If I Hear “Jobless Recovery” One More Time, I Will Scream

[McCamy Taylor]

“A dog starved at its master’s gate
Predicts the ruin of the state.”
William Blake

I. The Myth of the “Jobless Recovery”

“(T)he very principle of myth: it transforms history into nature…Men do not have with myth a relationship based upon truth but on use; they depoliticize according to their needs.”

Roland Barthes Mythologies

The “jobless recovery” is a fiction. How can your failing economy “recover” if the people are homeless, hungry and jobless? If assembly lines are rolling again, but no one can afford to buy, then capitalism is dead on arrival---and anyone who claims that they can breathe life into it without creating jobs is a zombie master.



“Jobless recovery” makes a virtue of high unemployment by linking it with the very desirable state “recovery.” The sick patient is better. He has recovered from his illness. Never mind that he has been left in a permanent state of physical misery, paralyzed, mute, blind. The doctors have declared his treatment a great success.

Say “jobless recovery” enough times, and people will begin to believe that jobs are the root of the problem. Employment is an evil that had to be rooted out, in order for “recovery” to take place.

II. Take a Walk on the Supply Side

Speaking of zombie masters, remember “voodoo economics”, Presidential Candidate George Bush Sr.’s term for supply side economics , a theory which would later be labeled “Reaganomics”? Supply side economics is the monster that will never die, no matter how much devastation it leaves in its wake. Corporate America just loves this theory, which goes something like If we produce it, they will buy it . But what if “they” have no jobs and no money? Should we create jobs, so that demand will rise? Nonsense. Eliminate government regulations, encourage monopolies, make production cheaper by outsourcing jobs and eventually you will drive down the cost of the things you produce so that they are more affordable…

But what if “they” still have no jobs and no money? Not less money. No money . Then the only thing that trickles down is shit.

III. Economic Bullshit

Economic journals just love our “jobless recovery”. They give it five stars. Here are some of their reviews.

Anthony Randozzo of the Reason Foundation writes:

The Fortune 500 companies achieved their increase in profits at the same that sales droped 8.7 percent in aggregate. However, companies were able to increase profits by cutting costs and laying off workers. In short, they were able to do more with less. Moving forward, those companies have probably learned ways that they can run their businesses more efficiently. In the future, when the economy starts humming again, those companies will hire again as sales pick up, but it is unlikely that all 821,000 will get their jobs back.
Snip
But here is where I see a pretty significant positive going forward: all that labor is now available for something else. Prior to the recession, certain amounts of labor were locked up in inefficiencies. Now there is an army of people who are not needed for the nation to achieve the same productivity.

http://reason.org/blog/show/reasons-why-the-jobless-recovery-ma



A zombie army? What’s not to love? People liberated from their jobs, free to pursue new lives in ragged clothes, walking the streets, carrying signs that say Will work for brains.

Forbes gushes:

However, a jobless recovery could still occur, even without previous over-investment in technology, if companies can increase production without hiring new labor.

http://www.forbes.com/2009/07/07/jobs-recovery-bubble-business-oxford.html
There’s our old friend, voodoo economics again, supplying Corvettes to the homeless.

Hale Stewart of the Wall Street Journal has this to say:

The "jobless recovery" is in fact a realignment of the US labor force. Fewer and fewer employees are needed to produce durable goods. As this situation has progressed, the durable goods workforce has decreased as well. This does not mean the US manufacturing base is in decline. If this were the case, we would see a drop in both manufacturing output and productivity. Instead both of those metrics have increased smartly over the last two decades, indicating that instead of being in decline, US manufacturing is simply doing more with less.

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/07/labor-force-realighment-and-jobless.html

Good news! You have not been laid off! You have been realigned! Like a set of tires.

The Cato Institute can always be counted upon to give a thumbs up for supply side. Here is zombie master, Alan Reynolds reassuring us that there is no unemployment crisis.

Using all of this statistical trickery to convert a weak job market into an imminent recession has become a bipartisan political strategy.

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=11886

In other words, you have not been looking for a job for two years. You just think you have been looking for a job for two years.

IV. The Monster That Ate My Job Part 1. Public Employees

The zombie masters do more than praise high unemployment as a sign of economic recovery. They try to increase unemployment. Here is how.

Public employees have been sparred the worst—until now. In “Gov’t Workers Feel No Economic Pain” Associated Press writer David Dickson lays the blame for high unemployment rates right where it belongs---at the feet of government workers.

Compensation for government workers "is a gigantic problem" that will only get worse in future years, said Chris Edwards, director of tax policy studies at the Cato Institute, which advocates less government and lower taxes.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/11/government-workers-feel-no-pain/

The local car manufacturer did not lay you off. Some guy who works at the Post Office laid you off. And his union probably told him to do it. Quick. Write your Congressman. Tell him you want to see all the teachers in your area fired, before they can do any more damage to the economy with their wreckless spending at the local Wal-Mart.





V. The Monster That Ate My Job Part II, Small Businesses

Remember when the GOP killed a bill that would have freed up money for small businesses? Weren't they the ones who complained that corporate taxes “hurt small businesses"? Don't they talk about"small business" in the same breath with Mom and apple pie? Why the sudden aversion to "small business"?

Small businesses create new jobs. The GOP serves corporate masters who want to destroy middle class jobs.

At the same time, the continued bite of the financial crisis has crimped the flow of money to small businesses and new ventures, which tend to be major sources of new jobs.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/21/business/economy/21unemployed.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1

Even Bernanke agrees:

"Making credit accessible to sound small businesses is crucial to our economic recovery and so should be front and center among our current policy challenges," Bernanke said in prepared remarks. "Small businesses are central to creating jobs in our economy; they employ roughly one-half of all Americans and account for about 60 percent of gross job creation. Newer small businesses, those less than two years old, are especially important: Over the past 20 years, these start-up enterprises accounted for roughly one-quarter of gross job creation even though they employed less than 10 percent of the workforce."
Snip
But the nation's biggest banks continue to reduce their lending to small businesses.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/12/as-lending-to-small-busin_n_643450.html

While we are on the subject, didn’t we give all our tax money to the banksters so that they could free up credit for people who need it... like small businesses? Hmm. Looks like the banksters have eaten our jobs, too. This could not be part of a broad economic scheme to break unions, deprive the middle class of its wealth (its homes) and accumulate all money in the hands of the rich, could it?

VI. Anatomy of a Murder (Of The American Way of Life)

From the New York Times article:

Large companies are increasingly owned by institutional investors who crave swift profits, a feat often achieved by cutting payroll. The declining influence of unions has made it easier for employers to shift work to part-time and temporary employees. Factory work and even white-collar jobs have moved in recent years to low-cost countries in Asia and Latin America. Automation has helped manufacturing cut 5.6 million jobs since 2000 — the sort of jobs that once provided lower-skilled workers with middle-class paychecks.
“American business is about maximizing shareholder value,” said Allen Sinai, chief global economist at the research firm Decision Economics. “You basically don’t want workers. You hire less, and you try to find capital equipment to replace them.”

Maximizing shareholder value? Wtf? Companies do not even like to pay dividends any more. They would rather spend their money buying their competitors, creating monopolies that can, in turn, be sold to other, even larger multinational companies. And each merger and acquisition is accompanied by another round of layoffs---and another round of CEO bonuses.




VII. President Obama/President Hoover

Anyone who has read Hard Times by Studs Terkel knows that the unemployed want jobs, not handouts. During the Great Depression, idled workers hated Hoover and his “dole”.

Recently, Democrats in Congress have made a big to-do about extending unemployment benefits. And Republicans grudgingly let it pass---meaning that they actually wanted it to pass. Why? Because “the dole” does not endear anyone to the government. The dole simply keeps the festering boil of our recession from rising to a head. Desperate workers who can keep a roof over their heads and their bellies full will not take to the streets. They will not organize a new political party. They will sit around until some company offers them a job at a fraction of the salary they used to make with no benefits, and they will be grateful .

Democratic Congress, Democratic President, the solution is easy.

1. Tax companies that send jobs abroad. Give tax breaks to companies that create jobs at home.
2. Force the banksters to extend credit to small businesses. We saved their butts with the bailout. They owe us.
3. End the quagmire in Afghanistan which is draining our tax coffers.
4. Spend war funds creating new federal jobs at home.
5. Anyone who advocates layoffs of public employees in our current economy is an idiot. I. D.I.O.T. Corporate zombie masters may think they do not need anyone to buy their product. They are wrong.
6. If all else fails, line the capitalists up against the wall. Folks that would try to sell us a "jobless recovery" are obviously up to no good.

[Hannah Bell]

1. exposing some glitches in the matrix, i see....the public story doesn't wash.

[pnorman]

2. I have no idea if this is BS or not,

but I'm putting my pug mark so that I can find it again for careful study.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

3. Thanks.

An outstanding post.

[pscot]

19. +1

cc the Whitehouse.

[hobbit709]

4. If there's no jobs, who exactly is "recovering"?

[WinkyDink]

16. Financial institutions.

[w4rma]

22. Which would have "recovered" anyway because someone else would have taken over their clients. (nt)

[Donnachaidh]

31. the elites in control. And it's really not a *recovery*, it's blatant THEFT of

taxes paid by the middle class. That great sucking sound you hear is the vacuum put into place by our representatives that dole out welfare to corporations and elites who then give them money for campaigns.

WE are not part of that economic circle. We just shovel our money into it. :grr:

[Recursion]

34. The 401(k)'s that the unemployed people have been forced to live off of

Which gets back to the idea that 401(k)s were always a scam for the very rich to keep everyone's retirement funds.

[KG]

37. the parasite class.

[truedelphi]

66. Certainly the Inner circle of Wall Street is doing just fine.

And it is the tax payer's Fourteen Trillion bucks and counting that lets them buy that new Mercedes and the second summer home in the Hamptons (to go with the third summer home "The Ski Lodge" in Aspen).

[McCamy Taylor]

5. Oops. Forgot 7. Pass the &^%! Employee Free Choice Act finally.

[Mimosa]

6. Excellent topic! n/t

[LooseWilly]

7. I think there's a plan for #5

"... Corporate zombie masters may think they do not need anyone to buy their product. They are wrong."

I have a feeling the "plan" is to open new markets abroad... so they can sell the products to those who are making them/manning the customer service phones... they've outsourced the work, now they'll outsource the products (try and think of someplace in the world where you can't get a Coke/Pepsi).

Gotta love the irony of it. Especially the fact that, globally, the "new middle classes" don't (from what I've seen) have the spending power the US "middle class" used to have... so they can sell to a bigger market, but they can't sell as many per capita... and everytime they cut wages/layoff that just means that much fewer "stuff" they can sell (ironically, the prices never seem to come down... so much for that whole chapter of supply and demand theory).

[JDPriestly]

50. They will meet up with a lot of competition abroad -- products made

abroad by people who understand those local markets better than the multinationals.

[Mimosa]

8. So Long, Middle Class

McCamy, despite this article coming from the New York Post it reinforces your points.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/so_long_middle_class_GoGvE3xMnYXzZpS2OMGZsI

Excerpts:

5. The number of Americans with incomes below the official poverty line rose by about 15% between 2000 and 2006, and by 2008 over 30 million US workers were earning less than $10 per hour.

6. According to Harvard Magazine, 66% of the income growth between 2001 and 2007 went to the top 1% of all Americans.

7. In New York, the top fifth of earners collect more than 53% of the income; the bottom fifth takes home less than 3%.

8. Over 1.4 million Americans filed for personal bankruptcy in 2009, which represented a 32% increase over 2008.

9. Only the top 5% of households have earned enough additional income to match the rise in housing costs since 1975.

10. For the first time in US history, banks own a greater share of residential housing net worth in the United States than all individual Americans put together.

11. In 1950, the ratio of the average executive’s paycheck to the average worker’s paycheck was about 30 to 1. Since the year 2000, that ratio has exploded to between 300 to 500 to one.

12. As of 2007, the bottom 80% of American households held about 7% of the liquid financial assets.

13. The bottom 40% of income earners now collectively own less than 1% of the nation’s wealth.

14. Average Wall Street bonuses for 2009 were up 17% when compared with 2008.

15. The average income of the top fifth of New York families is 8.7 times greater than that of the bottom fifth. This is the biggest difference of all states.

16. The average income of families in the top 5% in New York was five times greater than the average income of families in the middle 20% of earners. Again this is the biggest difference of all states.

17. The average federal worker now earns about twice as much as the average worker in the private sector.

18. An analysis of income tax data by the Congressional Budget Office found that the top 1% of US households own nearly twice as much of America’s corporate wealth as they did just 15 years ago.

19. The average time needed to find a job has risen to a record 35.2 weeks.

20. More than 40% of Americans who are employed now work in often low-paying service jobs.

21. For the first time in US history, more than 40 million Americans are on food stamps, and the US Department of Agriculture projects that number will go up to 43 million Americans in 2011.

22. What American workers compete with: In China a garment worker makes approximately 86 cents an hour, and in Cambodia it’s 22 cents an hour.

23. Despite the financial crisis, the number of millionaires in the US rose a whopping 16% to 7.8 million in 2009.

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/so_long_middle_class_GoGvE3xMnYXzZpS2OMGZsI#ixzz0vLty5k7c

[HughBeaumont]

12. That article is great.

Too bad the asshole commenter on the site seems to think the world began on January 21st, 2009. Talk about your classic lapses in memory, which almost all right-leaning idiots seem to be plagued with nowadays.

[russspeakeasy]

17. An excellent article...Worth the read...thanks...

[dotymed]

18. We are a third world country, and it is getting worse...

The latest "unemployment extension" only helps those who have been unemployed for less than 100 weeks. ALL of the other Americans, DO NOT get an extension.
My friend was laid off from his manufacturing job after 20 years. He has been going to a technical school to "re-train."
He currently has 3 courses left to receive his Associates Degree in his new field. His unemployment "benefits", which he paid for 20+ years, expired last month. He has 2 children and a mortgage, etc..
We spoke yesterday. He is looking for a job. We discussed how he needs to finish his degree so that he is more employable. He really can not afford it. His wife worked at the same "plant" for 15 years. She is now a school janitor and main provider for their family. They are two of the most selfless people I know. They are very active in their Church, they still donate (now beyond their means) to charities and help anyone who needs it. They have been there for me, especially since my heart failure has become critical and the Social "Security" that I paid for 30+ years, has, so far, denied my disability claim. This has been over 6 years, even though some of our best specialists (I.U.) have informed S.S. that my disease is fatal and I can not work.
Even though I had to move to Tn. for family support last month, they still offer to drive (400 miles) and help me.
What a fucked up country this has become.
If we had Fair trade instead of Free trade.....
If we would follow the path of "Western European SOCIALISM", so that America could compete (again) globally and its citizens could work and prosper....
IF my Aunt had balls, she'd be my Uncle...
The rich keep getting richer and the poor keep growing.....

[Drunken Irishman]

33. Have you ever been to a third world country?

We're a third world country and it's getting worse? Does that mean we'll dissolve into the only fourth world country?

Before you classify America as a third world nation, please hop on a plane to an actual developing country and see the differences.

We ain't perfect - but we're far, FAR from even being remotely close to what is considered a third world nation.

Give me a fucking break.

The stupid, it burns! haha

[treestar]

39. People in real third world nations don't have manufacturing jobs at all

Ever, at any time. They may live with 30% unemployment, underemployment, and employment that is mostly in the agricultural sector. With no chance to go back and finish any degree, nor even start one.

[tiny elvis]

43. beg pardon, drunkentreeirishstarman

your affluence and good health can also be found in third world countries
poverty and wealth abide in proximity around the world
these are our neighbors and they don't have manufacturing jobs at all















i only put up some of the pictures i found coming from honolulu, california, seattle, colorado, new jersey, rhode island, new york
maybe your defense against hyperbole has raised dotymed out of despair
your persistent efforts are acknowledged

[Drunken Irishman]

44. That still doesn't make us a third world nation...

So stop acting like just because we have poverty and homelessness, we're third world. If that were the case, EVERY nation would be third world.

Do you even understand the definition of third world or are you just trying to be ignorant enough to score some bullshit political points?

[tiny elvis]

48. no it does not. your affluence and good health negate my poverty and untreated illness

maybe your defense against hyperbole has raised dotymed out of despair
your persistent efforts are acknowledged

[Drunken Irishman]

53. No effort, pal. Just trying to correct an ignorant statement...

It lowers someone's talking point when they're not smart enough to know what a true third world (developing nation) looks like.

But whatever.

[McCamy Taylor]

45. Thanks for the photos! "Third world" is a state of mind which says that some folks

are expendible.

But I think the US is a great big colonial empire---which turns some of its own citizens into the Third World nation which it exploits. That way, no other country can complain. This arrangement is modelled on Great Britain and Ireland. I write about it in my new OP.

[Drunken Irishman]

54. It's modeled after every nation. LOL

That's the unfortunate reality of life, McCamy Taylor.

Some people are terribly naive. It's sad, eh?

[McCamy Taylor]

56. Disagree. Many nations treat their citizens with respect. Look at western Europe.

Income disparity, infant mortality, life expentancy--the US is no where near the standards set in France, Germany etc. And the powers that be in the US blame Blacks, Latinos and others for bringing out statistics down, when the blame actually lies with the corporate classes with their divide one ethnic group against another strategy to keep down wages.

DrunkenIrishamn, do you even know about the colonias inside the United States where US citizens live without running water?






Did you know that life expectancy for women is falling in some parts of this country?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/21/AR2008042102406.html?nav=rss_nation

Did you know our appalling infant mortality numbers? Our income disparity?

Maybe it is time for Bill Clinton to do another tour around the country to raise awareness of poverty.

[Drunken Irishman]

58. Look at it deeper than that.

Income disparity, infant mortality, life expentancy--the US is no where near the standards set in France, Germany etc

Income disparity between the United States, France and Germany are extremely similar.

The numbers:

France: lowest 10%: 3% highest 10%: 24.8% (2004)
Germany: lowest 10%: 3.6% highest 10%: 24% (2000)
United States: lowest lowest 10%: 2% highest 10%: 30% (2007 est.)

Now compare that to a true third world nation, Bolivia: lowest 10%: 0.5% highest 10%: 44.1% (2005) https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2047.html">1

Infant mortality is where the United States certainly takes a hit, obviously. But the difference isn't staggering.

The numbers (per 1,000 live births):

France: 3.33
Germany: 3.99
United States: 6.26

Now compare that to a true third world nation (Bolivia again): 44.66 https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2091rank.html">2

The differential between say the United States and Germany is marginal. But the difference between the United States and a developing nation is exceptional. Am I trying to justify our numbers? Of course not. But the average infant mortality rate in the world is 59.4 per 1,000 live births. That's an amazingly high number and the United States doesn't even come close to that.

Finally, life expectancy:

France: 80.7
Germany: 79.4
United States: 78.2

Now compare that to a true third world nation (Bolivia is my whipping boy tonight, ha): 65.6 http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/wpp2006/WPP2006_Highlights_rev.pdf">3

Now I'll readily admit France has a big advantage over the United States. But there isn't much difference between the U.S. and Germany. Even one of those left-leaning countries like Denmark is only .1 better than the United States.

But overall, the gap between a great deal of these nations aren't staggering. Nothing like between the developed & undeveloped.

Moreover, unemployment is far more than just a United States problem.

France has a higher unemployment rate than the United States currently. Germany is at 7%. Sweden is at 9.3 (compared to the US' 9.5). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_unemployment_rate">4

And just because we're open to photos:





http://www.dw-world.de/image/0,,2300078_1,00.jpg







All those photos are from France.

Looks remarkably similar to the pictures posted in this thread.

Are we perfect? No. Do we have a great deal of problems? Sure. But America is unlike a great deal of nations out there. We're very diverse. We're massive. We're the third largest country in terms of population and of the top-ten, probably the most balanced economically.

You know, when you reach a certain level in population, it does become difficult to sustain a certain level of prosperity. Especially when your nation was built by the poor. We're not like a great deal of other nations where we cultivated a race or ethnicity over thousands of years. This isn't France where most our citizens have called this country home for centuries.

Most our citizens came because they were dying. My family came to America because they couldn't survive in Ireland.

So we were built out of poverty, really. Much of our country comes from humbled roots - people seeking a better lifestyle. That continues today. You posted a photo of the Mexican flag. No doubt from a border town. Mexican-Americans are the fastest growing population group in America today. Many are poor. They were poor when they arrived here.

France is facing a similar situation with the Muslims, who have arrived in France looking for better opportunities. Similarly, their government and people have gone after them like we have here with the Mexican-Americans.

But overall, the United States is the most diverse nation on earth. That diversity is going to make it difficult to keep an economically pure country because with diversity of ancestry comes diversity of incomes.

Unfortunately, that has always been America's problem and will always be America's problem. But it doesn't mean we're horrible or the worst nation on earth. And it certainly doesn't mean we're destined for third world status (or as the original poster suggested, worse).

We're not. We'll always have our issues - but we'll also continue to be one of the most prosperous nations on earth. Especially among the population Big Boys.

Here are the top-ten largest countries in terms of population:

1. China
2. India
3. United States
4. Indonesia
5. Brazil
6. Pakistan
7. Bangladesh
8. Nigeria
9. Russia
10. Japan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population">5

Now how many of those nations are worse than the United States? How many are wildly better? Especially in the subjects that you listed?

So there you go.

[treestar]

60. Wow, great post, thanks for taking the time to put that together

[tiny elvis]

62. this is an argument against what?

a defense of what?
m taylor:

the powers that be in the US blame Blacks, Latinos and others for bringing our statistics down

drunk man:

That diversity is going to make it difficult to keep an economically pure country because with diversity of ancestry comes diversity of incomes.

g carlin:

poor people used to live in slums. now the economically disadvantaged occupy substandard housing in the inner cities

what did that whole stat laden post mean?
that's just the way it is?
i'm alright, you're diverse?
capitalism reigns supreme by nature?
labor is a fortunate side effect?
there is no explicit thesis in your comments, as if the discussion has no direction or point
or as if you do not wish to address the point

[Drunken Irishman]

63. I'm sorry you didn't read the post...

But I'll help you out, though I'm guessing you'll probably not read this, either and instead post something entirely different.

This is what the poster said:

Income disparity, infant mortality, life expentancy--the US is no where near the standards set in France, Germany etc

I proved they were.

[tiny elvis]

65. yes, i know he was wrong. usa is not far off the standard

and your response was more substantial than correcting a typo
but are you defending the status quo in our system?

That diversity is going to make it difficult to keep an economically pure country because with diversity of ancestry comes diversity of incomes.

what does that claim support?
i see it as inert, resigned, yet supportive of something

[treestar]

59. Of course we have poverty and third world nations have wealth

That doesn't mean we are the same. There's a definition for third vs. first world nations. Check it out to prevent making exaggerated claims.

[JDPriestly]

51. How much does the top 1% earn? Do they pay more than their share in taxes?

Income inequality grew significantly in 2005, with the top 1 percent of Americans — those with incomes that year of more than $348,000 — receiving their largest share of national income since 1928, analysis of newly released tax data shows.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/29/business/29tax.html

That was 2005. Bound to be even higher now. That's a lot of money per year.

We are often told, "Well, you can't increase the tax rates of the rich because they already pay such a high percentage of the taxes that are paid."

That is based on a logical fallacy. The poorer the rest of us get the less in taxes we pay and the greater the percentage of the nation's taxes that the rich pay. That's without our increasing the tax rates on the rich.

That is why the issue of what portion or percentage of the overall tax revenue it is "fair" to ask the rich to pay is irrelevant.

To be concrete, if my husband and I earn $10,000 one year, we probably pay nothing or next to nothing in taxes. The percentage in taxes that we and others with incomes of $10,000 per household pay is next to 0%.

If some other person makes $345,000 and pays 35% of their income after deductions, any percentage of the overall tax bill that person pays will be huge compared to the percentage of the overall bill that we pay.

Yet wealthy people often argue that their taxes should not be raised because they already pay such a large portion of the taxes collected. What nonsense. The more of the money they grab, the less other people can pay in taxes. It's the money that has to be taxed, no matter who has it. Those with the most have to pay the largest amount of tax revenue. If the top 1% get 1% of the income earned in the country, wouldn't it make sense that they should pay 99% of the taxes in the country?

Great OP. Recommended. The OP is concise and makes great points.

[Spheric]

9. K&R Well done. Thanks.

Businesses don't hire just because they can. That is the biggest economic lie the Republicans have ever come up with.

Businesses hire when they don't have enough help to supply the demand for their products or services. Period. Why would any small business hire more people just because they have access to the cash needed to do so? So they can have their new hires standing around with nothing to do until they've accumulated enough cash to actually buy something? It's an absurd notion.

FDR had it right and that's why it worked. You create demand by supplying consumers who don't have a pot to pee in with cash using whatever method it takes - work projects, welfare, tax breaks. The money then moves through the system as people use it to purchase things.

Business is driven by demand, not by supply. Just because you build it doesn't mean they'll come, especially if everybody is broke. And demand is created by pumping cash into the bottom. It'll get to the top eventually, but lots of hands get to touch it on the way by.

It really is that simple.

[ejpoeta]

11. and it doesn't do any good to give it to people who are rich and already have money.

they aren't going to spend it. they'll go stash it somewhere. you need to give it to the poor and unemployed. they WILL USE IT. they have no money, so you give them food stamps they'll go buy food. you give them cash they'll pay their bills and buy their kids school clothes. people like my family like to make it sound like the poor will just go buy a flat screen tv. i remember when in NY they gave $200 per child to those on assistance to get school clothes and stuff for the kids. And i will admit to feeling slighted myself as i took my kids to goodwill to buy school clothes that year (as i do every year). I don't get food stamps. and then there was the whole, they can spend it on whatever they want!!! I felt jealous. that money could help me get my kids school stuff!! and everywhere you turned people were complaining about it. they did a drive to collect school supplies and people didn't want to give stuff because THOSE PEOPLE would be getting it and they already got all this money!

Yes, I felt angry about it. And then I realized.... I am lucky. Yes, we don't have a lot of money, but people on assistance could really use that kind of help. Getting kids ready for school is expensive! If they could get that kind of help then instead of being angry that they are getting that help, I should be happy for them. It's a struggle for anyone. And to think that people who got that help ran out and bought tvs is so cynical. sure some probably did. but most? uh uh. i bet they used it to get their kids decent clothes if only for one year. maybe let them pick out a fancy folder and notebook. i know that i have always let my daughter pick out a nice folder and notebook.... and i can't be that bad off if I can spend .97 on a folder instead of buying the 15cent ones.

This is how they get us fighting each other. people like me who are just at the edge. people who are doing well enough to buy fancy named jeans for their kids getting angry at $200 help for a kid for clothes and supplies. and we all know how much it can cost to buy all that stuff. i spent about $100 just on crayons and markers and folders and binders and backpacks for 2 kids. but then, i stocked up, filling my school supply box. then we went over to good will and spent $80 on clothes and we'll get the rest at the regular store. i wonder how much others spend.

And they get us fighting and hating each other and the poor by this kind of stuff. Like medicaid and food stamps. HEAP. people complain about it. some would even qualify but are too busy listening to beck and limbaugh to bother. they think only illegal immigrants and black people can get it. and that is not true. they sit there and simmer and steam thinking about what someone living in the city is getting while they are struggling to stay afloat. they bitch about people buying cigarettes and assume that if people are getting help it's just because they sit at home on their ass and collect checks. this is a lie that has been sold to us to create the fighting you see. the tea parties and all the other bs is a result of this class warfare.

[txlibdem]

20. They say it's trickling down

Something is trickling on your head but it damn sure isn't money or prosperity. Trickle down doesn't. It never has and it never will.

I agree wholeheartedly with your comment on the rich keeping us fighting amongst ourselves. The pull our strings this way and that and all we do is dance for their amusement.

When are we going to wake up and realize that the rich have been waging a class war against us for decades. It is either us or them. Get ready, citizens!

[ejpoeta]

24. colbert did a nice thing on his show where he was drinking a beer.

he said it was like the economy and it works it's way through and the poor can have what's left. that's about the size of it. fighting over the rich's crumbs basically.

[Fumesucker]

10. K&R, thanks for posting..

[Jeffersons Ghost]

13. K&R!!!

[xchrom]

14. Recommend

[rucky]

15. Wall Street is still trying to turn the economy into a self-licking ice cream cone.

This "jobless recovery" is yet another short-term trick companies are using to boost their stock value. It's not sustainable this way forever, though. If you look at a balance sheet for a publicly held company (don't you love that term?), you'll see a line for "Shareholder Equity", which is basically the assets minus the liabilities. Guess which column payroll falls into?

When you cut the liabilities you need to create assets, you can look good for a quarter or two, but this is hardly sustainable in terms of stock value. So what's the next move? They're already working on it: When it's time to hire, they'll do it for cheap. Pennies on the dollar, if they can. There's already a large pool of skilled & experienced workers in the unemployment lines. They will be able to get the same productivity out of them for less. Their stock value may dip for a quarter or so, then bounce right back up off their cheap labor liability. Shareholders are happy. C-Level gets their bonuses. What else matters?

Just saying: When we say Wall Street only thinks in the short term, it is US who are watching and reacting to the deliberate steps they've taken to get cheap labor in America. They're breaking us down so they can build us back up their way. "Jobless Recovery" is very nearly the fruition of their long-term plans. America will never be the same, unless we start supporting startups that are willing to maintain the middle class standard. The biggest asset to their plan is to put labor in the liabilities column and make us believe it. The biggest threat to their plan is if other businesses started hiring from their cheap labor pool, but offered them a fair wage. But startups & small business can't do that without credit and capital, so Wall Street has the banks to thank for denying that to their would-be future competition. Oh wait, Wall Street IS the banks.

Game, set & match is when we actually start going back to work - for way less than we're worth. Just hope your new package has stock options.

[laughingliberal]

21. It's like the old medical joke: The operation was a success but the patient died.

Jobless recovery = Continued transfer of wealth to the top.

[Poboy]

23. k&r. What a great post. -nt

[Lorien]

25. I'd like to add to your list: we need public works and we need universal healthcare to

have any hope of competing globally or getting our economy back on track. Greater investment in public schools, green tech and energy, and a National high speed maglev system. Gotta spend money to make money. The corporation I usually work with has been outsourcing to their own division in Canada lately. They pay the same wages there, but they don't have to pay for health insurance for their employees, so it saves them 20% or more. On a 100 mil project that makes a big difference. We can't hope to compete globally with the health insurance situation that we have here (not to mention the 100,000 or so needless deaths that it causes every year).

[Jack Rabbit]

26. Well said

There is no such thing as a jobless recovery. The economy does not exist for the benefit of corporate executives, but for society as a whole. If the common people are not benefiting, then the economy is in a slump. It has nothing to do with the Dow being over 10K or whether Goldman Sachs or ExxonMobile made huge profits in the last quarter.

If the economy is failing to produce bread, then it is clearly failing. If the economy is producing bread but exporting it to a market where the miller gets a better price leaving consumers in the local market to starve, it is failing. If the economy is exporting grain to an industrial center where labor is cheaper and leaves workers in the local market without jobs and without means to purchase bread, then it is failing. And if the economy is exporting the grain to make the bread, re-importing the bread only to export it again, it is failing everybody except those who control the markets.

The maxim which the Declaration of Independence applies to a form of government can just as easily be applied to an economic structure:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

The Declaration goes on to add this important caveat:

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.

Indeed, if all else fails, then as a last resort and only as a last resort line the capitalists up against the wall or let the guillotine shave their necks. At the very least, feed the corporate charters to the paper shredder as a way to put the offending artificial persons to an appropriately artificial death.

The question is whether capitalism can be fixed or whether the capitalist should be swept into the dust bin of history along side the landed aristocrat.

[Odin2005]

27. I'm gonna STRANGLE the next idiot who uses that term.

[LongTomH]

28. K & R & Forward: An excellent article and analysis

A very insightful article, followed by some very good commentary!

I would add that, it's important to remember that this is a process which has been going on for some time. It mirrors the rise of "The Gilded Age" in the 19th century, which led to the Great Depression of the '30s.

It's past time for a New Deal 2.0 and a national health plan which guarantees health care to all of our citizens.

Edited to add: Before we can get either, we need to send more real progressives to congress and tell our current crop of Democratic congresspeople to 'grow a pair.'

[valerief]

29. As long as the wealthy stay wealthy, it's a recovery. "Small people" just do not count. nt

[Greyhound]

30. Basic business cycle; Large companies are net job destroyers, small companies are job creators.

This is HS-level business concepts, so why are so many suckered into this fantasy that our effort must go toward propping up big business at the expense of everything else?
:kick: & R

[Hydra]

32. I regret that I have but one rec to give this post

I, too, am dismayed that this meme is gaining traction.

I suspect the traction will only last as long as the unemployment checks do.

[unapatriciated]

38. I will give a second one for you.

[TheKentuckian]

35. major league heat right over the plate

[KG]

36. c'mon. you're just being a gloom and doomer!

:rofl:

[flyarm]

40. When hundreds of people apply for one job at Starbucks..there is no damn recovery.

when hundreds of people with degree's and outstanding resume's for one job at Starbucks , there is no recovery!

Oh and there is one way Americans can help themselves, when you call any service and you get someone on the Phone from a foreign call center..demand to speak to an American..don't discuss anything with the foreigners..if we all did this and these corps got so many demands to speak with Americans ..the call centers would be flooded with Americans demandng to speak with Americans!

I rufuse to speak with anyone that is not American..yes they have to put me on hold..and I Have to wait, but I refuse to discuss anything regarding my credit cards, airline reservations , Phone company or Cable with anyone unless they are right here in the USof A!

I have a friend who is from India, she was just back in India and she told me many of the call centers in huge wherehouses are not filled with Indians, but they are crowded with people from Africa..getting pennies a day.
These corporations are now importing Africans to work in the Call centers! These Corps won't even pay the low prices to Indians..they bring in Africans and put them up in Squalor, and they get paid very little..it is slave labor!

Refuse to speak with these call ceneters outside of the USA..Just do it!

I yell on the phone , I CAN"T UNDERSTAND YOU ..get me an American to speak with now!

Just do it!
Some companies are now bringing these call centers back here to mainland USA, Because many Americans are demanding to speak with Americans!

[NC_Nurse]

41. Why doesn't the fed stop providing no interest funds to bank and lend the money

directly to small businesses themselves? Cut out these greedy assholes that aren't doing anything for the country, just gambling our money away enriching themselves!

[KoKo]

42. "Are the American People Obsolete? The richest few don't need the rest of us ...."

"Are the American People Obsolete? The richest few don't need the rest of us ...."


The richest few don't need the rest of us as markets, soldiers or police anymore. Maybe we should all emigrate

By Michael Lind

Have the American people outlived their usefulness to the rich minority in the United States? A number of trends suggest that the answer may be yes.

In every industrial democracy since the end of World War II, there has been a social contract between the few and the many. In return for receiving a disproportionate amount of the gains from economic growth in a capitalist economy, the rich paid a disproportionate percentage of the taxes needed for public goods and a safety net for the majority.

In North America and Europe, the economic elite agreed to this bargain because they needed ordinary people as consumers and soldiers. Without mass consumption, the factories in which the rich invested would grind to a halt. Without universal conscription in the world wars, and selective conscription during the Cold War, the U.S. and its allies might have failed to defeat totalitarian empires that would have created a world order hostile to a market economy.

Globalization has eliminated the first reason for the rich to continue supporting this bargain at the nation-state level, while the privatization of the military threatens the other rationale.

The offshoring of industrial production means that many American investors and corporate managers no longer need an American workforce in order to prosper. They can enjoy their stream of profits from factories in China while shutting down factories in the U.S. And if Chinese workers have the impertinence to demand higher wages, American corporations can find low-wage labor in other countries.

This marks a historic change in the relationship between capital and labor in the U.S. The robber barons of the late 19th century generally lived near the American working class and could be threatened by strikes and frightened by the prospect of revolution. But rioting Chinese workers are not going to burn down New York City or march on the Hamptons.


What about markets? Many U.S. multinationals that have transferred production to other countries continue to depend on an American mass market. But that, too, may be changing. American consumers are tapped out, and as long as they are paying down their debts from the bubble years, private household demand for goods and services will grow slowly at best in the United States. In the long run, the fastest-growing consumer markets, like the fastest-growing labor markets, may be found in China, India and other developing countries.

This, too, marks a dramatic change. As bad as they were, the robber barons depended on the continental U.S. market for their incomes. The financier J.P. Morgan was not so much an international banker as a kind of industrial capitalist, organizing American industrial corporations that depended on predominantly domestic markets. He didn't make most of his money from investing in other countries.

In contrast, many of the highest-paid individuals on Wall Street have grown rich through activities that have little or no connection with the American economy. They can flourish even if the U.S. declines, as long as they can tap into growth in other regions of the world.

Thanks to deindustrialization, which is caused both by productivity growth and by corporate offshoring, the overwhelming majority of Americans now work in the non-traded domestic service sector. The jobs that have the greatest growth in numbers are concentrated in sectors like medical care and childcare.

Even here, the rich have options other than hiring American citizens. Wealthy liberals and wealthy conservatives agree on one thing: the need for more unskilled immigration to the U.S. This is hardly surprising, as the rich are far more dependent on immigrant servants than middle-class and working-class Americans are.

MORE AT:
http://www.salon.com/news/us_economy/index.html?story=/...

[Raksha]

46. K & R - bookmarked

A "jobless recovery" is a contradiction in terms, right?

[inna]

47. Bravo!

:applause:

[orbitalman]

49. A thesis worthy of a doctoral program?

Almost dissertation-like.
:applause:

[RufusTFirefly]

52. Perhaps the general discourse takes a decidedly business-centric view?

Perhaps this week's many labor news shows will examine this disparity in depth.

Oh yeah.

Never mind. I forgot.

There are no labor news shows.

My bad.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_xfxmmOzXySs/SqzKdYW6z5I/AAAAAAAABKQ/TKna7-QKTLE/S1600-R/emily+litella+and+jane+curtin.jpg

[Ken Burch]

55. A "Jobless Recover" is like a "Sexless Fuck".

n/t.

[snake in the grass]

57. So true and...

...so sad. I find it offensive that some of these fine politicians dare call themselves Democrats.

We need a general strike.

Excellent read, as usual.

[TK421]

61. ******************* JOBLESS RECOVERY **************************

edited to add: kidding! ;)

[guardian]

64. Only those who did NOT lose their job

every use the term "jobless recovery"