Unemployed group blasts Geithner's handling of economy [ UCubed ]

G’night all!

Prepare for another 4-5 million job cuts

Snips:
In fact, we could see a situation where another 4 to 5 million jobs could be shed in the United States — and in the three sectors that were, and remain, the most affected by the housing crisis and financial collapse.

For example, historically, the construction industry employed three workers for every housing start. Today, that ratio is closer to 10. This could easily mean that we see 3 to 4 million construction jobs being lost going forward, barring a major revival in the housing market, which isn’t happening.

How long until nancy accuses them of ‘astroturfing’?

Timmy is the only person in the US who could’a done it. We are lucky to have him.

"Geithner was delusional then and he's even worse now,"

JournaList && EconoList, I'm just sayin'

"Geithner was delusional then and he's even worse now,"

The Public Workers You Support
By STEPHEN B. MEISTER

Out of work? Behind on your bills? Defaulting on your mortgage, maybe? If so, you no doubt did not hold a government job before getting canned. Some 2½ years after the start of the recession, the evidence is now clear: The private-sector economy took a severe blow -- but public-sector workers were spared. In fact, their numbers actually grew, albeit slightly.

This stark picture clearly reflects upside-down priorities -- particularly if officials care about boosting the truly productive parts of the economy. Start with a few telling statistics: From January 2008 to January 2010, private-sector jobs plunged from 115.5 million to 106.8 million. But the number of federal, state and local public employees climbed up a tick, from 22.3 million to 22.4 million, as economist Veronique de Rugy recently noted. In other words, some 8.7 million private-sector jobs vanished, while the public sector gained 100,000 jobs.

Not much of a recession for government workers, but a hard hit for everyone else.

Private-sector jobs began to fall almost immediately after the onset of the recession in December 2007. But state and local jobs remained steady, at least until last month, when states finally started laying off their workers, too. As for federal employment, as of July, it was nearly 10 percent higher than back then.

Now generally, state and local governments are expected to balance their yearly budgets and depend on tax revenues to do so. But the feds can borrow money and run deficits. So while the recession may finally be starting to catch up with state and local government workers due to state budget constraints, it hasn't yet touched federal workers.

Now look at pay rates. In 2009, according to USA Today, compensation for the average federal civilian worker totaled $123,049 including benefits valued at $41,791. That's more than twice what the average private-sector employee earned -- only $61,051, including benefits. Even state and local government workers fared better than private-sector employees, averaging nearly $70,000 in 2009, including benefits. How long before the average federal worker's benefits alone surpass the average private worker's combined wages and perks?

Something is clearly wrong with this picture -- particularly when you remember that government workers don't really produce anything; they just "govern." (Ever wear any clothes made by a government worker? Eat any food grown by a government farmer?)

Meanwhile, these scary statistics also show that a shrinking group of private workers -- now numbering 107 million -- is paying the salaries and benefits of more than 22 million government workers. Thus, every five private-sector workers chip in to cover the costs of one government worker. (Maybe taxpayers should get cards with the name and picture of the government worker they're sponsoring.)

Fact is, private workers are being taxed to death so they can pay their federal counterparts more than twice what they themselves earn.

And it's getting worse: This month, President Obama signed into law another $26 billion giveaway -- meant to save the jobs of 300,000 state workers. That's on top of earlier stimulus packages that helped shield government workers. And since Washington is running deficits as far as the eye can see, the bailout is essentially borrowed money (though Democrats deny it). In other words, states get around their obligation to balance their books, and lay off public employees, by having the nation go further in the red.

And make no mistake: Protecting those 22 million public-sector jobs through borrowing has cost the 107 million private workers dearly. On Aug. 1, 2008, the portion of our national debt held by the public stood at $5.4 trillion. Now it stands at more than $8.8 trillion. As of the second quarter, GDP was growing at 2.4 percent, but many economists expect the growth rate to be revised down to 1.3 percent. So while our economy is growing at less than $19 billion per month, we are borrowing, based on the last two years, at the rate of more than $141 billion per month -- 7½ times faster.

This is a prescription for disaster.

Maybe civil servants think otherwise.

But the struggling American workers who actually foot the bill, I suspect, have a different view.

Stephen B. Meister is a partner at Meister Seelig & Fein LLP.

Einstein got the Nobel Price for explaining that E=MC2

Who will get the Nobel Price for Explaining what T+S=LS2 stands for...What do you think are the chances that any Democrat-Liberal-Socialist- ever will claim such a price?

(For the ones not versed in physics TAX+SPEND=LONG SOUP-LINES SQUARED)

Thanks!

From January 2008 to January 2010, private-sector jobs plunged from 115.5 million to 106.8 million. But the number of federal, state and local public employees climbed up a tick, from 22.3 million to 22.4 million, as economist Veronique de Rugy recently noted. In other words, some 8.7 million private-sector jobs vanished, while the public sector gained 100,000 jobs.

So there should be a 'Private Sector' jobs deficit chart too.

text describing the image

Hey Son House, thanks for the chart - how's this?

So there should be a 'Private Sector' jobs deficit chart too.

The Public Workers You Support
By STEPHEN B. MEISTER

Out of work? Behind on your bills? Defaulting on your mortgage, maybe? If so, you no doubt did not hold a government job before getting canned. Some 2½ years after the start of the recession, the evidence is now clear: The private-sector economy took a severe blow -- but public-sector workers were spared. In fact, their numbers actually grew, albeit slightly.

This stark picture clearly reflects upside-down priorities -- particularly if officials care about boosting the truly productive parts of the economy. Start with a few telling statistics: From January 2008 to January 2010, private-sector jobs plunged from 115.5 million to 106.8 million. But the number of federal, state and local public employees climbed up a tick, from 22.3 million to 22.4 million, as economist Veronique de Rugy recently noted. In other words, some 8.7 million private-sector jobs vanished, while the public sector gained 100,000 jobs.

Not much of a recession for government workers, but a hard hit for everyone else.

Private-sector jobs began to fall almost immediately after the onset of the recession in December 2007. But state and local jobs remained steady, at least until last month, when states finally started laying off their workers, too. As for federal employment, as of July, it was nearly 10 percent higher than back then.

Now generally, state and local governments are expected to balance their yearly budgets and depend on tax revenues to do so. But the feds can borrow money and run deficits. So while the recession may finally be starting to catch up with state and local government workers due to state budget constraints, it hasn't yet touched federal workers.

Now look at pay rates. In 2009, according to USA Today, compensation for the average federal civilian worker totaled $123,049 including benefits valued at $41,791. That's more than twice what the average private-sector employee earned -- only $61,051, including benefits. Even state and local government workers fared better than private-sector employees, averaging nearly $70,000 in 2009, including benefits. How long before the average federal worker's benefits alone surpass the average private worker's combined wages and perks?

Something is clearly wrong with this picture -- particularly when you remember that government workers don't really produce anything; they just "govern." (Ever wear any clothes made by a government worker? Eat any food grown by a government farmer?)

Meanwhile, these scary statistics also show that a shrinking group of private workers -- now numbering 107 million -- is paying the salaries and benefits of more than 22 million government workers. Thus, every five private-sector workers chip in to cover the costs of one government worker. (Maybe taxpayers should get cards with the name and picture of the government worker they're sponsoring.)

Fact is, private workers are being taxed to death so they can pay their federal counterparts more than twice what they themselves earn.

And it's getting worse: This month, President Obama signed into law another $26 billion giveaway -- meant to save the jobs of 300,000 state workers. That's on top of earlier stimulus packages that helped shield government workers. And since Washington is running deficits as far as the eye can see, the bailout is essentially borrowed money (though Democrats deny it). In other words, states get around their obligation to balance their books, and lay off public employees, by having the nation go further in the red.

And make no mistake: Protecting those 22 million public-sector jobs through borrowing has cost the 107 million private workers dearly. On Aug. 1, 2008, the portion of our national debt held by the public stood at $5.4 trillion. Now it stands at more than $8.8 trillion. As of the second quarter, GDP was growing at 2.4 percent, but many economists expect the growth rate to be revised down to 1.3 percent. So while our economy is growing at less than $19 billion per month, we are borrowing, based on the last two years, at the rate of more than $141 billion per month -- 7½ times faster.

This is a prescription for disaster.

Maybe civil servants think otherwise.

But the struggling American workers who actually foot the bill, I suspect, have a different view.

Stephen B. Meister is a partner at Meister Seelig & Fein LLP.