The Curious Bush Recovery

lewrockwell.com ^ | February 19, 2004 | Steven LaTulippe

[Fledermaus]

Pure crap written by an idiot.

It comes down to one simple fact...productivity and temp hiring.

Businesses are hiring full time employers simply because they are still unsure about the short term.

Tax rates and incentives are set to expire in 2006, unemployment insurance goes up because they keep extending them.

It's easier and cheaper to fill gaps in growth with temp workers (doubt this? just look at the temp agencies listing jobs compared to businesses doing the hiring) when you aren't sure you are going to continue.

Hiring full time costs too much these days with all the regulations and taxes and laws. So unless they are totaly convinced they are going to grow in real terms, they aren't going to hire new employees for the long term.

And many companies are getting more efficient and finding that in the heyday of the 90's they over hired and have bloated middle management and staffs.

It's not rocket science. 2003 saw a GDP growth rate of 3.1% after a mild recession. But until that turns into 3-4% for 2004, 2005 and 2006, it's going to be a while before serious hiring goes on.

It has almost nothing to do with illegal aliens or outsourcing or moving jobs overseas.

[america-rules]

"just divide the $87 billion we're spending to rebuild"

WRONG Superman !

The 87 Billion included a bunch of money for many things not related to Iraq.

Iraq rebuilding is 18 Billion !

[tj005]

...The only thing I can tell you with first hand experience is that I made more money last year than I ever have before. And this year looks better than last year. ....


I agree, mine is too. I place the 'blame' on me and my stubborn determination not to fail. I figure you are 'plagued' with the same stubborn determination.

[TheWriterInTexas]

I'm wondering about this "jobless recovery" myself. I know two women who were laid off or downsized out of their positions in the last few months - the hospitality industry is still struggling post 9-11, and they both worked in related industries (which, by default, are also struggling in some areas).

They both decided to stay at home with their kids, instead of fighting their way back into the job market.

How many others are opting to do the same, I wonder?

[altair]

how many presidents have had their party control both houses of Congress, as GWB has for half of his first term?

In my lifetime there have been 3 -- Kennedy, Johnson and Carter.

[m1911]

Thanks! I was feeling lazy or I could have looked up the congresses and compared.

Let's see - Kennedy, 2 1/2 years, 21 vetoes; Johnson 5 1/2 years, 30 vetoes, Carter 4 years, 31 vetoes.

Seems like Democrats can't even stand to let their own party members get the glory...

[ValenB4]

So I guess a physician is incapable of writing about economics? In that case uneducated radio warmongering blabbermouths like Sean Hannity have no business talking about military matters.

[ValenB4]

A bunch of presidents. And they were all Democrats.

[prognostigaator]

many 'homeruns' are in the works....'In the US, that is.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Good spin.

[ValenB4]

Better than yours.

[RussianConservative]

bump

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

Ever notice that there's an inverse relationship between the length of the whack-job articles on sites like anti-war.com and and lewrockwell.com and the intelligence found therein?

No kiddin'. What a load of dung.

First, Americans have essentially ceased saving money.

This is news!? Americans have been in last place in the savings race among industrialized nations for the last 20 years. Thanks for the news flash Lew.