American Job market: DOWN 276,000 Full time Jobs—UP 446,000 Part Time Workers
Barack Obama is lying to us, like he lied about his AG selling guns to the Mexican drug cartel and the murders of Americans in Benghazi. BO lied to us about Obamacare and he lied as he added $6 Trillion to the national debt in only four years. President Obama is not able to tell the truth. Period
He is so happy about the 236,000 added to the employment rolls. Here is the truth, they are part time, no benefit jobs. The Obama Economy is the government creation of poverty.
“According to the household survey (on which the unemployment rate is based), the economy added a healthy 170,000 jobs. The survey also shows a tremendous increase of 446,000 part-time jobs.
What this means is that the economy actually shed 276,000 full-time jobs.”
See the full story by clicking on the blue headline
COMMENTARY: MILLIONS WHO WANT FULL-TIME WORK CAN’T GET IT
Mike “Mish” Shedlock, Market Watch, 3/8/13
Economists were surprised by the massive “beat” in Friday’s reported job numbers. The unemployment rate dropped 0.2 percentage points to 7.7% and the economy allegedly added 236,000 jobs. But is that what really happened? Not really.
According to the household survey (on which the unemployment rate is based), the economy added a healthy 170,000 jobs. The survey also shows a tremendous increase of 446,000 part-time jobs.
What this means is that the economy actually shed 276,000 full-time jobs.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics labeled those 446,000 part-time jobs as “voluntary,” but I am not so sure.
A Gallup survey on jobs released Thursday shows the percentage of workers working part time but wanting full-time work was 10.1% in February, an increase from 9.6% in January and the highest rate measured since January 2012.
Gallup notes “Although fewer people are unemployed now than a year ago, they are not migrating to full-time jobs for an employer. In fact, fewer Americans are working full-time for an employer than were doing so a year ago, and more Americans are working part time.
Although part-time work is clearly better than no work at all, these are not the types of good jobs that millions of Americans are still searching for.
Obamacare is in play. Recall that under Obamacare, the definition of full-time employment is 30 hours. The BLS cutoff is 34 hours. At 30 hours, companies gave to pay medical benefits so they have been slashing the number of hours people work. This reduced the number of hours people worked and provided an incentive for many to take on an extra job.
We can see the effect in actual BLS data.
After declining for years, the percentage of those working two or more jobs is again on the rise.
In the past month there was a surge of 679,000 in the number of people working multiple jobs. The seasonally-adjusted increase was 340,000.
One can look at the data two ways. Either the economy is getting better and more jobs are available, or people are working more jobs because their hours were cut and they need a second job.
Evidence suggests more of the latter than the former.
The 'fiscal cliff': It will hit your wallet
Published: Saturday, Dec. 29, 2012 - 12:00 am | Page 1A
Last Modified: Saturday, Dec. 29, 2012 - 11:01 am
Enough to make a year's worth of payments on a small car. Enough to take a weeklong vacation for two in Hawaii. Enough to feed a family of three for almost six months.
The fiscal cliff is a series of tax increases andspending cuts that will go into effect on Tuesday unless Congress and the president agree to stop some or all of them. The nation's leaders created the cliff during a previous fiscal crisis as a way of motivating Democrats and Republicans to agree on reducing the federal budget deficit.
A Sacramento family earning the medianhousehold income for the region – about $55,000 – would likely pay an additional $2,200 to $3,500 in taxes next year if the cuts and taxes go into effect, according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center.
The full extent of those tax hikes wouldn't be felt unless all of 2013 passed without a deal. But each day without an agreement makes it more likely that families will have to cough up at least a little extra to the federal government.
"Even if they work something out, most people agree that taxes are going to increase," said Cynthia S. Myers, a certified financial planner based in Sacramento.
The cost of the fiscal cliff for local families will depend on their income level; whether they have children; whether they have a job; whether they have investment income; whether they are married and, most importantly, when – or if – leaders agree to mitigate some of the consequences.
Apple to Become BIGGEST Employer….in Central Texas
Great news for Austin, Texas—Apple is coming to become its largest employer. Chevron is also on its way; Comcast and Campbell Soup have all arrived as well.
The thousands of new jobs come at the expense of California—home of high taxes, AB 32 and Hollywood liberals that hate freedom.
“According to the Austin Business Journal, Cupertino-based Apple(NASDAQ: AAPL) is estimated to add 3,600 jobs to its existing 4,000 when the $300 million expansion opens. Dell is also expected to continue cutting from its 12,000 current staff in the area, according to the report that cites economist Angelos Angelou.”
See the full story by clicking on the blue headline
Silicon Valley / San Jose Business Journal by Lisa Ward, 12/12/12
It’s possible that Apple Inc. may employ more Central Texas workers than Dell Inc. in the coming years, economist Angelos Angelou said.
According to the Austin Business Journal, Cupertino-based Apple(NASDAQ: AAPL) is estimated to add 3,600 jobs to its existing 4,000 when the $300 million expansion opens. Dell is also expected to continue cutting from its 12,000 current staff in the area, according to the report that cites economist Angelos Angelou.
Debt Ceiling Disaster Ahead
It is almost impossible to believe, but the hysteria surrounding the so-called “fiscal cliff” is being overshadowed by an even more pressing problem. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has alerted Congress that the nation will once again hit the debt ceiling on Monday, but that his department can take “extraordinary measures” to keep paying the bills for another few months. For those keeping track, the debt ceiling was raised from $14.294 trillion in August 2011, to its current level of $16.394 trillion. Thus in the span of only sixteen months, an utterly irresponsible Obama administration has added a whopping $2.1 trillion to the national debt.
As bad as that is, the administration’s “solution” for out-of-control spending is even worse. As part of his fiscal cliff negotiations, the president and his minions have proposed doing away with Congress altogether when it comes to raising the debt ceiling, and giving the president unilateral power to raise it. ”If the Congress in any way suggests they are going to tie negotiations to the debt ceiling and take us to the brink of default once again as part of a budget negotiation. … I will not play that game because we’ve got to break that habit before it starts,” Obama told CEOs at the Business Roundtable held earlier in December.
Perhaps a better habit to break would be the one where our narcissistic president tries to kick the constitutionally-mandated separation of powers to the curb whenever it impedes his transformative agenda. Or maybe he could wean himself off the urge to keep blowing through trillions of dollars in deficit spending in order to underwrite exponentially expanding government.
Yet if there were only one habit this president could break, rank hypocrisy would go to the top of the list. “The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies…Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here.’ Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better. I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America’s debt limit,” said then-Senator Obama in 2006.
Presidential candidate Obama doubled down on that assertion in 2008. “The problem is, is that the way Bush has done it over the last eight years is to take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children, driving up our national debt from $5 trillion dollars for the first 42 presidents — number 43 added $4 trillion dollars by his lonesome, so that we now have over $9 trillion dollars of debt that we are going to have to pay back — $30,000 for every man, woman and child,” Obama said on July 3, 2008, at a campaign event in Fargo, N.D. “That’s irresponsible. It’s unpatriotic,” he added.
Democrats’ $1 Trillion Obamacare Tax Hike to Hit American Producers on January 1
Posted by Jim Hoft on Saturday, December 29, 2012, 9:40 AM
Back in October Joe Biden warned America that the Obama
Administration was going to raise taxes by a trillion dollars.
He wasn’t kidding.
On January 1, 2013 American producers can expect a trillion
dollar Obamacare tax hike.
Americans for Tax Reform reported:
On January 1, regardless of the outcome of fiscal cliff negotiations, Americans will be hit with a $1 trillion Obamacare tax hike.
Obamacare contains twenty new or higher taxes. Five of the taxes hit for the first time on January 1. In total, for the years 2013-2022, Americans face a net $1 trillion tax hike for the years 2013-2022, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
The five major Obamacare taxes taking effect on January are as follows…
Read the rest here.
And, that doesn’t include the tax hikes you can expect if Congress and Obama do not reinstate the Bush tax cuts before January 1.
Former California Employment Development Department Director & Milken Institute Fellow
Wednesday, December 5th, 2012
Recently, Tom Vacar, Channel 2 consumer editor e-mailed me the resume of a friend of his who is looking for work. The man has a distinguished career in communications for large scale infrastructure projects, including serving as a spokesperson for a major municipal entity.
Tom and I are part of an informal employment network for “older workers” (workers over 50) in the Bay Area. The seven of us that I would count among this network are not an official organization. We have no name or real structure or formal recruitment process. People come to us informally, as they may know one of us directly or through one or two degrees of separation. We try to use our contacts to provide leads and entry into firms.
We know that “there but for the grace of God” we all are one step away from searching for work. We know that even with all of the high tech job boards, the network is the best way of locating a job. Most of all we know that there is nothing worse than growing old today in California’s job market.
Experience, depth of knowledge, contacts, judgment: all of these characteristics improve as we age in the job market. At the same time, the hiring processes in California don’t place a lot of weight on these characteristics. Instead, the hiring emphasis is on the new, the young, the blank slate. This is true particularly of our technology and entertainment sectors, as noted in this article last week from Reuters on “mature workers” and Silicon Valley. But it occurs throughout all sectors.
A growing number of job counselors in California are concentrating their practices on advising older workers. Ms. Camille Grabowski, for example, is an experienced California job counselor with a practice that includes workers of all ages. Her focus is on workers over 50. Her website, “The 50 Plus Career Coach” is tailored to workers over 50, with sections for job seekers, persons reentering the job market, and persons seeking transition careers.http://www.foxandhoundsdaily.com/2012/12/growing-old-in-the-california-job-market/
Special Report: Silicon Valley's dirty secret - age bias
SAN FRANCISCO |
(Reuters) - When Randy Adams, 60, was looking for a chief-executive officer job in Silicon Valley last year, he got turned down from position after position that he thought he was going to nail — only to see much younger, less-experienced men win out.
Finally, before heading into his next interview, he shaved off his gray hair and traded in his loafers for a pair of Converse sneakers. The board hired him.
"I don't think I would have been able to get this CEO job if I hadn't shaved my head," says Adams, who has founded eight venture-backed companies. He is now chairman of the company that hired him, mobile conference-call service Socialdial, and is fundraising for a new business. Adams has supplemented his makeover by trading in his button-down shirts for T-shirts, making sure he owns the latest gadgets, and getting an eyelid lift.
Such are the pressures in Silicon Valley, where the start-up ethos extols fresh ideas and young programmers willing to toil through the night. Chief executives in their 20s, led by Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, are lionized, in part because of their youth. Many investors state bluntly that they prefer to see people under 40 in charge.
Yet the youth worship undercuts another of Silicon Valley's cherished ideals: that anyone smart and driven can get ahead in what the industry likes to think of as an egalitarian culture. To many, it looks like simple age discrimination - and it's affecting people who wouldn't fit any normal definition of old.
"I don't think in the outside world, outside tech, anyone in their 40s would think age discrimination was happening to them," says Cliff Palefsky, a San Francisco employment attorney who has fielded age-discrimination inquiries from people in their early 40s. But they feel it in the Bay Area, he said, and it's "100 percent due to the new, young, tech start-up mindset."
Regional data on age discrimination are hard to come by, making it hard to establish precisely how Silicon Valley stacks up against other parts of the United States.
Of the 18,335 employment cases filed in 2010 with California's Department of Fair Employment and Housing, one-fifth cited age. That puts age below retaliation as a discrimination claim, but above racial discrimination, sexual harassment, and sexual orientation.
Ahead of Election, Obama Stops Releasing ‘Stimulus’ Reports
9:01 AM, OCT 19, 2012 • BY JEFFREY H. ANDERSON
The $831,000,000,000 economic “stimulus” that President Obama spearheaded and signed into law requires his administration to release quarterly reports on its effects. But “the most transparent administration in the history of our country” is now four reports behind schedule and has so far not released any reports whatsoever in 2012. Its most recent quarterly report is for the quarter than ended on June 30, 2011.
One wonders how the administration would treat a private citizen who acted like such a scofflaw in response to one of Obama’s principal legislative initiatives. It certainly appears that this administration, which is so very fond of regulating Americans’ lives — witness the 13,000 pages of Obamacare regulations it has already penned — doesn’t hold itself accountable to the same set of rules that it’s so eager to compel the American people to obey.
Section 1513 of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (the “stimulus”) explicitly states, “In consultation with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget and the Secretary of the Treasury, the Chairperson of the Council of Economic Advisers shall submit quarterly reports to the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and House of Representatives that detail the impact of programs funded through covered funds on employment, estimated economic growth, and other key economic indicators.” (The head of the Council of Economic Advisors, currently Alan Krueger, is appointed by the president, confirmed by the Senate, and works within the Executive Office of the President. He is the president’s chief economic adviser.)
Indeed, the old reports that the administration released begin, “As part of the unprecedented accountability and transparency provisions included in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), the Council of Economic Advisers (CEA) was charged with providing to Congress quarterly reports on the effects of the Recovery Act on overall economic activity, and on employment in particular.”
Section 1513 of the ARRA further specifies, “The first report…shall be submitted not later than 45 days after the end of the first full quarter following the date of enactment of this Act….The last report required to be submitted…shall apply to the quarter in which the [Recovery Accountability and Transparency] Board terminates under section 1530.” Section 1530 declares, “The Board shall terminate on September 30, 2013.”
President Obama’s Taxpayer-Backed Green Energy Failures
It is no secret that President Obama’s and green-energy supporters’ (from both parties) foray into venture capitalism has not gone well. But the extent of its failure has been largely ignored by the press. Sure, single instances garner attention as they happen, but they ignore past failures in order to make it seem like a rare case.
The truth is that the problem is widespread. The government’s picking winners and losers in the energy market has cost taxpayers billions of dollars, and the rate of failure, cronyism, and corruption at the companies receiving the subsidies is substantial. The fact that some companies are not under financial duress does not make the policy a success. It simply means that our taxpayer dollars subsidized companies that would’ve found the financial support in the private market.
So far, 36 companies that have received federal support from taxpayers are faltering — either having gone bankrupt or laying off workers or heading for bankruptcy. This list includes only those companies that received federal money from the Obama Administration’s Department of Energy and other agencies. The amount of money indicated does not reflect how much was actually received or spent but how much was offered. The amount also does not include other state, local, and federal tax credits and subsidies, which push the amount of money these companies have received from taxpayers even higher.
The complete list of faltering or bankrupt green-energy companies:
1. Evergreen Solar ($24 million)*
2. SpectraWatt ($500,000)*
3. Solyndra ($535 million)*
4. Beacon Power ($69 million)*
5. AES’s subsidiary Eastern Energy ($17.1 million)
6. Nevada Geothermal ($98.5 million)
7. SunPower ($1.5 billion)
8. First Solar ($1.46 billion)
9. Babcock and Brown ($178 million)
10. EnerDel’s subsidiary Ener1 ($118.5 million)*
11. Amonix ($5.9 million)
12. National Renewable Energy Lab ($200 million)
13. Fisker Automotive ($528 million)
14. Abound Solar ($374 million)*
15. A123 Systems ($279 million)*
16. Willard and Kelsey Solar Group ($6 million)
17. Johnson Controls ($299 million)
18. Schneider Electric ($86 million)
19. Brightsource ($1.6 billion)
20. ECOtality ($126.2 million)
21. Raser Technologies ($33 million)*
22. Energy Conversion Devices ($13.3 million)*
23. Mountain Plaza, Inc. ($2 million)*
24. Olsen’s Crop Service and Olsen’s Mills Acquisition Company ($10 million)*
25. Range Fuels ($80 million)*
26. Thompson River Power ($6.4 million)*
27. Stirling Energy Systems ($7 million)*
28. LSP Energy ($2.1 billion)*
29. UniSolar ($100 million)*
30. Azure Dynamics ($120 million)*
31. GreenVolts ($500,000)
32. Vestas ($50 million)
33. LG Chem’s subsidiary Compact Power ($150 million)
34. Nordic Windpower ($16 million)*
35. Navistar ($10 million)
36. Satcon ($3 million)*
*Denotes companies that have filed for bankruptcy.
The problem begins with the issue of government picking winners and losers in the first place. Venture capitalist firms exist for this very reason, and they choose what to invest in by looking at companies’ business models and deciding if they are worthy. When the government plays venture capitalist, it tends to reward companies that are connected to the policymakers themselves or because it sounds nice to “invest” in green energy.
The 2009 stimulus set aside $80 billion to subsidize politically preferred energy projects. Since that time, 1,900 investigations have been opened to look into stimulus waste, fraud, and abuse (although not all are linked to the green-energy funds), and nearly 600 convictions have been made. Of that $80 billion in clean energy loans, grants, and tax credits, at least 10 percent has gone to companies that have since either gone bankrupt or are circling the drain.
Plant that received $150 million Dept. of Energy grant and hasn’t produced a single battery begins worker furloughs
By Doug Powers • October 8, 2012 10:47 PM
In Michigan (and everywhere else), Senator Debbie Stabenow has been pushing to spend billions more on batteries for vehicles that so far not many people are buying. President Obama has of course shared that sentiment, as has a Department of Energy that rarely meets a poorly thought out “investment” unworthy of risking taxpayer money on. Here’s an update on yet another one of their pet projects, Compact Power:
President Obama touted it in 2010 as evidence “manufacturing jobs are coming back to the United States,” but two years later, a Michigan hybrid battery plant built with $150 million in taxpayer funds is putting workers on furlough before a single battery has been produced.
Workers at the Compact Power manufacturing facilities in Holland, Mich., run by LG Chem, have been placed on rotating furloughs, working only three weeks per month based on lack of demand for lithium-ion cells.
The facility, which was
opened in July 2010 with a groundbreaking attended by Obama, has yet to produce
a single battery for the Chevrolet Volt, the troubled electric car from General
Motors. The plant’s batteries also were intended to be used in Ford’s electric
The 650,000-square-foot, $300 million facility was slated to produce 15,000 batteries per year, while creating hundreds of new jobs. But to date, only 200 workers are employed at the plant by the South Korean company. Batteries for the Chevy Volts that have been produced have been made by an LG plant in South Korea.
The groundbreaking ceremony was just over two years ago. Maybe if the Obama administration started insisting on using shovels powered only by American-made lithium-ion cells for their “clean energy grant” ground breaking ceremonies they’d be able to at least create genuine artificial demand for the batteries.
Data Massaging Continues: Initial Claims Tumble To 339K Lowest Since 2008, Far Below Lowest Expectation
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 10/11/2012 08:42 -0400
This is just getting stupid. After expectations of a rebound in initial claims from 367K last week (naturally revised higher to 369K), to 370K (with the lowest of all sellside expectations at 355K), the past week mysteriously, yet so very unsurprisingly in the aftermath of the fudged BLS unemployment number, saw claims tumble to a number that is so ridiculous not even CNBC's Steve Liesman bothered defending it, or 339K. Ironically, not even the Labor Department is defending it: it said that "one large state didn't report some quarterly figures." Great, but what was reported was a headline grabbing number that is just stunning for reelection purposes. This was the lowest number since 2008. The only point to have this print? For 2-3 bulletin talking points at the Vice Presidential debate tonight. Everything else is now noise. It is also sad that the US "economy" has devolved to such trivial data fudging on a week by week basis, which makes even the Chinese Department of Truth appear amateurish by comparison. Needless to say, Not Seasonally Adjusted initial claims jumped by 26K to 327K in the past week but who's counting. Finally, what is the reason for ongoing QEternity if the employment situation is now back to normal. Finally, in completely ignored news, because who needs global trade when you have toner cartridge, and generally ink, the US trade deficit in August rose by 4.1% to $44.2 billion, on expectations of a deterioration to $44.0 billion. Then again nobody talks about the US trade deficit during presidential debates so all good here.
Jobless Claims beat by the most since May 2009 and is the lowest since Jan 2008 - the new normal...
with the biggest 3-week drop since Jan 2006..