Welcome Guest
( Log In | Register )
The time is now 12:06 am
You last visited January 24, 2017, 12:02 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

"Zero Private-Sector Jobs Created In Past 11 Years

Published:

"Zero Private-Sector Jobs Created In Past 11 Years

By Jed Graham   

Wed., Jan. 27, '10    1:21 PM ET
Source Investors.com

I"t’s been pretty widely discussed that the past decade was a lost one for job creation. But focusing on private payrolls alone would also wipe out nearly all of the employment gains from 1999, among the better years on record.

Next Friday’s employment report comes with an annual benchmark revision that the Bureau of Labor Statistics estimated would erase 855,000 private jobs (and add 31,000 government jobs).

Subtract that from the seasonally adjusted December payroll number of 108.44 million and that would leave just 107.59 million private payroll jobs. That’s the least since January 1999, when there were 107.40 million. ..........."

http://blogs.investors.com/capitalhill/index.php/home/35-politics/1250-zero-private-sector-jobs-created-in-past-11-years

Entry #1,618

Comments

1.
JAP69Comment by JAP69 - January 29, 2010, 1:46 pm
Thats quite interesting.
I can see two easons for no increase in private sector jobs.
1) Out sourcing
2) Robotics
I can see this possible scenario that the gov't is going to tap into for taxation. With robotics replacing manpower in production the feds and states will impose a tax on each robotic that has replaced manpower. Calculate the manpower saved in production time and tax accordingly.
That could be a small piece of equiptment to a large one. Whatever has replaced the living work force.

2.
konaneComment by konane - January 29, 2010, 2:43 pm
Thanks JAP! Highly interesting analysis!
3.
jarasanComment by jarasan - January 29, 2010, 4:57 pm
Thanks Konane thanks Jap!   I think I may delve into robot repair and calibration!   I love that Discovery show How do they do that?
4.
konaneComment by konane - January 29, 2010, 7:48 pm
Thanks Jarasan! Good luck with your new research, hope you find something you really enjoy.
5.
Comment by reddog - January 29, 2010, 8:54 pm
What happened to all the jobs Obama was going to create with all this hard working, we pay forever for, stimulas money? OHHH, that's right,,,,another B.S;. lie that he, told that his voters, with stickers stuck to their cars that are hard to get off, I may add, which was a lie.
6.
Comment by reddog - January 29, 2010, 9:00 pm
Boy, I am really loving this, "I told you so" cliche!!    LMAO
7.
konaneComment by konane - January 29, 2010, 9:24 pm
Thanks Reddog! For some it will take America looking like a ghost town in the old west, tumble weeds blowing through no livelihood in sight, to get the message.

Warnings were out there before the election for anyone wishing to inform themselves.
8.
truecriticComment by truecritic - January 30, 2010, 2:01 am
This goes back to 1999, reddog, then why not be honest? Part of the blame has to go to Bill Clinton and the BULK of the blame has to go to George W. Bush. Obama can still redeem himself (not that I think he will, but at least he is still in office).
9.
ToddComment by Todd - January 30, 2010, 6:43 am
George Bush came into office with a recession started under Clinton. He cuts taxes, thereby creating the environment for 54 straight months of economic growth and prosperity. Taxes saved the economy, they did not break it.

What broke the economy, and his biggest mistake, was all the *spending*. That includes the primary reason for the current economic woes: massive mortgage lending to people who could not afford to pay the loans. When those people started defaulting on the loans, the economy could not absorb the massive weight of bad debt, and the rest is history.

The spending was atr fault, as was the Democrat-controlled congress, which used Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae to become their personal spending machines, as they pushed those no-doc loans onto millions of unsuspecting people.

So before you pull "an Obama" and blame George Bush for everything, it would be wise to have some facts at your disposal. Obama did not directly cause the current recession, but he made it a lot worse than it could have been.

His excuses about "underestimating" the recession (thereby exceeding the promised 8% unemployment figure) is B.S. too -- he called this economy "the worst since the Great Depression". So, how could it be worse than that? Is he saying it's WORSE than the Great Depression? Even he could not tell such a lie.
10.
konaneComment by konane - January 30, 2010, 9:20 am
Thanks Truecritic! Yes Clinton did what he could to decimate the economy which was on a severe downturn when GW took office. Along came 9-11 and it's been a downhill slide since.
11.
konaneComment by konane - January 30, 2010, 9:33 am
Thanks Todd! Considering the re-education machine otherwise known as our press did everything they could to elevate Clinton to superstar status, denigrate GW to status of evil incarnate, then paved the way to making Obama as the second coming who can do no wrong.

It's all been orchestrated by globalists bent on breaking the back of the last representation of freedom and self determination on the planet .... which is why we all need to wake up pay attention to the blivits Obama is selling us as 'economic recovery.' Only thing Obama is selling is hero worship so we won't notice how his administration is in process of destroying this nation.

Only difference between now and the Great Depression is the soup lines now are food stamps .... and it's getting worse because his spending since taking office is making it so.
12.
truecriticComment by truecritic - January 30, 2010, 9:56 am
Todd
Hope you see this...
You have twisted what I said or maybe you just read my statement incorrectly? I did blame Clinton. Also it is a fact that Bush had the longest chance to create new jobs and wasn't able to. And I didn't leave Obama out of it either - I simply said he has more time left. I also said I wasn't holding my breath for Obama to create new jobs. If you can't see that my statements are factual rather than "pulling an Obama" then I don't know what it would take to convince you.   You make it sound like you are "pulling a Bush."

I'm posting this because I want what I said to be clearly understood.
13.
konaneComment by konane - January 30, 2010, 4:17 pm
Thanks Truecritic! Carter before Reagan and everyone after Reagan hopped on the globalist train and left us behind to twist in the wind. We're looking tattered as a Tibetan prayer flag.

You must be a Lottery Post member to post comments to a Blog.

Register for a FREE membership, or if you're already a member please Log In.