Posted on 07/02/2009 5:50:52 PM PDT by Kaslin
U.S. nonfarm payroll employment has declined by 6.5 million jobs since the recession started in December 2007. One exception is Wal-Mart, which has expanded its domestic work force by 40,000 (2.9%) and announced June 3 that it will add 22,000 jobs in its U.S. stores in 2009.
Wal-Mart's everyday job creation is a countercyclical trend visible in all six recessions since the firm's IPO in October 1970 during the December 1969-to-November 1970 recession.
Corporations with entrepreneurial roots (think Wal-Mart's founder, Sam Walton) are providing the everyday job creation the U.S. economy needs to escape the worst economic contraction since the Great Depression. Government should resist demands to increase economic regulations, such as card check, and leave entrepreneurial firms alone to prosper.
Wal-Mart's ability to create jobs, even in a recession, has benefited financial markets. The Bentonville, Ark.-based firm was one of only two Dow 30 components (the other was McDonald's) to record a gain in 2008 as the market sank.
(Excerpt) Read more at ibdeditorials.com ...
My guess is somewhere around 13% (IF we don't get hit by chem/bio/nuc event in the meantime).
As you can see this occured in Q3-4 2008. Hey it's just the governments data and chart so it may not be accurate. So according to government data the recession started in Q3 2008.
The truth never hurts anybody, except the state run media and Colonel Obama who is trying to lay off the blame on Bush.
And now they are PROUD of those jobs.
Treasonous vermin.
What do you expect from them?
In 3 weeks, July 24, minimum wage jumps from $6.55 to $7.25. This will slow the pace of job creation.
And those that have a minimum wage job will get their hours cut from 20 hours per week to 10 hours per week
That, and ACORN poll-takers.
Cheers!
Something that might interest you and maybe others; this 22,000 is such a common thread. After I read this article I was curious and Googled “stimulus bill and 22,000 jobs”. I knew from my stuff I've been coming across it often but I was even taken back by its use (permeated).
I read an article in FR by someone commenting on ‘the person occupying the office of President of the United States’ using the term ‘deeply concerned’ so often for so many things.
I've joked that there is so much commonality it must be genetic. Maybe it is time to push aside my pragmatism (Peirce and Dewey) and consider they may be using a handbook (Occam's razor).
Actually, as I have gone along in this journey I have seen a structure built over another and quietly one is being removed and only requires the final touches. It is not my mind but my heart that does not want to accept this.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.