Posted on 05/06/2011 6:15:26 AM PDT by tobyhill
U.S. companies added more jobs than expected in April, but the unemployment rate rose for the first time in five months and the economy's recent slowdown is likely to keep a lid on gains.
Nonfarm payrolls rose by 244,000 last month as the private sector posted the strongest employment gain in five years, the Labor Department said Friday in its survey of employers. The March data were revised upward to show an increase of 221,000 jobs, from a previous estimated gain of 216,000.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
“””The employer pays it out, and I believe the fed. govt. funded the extensions (the employers arent on the hook indefinitely)”””
They will be on the hook soon enough. Someone has to pay for the two year paid vacations.
“”
While the lazy have always been among us, anyone who thinks two years on unemployment is a vacation needs a reality check””
My current UI tax rate is close to 11%. Maybe we could double it so people could stay on vacation forever.
I read on another thread that the number of private sector jobs added was 268,000 and the number of public sector jobs decreased by 24,000...for a net increase of jobs overall of 244,000.
Of course, as with any information coming out from D.C. these days, you have to read all the fine print and check out the assumptions used to see how much of the info is guesswork at best.
“Here in NJ, those of US in IT compete not only with guest workers who often pay no or partial taxes, but also illegal aliens (visa overstays)who work through temp agencies. For those who can find jobs, those jobs are increasingly part time.”
You’re absolutely right, and no matter how Obama’s media henchmen dress it up, those American workers (either working part-time or having their wages driven down by “newcomers” - both legal & illegal) will not make the same mistake twice in terms of voting for Obama or Dems. In fact, a year after delivering NJ to Obama, many of those voters turned around and elected Christie as governor.
I’ll preface this by saying I have never collected unemployment in my life: The system is set up so that here in NJ, we lost so many better-paying jobs so quickly that many people would actually take a pay cut by taking “any job” instead of collecting the unemployment insurance they’d often paid into for decades; they would have simply lost their homes more quickly (it is very expensive to live here). Those people were in a terrible position here in NJ because their homes were worth much less (even if not “underwater”), and nobody wanted to buy them (because the jobs that made the prices & taxes bearable had left) - they couldn’t have moved to another region even if there were jobs elsewhere because they were shackled to those homes (with incredible property taxes - a real turn-off when salaries are plummeting). I don’t see the next generation buying homes in these high-cost states; too many younger people starting off know firsthand how easy it is to lose the house, and they also know how easy it is to lose the jobs that pay for the house. Any American worker can now see that if their salary reaches a certain point, either 1) the jobs will be moved to other countries with much lower standards of living & freedoms, or 2) the market will be flooded with foreign talent to bring those costs under control (with the complicity of the government the Americans elected to represent them).
We have just descended to the level of Western Europe - no more prosperity, children, or national identity.
So... In normal times, when competition for good employees exists, if you had that 11% back, you would not use it or part of it to attract and keep good employees?
Are those 125,000 new legal workers brought into the U.S. each month part of the reported 221,000 increase in March? If so, add in those MacDonalds’ bottom rung (mostly) jobs and you don’t have much left.
“”So... In normal times, when competition for good employees exists, if you had that 11% back, you would not use it or part of it to attract and keep good employees?”””
It’s an irrelevant question. When times are good you have to pay the going rate or better to get good employees. They are a commodity like anything else. Now that the demand is low, so are the prices.
You’re correct. Moreover, it is a meaningless statement—particularly in view of today’s political climate and dumbed down electorate. It’s like saying Americans pay less taxes than people in other country therefore we should accept higher taxes here. The premise, however, is specious at best. In debate it’s called the glittering generality. In other words it’s nothing more than debate ploy.
The real question should be: Do we want to retain our Constitutional republic form of government and capitalist economy? Or do we want to chuck what made America the most successful economic and social engine the world has ever produced, replacing it with Marxism—an ideology that has failed everywhere it’s been tried? A system that has perpetrated more genocide on the world than Hitler’s Nazi Germany.
It’s people’s own fault they are on unemployment. This country has plenty of jobs out there for everyone. /s
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.