HOTY

Go look in Alta Mesa.

+1

isn`t jobs dead?

Jobs not found

I think he's buried by now, no?

No worries, once they all fall off of the unemployment benefit list after maxing out, they cannot continue to make the Job Creators look bad for doing nothing.

It's obvious that Obomba needs to spend a few trillion dollars on green tech. That should get the number down a few thousand for a couple months.

Nadie_AZ: This past week, the local Fox affiliate suddenly decided that the OWS protesters were wrong. There were jobs everywhere! They spent half an hour or so presenting all the jobs all over the valley. Most were starbucks or similar. They kept pounding the coffee table that there were jobs jobs jobs, you just gotta go get them.

Guess they were wrong?

Wow...I'm glad my local Fox affiliate isn't a clone of Fox News. The DC Fox affiliate is the most neutral news I can find in the area.

Wow, that number is way lower than I thought. Still bad though.

//and there are ppl out there who won't take a lower paying jobs (like some univ. grads who expect 100K/yr to start)

Cheesus: Go look in Alta Mesa.

Pfft. Its search results suck. Use Google.

Dig a little deeper, Subby. You'll find him eventually...

Blues_X: [images.politico.com image 605x328]

It's their own fault that they are unemployed!

That's only if they voted for Democrats.

rev. dave: No worries, once they all fall off of the unemployment benefit list after maxing out, they cannot continue to make the Job Creators look bad for doing nothing.

Someone else that doesn't understand how U3 is calculated.

natazha: rev. dave: No worries, once they all fall off of the unemployment benefit list after maxing out, they cannot continue to make the Job Creators look bad for doing nothing.

Someone else that doesn't understand how U3 is calculated.

I am talking about U6 and how U3 is reported instead of the U6.

Joshua Shapiro, chief US economist
NAZI ZIONIST OBONGO CONSPIRACY!!1111!!1@11!!!11!!11

The jobs will come along any minute now. Just keep electing Republicans to make legislation that they freely admit CAN'T create jobs.

rhondajeremy: Wow, that number is way lower than I thought. Still bad though.

//and there are ppl out there who won't take a lower paying jobs (like some univ. grads who expect 100K/yr to start)

I wonder if that number doesn't take into account people who have completely given up looking for a job so they're not even on the radar.

/Overworked and underpaid
//Only way to stay employed in the US today.

Maine has manufacturing jobs going unfilled.
Who wants to earn $10.00 an hour doing riveting all day when you can go on welfare and fish all day?

A large group of people are satisfied with what is considered 'poverty', so why work?

rhondajeremy: Wow, that number is way lower than I thought. Still bad though.

//and there are ppl out there who won't take a lower paying jobs (like some univ. grads who expect 100K/yr to start)

Um, yes there are. When you factor in the cost of living that keeps skyrocketing, the student loans, and what it takes to house and feed a family, not to mention the ever rising taxes, 100k a year is just getting by in most major cities where these disappearing jobs are ...

Anyone who sez, "TAKE A LOWER PAYING JOB! ANY JOB IS BETTER THAN NO JOB!" should try to raise a family of four on 25k a year, with no benefits and a mortgage. A minimum wage job is just enough to starve to death and live at the Salvation Army.

People don't realize how expensive it is just to survive these days. Kids between the ages of 5-18 need at least three wardrobe changes a year because they keep growing, and all the while, they eat everything in sight. Next month, people will have to make a BUDGET FOR PEANUT BUTTER, GODDAMMIT! It's farking ridiculous!

Even in mid sized cities, like the one I live in, anything less than 50k a year just ain't enough to pay the bills. Forget about "entertainment", "getting a new car", or "luxury items" like a new cell phone, the latest and greatest computer, flat screen, or whatever the hell people are shelling out money for ... it just ain't gonna happen. I consider myself to be very fortunate and blessed in these times, man. I don't spend money on anything that I don't absolutely need, and my kids are well taken care of. That's a rarity by and large with what's going on ...

BHShaman: Maine has manufacturing jobs going unfilled.
Who wants to earn $10.00 an hour doing riveting all day when you can go on welfare and fish all day?

A large group of people are satisfied with what is considered 'poverty', so why work?

If someone living on, "poverty level" can afford to pack up and move to Maine to get a $10.00 an hour job, pay the rent, feed the family and STILL have no health insurance, that person should be in charge of the finances of the entire world. Does anyone honestly think that someone on unemployment and county assistance will take a PAY CUT just to round out some inaccurate numbers about employment, made up by people who really don't give a shiat?

Currently unemployed (last day on my old project was at the end of September). Had 2 interviews yesterday (one with a total prick whose company I have zero interest working for), one for a slightly boring IT project. Have 3 interviews scheduled for Friday, and another one on Monday, and all of these will be for about $10K more than I was making on my last project.

Technology currently has an unemployment rate of less than 4%, which is kinda nice, and it seems like it is housing and construction is where a lot of the hardship is being felt right now.

Wow, made that same joke 6 months ago when the numbers were like that :\ but it wasn't as funny because Jobs wasn't dead yet?

rhondajeremy: Wow, that number is way lower than I thought. Still bad though.

//and there are ppl out there who won't take a lower paying jobs (like some univ. grads who expect 100K/yr to start)

"Which one gave you the quarter?"

"They ALLLLLLLLLLLLL did!"

/just to balance the derp for both sides

Nasty_McFilth: The DC Fox affiliate is the most neutral news I can find in the area.

...until they discuss anything happening on the Hill, then it's all "Obamacare" this and "job-killing regulations" that. In their defense, I think the guy they cut to in those segments isn't a local.

qsblues: rhondajeremy: Wow, that number is way lower than I thought. Still bad though.

//and there are ppl out there who won't take a lower paying jobs (like some univ. grads who expect 100K/yr to start)

Um, yes there are. When you factor in the cost of living that keeps skyrocketing, the student loans, and what it takes to house and feed a family, not to mention the ever rising taxes, 100k a year is just getting by in most major cities where these disappearing jobs are ...

Anyone who sez, "TAKE A LOWER PAYING JOB! ANY JOB IS BETTER THAN NO JOB!" should try to raise a family of four on 25k a year, with no benefits and a mortgage. A minimum wage job is just enough to starve to death and live at the Salvation Army.

People don't realize how expensive it is just to survive these days. Kids between the ages of 5-18 need at least three wardrobe changes a year because they keep growing, and all the while, they eat everything in sight. Next month, people will have to make a BUDGET FOR PEANUT BUTTER, GODDAMMIT! It's farking ridiculous!

Even in mid sized cities, like the one I live in, anything less than 50k a year just ain't enough to pay the bills. Forget about "entertainment", "getting a new car", or "luxury items" like a new cell phone, the latest and greatest computer, flat screen, or whatever the hell people are shelling out money for ... it just ain't gonna happen. I consider myself to be very fortunate and blessed in these times, man. I don't spend money on anything that I don't absolutely need, and my kids are well taken care of. That's a rarity by and large with what's going on ...

8/10

Excellent adaptation of "Won't someone think of the children?"

My unemployment ran out, that doesn't mean that I have a job that pays the bills, or that I can file a new claim. It just means that I'm not on the rolls anymore. But I have "a job," so I'm not unemployed, and I don't count.

/duh

BHShaman: Maine has manufacturing jobs going unfilled.
Who wants to earn $10.00 an hour doing riveting all day when you can go on welfare and fish all day?

A large group of people are satisfied with what is considered 'poverty', so why work?

Optimally, this would be exactly the logic people use. If employers are trying to maximize their profits, they minimize their wages; thus a 'floor' is necessary to keep people from being forced to take jobs which do not actually pay enough for them to survive. Ten dollars an hour may be technically enough to afford rent, transportation, and food, but it is not after factoring in the cost of healthy enough food to stave off malnutrition or money for health and auto insurance, especially for a family. Add to this the medical issues inherent in manufacturing work and the dearth of people willing to work for employers who apparently don't care about their employee's survival makes a lot more sense.

There appears to be a strange assumption that "If people can work, at any price, they should". Not only is this contrary to basic logic, (If I'm going to die slowly, I may as well not do so in a way that incentivizes others to keep me in that position) it's contrary to the greater good of the economy. (that is, the creation of demand for goods by the distribution of purchasing power)

'Supply and Demand', in the long term of this case, is actually counterproductive; sure, employers may be able to get some people to work at that wage, and there's plenty of demand for jobs, but the less you pay your employees, the less money there is to go around, the less demand there is for products in general, and what goes around comes around: Suddenly there's less demand for your products, too, which means you don't need as many employees. And the cycle continues.

Now, if the rich reliably spent all their money instead of investing it in funds or companies that also don't bother spending it, this wouldn't be as big a problem (it would still skew demand, in that you'd have a larger market for the kind of incredibly expensive, unique luxury goods that rich people like to splurge on, but your market for basic goods would keep falling, thus compounding the problem described above), but at least that money would come back into the economy somewhere.

I distinctly remember being told that our Master Race of Job Creators disliked uncertainty regarding their taxes and if the Bush era tax cuts were extended, we would see new jobs. That was 10 months ago. Where are the new jobs? It should be any day now...right?

Yoyo: 8/10

Excellent adaptation of "Won't someone think of the children?"

thank you very much for your thoughtful insight Smarmy McSmugness. SOMEBODY'S kid is going to find a cure for everything, but no matter how far advanced medicine gets, there's no cure for your idiocy.

blackminded: Nasty_McFilth: The DC Fox affiliate is the most neutral news I can find in the area.

...until they discuss anything happening on the Hill, then it's all "Obamacare" this and "job-killing regulations" that. In their defense, I think the guy they cut to in those segments isn't a local.

I think you're talking about Doug Luzader. He does work for Fox News as a DC correspondent and he definitely does project some of that smug Fox News douchiness.

Isuelde: Optimally, this would be exactly the logic people use. If employers are trying to maximize their profits, they minimize their wages; thus a 'floor' is necessary to keep people from being forced to take jobs which do not actually pay enough for them to survive. Ten dollars an hour may be technically enough to afford rent, transportation, and food, but it is not after factoring in the cost of healthy enough food to stave off malnutrition or money for health and auto insurance, especially for a family. Add to this the medical issues inherent in manufacturing work and the dearth of people willing to work for employers who apparently don't care about their employee's survival makes a lot more sense.

I disagree with your initial point. An employer can maximize profit without minimizing wages. Think about commissioned sales to start with. The more the employee sells, the more he earns and the more the employer profits. Also, consider competition between employers for the best employees. If I want my business to do better than my competition, I need a better product, so I need better employees, so I will pay them more to work for me instead of my competition. I can increase market share and increase profit. Caring for an employees heath and longevity can be beneficial as well. A healthier workforce means fewer workers absent due to illness, and less loss of productivity. In a manufacturing envorinment, this can be very beneficial, as the loss of one worker can shut down an entire production line, require payment of overtime to a replacement, or involve a less skilled temporary employee. Unfortunately in a lot of jobs in the service economy, employees are a fungible commodity or at least they are treated as such.

Yoyo:I disagree with your initial point. An employer can maximize profit without minimizing wages. Think about commissioned sales to start with. The more the employee sells, the more he earns and the more the employer profits. Also, consider competition between employers for the best employees. If I want my business to do better than my competition, I need a better product, so I need better employees, so I will pay them more to work for me instead of my competition. I can increase market share and increase profit. Caring for an employees heath and longevity can be beneficial as well. A healthier workforce means fewer workers absent due to illness, and less loss of productivity. In a manufacturing envorinment, this can be very beneficial, as the loss of one worker can shut down an entire production line, require payment of overtime to a replacement, or involve a less skilled temporary employee. Unfortunately in a lot of jobs in the service economy, employees are a fungible commodity or at least they are treated as such.

I agree. There exist circumstances under which employers can better maximize profits without paying employees a minimum. Unfortunately, those circumstances tend only to affect those people who have a) already been in the workplace for a while (in the case of competition for employees), b) are expected to remain in the workplace for a while (in the case of medical benefits), and/or c) are not considered disposable commodities (in the case of employee commissions). Furthermore, these circumstances tend to assume that the employers care about the quality of their product more than its price and/or image, which is increasingly rarely the case (due to the success of widespread media advertising in place of word-of-mouth and/or dearth of affordable choice due, once again, to low wages.) If these circumstances, or some like them, applied to all employees, then the problem would be moot.

Unfortunately, they do not, and so the race to the bottom line (among employers who, as you correctly noted, are short-sighted enough not to value their employees) continues.

Yoyo: I disagree with your initial point. An employer can maximize profit without minimizing wages. Think about commissioned sales to start with. The more the employee sells, the more he earns and the more the employer profits. Also, consider competition between employers for the best employees. If I want my business to do better than my competition, I need a better product, so I need better employees, so I will pay them more to work for me instead of my competition. I can increase market share and increase profit. Caring for an employees heath and longevity can be beneficial as well. A healthier workforce means fewer workers absent due to illness, and less loss of productivity. In a manufacturing envorinment, this can be very beneficial, as the loss of one worker can shut down an entire production line, require payment of overtime to a replacement, or involve a less skilled temporary employee. Unfortunately in a lot of jobs in the service economy, employees are a fungible commodity or at least they are treated as such.

6/10

Next, you're gonna say, "But I AM one of teh 99%!" Way to swing and entirely miss the point there Barry Bonds. If people can't AFFORD to buy your "better product", THEN what? And since you "Care for an employee's heath and longevity", does that mean you spring for benefits, amidst rising insurance costs? And if your competition offers the same product for less money, how do you adjust for that while paying your employees more? And since women tend to have this nasty affliction called "pregnancy", do you just not hire any women? Are all of your employees agnostic, to avoid taking time off for those pain in the ass religious holidays like Christmas and whatnot? Who the hell needs vacation, since you care so goddamn much?

Either you're still in Business Economics 101, or you have absolutely no idea what the hell you're talking about.

Looks like your production line will be completely automated and you layoff everyone, to maximize your profits, you buy foreign made products, then send all the tech jobs overseas, slash medical coverage for everyone but upper management, and pay piss poor wages for the few employees to do the most menial of tasks. Congratulations. You are now the CEO of Wal Mart.

Nadie_AZ: Most were starbucks or similar. They kept pounding the coffee table that there were jobs jobs jobs, you just gotta go get them.

I'm curious how many applications were received per open Starbucks job. The stats I generally hear are about 500 applications per open position.

Nasty_McFilth: blackminded: Nasty_McFilth: The DC Fox affiliate is the most neutral news I can find in the area.

...until they discuss anything happening on the Hill, then it's all "Obamacare" this and "job-killing regulations" that. In their defense, I think the guy they cut to in those segments isn't a local.

I think you're talking about Doug Luzader. He does work for Fox News as a DC correspondent and he definitely does project some of that smug Fox News douchiness.

GIS says yep, that's the dude in question. Yeesh. The anchors seem genuinely uncomfortable when he throws back to them sometimes.



"...and that's why Obama is a communist that hates America. Back to you, Jim!"

qsblues: thank you very much for your thoughtful insight [Yoyo]. SOMEBODY'S kid is going to find a cure for everything, but no matter how far advanced medicine gets, there's no cure for your idiocy.

And it seems that there is no cure for your idea that the affluence of a middle class lifestyle is a right.

Official jobs claims are pretty meaningless. The way it's reported has been finagled in such a way over the year that they almost never give an accurate impression of what's going on.

Looking at the percentage of the working population, 18 until they can collect SS, that is actually employed is far more useful. And further break it down to those working 40+ hours per week and those working fewer.


But they try not to report that as much as possible.