Jobs Cuts Unexpectedly Accelerate

Jobs are part of the key/equastion..its jsut like clockwork..all the piees have ti fit and work a certain way, otherwise it will not work. it must be precise to sustain its current order. Jobs=people with money, theirfore people can buy, thus circulating the money. Unemployment=yuor saving yuor pennies, spending ONLY what you need, not as you please, thus no one makes real purchases, thus=loss of profits from company.
I dont foresee anytime soon, pulling out of thiss recession. Ever few weeks bad news keeps coming about, like in this article. Its alwasy more bad news than what the the ones tell us or predict it is. it always outwieghs the positive. seeems big buisness is sending jobs overseas....and yes, jobs here will be for less wages/salary, half benfits, and msot likely, part time. Even on that, yuode still have to save all you can, because the value of life* keeps going up, to top it off.
really, with this system in place, i cannot foresee any new jobs.that would require new businesses to open, and with how things are now, thier IS no new businesses opening..= NO new jobs that pay fair to moderate wages/salary to keep up with the value of life* today, buisnessess are more worried about their profits. I hear it alt he time at work, yuo dont wanna do it? theis someone else who will for much less*

reply to post by jtma508


Depends on the type of job. Wages are only a major issue in industries with extremely low materials costs. Thats why you see clothing sweat shops. Materials cost almost nothing, so wages, taxes, and packaging/shipping are the only costs. The more expensive materials become, the less wages matter. That might seem counter to logic, but you have to figure in the advantages of being located in a more developed nation vs a developing nation into the mix, too. It's about percentages of expense vs the big picture.

But also, take service industries. Call centers, for example. They employee a VERY large number of workers, and where my parents live, two have shipped out some of the highest paying non-professional jobs in the county overseas to avoid taxation. In this instance, paying higher wages in the US also meant far more effective workers, but once increases in corporate taxes started looming, they pulled up stakes and ran.

I'll give you a better way to look at it. Say my company grosses $1m a year. I employ 5 full-time workers, up to 10 part-time workers, for a total expense of $150k a year. 6.6% of gross receipts to wages. (This is actually based on a company I once managed, though scaled down.)

Now how about corporate taxes? As seen here, combined corporate tax rates are approximate 39.1%! In the face of that, who really cares about wages? Honestly? Especially when the average, 26.5%, would leave you with the additional amount that goes to taxes in the US covering all your employee wages. And that's not even factoring in nations with extremely low corporate tax rates.

See the bigger picture now? Wages are nothing compared to taxation.

What we need is a bail out for main street.

You know maybe use some of those tax dollars from the American people for the American people not the corrupt banksters and corporate fat cats?

Our economy is 70% consumer driven.

You don't have to have a masters degree in economics to realize that less people with jobs = less spending on # we really don't need in the first place.

Someone just needs to hurry up and hit the reset button already.

[edit on 2-10-2009 by lucentenigma]

reply to post by joscarfas


Only unexpected if you believe in the Messiah, of course. Though, to be fair, that language is also partially used to try to blunt the impact of the news on the investments of those running these news agencies. lol Does anyone else miss objective reporting?

reply to post by lucentenigma


Less a bailout, more a severe reduction in taxation. Give Americans the freedom to spend their hard-earned money as they wish, rather than stealing it before it ever hits their bank accounts and spending it where special interests desire.

reply to post by HunkaHunka


I'm afraid I'm also of the opinion that this idea of a recovery is a myth.
Nothing substantial has been changed. The system was flawed to begin with, designed to create debt for the people while funnelling wealth to the top.
People have learned nothing, they're being told to spend, none of our countries have made the decision to increase domestic production, energy or agricultural independence.
The same global greed that brought us to this point is still in existence, because rather than let it go and seek a healthier way, leaders have their business buddies and their investments to think about.

They're propping up a failed system by pumping your money into it, ensuring that if the entire financial system doesn't collapse in the next few years, your kids will be forced to pay for our greed their entire lives.

The people who put their fingers in their ears and pretend everything is getting back to normal are the same people who'll see taxes rising exponentially over the next few years and act all surprised and shocked.

Governments have made their decisions based on retaining support from both corporations and the people. They've refused to tell the truth and make the required changes to save the financial systems we have. It is inevitable that the entire machine will come apart.

Originally posted by lucentenigma
What we need is a bail out for main street.

[edit on 2-10-2009 by lucentenigma]

Well, the dems had their chance to "bail out main street" and just about everyone else at the same time.

How?
The money spent on the pork bill and the stimulus bill would have paid off most if not all the mortgage loans in the U.S.

Results?
Banks don't need a bailout - bad loans are gone.
People don't lose their homes and have more money to spend to stimulate the economy from the bottom up.
businesses still making sales and keeping jobs.

Instead?
trillions spent, and they can't even figure out (or won't say) where it all went.
banks still need bailouts.
people are still losing their homes.
businesses are cutting back and laying off people.



[edit on 10/2/2009 by centurion1211]

Well I don't know about anyone else, but I have predicted over the past year that we are going into a major depression. It will take anywhere from 10 to 15 years to recover at least.
You all have to understand that the statistics do Not include the unemployed benefits that have run out, or those that are under-employed. The numbers only include the people Currently on unemployment.
This is going to get Way worse before it gets better.
Listening to the Media is a joke. Recovery? Honestly do you see any recovery?
Home sales are up for first time home buyers? What I have been seeing is kids moving back to their parents homes.
Retail sales up? Where? There are more and more businesses closing here. Starting to look like Detroit.
Food prices down? Where? The food costs are going up faster than I ever thought they would.
Recovery?????????
Someone please tell me where? I'll think about moving there, as long as it is in the U.S. Which I doubt.

Originally posted by centurion1211
trillions spent, and they can't even figure out (or won't say) where it all went.

Only a fraction of the stimulus money has been spent. So you seem misinformed.

I was told by an acquaintance (who is construction manager) of a few construction projects that happen because of that money (equals job creation/retention), a few major research initiatives (job creation/retention, good for the country) etc.

reply to post by HunkaHunka


My company is hiring right now.We had lean times(4 day work weeks, Lay-offs in our manufacturing division,et al), We weathered the storm, brought back our laid off employees and are giving raises. I refuse to embrace nihilism. These things take time. If our small company can do it so can others.

reply to post by concernedcitizan


Just wondering if your company is related to the Auto industry? If not can you tell us what the company does?

reply to post by Iseekthetruth!!!!!!!!


No auto. We are small microchip manufacturer. And we do not outsource.

The responses are so predictable: On the right, it's all the fault of government. On the left, it's all the fault of capitalism.

The truth is somewhere in the middle.

On the one hand, we are still in the midst of a repression/depression and it will take a while--maybe a long while--for jobs to rebound. Employment figures will probably get worse before they get better.

On the other hand, we could be facing a lot worse--more like a depression on the scale of the one that started in 1929--if there had been no bailout. Imagine going to the bank and finding your account frozen. Most of the economies of the world are dependent to a greater or lesser degree on ours. They, too, have benefited from the steps the U.S. has taken.

The truth is the bailout was a huge gamble, with much depending on amount and timing of the stimulus. The total effects are still to be realized, but leading indicators show we have averted a worldwide disaster at the least.

As bad as things seem to be, they could easily have been much, much worse.

NOT providing a stimulus would have certainly resulted in catastrophic failure.

This system was in trouble before the "recession" (more like depression). The average household is making the same money they were 40 years ago. That's why the country's in debt. It's not only jobs, it wage increases that should (at least) keep afoot with inflation - the inflation that causes goods to become far too expensive without the average person going into debt. Education is supposed to be the key to our future but the public schools get worse and college and advanced degrees more and more expensive. It's usury - interest rates being solely under the control of some company or bank without any (or very little) government regulation. Even if somehow a miracle happens, and we get out of this "recession", all of these problems will still be here. They're even outsourcing legal jobs now.

reply to post by Sestias


All depends on who you are concerned with keeping afloat. Bailouts kept shady businesses from paying for their actions, and kept them and their related business afloat. Great for corporate interests, great for banking and insurance. Totally screwing over the average citizen. Oh, sure, it rescued your 401k, at least a little. That's it.

Now, let's see what happens if these poorly run, dishonest institutions fail...times are hard, for a while, because we have become a debt based society. But in the long run, it would have led to an opportunity to establish an honest, free system again, one that could have brought prosperity to the average citizen. Study your history. Learn what life was like, prosperity-wise, before the United States adopted the current system of economics. (And don't repeat the Great Depression BS. That was the first collapse of the current system, not a failure of the previous system.) Strange thing; there was still the American dream. People still reaped what they sowed. Now, the only ones who come to the US and find the American Dream are illegals, because they don't have to bear the colossal tax burden.

This has nothing to do with right or left. This has to do with prosperity for all. With any citizen being able to trade their skills or labor for an asset that isn't stolen or devalued by a government and federal reserve that is rampant with corruption, unlike now. You like the bailout, probably because it protected your bank account. Meanwhile it makes life ever harder for every citizen who lives paycheck to paycheck, who cuts corners and works a second job to see that their children have food, heat, and clothing. I don't believe that you're too ignorant to understand this; I only believe that you are too happy to feed off of the corruption, or at least turn a blind eye, as long as your life carries on, uninterrupted. Forget the mass corruption pervading politics today; it is small corruptions like this that make it all possible.

reply to post by Sestias


Please stop with the left/right paradigm, it's a farce and has little if anything to do with the world's financial woes.

The banks are clearly at fault due to shady business practices, and yes alot of people got suckered into taking out loans that they THOUGHT they could afford at the time. Blame Prez Clinton and his lift on regulatory laws.

reply to post by really


Good catch on the inflation. The lack of inflation protection for the common man is the at the heart of this crime. Every free man should be able to trade his work for something of value that can not be devalued by the interests of others. That does not mean that the value of currency cannot or will not ever fluctuate in an honest system. What it means is that the value of that currency will never be stolen via inflation to line the pockets of large corporations and the banking industry, as has been the case for far too long.

There are a number of ways to solve this problem; the problem is that those on top, who control the money, have no interest in losing that control, obviously. Those a tier below feed off of the corruption, hoping to become one of those controlling players someday. Those a step lower are happy to let it happen, as long as their 401k and other investments are safe. Then there is the majority of the country, working hard to scrape by, to try to build up enough to send their kids through school, to retire. They are frustrated by what is happening, but most lack any understanding of what is really happening, so their frustration is directionless, and they feel powerless. Lastly, there are those at the bottom, most of whom are happy to suck from the tits of Mother Country, voting for a continuance of these atrocities, as long as there continues to be welfare and social programs to "lift them from oppression."

There's the dynamics of this country, in a nutshell. It is up to each of us to decide which of those people we are, and which of those people are our enemies, and choose a course of action to realize our objectives for this nation. It really is that simple. And yet, that daunting.

reply to post by mpriebe81


Idk about blaming Clinton. Ultimately, we are all responsible for our actions. I would be more inclined to blame all who backed legislation pushing for those bad loans, forcing those bad loans. Businesses should be left to live or die based on their own decisions.

The question; Is this a conspiracy of just people trying to keep positive in a bad situation.
When discussing the jobs market and unemployment, I keep hearing about the “greenness”
of the “little change” or only a “percent change” they toss in “minimal” and “promising” for the outlook.
“Not as bad” is continuously attached to bad news and is likely coupled with “better than” analyst projections.


Unlike the Talking heads, I will show you a bigger picture. This is from today’s employment statistics
and you should be concerned. Look at the angle of decent for the “number of employed” in thousands.
Now imagine that trend over 12 more months.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/e48569a00d90.jpg[/atsimg]

How are we going to create enough jobs to stop this?
You would need to start adding hundreds of thousands of jobs every month for a year to stop the decline.
Can you draw that line a bit further to 2010 and seriously tell me we will all be recovering!


Anyone that can look at that graph and say things are going to get better
in a year is either in denial or delusional.

No jobs = no pay = no spending = no selling = Depression.

Its actually worse than the numbers quoted. 571,000 people dropped off the rolls and are still unemployed but not counted in the 'official statistic' anymore.

If laid-off workers who have settled for part-time work or have given up looking for new jobs are included, the unemployment rate rose to 17 percent, the highest on records dating from 1994.

All told, 15.1 million Americans are now out of work, the department said. And 7.2 million jobs have been eliminated since the recession began in December 2007.

The department said 571,000 of the unemployed dropped out of the work force last month, presumably out of frustration over the lack of jobs. That sent the participation rate, or the percentage of the population either working or looking for work, to a 23-year low.

The unemployment rate would have topped 10 percent if the labor force hadn't shrank, Fabbri said.

Source