Thanks a lot, Bush. Thanks a lot, trickle-down economics.

Le Jacquelope

Loves Spam
Joined
Apr 9, 2003
Posts
76,445
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/27/business/economy/27jobs.html?_r=1&pagewanted=print

September 27, 2009
U.S. Job Seekers Exceed Openings by Record Ratio
By PETER S. GOODMAN

Despite signs that the economy has resumed growing, unemployed Americans now confront a job market that is bleaker than ever in the current recession, and employment prospects are still getting worse.

Job seekers now outnumber openings six to one, the worst ratio since the government began tracking open positions in 2000. According to the Labor Department’s latest numbers, from July, only 2.4 million full-time permanent jobs were open, with 14.5 million people officially unemployed.

And even though the pace of layoffs is slowing, many companies remain anxious about growth prospects in the months ahead, making them reluctant to add to their payrolls.

“There’s too much uncertainty out there,” said Thomas A. Kochan, a labor economist at M.I.T.’s Sloan School of Management. “There’s not going to be an upsurge in job openings for quite a while, not until employers feel confident the economy is really growing.”

The dearth of jobs reflects the caution of many American businesses when no one knows what will emerge to propel the economy. With unemployment at 9.7 percent nationwide, the shortage of paychecks is both a cause and an effect of weak hiring.

In Milwaukee, Debbie Kransky has been without work since February, when she was laid off from a medical billing position — her second job loss in two years. She has exhausted her unemployment benefits, because her last job lasted for only a month.

Indeed, in a perverse quirk of the unemployment system, she would have qualified for continued benefits had she stayed jobless the whole two years, rather than taking a new position this year. But since her latest unemployment claim stemmed from a job that lasted mere weeks, she recently drew her final check of $340.

Ms. Kransky, 51, has run through her life savings of roughly $10,000. Her job search has garnered little besides anxiety.

“I’ve worked my entire life,” said Ms. Kransky, who lives alone in a one-bedroom apartment. “I’ve got October rent. After that, I don’t know. I’ve never lived month to month my entire life. I’m just so scared, I can’t even put it into words.”

Last week, Ms. Kransky was invited to an interview for a clerical job with a health insurance company. She drove her Jeep truck downtown and waited in the lobby of an office building for nearly an hour, but no one showed. Despondent, she drove home, down $10 in gasoline.

For years, the economy has been powered by consumers, who borrowed exuberantly against real estate and tapped burgeoning stock portfolios to spend in excess of their incomes. Those sources of easy money have mostly dried up. Consumption is now tempered by saving; optimism has been eclipsed by worry.

Meanwhile, some businesses are in a holding pattern as they await the financial consequences of the health care reforms being debated in Washington.

Even after companies regain an inclination to expand, they will probably not hire aggressively anytime soon. Experts say that so many businesses have pared back working hours for people on their payrolls, while eliminating temporary workers, that many can increase output simply by increasing the workload on existing employees.

“They have tons of room to increase work without hiring a single person,” said Heidi Shierholz, an economist at the Economic Policy Institute Economist. “For people who are out of work, we do not see signs of light at the end of the tunnel.”

Even typically hard-charging companies are showing caution.

During the technology bubble of the late 1990s and again this decade, Cisco Systems — which makes Internet equipment — expanded rapidly. As the sense takes hold that the recession has passed, Cisco is again envisioning double-digit rates of sales growth, with plans to move aggressively into new markets, like the business of operating large scale computer data servers.

Yet even as Cisco pursues such designs, the company’s chief executive, John T. Chambers, said in an interview Friday that he anticipated “slow hiring,” given concerns about the vigor of growth ahead. “We’ll be doing it selectively,” he said.

Two recent surveys of newspaper help-wanted advertisements and of employers’ inclinations to add workers were at their lowest levels on record, noted Andrew Tilton, a Goldman Sachs economist.

Job placement companies say their customers are not yet wiling to hire large numbers of temporary workers, usually a precursor to hiring full-timers.

“It’s going to take quite some time before we see robust job growth,” said Tig Gilliam, chief executive of Adecco North America, a major job placement and staffing company.

During the last recession, in 2001, the number of jobless people reached little more than double the number of full-time job openings, according to the Labor Department data. By the beginning of this year, job seekers outnumbered jobs four-to-one, with the ratio growing ever more lopsided in recent months.

Though layoffs have been both severe and prominent, the greatest source of distress is a predilection against hiring by many American businesses. From the beginning of the recession in December 2007 through July of this year, job openings declined 45 percent in the West and the South, 36 percent in the Midwest and 23 percent in the Northeast.

Shrinking job opportunities have assailed virtually every industry this year. Since the end of 2008, job openings have diminished 47 percent in manufacturing, 37 percent in construction and 22 percent in retail. Even in education and health services — faster-growing areas in which many unemployed people have trained for new careers — job openings have dropped 21 percent this year. Despite the passage of a stimulus spending package aimed at shoring up state and local coffers, government job openings have diminished 17 percent this year.

In the suburbs of Chicago, Vicki Redican, 52, has been unemployed for almost two years, since she lost her $75,000-a-year job as a sales and marketing manager at a plastics company. College-educated, Ms. Redican first sought another management job. More recently, she has tried and failed to land a cashier’s position at a local grocery store, and a barista slot at a Starbucks coffee shop.

Substitute teaching assignments once helped her pay the bills. “Now, there are so many people substitute teaching that I can no longer get assignments,” she said.

“I’ve learned that I can’t look to tomorrow,” she said. “Every day, I try to do the best I can. I say to myself, ‘I don’t control this process.’ That’s the only way you can look at it. Otherwise, you’d have to go up on the roof and crack your head open.”
 
Once again Bush left office in January '09.

Thank Obama and his band of merry Sentors & Congressmen.
 
Once again Bush left office in January '09.
Doesn't matter. These unemployment rates started under Bush.

Thank Obama and his band of merry Sentors & Congressmen.
For something they didn't cause? No thank you. This is Bush's fault. Obama is now stuck with cleaning up the mess that Bush's economic policies created.

If Bush or McCain were in office today you'd still be reading this news story. Who would you blame then?
 
Doesn't matter. These unemployment rates started under Bush.


For something they didn't cause? No thank you. This is Bush's fault. Obama is now stuck with cleaning up the mess that Bush's economic policies created.

If Bush or McCain were in office today you'd still be reading this news story. Who would you blame then?

Oh yeah his excessive spending has not hurt anything, has it.:rolleyes:
 
Doesn't matter. These unemployment rates started under Bush.


For something they didn't cause? No thank you. This is Bush's fault. Obama is now stuck with cleaning up the mess that Bush's economic policies created.

If Bush or McCain were in office today you'd still be reading this news story. Who would you blame then?

I believe the Democrats control Both houses...and have for some years now.
 
Trickle Down Economics only works for the wealthy. The money never trickles down to the middle class or the poor.
 
Trickle Down Economics only works for the wealthy. The money never trickles down to the middle class or the poor.

Now we have the liberal approach instead....trickle down unemployment and despair.
 
Trickle down economic policies do not work. The rich build the economic equivalent of hill side terraces and cisterns. Tax cuts for them mean tax increases for everyone else, cuts in spending programs that benefit everyone else, and/or more national debt.

We need for the government to take money away from rich Republicans, and spread the wealth around in order to buy votes for Democratic politicians. It worked for Franklin Roosevelt. It will work for Barack Obama. The Democrats should use their power in order to get money in order to get more power.
 
Unemployment and despair started during the Bush Administration.

Unemployment and despair were started by the liberal congress who insisted on leveraging our banking system (twisting it) to make loans to people who couldn't afford to pay it back for political purposes. It caused the real estate bubble which caused the economy to tank. It's this continued twisting of economics by liberals for their political excesses which is further eroding the economic base. It won't recover until we gain stability and business-friendly policies (from a Republican congress and administration).
 
Unemployment and despair were started by the liberal congress who insisted on leveraging our banking system (twisting it) to make loans to people who couldn't afford to pay it back for political purposes. It caused the real estate bubble which caused the economy to tank. It's this continued twisting of economics by liberals for their political excesses which is further eroding the economic base. It won't recover until we gain stability and business-friendly policies (from a Republican congress and administration).
You're still in denial, skippy.
 
Trickle down economic policies do not work. The rich build the economic equivalent of hill side terraces and cisterns. Tax cuts for them mean tax increases for everyone else, cuts in spending programs that benefit everyone else, and/or more national debt.

We need for the government to take money away from rich Republicans, and spread the wealth around in order to buy votes for Democratic politicians. It worked for Franklin Roosevelt. It will work for Barack Obama. The Democrats should use their power in order to get money in order to get more power.

Thank you for illustrating for how badly liberals govern.

Wealth grows when it's not in the hands of liberals, and growing wealth benefits all in society. Our "poor" are wealthier than middle class people in most of the rest of the world, thanks in good part to conservative, economic-friendly policies of the past. Liberals like you try to convince us that economic growth is bad or impossible and that our economy made up of a fixed sized "pie" whereas it's not, its something that can grow if left to it's own and not burdened with excess taxes and 'wealth redistribution'.

When you have excess taxes, you have taken capital out of the hands of the people who know how to grow the economy and put it in the hands of corrupt politicians. Under liberal leadership, jobs will continue to dissappear and won't reappear for a long time...will take 3-4 years to recover from this horrible mess, and that's only after we throw the liberals out of power and return to favorable economic policies (takes about a year to implement after the Republicans return to power).
 
Last edited:
You're still in denial, skippy.

From your point of view, it must sound nice to put some fool liberal in power with the authority to "look out for your good." The problem is that the fool liberal is implementing policies that are bad for you and most other people. Restricting economic growth for a bunch of feel-good legislation will not do you nor much of anyone any good and will give us continued elevated unemployment figures. The "stimulus" was just one example of pork-gone-wild which did nothing for "stimulus" and instead just burdened your kids with more deficit while enriching friends of politicians.
 
From your point of view, it must sound nice to put some fool liberal in power with the authority to "look out for your good." The problem is that the fool liberal is implementing policies that are bad for you and most other people. Restricting economic growth for a bunch of feel-good legislation will not do you nor much of anyone any good and will give us continued elevated unemployment figures. The "stimulus" was just one example of pork-gone-wild which did nothing for "stimulus" and instead just burdened your kids with more deficit while enriching friends of politicians.
I suppose the Bush tax cuts for the rich and debt he created for the war in Iraq and Afghanistan didn't create a deficit? You're still in denial.
 
You're still in denial, skippy.

I'm not the one who wiled his youth away in a fog of drugs and alcohol and now wants to have some liberal politican kill the golden goose for a bite of some gooseflesh.
 
I suppose the Bush tax cuts for the rich and debt he created for the war in Iraq and Afghanistan didn't create a deficit? You're still in denial.

The deficit was miniscule compared to what we have now. Bush's tax cuts were to get money back into the hands of people and out of the hands of government.

Defending ourselves is an important effort. Giving ACORN millions/billions in borrowed money is not.
 
Last edited:
I'm not the one who wiled his youth away in a fog of drugs and alcohol and now wants to have some liberal politican kill the golden goose for a bite of some gooseflesh.
You're just a Right Wing Nut in denial.
 
You're just a Right Wing Nut in denial.

I'm not in denial, I know perfectly well what happened. Now it's time to reverse the idiocy and get back to sound economic principles and the only way to do that is defeat the foolish and corrupt liberals at the ballot box.

I'm not a nut job, as far as you know, I'm probably the senior management guy at your work location who is worried about the economy and how I'm going to keep the hundreds of guys like you employed in this horrible economy which is sinking further and further down thanks to the crazy policies of this congress and administration.
 
I'm not in denial, I know perfectly well what happened. Now it's time to reverse the idiocy and get back to sound economic principles and the only way to do that is defeat the foolish and corrupt liberals at the ballot box.

I'm not a nut job, as far as you know, I'm probably the senior management guy at your work location who is worried about the economy and how I'm going to keep the hundreds of guys like you employed in this horrible economy which is sinking further and further down thanks to the crazy policies of this congress and administration.
First of all you are not my senior management guy. For all I know you aren't that smart. And yes we are going to reverse all the wrong that the Bush Administration did. However, it will take some time to clean-up such a mess. :)
 
First of all you are not my senior management guy. For all I know you aren't that smart. And yes we are going to reverse all the wrong that the Bush Administration did. However, it will take some time to clean-up such a mess. :)

Just remember this, there is not enough money in the world to pay endless unemployment to all the people who this administration will make jobless. Make no mistake, these economic policies are not going to restore employment either. It will get worse. Pray that they don't put you in the unemployment line. A liberal vote is a vote for job loss.
 
Unemployment and despair started during the Bush Administration.

Unemployment and despair were started by the liberal congress who insisted on leveraging our banking system (twisting it) to make loans to people who couldn't afford to pay it back for political purposes. It caused the real estate bubble which caused the economy to tank. It's this continued twisting of economics by liberals for their political excesses which is further eroding the economic base. It won't recover until we gain stability and business-friendly policies (from a Republican congress and administration).
That wasn't started by the liberal congress you retard. It was started during the Republican Congress in the early Bush years. It was started by DE REGULATION, your holiest watchword.

From your point of view, it must sound nice to put some fool liberal in power with the authority to "look out for your good."
It sure beats leaving the corporations to plunder us.

It's always about greed with you.

The problem is that the fool liberal is implementing policies that are bad for you and most other people.
They work for Europe. Take a look at their unemployment compared to ours, dumbass.

Restricting economic growth for a bunch of feel-good legislation will not do you nor much of anyone any good and will give us continued elevated unemployment figures.
News flash: the elevated unemployment figures have come as a result of offshoring jobs and investment going overseas - trickle down economics under Reagan and Bush and Bush Jr.

The "stimulus" was just one example of pork-gone-wild which did nothing for "stimulus" and instead just burdened your kids with more deficit while enriching friends of politicians.
If it weren't for the Stimulus Package more Americans would have run out of unemployment benefits by now. The business Credit Freeze would be in full swing right now. This wouldn't be just a Depression - it would be fucking Fallout 3. WITHOUT NUKES.

By the way, Bush and Obama fought for that Stimulus Package.

I suppose the Bush tax cuts for the rich and debt he created for the war in Iraq and Afghanistan didn't create a deficit? You're still in denial.
This goes way beyond denial. He's piss drunk.

I'm not the one who wiled his youth away in a fog of drugs and alcohol and now wants to have some liberal politican kill the golden goose for a bite of some gooseflesh.
Put the Jack Daniels down. Now.

The deficit was miniscule compared to what we have now. Bush's tax cuts were to get money back into the hands of people and out of the hands of government.
But his tax cuts failed to produce that.

And then the kicker is Bush had to sign a bill adding over a trillion dollars to the "deficit" to save us from total societal collapse. Do you remember that part?

Defending ourselves is an important effort. Giving ACORN millions/billions in borrowed money is not.
Defending ourselves from WHAT? Iraq? WTF were they gonna do to us? Put a Muslim song on the top 100? Hell, they weren't even gonna do that.

I'm not in denial, I know perfectly well what happened. Now it's time to reverse the idiocy and get back to sound economic principles and the only way to do that is defeat the foolish and corrupt liberals at the ballot box.
Your way led America to near ruin.

I'm not a nut job, as far as you know, I'm probably the senior management guy at your work location
Dude, I am senior management. I'm at the top of the IT food chain at a community bank.

As a liberal I got POLICIES enacted at this bank that saved jobs and that saved the bank from being at Ground Zero of this economic crisis.

The key was not anything you have come up with here - it was to get out of the subprime market years ago, as I suggested and helped make happen.

who is worried about the economy and how I'm going to keep the hundreds of guys like you employed in this horrible economy which is sinking further and further down thanks to 8 years of Bush and 6 years of the GOP in Congress.
Edited for correctness.
 
Just remember this, there is not enough money in the world to pay endless unemployment to all the people who this administration will make jobless. Make no mistake, these economic policies are not going to restore employment either. It will get worse. Pray that they don't put you in the unemployment line. A liberal vote is a vote for job loss.
A conservative vote has already proven to be a vote for job loss.

Look at how poorly Bush did during the 6 years of total Republican dominance.

Conservative principles lead to a nation's ruin.
 
Just remember this, there is not enough money in the world to pay endless unemployment to all the people who this administration will make jobless. Make no mistake, these economic policies are not going to restore employment either. It will get worse. Pray that they don't put you in the unemployment line. A liberal vote is a vote for job loss.
Remember this. Bush spent billions of dollars on the war in Iraq while reducing revenue through his tax cuts for the wealthy. The damage and despair we are experiencing right now is from Bush. Not from Obama.
 
Ah hell let's all be honest. The current economic problem stems from republicans and democrats. Don't forget after Bush Sr was in office it was Clinton, he enacted policies that Bush Jr had to deal with, he didn't do that right obviously but he knew there was a problem. :rolleyes:

What we need is to find not politicians get at the top levels and well not politician a fix. Think about it, politicians think about the people they are nominally in charge of helping, after they think about the people who give them money to get elected. If you put people in charge who are not there because they kiss ass better than the other guy and don't put the same words in a better spin things will get done that alot won't like but will work.

With a politician they only do things that everyone possible will like, which probably doesn't fix the problem anyway. :eek:
 
Back
Top