The Economy Is Creating Jobs. Will It...

The Economy Is Creating Jobs. Will It Continue?

There are 39 comments on the www.newyorker.com story from May 6, 2013, titled The Economy Is Creating Jobs. Will It Continue?. In it, www.newyorker.com reports that:

The payroll survey shows job growth averaging almost two hundred thousand per month—196,000 to be precise—since the start of the year.

Friday's employment report for April was generally positive, and, at least for now, it has alleviated fears that the economy is stuttering.

On Wall Street, traders cheered the numbers. The Dow flirted with 15,000, and the S. & P. 500 topped 1,600. Both surveys from the Labor Department—of firms and of households—showed solid job growth.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.newyorker.com.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#21 May 6, 2013
Don Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
All the jobs continue to be worse and worse. Professional jobs are having wages reduced and benefits cut. Why pay the prevailing wage when you can hire a new immigrant for half the pay? Even if they are only 2/3 as good, you still make more profit.
While there are jobs being created, we need about 350,000 per month to keep up with the growth of the population, and to start to reduce the number of unemployed. 100,000 to 200,000 just isn't enough. More and more people are falling through the cracks, whether they have advanced degrees in engineering or not. With the middle class disappearing, who are you going to sell anything to?
As you say, this is a service economy. What degree do you need to stock shelves, or run the cash register?
Now there's some common sense, mostly, but meh, the few errors you stated are too small to discount your point here. The biggest problem in the US is simply that our money is ... well ... gone, completely gone. We squandered it, and now we're paying the piper and people are whining about that. If they raise minimum wage the cost to produce goes up as well, and the taxes to regulate go up in tandem. We need to curb our costs somehow, "how" is the real question, since no one wants to give up any of their profits, no one, not even our own government.
Don Joe

Saint Paul, MN

#22 May 6, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Now there's some common sense, mostly, but meh, the few errors you stated are too small to discount your point here. The biggest problem in the US is simply that our money is ... well ... gone, completely gone. We squandered it, and now we're paying the piper and people are whining about that. If they raise minimum wage the cost to produce goes up as well, and the taxes to regulate go up in tandem. We need to curb our costs somehow, "how" is the real question, since no one wants to give up any of their profits, no one, not even our own government.
Squandered, sure enough, but it is informative to look at how it was squandered. It was given to the rich, either as individuals or owners of large corporations. They got tons of money and they are still robbing us blind. I suggest we stop letting them take everything, and make them pay their own way. Why do we need massive subsidies for oil companies making more money than any corporation in history? Why do we have to pay subsidizes to corporations to move our jobs overseas? Why do we subsidize China's currency manipulation?

As to regulations, it depends upon what you mean. There are way to many regulations on small businesses and people, and way too few on large corporations. The large corporations hire lobbyists to write those same regulations, which prevent small companies from ever being competitive, so the large company always has a great advantage.

As to the minimum wage, it doesn't work that way. When a company decides to make a product or provide a service, they figure out what they can charge and what it costs. If it costs more than they can charge, they don't do it. The bigger the difference between cost and price, the bigger their profit. Corporations are making more money now than ever in history, so they are finding plenty of products to sell at a price that gives them massive profit. With min wage so low, people are in dire poverty working 2 or 3 jobs and they end up getting welfare and food stamps. Thus taxpayers are subsidizing the corporation who wants to pay so little to the people who are creating all the profit.

If min wage goes up, it might cut into profit a bit, but that cut will go toward the employees having more money, being able to spend a bit more. With so many poor having more money, they will spend it, increasing the number of customers the company can have, so in the end, they will make even more money.
Eleanor

Vernon Hills, IL

#23 May 6, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
You ignored the fact that 90% of Walmart workers were unemployed and almost 50% of them are disabled. Fancy that your source left those facts out as well.
That 'nice' fact of Walmart hiring the disabled and the unemployed is wonderful.

If only their Walmart job could earn them a living wage and get them off food stamps, it would be like having a REAL job.

But it was 'nice' for Walmart to give them a job even if it is at slave labor rates.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#24 May 6, 2013
Don Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
Squandered, sure enough, but it is informative to look at how it was squandered. It was given to the rich, either as individuals or owners of large corporations. They got tons of money and they are still robbing us blind. I suggest we stop letting them take everything, and make them pay their own way. Why do we need massive subsidies for oil companies making more money than any corporation in history? Why do we have to pay subsidizes to corporations to move our jobs overseas? Why do we subsidize China's currency manipulation?
As to regulations, it depends upon what you mean. There are way to many regulations on small businesses and people, and way too few on large corporations. The large corporations hire lobbyists to write those same regulations, which prevent small companies from ever being competitive, so the large company always has a great advantage.
As to the minimum wage, it doesn't work that way. When a company decides to make a product or provide a service, they figure out what they can charge and what it costs. If it costs more than they can charge, they don't do it. The bigger the difference between cost and price, the bigger their profit. Corporations are making more money now than ever in history, so they are finding plenty of products to sell at a price that gives them massive profit. With min wage so low, people are in dire poverty working 2 or 3 jobs and they end up getting welfare and food stamps. Thus taxpayers are subsidizing the corporation who wants to pay so little to the people who are creating all the profit.
If min wage goes up, it might cut into profit a bit, but that cut will go toward the employees having more money, being able to spend a bit more. With so many poor having more money, they will spend it, increasing the number of customers the company can have, so in the end, they will make even more money.
When you increase what you have to pay the people who produce, where do you think the money for that increase must come from? Profit is what makes business worth it, without the prospect of profit, no one would run a business, no one, and we'd all be stuck in the fields making our own food and never having any free time.

Regulations are not just oppressive on small companies, that's a fallacy, all lobbyists, even the "green" ones, are paid for by corporations, all of them. You first need to ignore everything mainstream media has told you, including Rush and those idiots, because they don't care about all the facts, just the ones that earn them a profit.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#25 May 6, 2013
Eleanor wrote:
<quoted text>
That 'nice' fact of Walmart hiring the disabled and the unemployed is wonderful.
If only their Walmart job could earn them a living wage and get them off food stamps, it would be like having a REAL job.
But it was 'nice' for Walmart to give them a job even if it is at slave labor rates.
Wow, you don't know much about food stamps either. Food stamps are a subsidy, in which the government taxes people to pay the corn farmers of the US, and in return for that tax they offer a discount on food products, thus, food stamps. Without people using the program, ironically, the entire farming industry of the US would actually go under, all of it, our primary and almost exclusive crop is corn. So who do you think has a vested interest in keeping people on food stamps? Walmart, who imports most of their products, or the US government and US farmers?

Now, back to the wages, if they were earning no wages, they'd instead be living off half of what they do earn by draining welfare. If you think welfare pays more than minimum wage, you're insane, I can tell you from experience that it does not, not in any state.
BandMaster

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#26 May 6, 2013
Marine Corp Pat wrote:
When you look at the mess President Obama inherented from George W Bush, with an economy in free fall on the edge of total collapse, and to see the economy recovering at this rate so soon; it is just beyond amazing... especially with unpatriotic right-wingers begging for Obama and this nation to fail... to see things getting much better. How can any American who loves this country not appreciate what Obama has done.
BENGHAZI
BandMaster

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#27 May 6, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Okay, you are insulting the working Midamerican now. The people who make our lives possible. The people who you walk on. The people who you depend on.
Without people working in these jobs you list, most of us would starve, not because we are incapable of doing it ourselves, but because there is no room for us to do all this ourselves now. In order for 100% of the population to be self-sustaining we would need 4 times the amount of land, or more, and it would all be used as farmland, all of it. No one would have any free time. We'd also have no medical care, no computers, nothing. So yes, as the economy improves the number of job openings will always increase, that's basic math and logic. If you don't like people who do the jobs you depend on to survive, perhaps you should move to Mars.
That's telling that snobby moron. Good job.

“I Offer You Truth!”

Since: Jul 07

Tampa, FL

#28 May 7, 2013
BandMaster wrote:
<quoted text>BENGHAZI
Yeah, ranks right up there with "Birth Certificate" and "College Transcripts".

Idiot!

“Open your eyes”

Since: Sep 09

Central Florida

#29 May 7, 2013
Where Is The Recovery? A Higher Percentage Of Americans Had Jobs Three Years Ago
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/w...

If you think that the latest employment numbers are good news, you might want to look again. In April 2013, 58.6 percent of all working age Americans had a job. But three years ago, in April 2010, 58.7 percent of all working age Americans had a job. Well, you may argue, that is not much of a difference. And that is precisely my point. The percentage of Americans that have a job fell like a rock during the last recession. It dropped from about 63 percent all the way down to below 59 percent, and it has stayed below 59 percent for 44 months in a row. So where is the recovery? This is the first time in the post-World War II era that the employment-population ratio has not bounced back after the end of a recession. So anyone that tells you that we are experiencing an employment recovery is lying to you. Yes, the U.S. economy added 165,000 jobs last month. But it takes nearly that many jobs just to keep up with population growth. The truth is that we are just treading water.

So why has the unemployment rate been going down? Well, it is because the government has been pretending that millions upon millions of unemployed Americans "don't want jobs" anymore. In fact, an astounding 9.5 million Americans have "left the workforce" since Barack Obama took office.

Some in the mainstream media have started calling them "missing workers". But whatever label you want to use, the reality of the matter is that they are really hurting. They are part of the reason why food stamp enrollment has soared from 32 million to more than 47 million while Barack Obama has been in the White House.

If you still believe that the employment market is getting better, just look at the following numbers. The percentage of working age Americans with a job has been sitting at about the same level for four years in a row...

April 2008: 62.7 percent

April 2009: 59.8 percent

April 2010: 58.7 percent

April 2011: 58.4 percent

April 2012: 58.5 percent

April 2013: 58.6 percent

So why is everyone getting so excited over the latest numbers? When you step back and look at what has happened to the employment-population ratio over the past decade it really is quite horrifying...(con'd in link)

“It's a Brand New Day”

Since: Feb 06

New Rochelle

#30 May 7, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
I live in Seattle, where Microsoft, Apple, and Amazon rule, Amazon is new but hey, they offer a lot to the city as well. Guess who the primary contributors to helping people not only work, but helping those incapable of work live, are ... just a guess. You'll probably get it wrong.
Stop guessing, you are too lame.

“It's a Brand New Day”

Since: Feb 06

New Rochelle

#31 May 7, 2013
Kahoki wrote:
Where Is The Recovery? A Higher Percentage Of Americans Had Jobs Three Years Ago
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/w...
If you think that the latest employment numbers are good news, you might want to look again. In April 2013, 58.6 percent of all working age Americans had a job. But three years ago, in April 2010, 58.7 percent of all working age Americans had a job. Well, you may argue, that is not much of a difference. And that is precisely my point. The percentage of Americans that have a job fell like a rock during the last recession. It dropped from about 63 percent all the way down to below 59 percent, and it has stayed below 59 percent for 44 months in a row. So where is the recovery? This is the first time in the post-World War II era that the employment-population ratio has not bounced back after the end of a recession. So anyone that tells you that we are experiencing an employment recovery is lying to you. Yes, the U.S. economy added 165,000 jobs last month. But it takes nearly that many jobs just to keep up with population growth. The truth is that we are just treading water.
So why has the unemployment rate been going down? Well, it is because the government has been pretending that millions upon millions of unemployed Americans "don't want jobs" anymore. In fact, an astounding 9.5 million Americans have "left the workforce" since Barack Obama took office.
Some in the mainstream media have started calling them "missing workers". But whatever label you want to use, the reality of the matter is that they are really hurting. They are part of the reason why food stamp enrollment has soared from 32 million to more than 47 million while Barack Obama has been in the White House.
If you still believe that the employment market is getting better, just look at the following numbers. The percentage of working age Americans with a job has been sitting at about the same level for four years in a row...
April 2008: 62.7 percent
April 2009: 59.8 percent
April 2010: 58.7 percent
April 2011: 58.4 percent
April 2012: 58.5 percent
April 2013: 58.6 percent
So why is everyone getting so excited over the latest numbers? When you step back and look at what has happened to the employment-population ratio over the past decade it really is quite horrifying...(con'd in link)
"Where Is The Recovery? A Higher Percentage Of Americans Had Jobs Three Years Ago"

HELD UP IN CONGRESS BY the GOP.
Don Joe

Saint Paul, MN

#32 May 7, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
When you increase what you have to pay the people who produce, where do you think the money for that increase must come from? Profit is what makes business worth it, without the prospect of profit, no one would run a business, no one, and we'd all be stuck in the fields making our own food and never having any free time.
Regulations are not just oppressive on small companies, that's a fallacy, all lobbyists, even the "green" ones, are paid for by corporations, all of them. You first need to ignore everything mainstream media has told you, including Rush and those idiots, because they don't care about all the facts, just the ones that earn them a profit.
Corporations are making record profits because they pay people less. If the corporation makes 4.9 billion dollars instead of 5 billion dollars, it won't make that much of a difference. Telling the founders they will only get 4.9 billion for their 5 million dollar investment will not cause them to forget it. On the other hand, paying people a decent salary, means they will be more productive, and the profit will increase from 4.9 to 10 billion and the founders will have even more profit. That is where the money comes from.

Yes, the lobbyists write the laws and are paid by corporations. That is why the laws are all written from the point of view of helping large corporations. Even the regulations are written so as to put into law the way the large corporations want to run their business. That prevents competition and kills small businesses. The last thing a large corporation wants is for some small upstart to take away it's business, so they make sure it is impossible.

As to the main stream media, I agree. They are pushing propaganda and nothing else. They are not to inform, but to mislead.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#33 May 7, 2013
Don Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
Corporations are making record profits because they pay people less. If the corporation makes 4.9 billion dollars instead of 5 billion dollars, it won't make that much of a difference. Telling the founders they will only get 4.9 billion for their 5 million dollar investment will not cause them to forget it. On the other hand, paying people a decent salary, means they will be more productive, and the profit will increase from 4.9 to 10 billion and the founders will have even more profit. That is where the money comes from.
Yes, the lobbyists write the laws and are paid by corporations. That is why the laws are all written from the point of view of helping large corporations. Even the regulations are written so as to put into law the way the large corporations want to run their business. That prevents competition and kills small businesses. The last thing a large corporation wants is for some small upstart to take away it's business, so they make sure it is impossible.
As to the main stream media, I agree. They are pushing propaganda and nothing else. They are not to inform, but to mislead.
Yet ... you are citing only things you hear from mainstream media and not credible sources.

“It's a Brand New Day”

Since: Feb 06

New Rochelle

#34 May 8, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet ... you are citing only things you hear from mainstream media and not credible sources.
Should we then listen to Rupert for 'his truth?'
Don Joe

Saint Paul, MN

#35 May 8, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet ... you are citing only things you hear from mainstream media and not credible sources.
What source do you consider credible?

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#36 May 8, 2013
Don Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
What source do you consider credible?
The memos I receive.
Don Joe

Saint Paul, MN

#37 May 9, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
The memos I receive.
LOL, who sends these "memos?"

Apparently I don't receive those memos. I agree the main stream media is presenting propaganda, filled with outright lies. There probably is some truth in the propaganda, selected only to further their agenda, and the truth that does not support their agenda is suppressed.

For example, we were told Syria had used chemicals on the rebels and the GOP called for an immediate military strike. When it was discovered the rebels used the chemical weapons, and then claimed it was the Syrian government, that information was hidden.

So, was this information in your memos?

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#39 May 9, 2013
Don Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL, who sends these "memos?"
Apparently I don't receive those memos. I agree the main stream media is presenting propaganda, filled with outright lies. There probably is some truth in the propaganda, selected only to further their agenda, and the truth that does not support their agenda is suppressed.
For example, we were told Syria had used chemicals on the rebels and the GOP called for an immediate military strike. When it was discovered the rebels used the chemical weapons, and then claimed it was the Syrian government, that information was hidden.
So, was this information in your memos?
Sad, you have no humor.
Don Joe

Saint Paul, MN

#40 May 10, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Sad, you have no humor.
?? I prefaced my comments with "LOL." Asking for the memos is simply a continuation.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

US News Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News US Supreme Court split on Obama's immigration p... 1 min They light 16
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 1 min Incognito4Ever 1,394,414
News Bernie Sanders says he'll vote for Hillary Clinton 3 min Wholly Silicon Wafer 11
News Oklahoma Lawmaker Shares Article Arguing Islam ... 4 min Lawrence Wolf 91
News 'Free Kim Davis': This is just what gay rights ... (Sep '15) 4 min Terra Firma 12,911
News Minority Party Makes a Major Shift in House 5 min Wholly Silicon Wafer 8
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 7 min Calvin_Coolish 228,375
News Rebellious Democrats disrupt House, stage protest 12 min Lawrence Wolf 222
News The President has failed us (Jun '12) 35 min katrina 88 387,786
News Boston Globe's front page: AR-15, 'Make It Stop' 1 hr Retired SOF 373
More from around the web