- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
September 15, 2010 at 11:08 pm #596383
JiggersMemberDarn, and I was just thinking that we were improving.
Article,
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2012903145_jobs16.html
September 16, 2010 at 12:14 am #703606
SmittyParticipant“Flat” is the new “up” (or in this case down), Jiggers!
September 16, 2010 at 12:25 am #703607
JoBParticipantSeptember 16, 2010 at 12:26 am #703608
CarsonParticipantI heard an estimate, 12.5% if not for the Stimulus, so you are dead right Smitty, flat, is up!
September 16, 2010 at 12:48 am #703609
SmittyParticipantI heard it would have been 29.5% had Bush still been in office.
When does “Recovery summer” start? *Next* summer?
September 16, 2010 at 12:54 am #703610
AndyParticipantSo Washington is holding steady, I wonder how the other 56 states are doing?
September 16, 2010 at 1:00 am #703611
SmittyParticipantAndy! It’s only funny(and newsworthy) when Republicans make flubs, not Democrats.
Get with the program!
September 16, 2010 at 1:06 am #703612
AndyParticipantMy bad.
September 16, 2010 at 1:27 am #703613
CarsonParticipantSmitty, you are in fantasyland. If Bush was still in office unemployment would be at 1943 levels, just under 2%. The bad news is the mandatory draft and invasion of Iran because they insulted his mother…
September 16, 2010 at 2:29 am #703614
SmittyParticipantCarson, are you saying that good old FDR’s “stimulus” didn’t get us out of the depression, but war did?
Welcome to the club, baby! You are finally starting to see the light!
Carson the tea bagger! (not that there’s anything wrong with that, Jerry).
September 16, 2010 at 3:33 am #703615
JoBParticipantSmitty…
aren’t you lucky you can blame the republican mess on the democrat who was left to shovel the sh.t.
yeah.. that works.
September 17, 2010 at 5:32 am #703616
HMC RichParticipantYeah, I didn’t claim the past few weeks. Seems like when I claim it goes up too! As Mel Allen used to say . . . How bout that.
September 17, 2010 at 4:28 pm #703617
JoBParticipantHow quickly we forget that unemployment was projected to reach 25% in the US prior to TARP and all those other “ineffective” programs…
and that was considered a conservative estimate…
September 17, 2010 at 4:58 pm #703618
JoBParticipantSmitty…
the president that “business” thought was going to bring our economy down..
netted 7 billion on that TARP bill he pushed through congress….
while “business” was helping to bring their own profits down with prophylactic layoffs…
in hindsight.. maybe not so savvy after all.
unless…
perhaps there was another agenda?
like fueling anger for a mid-term election to restore a republican congress..
and the kind of deregulation that created the economic meltdown in the first place….
hmmmm….
one wonders.
September 17, 2010 at 6:27 pm #703619
SmittyParticipant“and the kind of deregulation that created the economic meltdown in the first place….”
What started this entire thing was REGULATION. Regulation forcing banks to lend to people they normally wouldn’t have – resulting in the housing bubble. It was all downhill once that started to collapse.
Oh, and Alan Greenspan(a government REGULATOR) keeping rates WAY TOO LOW for way too long.
September 17, 2010 at 6:32 pm #703620
CarsonParticipantSmitty,
I know, you hate dealing in facts. What regulation required banks to make risky loans? Please, that should be easy to find. (ie, the regulation WAMU followed to a T and banks like Wells totally ignored)
September 17, 2010 at 7:37 pm #703621
SmittyParticipantGoogle C.R.A. It has a long and sorted history that (as with all liberal causes) sounds great in theory, but backfires in practice.
September 17, 2010 at 7:51 pm #703622
CarsonParticipantReally? The Community Reinvestment Act required banks to lend to people with no verifiable income and inflated values? I must have missed that part..keep trying Smitty, like the Million Monkey Theory, you will get it eventually!
September 17, 2010 at 8:19 pm #703623
JoBParticipantLOL smitty…
i shouldn’t have been drinking that new old coke when i read your post… what a mess!
that big bad old government ;)
which btw was controlled by the Bush babies at the time the loans in question were made…
you don’t think that making bad loans and repackaging them as top class securities and then talking insurance companies into insuring the bank’s risk while spreading the exposure to toxic loans across America’s pension systems had anything to do with the economic crisis?
I thought my family were champs at the rewrite personal history stuff…
but i have to hand it to you..
you have topped them in one fell swoop.
where was it you got that business education of yours?
September 17, 2010 at 8:46 pm #703624
SmittyParticipant“which btw was controlled by the Bush babies at the time the loans in question were made…”
Agreed.
It also didn’t help when Clinton threatened the mortgage industry with the CRA and all the scrutiny that comes with it.
“you don’t think that making bad loans and repackaging them as top class securities and then talking insurance companies into insuring the bank’s risk while spreading the exposure to toxic loans across America’s pension systems had anything to do with the economic crisis?”
Cart, meet horse.
“where was it you got that business education of yours?”
From the same school that taught me to cut expenses (including labor) as soon as you smell a recession. Your competitor is certainly going to do it.
September 18, 2010 at 1:08 am #703625
DPMemberRe: cutting expenses including labor as soon you smell a recession.
—But couldn’t that also cause a recession where there wasn’t actually going to be one?
Of course, there’s no way to dispute Smitty Logic, because after all those pre-recessionary layoffs and cut-backs the economy is almost sure to go down anyway. Then Smitty can just point to the unemployment lines and say: See? I told you this was going to happen!
Smitty, strategic business planning is a good thing. I’m not saying employers should wait until they go into the red to respond to a slumping economy. But laying off people in anticipation of a recession seems like it could easily become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Think of it like a bunch of bank depositors making a run on the bank based on a rumor that the bank was going to fail.
September 18, 2010 at 5:28 am #703626
JoBParticipantDP..
you can give your business school a point more than smittys..
because yes..
laying people off in large numbers certainly can cause a recession…
September 18, 2010 at 2:30 pm #703627
SmittyParticipantHey now, who said “large numbers”….more like “prudent numbers” – half via attrition (hiring freeze).
Sorry, but everyone plays the same game when we are beholden to shareholders – of which you may be an unknowing participant!
September 18, 2010 at 3:15 pm #703628
JoBParticipantSmitty…
so now we get to the real bottom line..
the shareholders.. aka stock price.
your company dumped employees to raise stock price…
i don’t know if you are old enough to remember this Smitty… but there was a time when a company increased production to raise stock price… when stock price actually reflected a company’s performance.
Will the stock market have to collapse completely before American business starts looking at markets and production again instead of continually pandering to the financial sector?
maybe.
September 18, 2010 at 5:09 pm #703629
SmittyParticipantWe “dumped” employees to remain competitive. If you don’t remain competitive (lowering prices while maintaining margins as best you can) you will lose and be out of business. Share price drops, business goes under and WAY more than the 10% you “dumped” (like, 100%) will be looking for work.
Get it?
Times have changed, things are global, labor is CHEAP and you appear to still be living in a world where a 3% COLA is a guarantee and anything less that a 5% raise on top of that is worthy of a strike. Paying $50/hour to screw bolts on an assembly line will not keep you in business for long. It’s just reality.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.