Tag Archives: jobs

Losing a debate on ‘media optics,’ winning at what matters

Posted on by


via: nickoftime

Reminder from Think Progress: At the same point in his administration, President George W. Bush’s record wasn’t as positive. Through 44 months, the private sector had lost more than 1 percent of its jobs (under Obama, it has gained 0.46 percent), and the only reason Bush could claim positive overall growth was because the public sector had grown by almost 4 percent. [...] Under Obama, the public sector has shrunk by more than 600,000 jobs, increasing only while the government conducted the 2010 Census. Without those losses, the unemployment rate would be near 7 percent. The unemployment rate would be lower still had Republicans not blocked the American Jobs Act, which economists estimated would have added more than one million jobs to the economy.

US STOCKS-Dow hits 5-year high on jobs report | Reuters – The Dow Jones industrials index climbed to its highest level in nearly 5 years on Friday, after a surprise drop in the unemployment rate pointed to continued improvement in the U.S. labor market. The S&P 500 rose for a fifth straight day and was also on course to close near a 5-year high.

Also this:

DailyKos: Here’s a big win for Eric Holder, Kathleen Sebelius and President Obama. It’s also evidence of how this administration really is protecting Medicare:

WASHINGTON — A federal strike force has charged 91 people, including a hospital president, doctors and nurses, with Medicare fraud schemes in seven cities involving $429 million in false billings. [...]

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said that that in addition to the newly announced criminal charges, her agency used new authority under the Obama administration’s health care law to stop future payments to many of the health care providers suspected of fraud.

President Obama DNC2012: Made in America

Posted on by

“We can choose a future where we export more products and outsource fewer jobs. After a decade that was defined by what we bought and borrowed, we’re getting back to basics, and doing what America has always done best: We’re making things again. I’ve met workers in Detroit and Toledo who feared they’d never build another American car. Today, they can’t build them fast enough, because we reinvented a dying auto industry that’s back on top of the world. I’ve worked with business leaders who are bringing jobs back to America – not because our workers make less pay, but because we make better products. Because we work harder and smarter than anyone else. I’ve signed trade agreements that are helping our companies sell more goods to millions of new customers – goods that are stamped with three proud words: Made in America.”

— President Obama, DNC2012

Register to vote | Volunteer | Contribute

President Obama DNC2012: will you reward companies that create jobs here at home, or overseas?

Posted on by

“After a decade of decline, this country created over half a million manufacturing jobs in the last two and a half years.  And now you have a choice:  we can give more tax breaks to corporations that ship jobs overseas, or we can start rewarding companies that open new plants and train new workers and create new jobs here, in the United States of America.  We can help big factories and small businesses double their exports, and if we choose this path, we can create a million new manufacturing jobs in the next four years.  You can make that happen.  You can choose that future.”

— President Obama, DNC2012

###

Think Progress: 

Did you know that you’re actually paying to ship American jobs overseas? [...Just two months ago, Senate Republicans] voted almost unanimously to protect these outrageous giveaways to corporations that ship American jobs overseas. The Bring Jobs Home Act got a 56-vote majority, but Republicans used a filibuster to kill it. The bill would have:

    • Abolished tax breaks for companies that ship American jobs overseas
    • Created new tax incentives that reward companies for that bring jobs home to America

[...W]hy would Republicans do this? Two words: Grover Norquist. Almost every single Senate Republican has promised this Washington lobbyist that they will never, ever raise taxes or end a single giveaway to special interests. And not only has Mitt Romney signed this same pledge to a lobbyist, he wants to give companies even more incentives to create jobs in other countries instead of here in America. [This] vote shows you just how far Republicans will go to protect tax giveaways to the wealthy and special interests. It also shows why we need to fix our tax code so it helps build an economy that works for everyone, not just the privileged few and their lobbyists.

Vote in a President and a Congress who vote for the American people instead of politicians who vote for the global elite and their multinational interests. 

Register to vote | Volunteer | Contribute

Important considerations about the Bureau of Labor Jobs Report

Posted on by

Daily Kos: The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported Friday morning that, seasonally adjusted, the economy created 103,000 new private jobs in August, and shed 7,000 government jobs for a net gain of 96,000. The consensus of experts surveyed ahead of time by Bloomberg was that there would be a net gain of 125,000. The official unemployment rate fell to 8.1 percent, mostly because of a shrinking work force.

Bob Cesca: 96,000 nonfarm jobs in the month of August is the highest amount since August 2006.

August 2003: – 45,000
August 2004: +122,000
August 2005: +193,000
August 2006: +183,000
August 2007: – 18,000
August 2008: – 274,000
August 2009: – 231,000
August 2010: – 51,000 (worsened by Census layoffs)
August 2011: + 85,000
August 2012: + 96,000

Is it good enough? No, but you already know that. It is better than your average gotcha headline will lead you to believe, however.

Also keep in mind that when there were great job numbers during the Bush years, that was thanks to PUBLIC SECTOR hiring — government jobs. From Salon:

But the real eye-opener comes when we compare Obama’s numbers to George W. Bush’s. In Bush’s first term, the economy shed 913,000 private sector jobs! 913,000! The only thing that saved Bush’s first term from being a complete economic disaster, in terms of employment, was robust public sector growth: The economy added 900,000 government jobs. One wonders: Without the massive growth in the public sector during Bush’s first term, would he have been reelected?

[...] Of course, Obama isn’t running against Bush, so that’s moot. But as this presidential campaign heats up, it might be worth periodically reminding ourselves: Bush led the U.S. economy out of a weak recession with strong public sector growth. Obama is leading the U.S. economy out of a near-death experience while a steadily shrinking government swells the unemployment rolls. Which magic trick do you think is harder?

In other words, if the Republicans in Congress today worked for America under the Obama Administration the same way they worked for America during Bush’s Administration, we’d be in much better shape. Obviously government workers aren’t the enemy when there’s a Republican in the White House. And if your top priority is to make Obama a one-term president, you make the country’s employment situation worse by blocking government hiring on every level (city, state, federal) while demonizing government workers.

Ezra Klein: Since Obama was elected, the public sector has lost about 600,000 jobs. If you put those jobs back, the unemployment rate would be 7.8 percent. But what if we did more than that? At this point in George W. Bush’s administration, public-sector employment had grown by 3.7 percent. That would be equal to a bit over 800,000 jobs today. If you add those hypothetical jobs, the unemployment rate falls to 7.3 percent.

By the way, President Obama introduced The American Jobs Act a year ago, which is also exactly when the Republicans began blocking it.

FACT: Who creates more jobs: Democratic presidents or Republican presidents?

Posted on by

The Claim: Clinton said that over the past half century almost twice as many jobs had been created when Democrats were in the White House as under Republican administrations.

The Facts: Clinton’s math is correct. Using Bureau of Labor Statistics figures for the month each president took office, Democratic presidents presided over the creation of 42.3 million jobs and Republican chief executives saw 23.9 million.

The Claim: Clinton said that in the last 29 months the economy has produced about 4.5 million private-sector jobs.

The Reality: The statement is true. Private non-farm payrolls rose by 4.5 million during the 29 months ended in July, the most recent month for which figures are available.

 
 
 
 

Source: sandandglass

Response to “Are you better off today than you were four years ago?” YES!

Posted on by

Better off now than 4 years ago? Romney launches aggressive GOP response during Dem convention: Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign is launching an aggressive Republican response at the site of the Democratic National Convention aimed at stealing attention and driving new questions about President Barack Obama’s leadership on the eve of his nomination for a second term. As thousands of Democratic activists gather in Charlotte on Monday, Republican vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan will campaign 230 miles to the east in Greenville. Aides say the Wisconsin congressman will focus on a simple question reflecting a message that staffers and surrogates will deliver in North Carolina and across the nation: “Are you better off than you were four years ago?”

RESPONSE:

Matthew Yglesias: It would probably be political malpractice to offer this as an answer to the question “are you better off than you were four years ago,” but the chart above (highlighting month-to-month changes in employment) gestures at what I think the most accurate response to that question is. Barack Obama wasn’t president four years ago. Nor did he become president magically on Election Day 2008. Between “four years ago” and his inauguration came the months of September, October, November, and December 2008 plus almost all of January 2009 (he took office on January 20th). That five month span was a terrible time for the American economy, seeing the net loss of over 3 million jobs. Under the circumstances, it’s perfectly plausible that lots of people are worse off than they were four years ago (perhaps employed in a lower-paid, lower-status job than they used to have) but better off then they were when Obama took office (perhaps employed rather than unemployed).

Bob Cesca: Yes, I agree that there are still people who are hurting. Unemployment remains unacceptably high, and, ultimately, the depth of the Great Recession is still playing itself out in the difficult task of mitigating it and returning the economy to a place of steady prosperity. But when it comes to the question of whether we’re better off, there’s no doubt that everyone is better off now than we were when, for example, the economy was collapsing with no end in sight; when we were engaged in two wars with no end in sight; when healthcare was less affordable; when mutual funds and 401(k) retirement plans were losing value as the stock market crashed; and so forth. More of this presently. (Frankly, I hesitate to enumerate all of the catastrophes we faced in 2008 and early 2009 because grouping them together makes each individual item seem less catastrophic.) So how effective were the policies of the Obama administration? Continue…

DailyKos: I think that the answer to the question is that, Yes, we are better off than we were four years ago.

1.  The war in Iraq is over.
2.  Bin Laden is dead.
3.  The Stock Market is up.
4.  We are creating new jobs, not losing jobs.
5.  We have stopped the increase in medical insurance costs.
6.  More people in the USA have medical insurance than ever before.
7.  The American automobile industry is stronger than ever.
8.  WE are producing more  domestic energy than ever.
9.  We are working toward new and innovative forms of energy.

Still, wages are frozen for working people.  CEO’s are making unprecedented profits.  The income disparity in the USA is completely skewed. We Can Do Better.  But, not by electing Tea Party and GOP representatives, Senators and Mitt Romney.

The Obama Campaign is tightening up the response to this question — THANK GOD:

David Axelrod: ”Here’s what I can say, Chris,” answered Axelrod, who advises Obama’s reelection campaign. “We are in a better position than we were in the economy in the sense that when the president took office, we were losing 800,000 jobs a month, and the quarter before he took office was the worst since the Great Depression. We are [now] in a different place: 29 straight months of job growth and private sector jobs. Are we where we need to be? No.” Axelrod then pointed out that Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney had failed to outline a specific alternative during his speech at the Republican National Convention last Thursday — a convention that Axelrod called “a terrible failure.” Wallace recited grim statistics reflecting increased unemployment, higher gas prices, more national debt and lower incomes. He put the question to Axelrod again. “I think the average American recognizes it took years to create the crisis that erupted in 2008 and peaked in January 2009,” Axelrod said. “It’s going to take some time to work through it.”

Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley: (today) “We are clearly better off as a country because we’re now creating jobs rather than losing them.”

Stephanie Cutter: ”Absolutely. By any measure the country has moved forward over the last four years. It might not be as fast as some people would’ve hoped. The president agrees with that.”

It’s amusing that the Romney campaign is also using the talking point as their response: “If we want a new direction, we need a new president.”  NEW DIRECTION? Are  you kidding me? Romney-Ryan are indicating they’d go back to the failed policies of the Bush Administration — the exact same policies that took us to the place we were FOUR YEARS AGO.

Juan Cole: Labor Day Question: Are you Better off than You were in 1970?: The real question isn’t whether we are better off than we were four years ago. It takes a long time to recover from burst bubbles and near-depressions (the Japanese have still not recovered from their burst bubble of the early 1990s). The real question is whether the working and middle classes of the United States will go on allowing themselves to be taken advantage of by our super-rich, who are gathering to themselves more and more of the national income. The top 1% owned 25% of the privately held national wealth in the United States in the 1950s, but have 38% of it today. In contrast, real wages per hour for the average worker in the United States, adjusted for inflation, peaked in 1970. We’re now down from that, with a generation and a half blocked from meaningful economic advancement. But, you will say, the US is a much wealthier society now than it was in 1970 or 1990. Where has all the extra money generated by American labor and investment gone? It has gone to the rich. Yes, folks, the rich are taking home a fifth of everything we make as a country each year, up from ten percent in 1970. We are 310 million people. About 3 million get a fifth of the annual income. Those 3 million people are 3 million Mitt Romneys. They want low taxes and they want to get rid of social security, medicare and Obamacare. Continue…

 

President Obama: Republican ideas are better suited for the last century

Posted on by

Huffington Post: URBANDALE, Iowa, Sept 1 (Reuters) – President Barack Obama tried to bolster his re-election campaign on Saturday with a fierce critique of the Republicans’ convention and a plea to supporters to cast their ballots as early as possible.

“Speaking to a crowd of 10,000 in the battleground state of Iowa, Obama said rival Mitt Romney and his fellow Republicans had offered no new ideas when they held the national spotlight for three days during their convention in Tampa.

“”What they offered over those three days was more often than not an agenda that was better-suited for the last century,” Obama said. “We might as well have watched it on a black-and-white TV.”

“Obama criticized Romney for failing to mention the war in Afghanistan or his plans for veterans care in his speech, and said he had failed to outline a credible plan to boost the economy.

“”There was a lot of talk about hard truths and bold choices … but no one ever actually bothered to tell you what they were,” Obama said.

“Obama is gearing up for his own star turn next Thursday at the Democratic convention in Charlotte, North Carolina, where he will lay out his argument for re-election in a football stadium that can hold almost 75,000 people.

“The speech is likely to offer few surprises: Obama has been arguing since June that the election is a choice between continuing the policies he enacted in his first term, such as keeping his health reforms in place and bolstering education spending, and returning to policies enacted under Republican President George W. Bush that hollowed out the middle class in order to cut taxes for the wealthy.”


firstfamily: Urbandale, Iowa | September 1, 2012

Register to vote | Volunteer | Contribute

Willard Romney would return to policies that created this debacle in the first place

Posted on by

Charles P. Pierce discusses job creation and the slow and steady pace of President Obama vs. the radical fiction of a Willard Romney / George W. Bush II presidency:

The new job numbers should have the White House stowing away the oxygen tanks for a month or so, at any rate. The economy added 163,000 new jobs, and Americans are building and selling more stuff, and all this is what you want to hear if you’re a president who wants to be president again, and particularly if you’re running against a fella whose entire tax plan just now was left by various independent experts as little more than a pile of smoking meat by the side of the road. When you’re reduced to trying to cast the Tax Policy Center — which is so wonkish that it makes the National Science Foundation look like the back rows at a Pantera concert — as a passel of wild-eyed Alinskyite radicals, you’re pretty much admitting that you’ve lost the argument.

Unemployment ticked up a little, but remains below 9 percent, and, yes, it’s damn tragic that we celebrate that as though it were, well, something to celebrate. Nevertheless, this is the best week the president’s had on the numbers in a very long time.

Is this a mixed blessing for the president? Of course, it is. That’s the only kind of blessing that’s left, given what was done to the economy, and his own dilatory caution in addressing the magnitude of the crisis out in the country. And the status quo, in terms of the human cost of what is increasingly looking like the new normal, is both unsustainable and indefensible. But the numbers are moving, and the president is committed, for good or ill, to creating measured progress back from a precipitous crisis. His is the slow and steady pace…

[...] It’s Willard Romney who is the get-rich-quick huckster now. He is making the fundamentally radical proposal — a radicalism limned precisely by the analysis of his tax plan — that we return to the policies that created the debacle in the first place, that we abandon patience for the quick-fix nostrums of supply-side theory and for the even more profound poisons being peddled by Paul Ryan, the zombie-eyed granny-starver from the state of Wisconsin, that we abandon the ant for the grasshopper. Rommey is the candidate of the unlimited credit card, of the magic asterisk, of the underpants gnome. He’s the candidate of crazy risk and unlikely reward. You want to look at a radical, don’t look at the Tax Policy Center. Look at the guy with the dancing horse.


via: questionall

Related: Romney’s “Plan for a Stronger Middle-Class” wouldn’t create ANY American jobs

Job growth over a decade: George W. Bush vs. President Obama

Posted on by

Steve Benen charts job growth in the public and private sectors, comparing the terms of George W. Bush and President Obama: (emphasis below is mine)

“So far in 2012, from January to July, the overall economy has added 1.06 million jobs, while the private sector has added 1.12 million jobs. Note that in every year of the Obama presidency, the private sector outpaced the overall economy, while in every year under Bush, that notorious Marxist, the private sector trailed the overall job market.

“And while job growth has been underwhelming in 2012, the year to date — which, again, only includes seven months — has outpaced the first three years of the Bush presidency combined. Indeed, we’ve seen more jobs created since January than in five of the eight years Bush was in office.

“What’s more, the chart should also make it obvious that economic conditions have vastly improved since 2009, when Obama took office… Mitt Romney recently said the first 6 to 12 months shouldn’t be held against a new president. If that’s true, Obama has created 3.88 million jobs overall, and 4.44 million private-sector jobs.”

What about this private-sector vs. public-sector jobs situation? Think Progress summarizes (America has hundreds of thousands fewer teachers than it had 3 years ago):

“The Hamilton Project examined government data and found that among those public sector cuts, teachers, police officers, and emergency first responders have been hit especially hard. From 2009 to 2011, the country lost 220,000 teaching jobs, and the number of emergency responders dropped by more than 40 percent, as the chart below shows:

“[...] While the government typically adds jobs during recessions to bolster economic recoveries, it has not done so this time. This hurts the economy in the short-term — the nation’s unemployment rate would be a full point lower without the public sector cuts — but it also has perilous consequences for the future…

“Worse yet, the problem created by these job losses is unnecessary. Republicans’ “completely misguided” pursuit of deficit reduction at all costs, even as the nation’s borrowing costs reach record lows, has prevented the government from making the investments it needs to protect the jobs of teachers, police officers, and first-responders. Those investments wouldn’t just keep teachers in the classroom and first responders on the job, but would also help improve the nation’s overall recovery.”

The Republican Party would gladly watch the country and our economy burn to the ground for their political ideology. Public-sector employment is one of the foundations of America’s middle class.

The GOP is holding tax cuts for 98% of us hostage until tax cuts for the wealthiest are extended

Posted on by

America needs to regain some balance and the Republican Party needs to be reminded of that. For three decades the wealthy have unequally benefited from tax laws, taking home more money than the rest of us, paying less tax on their incomes than the rest of us.

The rich have stashed their extra money in offshore accounts while creating zero jobs. Actually, with less revenue coming into local, state, and federal treasuries, thousands of public sector jobs have actually been lost through layoffs and hiring freezes. Paul Krugman says the fall in public employment is “about 1.4 million jobs less than it would be if it had grown as fast as it did under President George W. Bush. And, if we had those extra jobs, the unemployment rate would be much lower than it is — something like 7.3 percent instead of 8.2 percent.”

That’s lost jobs, lost paychecks and benefits and pensions, lost buying power, lost business. Formerly middle class people now unemployed, homes foreclosed, some now living on unemployment and public assistance. And what for? So that the rest of us can continue to finance the one percent’s tax deductions / lifestyles – like the $77,000 deduction the Romneys took on their Olympic horse.

It’s time to let the Bush tax cuts expire for the super rich.

The Hill:

“In his weekly address, the President called for lawmakers to adopt a Democratic measure which would extend the expiring lower George W. Bush-era tax rates only for those couples making below $250,000, and forcing higher income earners to pay more.

“[...] Republicans charge that a tax increase on any Americans would further hurt the recovering economy, while Obama has threatened to veto an across-the-board extension, calling on the wealthy to pay more.

“In his address, Obama again called on the GOP to decouple the middle class rates from rates for higher income earners.

““If 218 Members of the House vote the right way, 98% of American families and 97% of small business owners will have the certainty of knowing that that their income taxes will not go up next year,” said the president.

““Everyone says they agree that we should extend the tax cuts for the middle class,” said Obama. “Instead of doing what’s right for middle class families and small business owners, Republicans in Congress are holding these tax cuts hostage until we extend tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans.

“Obama said the country could not afford more “top-down economics” and vowed that as soon as they sent him a bill to block a tax raise on the middle class he would “sign it right away.””

Your tax dollars at work: the do-nothing Republican House did more of that yesterday

Posted on by

244 members vote to repeal Obamacare, for the 31st time. House Republicans just spent 89 hours to repeal Obamacare instead of, you know, doing something that actually helps people.

image: demnewswire

And who were the five bluedogs who voted with the GOP? Reps. Dan Boren (OK), Larry Kissell (NC), Mike McIntyre (NC), Mike Ross (AR), and Jim Matheson (UT).

Your GOP-led Congress and jobs, jobs, jobs

Posted on by

Dave Weigel remarks on the lousy jobs forecast and how your Congress is ON IT:

“Michele Bachmann assures us that the economy is struggling because of “uncertainty.” Mitt Romney wants the “kick in the gut” to end. Amid all the verbs and gerunds expressing disappointment, Eric Cantor gives us a sort of heads-up about how Congress will respond: “In the coming weeks, the House will vote to stop the tax hike on working families and remove the red tape burdening small businesses to reduce uncertainty and make America more competitive.” What this means, functionally: The House will hold yet another vote on full repeal of the Affordable Care Act. It will pass, and die in the Senate. Tread carefully. After that vote, you don’t want to be mobbed on the street by newly certainty-infused people offering you jobs.”

And another thing:

Source: keepyourbsoutofmyuterus

President Obama continues to push Congress to create jobs, use war money for nation-building

Posted on by

“…on Friday, I signed into law a bill that will do two things for the American people. First, it will keep thousands of construction workers on the job rebuilding our nation’s infrastructure. Second, it will keep interest rates on federal student loans from doubling this year – which would have hit more than seven million students with about a thousand dollars more on their loan payments. Those steps will make a real difference in the lives of millions of Americans. But make no mistake: we’ve got more to do. The construction industry was hit brutally hard when the housing bubble burst. So it’s not enough to just keep construction workers on the job doing projects that were already underway. For months, I’ve been calling on Congress to take half the money we’re no longer spending on war and use it to do some nation-building here at home. There’s work to be done building roads and bridges and wireless networks. And there are hundreds of thousands of construction workers ready to do it…” — The President’s weekly address


…

“Conservatives would have you believe that our disappointing economic performance has somehow been caused by excessive government spending, which crowds out private job creation. But the reality is that private-sector job growth has more or less matched the recoveries from the last two recessions; the big difference this time is an unprecedented fall in public employment, which is now about 1.4 million jobs less than it would be if it had grown as fast as it did under President George W. Bush. And, if we had those extra jobs, the unemployment rate would be much lower than it is — something like 7.3 percent instead of 8.2 percent. It sure looks as if cutting government when the economy is deeply depressed hurts rather than helps the American people.” – Paul Krugman
…

Mitt Romney held a press conference to say that Mitt Romney deserves a vacation

Posted on by

And, of course, to criticize the President.

Romneys at Play
Just a few hours after telling reporters the jobs report today was a “kick in the gut” for Americans, Mitt Romney returned to his vacation, driving his high-power speedboat, filled to the brim with his kids and grandkids, to a nearby home for a dip in Lake Winnipesaukee. ABC News

In a press conference scheduled less than a hour before he spoke, and timed as a response to Friday’s jobs report, Mitt Romney continued to criticize President Obama’s economic policies in general and also defended his decision to leave the campaign trail for a family vacation — a move that has been widely criticized within the GOP, Politico reports:

““I’m delighted to be able to take a vacation with my family. I think all Americans appreciate the memories they have with their children and their grandchildren. I hope that more Americans are able to take vacation… Part of a good job is the capacity to take a vacation.” [...] This was the second month in a row where Romney had no public schedule on the day jobs figures were released. Last month, he gave a quickly arranged interview on CNBC and then had no public events for several days after.”

Far be it for Mitt Romney to deny himself a vacation when he’s worked so hard over the years at leveraging and cannibalizing healthy companies, brutalizing American employees, and walking away with all the money. Not to mention the energy it takes to campaign for almost five years straight, lie constantly, reverse your opinions (and then reverse them back!) on anything and everything on an almost daily basis, while trying to convince voters to trust you as you’re fighting to hide your true wealth, tax returns, and offshore accounts from them.

Mitt and Ann Romney: hardest working people in America!

Related: “Lemon. Wet. Good.”