To clarify the success of the Obamaconomy

[OldJourno]

Alan Krueger, Princeton economist and former chairman of Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers, just released a study with fellow Princeton economist Lawrence Katz.
They report that 94 percent of all new jobs created under Obama were part-time. In essence, Obama created an economy good only for illegal aliens. Obama’s Labor Department reported that employment gains for women over the past decade benefited mostly “foreign born women.”
Obama’s Labor Department showed that women gained 1 million net jobs in the past decade, but “native born women” experienced net job losses.

 

[Ms_Ann]

The company I work for is gearing up to hire people we had to fire to survive the Obamaconomy.

 

[OldJourno]

The company I work for is gearing up to hire people we had to fire to survive the Obamaconomy.

Hey, at least you've got a job. Another success story!

 

[Ms_Ann]

Hey, at least you've got a job. Another success story!

It was touch & go.

 

[Disgustipated]

Alan Krueger, Princeton economist and former chairman of Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers, just released a study with fellow Princeton economist Lawrence Katz.
They report that 94 percent of all new jobs created under Obama were part-time. In essence, Obama created an economy good only for illegal aliens. Obama’s Labor Department reported that employment gains for women over the past decade benefited mostly “foreign born women.”
Obama’s Labor Department showed that women gained 1 million net jobs in the past decade, but “native born women” experienced net job losses.

You tried, you really did.

From your article:

Quoted by quartz, he said “We find that 94% of net job growth in the past decade was in the alternative work category,” said Krueger. “And over 60% was due to the [the rise] of independent contractors, freelancers and contract company workers.” In other words, nearly all of the 10 million jobs created between 2005 and 2015 were not traditional nine-to-five employment.

Yeah, probably because tech and overnight shipping work 24/7/365. Plus the other many positions created in that time period that are not made for Ward fucking Cleaver.

 

[Ms_Ann]

I like how they just dismiss the people that disappeared from the workforce.

 

[hashtag46]

This was a quite provoking article around the issue. Goes without saying that the writer is negatively biased towards the previous "establishment".

Top Ex-White House Economist Admits 94% Of All New Jobs Under Obama Were Part-Time
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-...ts-94-all-new-jobs-under-obama-were-part-time

"Just over six years ago, we wrote that in light of the underlying changes resulting from the second great depression, whose full impacts remain masked by trillions in monetary stimulus and soon, perhaps fiscal, America is shifting from a traditional work force, one where the majority of new employment is retained on a full-time basis, to a "gig" economy, where workers are severely disenfranchised, and enjoy far less employment leverage, job stability and perks than their pre-crash peers. It also explains why despite the 4.5% unemployment rate, which the Fed has erroneously assumed is indicative of job market at "capacity", wage growth not only refuses to materialize, but as we showed yesterday, the growth in real disposable personal income was the lowest since 2014.

Fast forward 6 years, when a report by Harvard and Princeton economists Lawrence Katz and Alan Krueger, confirms exactly what we warned. They show that from 2005 to 2015, the proportion of Americans workers engaged in what they refer to as “alternative work” soared during the Obama era, from 10.7% in 2005 to 15.8% in 2015. Alternative, or "gig" work is defined as "temporary help agency workers, on-call workers, contract company workers, independent contractors or freelancers", and is generally unsteady, without a fixed paycheck and with virtually no benefits."

The decline of conventional full-time work has impacted every demographic. Whether this change is good or bad depends on what kinds of jobs people want. “Workers seeking full-time, steady work have lost,” said Krueger. He then added, sarcastically, that “while many of those who value flexibility and have a spouse with a steady job have probably gained.”

 

[Ms_Ann]

This was a quite provoking article around the issue. Goes without saying that the writer is negatively biased towards the previous "establishment".

Top Ex-White House Economist Admits 94% Of All New Jobs Under Obama Were Part-Time
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-...ts-94-all-new-jobs-under-obama-were-part-time

"Just over six years ago, in December of 2010, we wrote that in light of the underlying changes resulting from the second great depression, whose full impacts remain masked by trillions in monetary stimulus and soon, perhaps fiscal, America is shifting from a traditional work force, one where the majority of new employment is retained on a full-time basis, to a "gig" economy, where workers are severely disenfranchised, and enjoy far less employment leverage, job stability and perks than their pre-crash peers. It also explains why despite the 4.5% unemployment rate, which the Fed has erroneously assumed is indicative of job market at "capacity", wage growth not only refuses to materialize, but as we showed yesterday, the growth in real disposable personal income was the lowest since 2014.

Fast forward 6 years, when a report by Harvard and Princeton economists Lawrence Katz and Alan Krueger, confirms exactly what we warned. In their study, the duo show that from 2005 to 2015, the proportion of Americans workers engaged in what they refer to as “alternative work” soared during the Obama era, from 10.7% in 2005 to 15.8% in 2015. Alternative, or "gig" work is defined as "temporary help agency workers, on-call workers, contract company workers, independent contractors or freelancers", and is generally unsteady, without a fixed paycheck and with virtually no benefits."

The decline of conventional full-time work has impacted every demographic. Whether this change is good or bad depends on what kinds of jobs people want. “Workers seeking full-time, steady work have lost,” said Krueger. He then added, perhaps sarcastically, that “while many of those who value flexibility and have a spouse with a steady job have probably gained.”

With 2 paragraphs to spare.

 

[hashtag46]

With 2 paragraphs to spare.

Haha! I don't want to be banned again

 

[Hard_Rom]

Shit like this is developed world wide. Hard to blame one man for the problems associated with globalization. You want companies to keep jobs in your country. Ditch capitalism and go with a socialist managed economy with nationalized companies. Corporations will follow the higher profit margins brought about by low salaries. Salaries are one of the few costs companies have some control over. Might only be worth 7% of price but that can mean an extra 1% of profit. Enough to get a CEO a million dollar bonus.

 

[water505]

Shit like this is developed world wide. Hard to blame one man for the problems associated with globalization. You want companies to keep jobs in your country. Ditch capitalism and go with a socialist managed economy with nationalized companies. Corporations will follow the higher profit margins brought about by low salaries.

Viva Venezuela!!

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Viva Cuba!

 

[water505]

No toilet paper, but free health care!

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Free rice cooker!


No rice...

 

[water505]

What ever happened to the American industry and investments that were going to flood into Cuba? I'm sure companies have been chomping at the bit ready to send their best and brightest to the Socialist Paradise.

 

[hashtag46]

Give him (HardRom) a break, will ya?

 

[JohnnySavage]

You tried, you really did.

From your article:


Yeah, probably because tech and overnight shipping work 24/7/365. Plus the other many positions created in that time period that are not made for Ward fucking Cleaver.

W-2 workers make me giggle. Burning their lives to make someone else rich.

 

[JohnnySavage]

What ever happened to the American industry and investments that were going to flood into Cuba? I'm sure companies have been chomping at the bit ready to send their best and brightest to the Socialist Paradise.

Ummm.... because we have a Republican Congress, bought and paid for by the cowards that cut and run from Cuba?

It's like you're trying to be the dumbest of the dumb on the GB

 

[Greypowerful]

The problem with a great deal of American op ed, both amateur and professional (although most of the pros are pretty much prone to sophistry, in my view) is the image I get of Charles Schultz's "Lucy" jumping up and down, stamping her feet and yelling stridently " I'm right and you're wrong, as well as STOOPID "

Most evident in Chump supporters, but Billary groupies come in a pretty close second.

When are you people actually going to show some interest in ADDRESSING the systemic rot that's so often talked about in such a mean-spirited manner?

Reason for edit : FUCKING Autocorrect

 

[water505]

Give him (HardRom) a break, will ya?

Are you kidding? He's one of the easiest targets around here.

 

[Disgustipated]

W-2 workers make me giggle. Burning their lives to make someone else rich.

But that's ok. If that's what you want to do and have the freedom to create while earning a guaranteed paycheck, it can be a sweet gig.

 

[Hard_Rom]

Shit like this is developed world wide. Hard to blame one man for the problems associated with globalization. You want companies to keep jobs in your country. Ditch capitalism and go with a socialist managed economy with nationalized companies. Corporations will follow the higher profit margins brought about by low salaries. Salaries are one of the few costs companies have some control over. Might only be worth 7% of price but that can mean an extra 1% of profit. Enough to get a CEO a million dollar bonus.

Don't take this as my being for socialist managed economies. Government has some role in managing economies but like most things extreme solutions usually have their own issues. Capitalist economies are very efficient and competition keeps prices down.

But don't complain when corporations go to lesser-developed countries searching for lower labour costs. Their profits are funneled into many retirement plans. Major stakeholders are typically mutual funds and retirement plan managers. And don't blame it on any one man. The Canada/US Free Trade agreement was negotiated by Ronal Reagan and Brian Mulroney. Conservative politicians. Many conservative politicians are capitalist free traders and like globalized free trade.

Much of this is driven by want not need. We want big screen TVs and 8-cylinder trucks. We don't need them. If folk lived simpler lives they could get by on a lot less, need lower salaries and keep jobs in our own countries. Fiscal austerity is not just for governments. the people should act in a similar fashion.

Socialist policies are best kept in health, welfare (including old age pensions and child benefits) and education. Let capitalism for the most part run the economy and siphon off the profits via taxation to support social programs.

 

[phrodeau]

What ever happened to the American industry and investments that were going to flood into Cuba? I'm sure companies have been chomping at the bit ready to send their best and brightest to the Socialist Paradise.

There's an embargo, dumbass.

 

[Hard_Rom]

I'm hoping that if and or when Cuba relaxes many of it's socialist managed economy policies Canadian companies get first dibs at investment. Fidel bounced Justin on his knee as a babe. Got to be worth quite a few million in potential investment dollars. Fidel was a pall bearer at Pierre's funeral.

 

[Greypowerful]

There's an embargo, dumbass.

Yup, and the REST of the Planet was happy to do business - even though the Commies wanted 50% vigorish.

Havana June 2015 - LOTS of multinational investment going on, but Cubans still want to welcome "Los Yanquis" back. They don't like your GOP douche bags, but they are looking forward to your MONEY!