Why Jobs Aren't Being Created

[Flopper]

I saw this this AM in the WSJ. You may not be able to access the whole thing but search for it as it is available. It is all anyone needs to know in a nutshell: The cost of hiring employees far outweighs any expected benefit their employment might confer. That is all anyone needs to know. That and the fact that this situation is the creation of Team Obama with help from other and past pols.
Michael P. Fleischer: Why I'm Not Hiring - WSJ.com

The cost of adding a new employee is high, however those costs were there long before Obama came on the scene. This is just another attempt to hold the president responsible for problems that are not of his making.

 

[ConservativeDad]

Not hiring employees because the market will not support it.
A coinsumer driven economy remember.

No jobs no spending,
No spending no new jobs.

Many roads to consumer spending. What I see now is, consumers will wait for the bargain. Deflated prices due to low demand. Once employers shed their higher priced employees, this will be achievable.

Except union shops. Collective bargaining and exorbitant retirement accounts doom these employers. And the biggest union shop? The US Government. Until the unions are willing to make concessions, this economy will continue to go downhill JMHO

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

I saw this this AM in the WSJ. You may not be able to access the whole thing but search for it as it is available. It is all anyone needs to know in a nutshell: The cost of hiring employees far outweighs any expected benefit their employment might confer. That is all anyone needs to know. That and the fact that this situation is the creation of Team Obama with help from other and past pols.
Michael P. Fleischer: Why I'm Not Hiring - WSJ.com

The cost of adding a new employee is high, however those costs were there long before Obama came on the scene. This is just another attempt to hold the president responsible for problems that are not of his making.

Yeah, that's it... you nailed it. Gold star for Floppy.

 

[VaYank5150]

The attack against job creation is growing at an alarming rate - and has been reached all new levels within the last few years.

Increased regulation and accompanying taxes are stifling the present business climate in America, as well as inhibiting its future growth. These taxes and regulations are put upon in layers of local, state, and federal levels.

The long established production industries have been decimated in great part by the legacy costs inflicted upon them via the unions.

Unions are destroying America. No offense to our union workers in here - past and present, but the great machine that is the union centralized power structure has been crippling the economy for far too long and is now aggressively moving the nation toward a European socialized economic model that will forever negatively alter the potential of future generations of Americans.

You guys are funny. While my corporation has seen some slow down in our industry sector, I have still managed to hire 4 new people since January and am in the process of hiring two more now. Because of the availability of seekers in the current climate, I am actually getting employees CHEAPER than I would have even 3 years ago.....

 

[The Rabbi]

I saw this this AM in the WSJ. You may not be able to access the whole thing but search for it as it is available. It is all anyone needs to know in a nutshell: The cost of hiring employees far outweighs any expected benefit their employment might confer. That is all anyone needs to know. That and the fact that this situation is the creation of Team Obama with help from other and past pols.
Michael P. Fleischer: Why I'm Not Hiring - WSJ.com

The cost of adding a new employee is high, however those costs were there long before Obama came on the scene. This is just another attempt to hold the president responsible for problems that are not of his making.

While some of those costs were there already, this president has added a whole new layer of uncertainty over costs. That's what the article talks about, if you had bothered to get your minder to read it to you.
The fact that tells the lie to what you say is that during the 2001 recession job creation was far higher.

 

[saveliberty]

Jobs aren't being created because no one is creating jobs. Everyones sitting on their butt expecting someone else to create the jobs. The President. The wealthy. Whomever.

Stop waiting on others and do it yourself.

Well, I'd like too but all these bankers are trying to throw money at me and its distracting.

 

[uscitizen]

Not hiring employees because the market will not support it.
A coinsumer driven economy remember.

No jobs no spending,
No spending no new jobs.

Many roads to consumer spending. What I see now is, consumers will wait for the bargain. Deflated prices due to low demand. Once employers shed their higher priced employees, this will be achievable.

So you agree that the "recovery" will be in a downward direction as far as standard of living in the USA goes?

 

[boedicca]

I saw this this AM in the WSJ. You may not be able to access the whole thing but search for it as it is available. It is all anyone needs to know in a nutshell: The cost of hiring employees far outweighs any expected benefit their employment might confer. That is all anyone needs to know. That and the fact that this situation is the creation of Team Obama with help from other and past pols.
Michael P. Fleischer: Why I'm Not Hiring - WSJ.com

IOW: Private Capital is On Strike.

 

[The Rabbi]

I saw this this AM in the WSJ. You may not be able to access the whole thing but search for it as it is available. It is all anyone needs to know in a nutshell: The cost of hiring employees far outweighs any expected benefit their employment might confer. That is all anyone needs to know. That and the fact that this situation is the creation of Team Obama with help from other and past pols.
Michael P. Fleischer: Why I'm Not Hiring - WSJ.com

IOW: Private Capital is On Strike.

Capital goes to the highest return given the risk. Currently the risk of hiring is so high that it makes any return anticipated not worthwhile. It is more worthwhile in the current environment to keep cash sitting around just in case at 1% or less return than hire someone and possibly lose money.
Or invest it elsewhere, like Singapore.

 

[The Rabbi]

And I'm waiting for the next genius in the Democratic Party to come up with the idea to tax "idle money" held by companies in order to "encourage them to invest in America." I think FDR had an idea like that, although mercifully he never did it. But I wouldn't put it past these knuckleheads to try.

 

[saveliberty]

Not hiring employees because the market will not support it.
A coinsumer driven economy remember.

No jobs no spending,
No spending no new jobs.

Many roads to consumer spending. What I see now is, consumers will wait for the bargain. Deflated prices due to low demand. Once employers shed their higher priced employees, this will be achievable.

So you agree that the "recovery" will be in a downward direction as far as standard of living in the USA goes?

It is the most likely path, yes.

 

[The Rabbi]

Many roads to consumer spending. What I see now is, consumers will wait for the bargain. Deflated prices due to low demand. Once employers shed their higher priced employees, this will be achievable.

So you agree that the "recovery" will be in a downward direction as far as standard of living in the USA goes?

It is the most likely path, yes.

Recovery indicates an upward path. Deflated prices due to low demand isn't a recovery. It is Japanese style deflation. And that is where we're headed with this adminsitration.

 

[uscitizen]

So you agree that the "recovery" will be in a downward direction as far as standard of living in the USA goes?

It is the most likely path, yes.

Recovery indicates an upward path. Deflated prices due to low demand isn't a recovery. It is Japanese style deflation. And that is where we're headed with this adminsitration.

We started down this path with the previous adminstration and it will continue for at least a decade.
In reality we started down this path over 30 years ago.

 

[saveliberty]

It is the most likely path, yes.

Recovery indicates an upward path. Deflated prices due to low demand isn't a recovery. It is Japanese style deflation. And that is where we're headed with this adminsitration.

We started down this path with the previous adminstration and it will continue for at least a decade.
In reality we started down this path over 30 years ago.

Thity years of government tinkering. Time to stop. I have no problem with enforcement of safety and security rules or regualtions. Trying to reshape what we purchase or how the economy runs needs to stop.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

It is the most likely path, yes.

Recovery indicates an upward path. Deflated prices due to low demand isn't a recovery. It is Japanese style deflation. And that is where we're headed with this adminsitration.

We started down this path with the previous adminstration and it will continue for at least a decade.
In reality we started down this path over 30 years ago.

Ahhhhhh.. it's all Bush's fault. That's original.

 

[uscitizen]

Recovery indicates an upward path. Deflated prices due to low demand isn't a recovery. It is Japanese style deflation. And that is where we're headed with this adminsitration.

We started down this path with the previous adminstration and it will continue for at least a decade.
In reality we started down this path over 30 years ago.

Ahhhhhh.. it's all Bush's fault. That's original.

Bush was president 30 years ago?

 

[The Rabbi]

It is the most likely path, yes.

Recovery indicates an upward path. Deflated prices due to low demand isn't a recovery. It is Japanese style deflation. And that is where we're headed with this adminsitration.

We started down this path with the previous adminstration and it will continue for at least a decade.
In reality we started down this path over 30 years ago.

What did the Bush Administration do that set in motion deflation with high unemployment?

 

[saveliberty]

Recovery indicates an upward path. Deflated prices due to low demand isn't a recovery. It is Japanese style deflation. And that is where we're headed with this adminsitration.

We started down this path with the previous adminstration and it will continue for at least a decade.
In reality we started down this path over 30 years ago.

What did the Bush Administration do that set in motion deflation with high unemployment?

So he could secretly run the government under someone named Obama.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

"General Motors Co said on Tuesday it would hire 1,000 engineers and researchers in Michigan over the next two years to develop more electric cars and hybrids as it launched its battery-powered Chevrolet Volt.

"Volt clearly demonstrates that we are well on our way and it is especially true when it comes to the electrification of the automobile," GM Chief Executive Dan Akerson said at a ceremony marking the start of production of the plug-in hybrid.

The Volt, which tops the Toyota Prius for fuel economy, is a first-of-its-kind vehicle that GM has touted as a symbol of its commitment to pushing for gains in fuel efficiency and developing new technology."

​

 

[saveliberty]

The Volt is too expensive to be widely sold. It will simply be an oddity in history within three years.

With sales being reported as flat to only slightly higher than last year at this time, the job gains should be temporary in retail.

Why do you hire 1,000 engineers for a vehicle already in production? Something is wrong with your article.