JOBS BOOM!

New Paradigm...

Published on October 8, 2004 By hitparade In Politics

Fact: The Bush administration enjoys a NET jobs gain under the traditional paradigm used to calculate employment statistics. More important fact: More people are now working than ever before. That is the number to tout. The traditional 9 to 5 factory job by which one earned income is no longer the exclusive calculus. In the after of 911, the historical trend towards self- employment considerably accelerated. Many employees are now independent contractors; many also now work from home. These numbers are not reflected in the jobs numbers announced today. The growth in small businesses is also at an all time high, especially in the construction industry. There is a construction boom across much of the U.S.A. The fact is that more people now than ever before are income earners as a direct result of self- industry. The glass grasshopper is surely half-full. Lest our mentality be self-fulfilling prophesy ! No?

Comments

CrispE

on Oct 08, 2004

hitparade:

There is an old saying that "figures lie and liars figure." But, toss into your salad the following: Yes, there is not a huge net loss of jobs, BUT, there is a huge net loss of income because $20 jobs were replaced by $7 to $10 jobs. Toss in that manufacturing jobs that have the good benefits (as well as pay) have declined the most since the great depression (1929-1940). Toss in that health care that cost an average of $2300 now cost $3500 in just 4 years and you see why spending has now flattened out and Americans are repaying their credit cards instead of spending at car dealers. Toss in that gas prices that are now rising probably won't stop until most people are paying $2.50 at the pump. Toss in that with the budget deficit at $425 billion that the government has no ammunition to help the economy.

So, try to paint a little sunshine on a bleak picture. Most people aren't buying it (or anything else).

hitparade

on Oct 08, 2004

I just bought a new television. I used my credit card. I paid it down a long time ago. I know others who just declare bankruptcy. Too each his own.

My neighbor's family just received a discount in their health insurance premium because they joined an innovative plan. The less the plan is used, the lower one’s health care cost. Makes sense. Seems fair. Likely, better than big government can do. The bigger the bureaucracy the more shackled the individual.

I presently do not have health care insurance. I choose not too. I have trust in my health. When the time comes, I will readjust my priorities. Unless, of course, I can count on you to pay my way, then I’ll just do what I want. I’ll keep my gas guzzling SUV. If sold it, I could get health care. If I didn’t pay so much in taxes, could also afford it.

If you don't personally pay enough taxes, e.g. Ben Affleck, please send your extra cash to me. I promise to spend it wisely. You buy that?

CrispE

on Oct 08, 2004

hitparade:

What I don't buy is a system where you have to make a choice between an SUV and health care.

The problem with the economy is simply stated that there are too many problems to deal with in any simple matter. The pluses to the economy over the past 18 months were consumer spending and real estate (both new and refinancing). Those pluses are either now gone or waning. Anybody who tells you differently is trying to lift your wallet. So, what keeps the economy afloat?

On the other hand, the deficit, the loss in wages, the rising commodity prices (especially oil) threaten to wreck our lives. All at a time when the Bush administration continues to tell us that it can cut taxes and thereby raise revenues.

So, saying the economy is ok, that it's going to get better is fairy tale land.

Deference

on Oct 08, 2004

I presently do not have health care insurance..... ... I’ll keep my gas guzzling SUV

That is a great illustration of a Bush vote. Look man, I'm young and healthy too, but accidents can happen.

hitparade

on Oct 08, 2004

Choices.

I know accidents can happen. That's why I have car insurance.

Breathing is a wayaward thread ready to be yanked out of our clothe of life at less than a moments notice.

Ask the 3,000 who died on 911.

Soicalize health care and acccidnets will still happen. Ask the soviets in the liberal media.

drmiler

on Oct 08, 2004

Reply #1 By: CrispE - 10/8/2004 8:52:37 AM
hitparade:

There is an old saying that "figures lie and liars figure." But, toss into your salad the following: Yes, there is not a huge net loss of jobs, BUT, there is a huge net loss of income because $20 jobs were replaced by $7 to $10 jobs. Toss in that manufacturing jobs that have the good benefits (as well as pay) have declined the most since the great depression (1929-1940). Toss in that health care that cost an average of $2300 now cost $3500 in just 4 years and you see why spending has now flattened out and Americans are repaying their credit cards instead of spending at car dealers. Toss in that gas prices that are now rising probably won't stop until most people are paying $2.50 at the pump. Toss in that with the budget deficit at $425 billion that the government has no ammunition to help the economy.

So, try to paint a little sunshine on a bleak picture. Most people aren't buying it (or anything else).

Try this:

December 04, 2003

According to democrats and their willing accomplices in the press, President Bush is single-handedly responsible for the worst economy since the ice ages. This inference suggests that the Constitution vests the office of the president with some level of authority over the economy. If the American people were more constitutionally astute, and the press was doing its job, the democrats could never get away with such a shameless distortion of the Constitution because there is not a single provision in the document that grants the President any general authority over the economy.

From a constitutional standpoint, the President is merely the head of one of the 3 branches of the federal government. He is not the ruler or president of a single nation because the Constitution only established a partial union between the several States. Under our constitutional system of government, the powers of the President are more fiction than fact because they are not as extensive as many believe.

The Constitution vests the President with twelve powers and duties. Since the document established a federal government of limited enumerated powers, the only powers and duties a President can lawfully exercise are those specifically granted by the Constitution. The constitutional powers and duties of the President are:

1) Signs or rejects all legislative bills submitted to him by Congress. Art. I., Sec. 7., Cl. 2.

2) Becomes the Commander and Chief of the military forces of the United States (After a declaration of War by Congress or an act of war against the United States by a foreign power) and the Militia of the several States when called into the actual service of the United States. (By Congress) Art. II., Sec. 2., Cl. 1.

3) Requests opinions, in writing, from the principal officer of any Executive Department of the federal government concerning their duties. Art. II., Sec. 2., Cl. 1.

4) Can grant Reprieves or Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment. Art. II., Sec. 2., Cl. 1.

5) Makes Treaties with the Advice and Consent of the Senate. (Only by a vote of two-thirds of those Senators present). Art. II., Sec. 2., Cl. 2.

6) Nominates for appointment, with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, Ambassadors, public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States. Congress can, by law, vest the President with the power to appoint inferior Officers, i.e., Courts of Law, or Heads of Departments. Art. II., Sec. 2., Cl. 2.

7) Can fill Vacancies which occur when the Senate is in Recess and unavailable to confirm an appointment. Art. II., Sec. 2., Cl. 3.

8) Gives Congress from time to time Information on the State of the Union, and recommends to Congress for its Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient. Art. II., Sec. 3.

9) Can convene both Houses of Congress on extraordinary Occasions. Art. II., Sec. 3.

10) Receives Ambassadors and other public Ministers. Art. II., Sec. 3.

11) Takes care that (federal) laws are faithfully executed. Art. II., Sec. 3.

12) Commissions all the Officers of the United States. Art. II., Sec. 3.

As shown above, none of the powers vested in the office of the president have anything to do with the so-called economy. How can the President control the destiny of the economy of a nation when he doesn’t even have the power to enact legislation on his own? All legislative powers granted to the federal government by the Constitution are vested in the Congress. This means Congress writes the laws, not the President. The President merely signs or rejects legislation submitted to him by Congress. So how can a president be held responsible for the performance of the economy?

The democratic candidates for the 2004 presidential election are falling over each other in an effort to pander to the American people concerning the economy. If one candidate promises to add 600,000 jobs, another promises 700,000 plus a Snickers bar. President Bush will do the same when the election rolls around next year.

Since the Constitution does not grant the President any general authority over the economy, these grandiose promises are nothing but shameless lies and distortions. These individuals will say anything to curry favor with the people. And to add insult to injury, the American people are such dupes that they are willing to give these clowns money so they can spout their carefully crafted propaganda.

There is no hope of preserving liberty unless the American people educate themselves and quit falling for these political fairy tales. The next time a presidential candidate asks for your vote in exchange for creating jobs and reducing unemployment, stand-up and scream―The President doesn’t have any constitutional authority over the economy, stupid!

Deference

on Oct 08, 2004

Soicalize health care and acccidnets will still happen

Absolutely, accidents will always happen. Bad things like 9 / 11 will happen again, we don't know at what point, but they will. Still, some believe restricting citizens individual freedoms and enacting police state policy is the best way to make us feel warm and fuzzy while we line up behind our C.I.C. to die like lemmings for paper tigers like Iraq. All the while we will claim that we are better off than other industrialized countries because our government offers very little assistance for those who can't pay to restore their health. Yeah, makes sense!

terpfan1980

on Oct 08, 2004

Reply #3 By: CrispE - 10/8/2004 10:22:02 AM
hitparade:

What I don't buy is a system where you have to make a choice between an SUV and health care.

I don't buy such a system either.

If you are that damn stupid that you choose an SUV when you know you don't have health care, then please don't assume that you can make me, or anyone else in the "system" responsible for it.

That is the biggest problem I have with liberals. They assume that society is to blame for stupid choices that people make. Liberals know that, left to our own devices, we will make wrong choices because society has let us down and not educated enough to make the right choices, or that society has let us down because those that should help make the choices easier haven't been taxed enough or haven't had enough incentives put into place to do the right thing and take care of "us".

Again, if you are choosing something other than basic transportation and a job that provides health coverage then who's fault is it?!? No one told you that you had to own an SUV before finding a job that provides good benefits.

If people choose to spend too much on their cars, their homes and their "stuff", then who is to blame? Oh, yeah, I forgot, it's society because we didn't tax the hell out of those individuals so they couldn't afford to live outside their means (even if it's not really outside their means).

Please, line up another fast ball down the middle of the plate so I can smack it right back up the middle. I love it when I get a chance to do that.

Myrrander

on Oct 08, 2004

Jobs Boom, eh? This just came out today:

American businesses created a net total of 96,000 jobs in September, far less than the 148,000 forecast by Wall Street economists. The US labour department also downgraded its estimate of new jobs created in August to 128,000 from the 144,000 reported a month ago.

Overall the unemployment rate is unchanged at 5.4%. Today's monthly report is the last one before next month's election, and is likely to provide ammunition for the Democrat candidate John Kerry.

"I wouldn't want to be in President Bush's shoes. He had better prepare himself for an onslaught," said Ken Mayland of ClearView Economics. "The reality is that a 96,000 increase ... is an anaemic rise, and is in no way a satisfactory one."

Mr Mayland said the economy should be creating 250,000 jobs or more per month. Mr Bush will now head into the election presiding over a nation where there are nearly 600,000 fewer jobs than when he took office in January 2001.

Daiwa

on Oct 09, 2004

Yes, there is not a huge net loss of jobs, BUT, there is a huge net loss of income because $20 jobs were replaced by $7 to $10 jobs. Toss in that manufacturing jobs that have the good benefits (as well as pay) have declined the most since the great depression (1929-1940). Toss in that health care that cost an average of $2300 now cost $3500 in just 4 years and you see why spending has now flattened out and Americans are repaying their credit cards instead of spending at car dealers. Toss in that gas prices that are now rising probably won't stop until most people are paying $2.50 at the pump. Toss in that with the budget deficit at $425 billion that the government has no ammunition to help the economy.

The nature of jobs is always in a state of flux influenced by economic factors outside the control of government. The fact of the global economy's effect on the nature and character of jobs cannot be ignored. We don't live or work in a vacuum here in the states and to think we can build a cocoon around ourselves and artificially sustain unsustainable wage levels is foolish. Presidents don't and can't immunize the economy against the effects of global economic trends. And who could imagine or predict the effect on our economy of the 9/11 attacks?

Cheers,
Daiwa

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!