total of only 71,000 jobs in July, far below the 200,000 or more jobs needed each month to reduce the unemployment rate.
The modest gains were even weaker when considering a loss of government jobs at the local, state and federal levels in July that weren't temporary census positions. Factoring those in, the net gains were only 12,000 jobs, according to the Labor Department's July report Friday."
Month after month, the Labor Dept. takes us on this rollercoaster of 'jobs' 'no jobs'. The good news, the unemployment rate did not go up. The bad news, the unemployment rate did not go down. Now even the Government seems to be getting in on the action of "losing jobs", granted that most States are nearly bankrupt, but its still an atrocious bit of news. What kind of an example is Uncle Sam setting by laying off its own employees? Jobs = taxes; NO jobs = NO taxes; a simple enough formula that no one in DC seems to have a grasp on.
Friday, July 2, 2010
Job losses return for first time in 2010 (the first time???)
Job losses return for first time in 2010 - Jul. 2, 2010:
"NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The U.S. economy lost jobs in June, for the first time this year, as modest hiring by businesses only partly offset the end of census jobs.
The Labor Department on Friday reported a net loss of 125,000 jobs in the month. That was due primarily to the loss of 225,000 census jobs that had swelled payrolls by 433,000 net jobs in May. Economists surveyed by Briefing.com had forecast a loss of 100,000 jobs in June."
And there goes the "census jobs bubble", a clever hyperbole to skew the true (and sad) state of the economy and the job market. We didn't lose jobs for "the first time" this year, the bogus census jobs don't count, we've been steadily losing jobs for a while now.
If only the Feds put in as much effort in helping small businesses to CREATE jobs, rather than waste time juggling numbers to protect their OWN jobs.
"NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The U.S. economy lost jobs in June, for the first time this year, as modest hiring by businesses only partly offset the end of census jobs.
The Labor Department on Friday reported a net loss of 125,000 jobs in the month. That was due primarily to the loss of 225,000 census jobs that had swelled payrolls by 433,000 net jobs in May. Economists surveyed by Briefing.com had forecast a loss of 100,000 jobs in June."
And there goes the "census jobs bubble", a clever hyperbole to skew the true (and sad) state of the economy and the job market. We didn't lose jobs for "the first time" this year, the bogus census jobs don't count, we've been steadily losing jobs for a while now.
If only the Feds put in as much effort in helping small businesses to CREATE jobs, rather than waste time juggling numbers to protect their OWN jobs.
Thursday, June 24, 2010
Unemployment claims (supposedly) fall in latest week
Unemployment claims fall in latest week - Jun. 24, 2010: "NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The number of first-time filers for unemployment insurance fell last week, according to a government report released Thursday.
There were 457,000 initial jobless claims filed in the week ended June 19, down 19,000 from a revised 476,000 in the previous week, the Labor Department said."
And yet more dismal news, but presented as always with a positive spin, "claims fall". When one actually reads the article, it says "initial jobless claims" - these are 457 THOUSAND newly unemployed that are filing their INITIAL benefits claims. 19,000 less out of 476,000 the previous period is barely, what, a 3% drop? Hardly a "fall", a drop in the bucket, more likely.
And the article further clarifies the scope of the economic disaster we are wallowing in:
"Continuing claims: The government said 4,548,000 people filed continuing claims in the week ended June 12, the most recent data available. That's down 45,000 from the previous week.
...
The figures do not include those who have moved to state or federal extensions, or people who have exhausted their benefits."
So there we have it, over 4.5 MILLION workers are still out of work filing "continuing claims", not including those who have gone onto extensions, or run out of benefits altogether, and are therefore not considered "unemployed"? The Labor Dept. dare not mention the "real" unemployment numbers, lest the populace grasp the scope of the fiscal hole they have dropped us into and demand that, heaven forbid, the Labor Dept. fulfill its mandate and Congress actually does something about the jobs situation.
There were 457,000 initial jobless claims filed in the week ended June 19, down 19,000 from a revised 476,000 in the previous week, the Labor Department said."
And yet more dismal news, but presented as always with a positive spin, "claims fall". When one actually reads the article, it says "initial jobless claims" - these are 457 THOUSAND newly unemployed that are filing their INITIAL benefits claims. 19,000 less out of 476,000 the previous period is barely, what, a 3% drop? Hardly a "fall", a drop in the bucket, more likely.
And the article further clarifies the scope of the economic disaster we are wallowing in:
"Continuing claims: The government said 4,548,000 people filed continuing claims in the week ended June 12, the most recent data available. That's down 45,000 from the previous week.
...
The figures do not include those who have moved to state or federal extensions, or people who have exhausted their benefits."
So there we have it, over 4.5 MILLION workers are still out of work filing "continuing claims", not including those who have gone onto extensions, or run out of benefits altogether, and are therefore not considered "unemployed"? The Labor Dept. dare not mention the "real" unemployment numbers, lest the populace grasp the scope of the fiscal hole they have dropped us into and demand that, heaven forbid, the Labor Dept. fulfill its mandate and Congress actually does something about the jobs situation.
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
Job openings rise?
Job openings rise to highest level in 16 months - Yahoo! News: "WASHINGTON – Job openings jumped in April to the highest level in 16 months, a sign that hiring by private employers is healthy despite last week's disappointing jobs report.
The number of jobs advertised at the end of April rose to 3.1 million from 2.8 million in March, the Labor Department said Tuesday. That's the most openings since December 2008.
Private employers accounted for the entire net gain. The government's advertising for jobs decreased, despite the hiring of hundreds of thousands of census workers in May.
Job openings have risen by about 740,000 since bottoming out at 2.3 million in July. But they remain far below pre-recession levels of about 4.5 million openings per month.
...
The report comes after the Labor Department said Friday that the economy generated 431,000 jobs in May. But almost all were census hires. Only 41,000 of the new jobs were in the private sector."
I guess the May jobs report was a classic case of putting the cart before the horse. If the April job situation was good, but the May report was bad - which one are we supposed to believe in?
The number of jobs advertised at the end of April rose to 3.1 million from 2.8 million in March, the Labor Department said Tuesday. That's the most openings since December 2008.
Private employers accounted for the entire net gain. The government's advertising for jobs decreased, despite the hiring of hundreds of thousands of census workers in May.
Job openings have risen by about 740,000 since bottoming out at 2.3 million in July. But they remain far below pre-recession levels of about 4.5 million openings per month.
...
The report comes after the Labor Department said Friday that the economy generated 431,000 jobs in May. But almost all were census hires. Only 41,000 of the new jobs were in the private sector."
I guess the May jobs report was a classic case of putting the cart before the horse. If the April job situation was good, but the May report was bad - which one are we supposed to believe in?
Friday, June 4, 2010
May jobs report: statistical skulldugery
May jobs report: Unemployment lower - Jun. 4, 2010:
"May jobs report: Census boosts payrolls
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- A flood of temporary Census workers in May led to the biggest jump in jobs in ten years, the government reported Friday.
Employers added 431,000 jobs in the month, up from 290,000 jobs added in April. It was the biggest gain in jobs since March 2000.
Census hiring was responsible for 411,000 of May's increase in employment, but private sector employers also added 41,000 jobs in the period. Government payrolls other than Census declined by 21,000 jobs in May."
More statistical juggling from Washington. Census "jobs" are NOT jobs. They are extremely temporary situations. Real "jobs" are full-time, long term, paying at least the industry average, and offer benefits.
The last sentence it that article says it all:
"But the problem of long-term unemployment continued to worsen as those out of work more than six months rose to a record 6.8 million, or nearly half of all unemployed workers."
And even those jobs that qualify as "jobs" have problems:
Say goodbye to full-time jobs with benefits
"NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Jobs may be coming back, but they aren't the same ones workers were used to.
Many of the jobs employers are adding are temporary or contract positions, rather than traditional full-time jobs with benefits. With unemployment remaining near 10%, employers have their pick of workers willing to accept less secure positions.
In 2005, the government estimated that 31% of U.S. workers were already so-called contingent workers. Experts say that number could increase to 40% or more in the next 10 years."
The situation is obviously bad, unfortunately the one Government agency that is supposed to understand the issue, the Dept. of Labor, obviously does not.
"May jobs report: Census boosts payrolls
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- A flood of temporary Census workers in May led to the biggest jump in jobs in ten years, the government reported Friday.
Employers added 431,000 jobs in the month, up from 290,000 jobs added in April. It was the biggest gain in jobs since March 2000.
Census hiring was responsible for 411,000 of May's increase in employment, but private sector employers also added 41,000 jobs in the period. Government payrolls other than Census declined by 21,000 jobs in May."
More statistical juggling from Washington. Census "jobs" are NOT jobs. They are extremely temporary situations. Real "jobs" are full-time, long term, paying at least the industry average, and offer benefits.
The last sentence it that article says it all:
"But the problem of long-term unemployment continued to worsen as those out of work more than six months rose to a record 6.8 million, or nearly half of all unemployed workers."
And even those jobs that qualify as "jobs" have problems:
Say goodbye to full-time jobs with benefits
"NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Jobs may be coming back, but they aren't the same ones workers were used to.
Many of the jobs employers are adding are temporary or contract positions, rather than traditional full-time jobs with benefits. With unemployment remaining near 10%, employers have their pick of workers willing to accept less secure positions.
In 2005, the government estimated that 31% of U.S. workers were already so-called contingent workers. Experts say that number could increase to 40% or more in the next 10 years."
The situation is obviously bad, unfortunately the one Government agency that is supposed to understand the issue, the Dept. of Labor, obviously does not.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
