Where are the jobs?

[rfranklin]

Feb. 2, 2011, 12:02 a.m. EST

Job growth is weak due to lack of demand
By Rex Nutting, MarketWatch
WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) – The U.S. economy began 2011 the same way it began 2010: With growth too weak to create a significant number of jobs.

On Friday, the Bureau of Labor Statistics will release its jobs report for January. It’s expected to show only halting progress, with about 140,000 nonfarm jobs created during the month (seasonally adjusted), according to the median forecast of the MarketWatch survey of top forecasters. See our complete calendar of this week’s economic releases.

If the forecasters are right, the economy would have created about 1.2 million jobs in the past year, gaining back only a fraction of the 8 million jobs lost since the recession began three years ago.

Worse yet, what job creation we have had hasn’t even kept pace with the growth in the number of people who want to work. The adult population grows by about 2 million a year, and about 1.3 million of them want or need a job.

The U.S. economy is still more than $1 trillion below its potential.
For all our technological advancements, we still haven’t figured out the central economic problem of our time: How to make sure that everyone who wants to work can find a good-paying job.


http://www.marketwatch.com/story/story/print?guid=324278BE-2E2B-11E0-A2FA-00212804637C

[defendandprotect]

1. All of the questions go back to this one...where is our people's government, where is Dem Party -- ?

For decades Congress has been permitting the Federal Reserve to set economic policy --

and it's been based on "employee instability" --

We have the very same problems the Egyptians have -- capitalism, corrupt and criminal

government -- rising corporate fascism all over the planet.

And millionaires and multi-millionaires in Congress we are expecting will help the

masses!!

Are we nuts?

[HughBeaumont]

2. What was that thing that Conservadicks always say .. .

. . . "You can't solve a problem by throwing money at it"?

Well, isn't that what they're trying to do with jobs . .. throwing money at the wealthy and hoping the problem gets solved?

DURRRRRR!

You need to pay your rank and file better if you want demand, and in turn, business. Stop pretending these goddamned tax cuts are a viable substitute for a living wage.

[defendandprotect]

3. Obama's stimulus "threw" billions at corporations -- and Rahm bragged about it--!

[rfranklin]

5. Yep, the easiest way to solve the revenue shortage is to raise wages...

for the people at the bottom. It will also get the economy rolling again. As long as we let the top one percent hoard wealth and chase after hedge fund returns, the economy will sputter.

[stockholmer]

12. unfortunately for the US, because your government allowed the destruction of manufacturing,.........

you now are in competition with slave-wage countries to compete for labour which could have paid a decent wage.

We protected our industrial base here in Sweden, Germany, etc, so our pay is much higher, our minimum wages are 2 to 3 times yours, and the companies do not have to pay health care expenses, as we have universal care (with much of the savings passed back to the workers in the form of more pay)

In regards to raising the lower wage pay rate, due to the fact that 70%+ of your economy is internal consumption, and most at service-sector level, that will not be happening for you anytime soon.

Imagine the cost of a Big Mac or Walmart china-prison-labour-made shite if they are forced to increase the payroll by 50% or double.

Even if you somehow did push through an increase, it would destroy most of the small to medium sized firms (and they employ and create 3/4 of your jobs). They operate on razor-thin margins as it is, and brute force scales of economy would ensure you have nothing to chose from or work for except the wicked trans-nationals.

The problem you face is systemic, entrenched, multi-generational in both the making and the possible solution, and both of your 2 political are to blame, unfortunately. Only 7% of your private workforce is unionized, and that will fall under 5% by 2020 at current trends. In the 1940's and 1950's, 30 to 35% was.

The only growing sector is the public, and that is very unfirm ground to build house of labour recovery on, as $1.5 trillion dollar+ a year federal deficits and multiple bankrupt states and cities will soon force brutal austerity cutbacks.

If you want higher wages, the Northern EU, especially the Nordic, or an authoritarian Singapore placement are just about your only good bets ATM.

[pampango]

15. How did Sweden protect its industrial base?

"In terms of structure, the Swedish economy is characterised by a large, knowledge-intensive and export-oriented manufacturing sector, an increasing, but comparatively small, business service sector, and by international standards, a large public service sector."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweden#Economy

An "export-oriented manufacturing sector" must be able to compete well against low-wage competition from Third World countries rather than one that has been protected from that competition.

And Sweden belongs to the EU and the WTO so it has more open trade than the US does. What did it do to protect its industry within the rules of the EU and WTO that the US has not done?

I love the fact that "Around eighty percent of the Swedish labour force is unionised."

"The Swedish economy is a developed diverse economy, aided by timber, hydropower, and iron ore. These constitute the resource base of an economy oriented toward foreign trade. The main industries include motor vehicles, telecommunications, pharmaceuticals, industrial machines, precision equipments, chemical goods, forestry, Iron and steel.

Because of the fact that Sweden is a neutral country and did not actively participate in the Second World War, during the post-war era, the country did not have to rebuild their economic base, banking system, and country as a whole, like other countries had to. Sweden has achieved an enviable standard of living under a mixed system of high-tech capitalism and extensive welfare benefits. Sweden has the second highest total tax revenue behind Denmark, as a share of the country's income. As of 2007, total tax revenue was 47.8% of GDP, down from 49.1% 2006.<3>"

Sweden seems to have found a great way to manage an economy - strong unions, extensive welfare benefits, progressive taxation, etc.

[stockholmer]

17. most importantly, we dont have empire to maintain at gunpoint,we practice soft power,not brute force

free trade was designed to operate from the basis of comparative advantage, with a nation state protecting the means of production

this is what we have done here, Germany is an even better (and much bigger) example

since 1965, the USA has off-shored over 85 percent of its industrial production, this is known as absolute advantage, simply the chase for lower and lower production costs on a global basis, irregardless of quality or the effect on the national economy in terms of domestic impact

over 80 percent of the industrial innovation occurs in the scaling-up process, from design, to factory floor

this entire culture has been ripped asunder from the US workforce, and will take at least one or two full generations to bring back

you literally will have to recreate the entire educational infrastructure of high-tech trade schools, as well change the spending and saving habits of 310,000,000 citizens, as 70 plus percent of the USA economy is based on internal consumption, with the vast bulk of all mnufactured goods consumed coming from imports


btw, another huge myth is that middle class are taxed to death in Sweden. I ran tax return for a friend of mine from New York who makes $75,000 US year on both Swedish rates and USA.

Due to the fact she pays for health insurance (thru her job, or would be even more), AND pays national, state, and city taxes, plus sales tax (we pay 2 taxes here, a national based income tax with exemptions, which varies slightly depending on where you live, and VAT), she would have around 50,000 SEK (at the time this was around $6,000 dollars) MORE take home pay a year here than in the USA, plus have huge social safety net benefits that simply dont exist there in US (compltetly free university, low subsidized rents, some of lowest cost public transporation in EU, etc)

that 50,000 crowns now, due to the dollar plummeting in just last 5 months or so, is now worth over $8,000 dollars US

[stillwaiting]

4. "Demand" will remain weak (and get weaker) without significant increases in wages.

Don't even need to be an economist to understand that!

Our healthcare, food, and energy costs are spiraling out of control and consuming our dollars.

I wouldn't bet on too many industries that cater to disposable income in the short to medium term in America.

[HughBeaumont]

8. Saw a signature here once, and I think this implies:

Paraphrasing:

Every savings plan we've seen teaches us how to save pennies, but our cost of living goes up in dollars.

[DJ13]

6. "lack of demand"

You cant solve a demand problem by supporting the supply side.

[xchrom]

7. Recommend - oh and ouch. Nt

[stockholmer]

9. more smoke and mirrors...ADP Comes At 187K On Expectations Of 140K, Previous Month Revised 50K Lower

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/adp-comes-187k-expectations-140k-previous-revised-50k-lower


The completely worthless and thoroughly discredited ADP number came in at 187,000 (who can forget last month's 297K which got the Barclays experts to predict a 600K NFP number for January) on expectations of 140K. Of course, the ridiculous print from last month was cut by 50K, just as this one will be in March. Someone should inform ADP (which doesn't count government jobs) that there was snow in January and thus the NFP will come in well below expectations (ref: eternal bad number apologist Joe LaVorgna).

From ADP:

Private-sector employment increased by 187,000 from December to January on a seasonally adjusted basis, according to the latest ADP National Employment Report® released today. The estimated change of employment from November to December was revised down by 50,000 to 247,000 from the previously reported increase of 297,000................................

[JHB]

10. Actually we have figured it out, but Monied Interests don't want to do it...

We used to have mechanisms to discourage ever-increasing concentrations of wealth. High marginal tax rates put a damper on how fast the already-wealthy could increas their wealth. (and did a lower capital gains tax combined with the high income tax steer investment towards increasing the value of real assets (over, say, stock speculation)? )

Estate taxes helped break up the biggest fortunes at the generational level.

Sure thee were plenty of loopholes (maybe those helped make it work), but overall it put some checks and balances into the economic system.

With Reagan, those were swept away, letting the most ruthless call the shots, and thus the Mess We're In.

[NNN0LHI]

11. Really need a new car and an electric Focus would be perfect but I am broke

Perfectly set up here to switch to electric too. My circuit breaker box is even located in the attached garage on the same wall my charger would need to be on. In my dreams.

Lack of money is what is holding me back.

Don

[Liberal In Texas]

13. I guess the rich guys who "create" the jobs still have all that "uncertainty"

they needed to get rid of when they didn't know if the * tax breaks for them would be extended.

[Populist_Prole]

14. I asked this of a neocon friend of mine who always bashes Obama on jobs

Amazingly, he did a quick about-face and dug his heels in with the standard RW boiler plate about how "a business doesn't exist to create jobs, but to make money for the stockholders...." blah blah blah.

Both angered and puzzled at the irony and dichotomy, I asked him why he begain complaining about jobs/unemployment only to suddenly claim unemployement is of no consequence. He didn't know what to say, but then spoke about terrorism, drugs, unions etc. Being as ardent GOP supporter as he was ( the knocking on doors type ) I was really surprised by how unwilling or unable he was willing to defend his talking points, and just basically whipped out others, as if he was sure he'd have something I'd "bite" on.

Freakin' robots.

[rfranklin]

16. Because it's about being a bully...

You've seen the bumper stickers, i.e. http://www.thebigfeedblog.com/2009/12/8-ways-to-make-liberal-cry-fun-pack.html