More Partisan Cheap Shots from "He Who Shall Not Be Re-elected™"

Hand in hand with the Emperor's New Jobs Bill, is this part of He Who Shall Not Be Re-elected's radio address:

It is time for Congress to get its act together and pass this jobs bill so I can sign it into law.

Some Republicans in Congress have said that they agree with certain parts of this jobs bill. If so, it’s time for them to tell me what those proposals are. And if they’re opposed to this jobs bill, I’d like to know what exactly they’re against.

Some Republicans?? What about Democrats in the Senate? Democrats hold a majority of seats in the Senate, and so far, Harry Reid won't touch this bill with a ten foot pole.

It is extremely hypocritical for the President to single out Republicans, as though they were the only thing holding this ruinous (and erroneously named) tax bill back.

Obama is in full campaign mode. His so called "jobs bill" is just more hype, designed to be a poison pill for the Republicans, which he hopes will boost his re-election chances in 2012. The plight of unemployed Americans is not on Mr. Obama's agenda, except as an obstacle to his second term.

Cross posted at LCR, Say Anything.

Obama Vs. The Machine

Remember when Obama appeared to be blaming unemployment of ATM machines and automated kiosks?

"A lot of businesses have learned to become much more efficient with a lot fewer workers. If you see it when you go to a bank you use the ATM, you don't go to a bank teller. Or you go to the airport and you use a kiosk instead of checking in at the gate. What we have to do now...is identifying where the jobs for the future are going to be. That there's a match between what people are being trained for."

Businesses have learned to become much more efficient with a lot fewer workers, so there are a lot fewer jobs, right? Read the White House blog and see what Obama thinks is the remedy for this:

The President’s plan, which leverages existing programs and proposals, will invest more than $500 million to jumpstart this effort. The President believes that even as we live within our means, we must invest to win the future. Investments will be made in the following key areas:... establishing U.S. leadership in next-generation robotics...and developing new technologies that will dramatically reduce the time required to design, build, and test manufactured goods. Leading universities and companies will compliment these federal efforts helping to invent, deploy and scale these cutting-edge technologies.

"New technologies that will dramatically reduce the time required to design, build, and test manufactured goods" New technologies? Gee, what reduces the time you stand in line at a bank or an airport check in? If you reduce the time required to design, build, and test manufactured goods, do you think you'll need as many people to do it?

Obama seems to be saying that automation eliminates jobs, so the federal government should subsidize it. What could account for his affinity for technology in light of what he believes are its job killing qualities?



Is it 2012 yet?



H/T The Daley Gator

Unemployment Figures Don't Lie, but the Obama Administration Will Figure

Remember the old joke about interviewing a prospective accountant?

"How much is 2 + 2?"

The accountant answers, "How much would you like it to be?"

Why do I get the idea this guy went to work for the Obama administration?

Have you ever heard of the Birth-Death Ratio as it relates to unemployment numbers? The Bureau of Labor Statistics takes essentially a WAG at how many businesses were "born" compared to how many businesses "died". According to Investopedia,

What Does Birth-Death Ratio Mean?
A figure that represents the net number of jobs provided from newly started businesses (births) and business closings (deaths) during a period of time, typically a month in conjunction with government-sponsored jobs reports. Birth-death figures are put out by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) as part of the monthly employment report; they use a rolling average to determine the monthly total based on historical averages over the past several years.

Although, it seems as if the birth/death ratios of the last couple of months have perhaps been inflated far beyond historical averages or common sense. More on that later.

The unemployment numbers are worse than reported. Last year the Labor Department admitted it over-counted the number of jobs by 1.4 million. Why? Because they used a computer program that tries to extrapolate how many new companies are being created during each month and then estimates the number of jobs these firms should be creating. They were wrong.

Since April, the Labor Department has counted 550,000 nonexistent jobs under this so-called birth/death series. Without these phantom jobs, the economy this year created virtually no jobs—certainly not the 600,000 the administration has been touting.

- Mort Zuckerman Aug, 16, 2010

Starting with February of this year, the Bureau of Labor Statistics changed the way they calculate these numbers, getting much more favorable numbers (to the administration) by making quarterly rather than annual projections. (See chart here.)

In April of this year, there was a Birth/Death adjustment of +175,000 jobs.

For May, the administration said the 54,000 net jobs created were far less than expected and far less than needed just to "stay even". What if someone in the government was spoofing those numbers? The BLS added something like 206,000 of these imaginary jobs to make that 54,000. Without them, there was a net loss of around 150,000 jobs in May.

Like a dishonest butcher with his thumb on the scale, look at how the imaginary jobs adjustment has grown since January of this year.



Larger image here.

According to the "calculation", the administration added 451,000 more jobs to the unemployment numbers in February than January, 5,000 more jobs in March than February, nearly 60,000 more jobs in April than March and 31,000 more jobs in May than in April.

How convenient! Nearly twice as many jobs, adjusted upward in May over February and yet, compared to the "historical average" of just a year ago, May was a record high (in adjustments, anyway) over the last two years, and April and May were both "assumed" to be higher than last year. Not bad for a Wild *ss Guess!

"they use a rolling average". Yeah. We've been "rolled" all right! Based on everything you know about the economy, the rising cost of energy and food, and the uncertainty of taxes, government regulation and health care mandates, do you really think that job growth due to new business creation is accelerating as much as the BLS says it is?

Yeah. Me, neither.

More Bad Economic Numbers

Keynsian econonmics prolonged the Great Depression, too. Image c/o Wayne State U.

By the Left Coast Rebel

Had CNBC on this morning and caught the fugly results on the jobs front. Even the talking heads noted the failure of QE2 (thereby Keynsian economics).

WC Varones has the basics on today's numbers:

• May Nonfarm Private Payroll 83K vs 180K consensus (triple ouch)
  

• May Nonfarm Payrolls 54K vs 169K consensus; prior revised to 232K from 244K (ouch)
  

• March Nonfarm Payrolls revised to 194K from 235K (double ouch)
  

• May Average Workweek 33.6 vs 34.3 consensus (ouch)
  

• May Unemployment Rate 9.1% vs 9.0% consensus (ouch, ouch, ouch)
  

As WC notes, fascism doesn't work. The markets have not been allowed to heal on their own, the federal government (and Fed) have created more debt and even that hasn't improved conditions today.

We need a complete makeover in our government and takeover by those who understand and respect the free market.

More economic news from CNBC:

U.S. employers hired far fewer workers than expected in May and the jobless rate rose to 9.1 percent as high energy prices and the effects of Japan's earthquake bogged down the economy.

Nonfarm payrolls increased 54,000 last month, the weakest reading since September, the Labor Department said on Friday.

Private employment rose just 83,000, the least since last June, while government payrolls dropped 29,000. Economists had expected payrolls to rise 150,000 and private hiring to increase 175,000 in May.

The government revised employment figures for March and April to show 39,000 fewer jobs created than previously estimated.

The job creation slowdown confirmed the economic weakness already flagged by other data from consumer spending to manufacturing.

Hope and Change!

The good news about data like this is that it makes it really, really, really hard for Teh One to achieve reelection, assuming of course that the Republican party does not nominate a squishy RINO with no fiscal conservative bona fides -- a distinct possibility -- given their track record in the last few cycles.

Via Memeorandum, cross posted to LCR.

Just How "Unemployed" Are They?

Is that a hammer on your tool belt, or are you just glad to see me?

A friend of mine sent me a link about unemployment cheats.

DENVER - He's got jobs to fill, yet one local employer says many applicants will only take the work if the pay is in cash. That cash, he says, would be paid under the table so the worker can continue to collect unemployment benefits.


A few local industrial companies are starting to see more potential employees trying to cheat the system. Ed Sleeman, owner of Colorado Drywall Supply, posted two new jobs eight months ago. Dozens of applications later, Sleeman still can't find two qualified truck drivers willing to load and unload building supplies, despite Colorado's 8.4 percent unemployment rate. And it's not that all of the jobseekers have been unqualified. Sleeman says about 40 of the applicants have admitted they're unemployed, and are hoping to double dip. "They'll come in and say, 'Well, I'd look at the job but if you could pay me cash I'd take the job so I could keep my unemployment,'" Sleeman said. Sleeman says he isn't the type of business owner to pay under the table. "There's no way we would do that," he said. Sleeman says he's aware double dippers have been approaching other businesses in the industrial sector.

And the unemployed aren't the only ones to game the system.

What's worse, he says, he's heard of companies willing to pay under the table to avoid extra costs, like health benefits

It doesn't surprise me. If there's a system to be gamed, someone will game it! Employers, the unemployed, you name it. One of my favorite talk show hosts was talking about some ideas he'd heard and liked for solving the insolvency of unemployment insurance. He thought that, perhaps the income of the household could be looked at as a way to identify those most in need of unemployment compensation.

He used an example of a husband a wife, one makes $100K/year, the other made $50K and was laid off. "Surely the household could survive on $100k annually?", he asked.

Just as many an unwed teen remains unmarried to keep the welfare coming in, and some divorcées have remained unmarried to keep the child support alimony* coming and oldsters have been known not to marry lest it decrease their Social Security benefits, I'm sure that this, too, would prompt people to game the system by legally keeping separate "households" to remain eligible.

Better to lower the tax rates to free up capital and eliminate the crippling effects of too much government regulation that keep small businesses from creating the very thing that would eliminate much of the strain on the unemployment insurance system:
Jobs.

Cross posted at LCR, Say
Anything.

*Friends don't let friends write sleep deprived.

Nancy Pelosi Argues for Tax Cuts*

*She just doesn't know it.


How much do you know about economics, Ms. Speaker?

"Economists tell us that unemployment insurance returns $2 to the economy for every $1 spent."

-Nancy Pelosi

Critics have said that this illustrates economic illiteracy (or innumeracy) on the part of the current Speaker. But, I'm here to tell you that one does not become Speaker of the House of Representatives by being a "pretty face". (Nancy certainly didn't!)

So, for the moment, let's say that the Speaker has her facts straight: Every dollar spent on unemployment insurance returns two dollars to the economy. Would not the reverse be true as well:
For every dollar taken from someone in taxes, two dollars is removed from the economy?

At best, that would be a wash. Factor in that the government is so inefficient in nearly everything it does, the overhead to get that dollar where it is going may siphon off 70 to 80% in bloated government overhead, and you've got a losing proposition.

Believe your own hype, Ms. Speaker. Stimulate the economy by two dollars for every one you cut in taxes. Better yet, take two tax cuts and call me in the morning.

Employment Chart of the Current Recession

Sadly, looking at that chart, the words "Marianas Trench" come to mind.

More at Pundit and Pundette

President Announces Major Cutbacks in Government Workforce

The President announced Monday layoffs of at least half a million government workers by early next year and laid out plans to help them find new jobs in private employment.

The President further suggested that as many as one in five government employees may be redundant. As has been pointed out, the speed and scope of the coming cutbacks were astounding.

Oh, and did I mention that the President in question is a tad more conservative than Barack Obama? It's Raul Castro, President of Cuba!

Yes. The People's Paradise of the Western Hemisphere has discovered that it cannot any longer afford to pay hundreds of thousands of people to do nothing at government expense.

I heard long ago a statement that has stuck with me, first in the context of third world countries and more recently of our own:

Government employment is hidden unemployment.

Looks like Michael Moore's home away from home is going to undergo some drastic reforms. Maybe they could teach Washington a thing or two?

Cross posted at Left Coast Rebel, Say Anything, Lady Cincinnatus

"Cheer up!" they said, "It Could Be Worse!"

...so I cheered up, and sure enough, things got worse!
Remember when all the president's men told us just what a rosy scenario could be obtained with a measly trillion dollars of your money?



More at Gateway Pundit

Cross posted at Left Coast Rebel

Obama on Job Creation

Doug Ross posted some charts on unemployment and job losses.

The detail of one of those charts showed job losses when temporary census jobs were taken out:


And I thought to myself, Where have I seen that curve before? Then it came to me!

More On How to Run Your Business from Planet Obama

This guy is really out of his depth!


At 2:00 in the video, Obama says:

Part of what’s happened also among a lot of companies, is they figured out how to squeeze more productivity out of the workers that they’ve got. They’re working people longer hours, they’re doing more overtime… or not, but either way, they’re producing the same amount of product or providing the same services without hiring more people. That’s something that we really going to have to work on.

Spoken like a man who's never had to meet a payroll! In fact, in nearly every company I ever worked for, as they were growing, there were times when our customer base had expanded, but not quite enough to justify hiring new people (profitably) to take up the slack, and until that happened...mirabile dictu some of us ended up working longer hours or overtime...or not... to provide goods and services to our customers! What a bumpkin! How naive can you get???
If Obama is really serious about "working on" the problem, he can lower taxes on corporations so that they can hire more people to provide better goods and more services and still maintain a margin of profit. Also, he can stop threatening to tinker with the American healthcare system, to give employers the confidence to be able to rationally calculate what it will cost to hire those additional workers, over time, as opposed to wondering what new government regulation or requirement might bankrupt them!

Oh, yeah. And while you're at it? Drill here. Drill now.

Cross posted at Say Anything

Does Obama Really Believe Everything He says?

President Obama in Allentown, PA trying to make silk purses out of sow's ears!



At about 5:20 into the video, Obama says this:

The unemployment rate ticked down instead of up. The report also found we lost about 160,00 fewer jobs over the last two months than we previously thought. So, overall this is the best jobs report we’ve seen since 2007

Unemployment at 10% is the best overall jobs report since 2007? Exactly which planet are you from, Mr. President? Are you saying you thought things were bad, but they weren't as bad as we thought, but at least you're not that other guy, whose numbers we'll pretend are worse than yours, so your followers can feel smugly superior in their BDS?

How soon can we vote this guy off the island???

Cross posted at Say Anything

Presidential Jobs Summit in Six Words

President Obama can cancel his jobs summit for later this week. I can sum up what he needs to do in six words:

Lower taxes.

Drill here,

Drill now.


Any questions?

Cross Posted at Say Anything

Obama Jokes About Unemployment at Turkey Pardon

They may have pardoned the wrong turkey!

At about 2:21 in the video, Obama jokes that he has "saved or created" more turkeys, an obvious reference to the administration's efforts to curtail rampaging unemployment. Glad you think other people's misfortune is such a great source of humor, Mr. President! Maybe you could go on Letterman and tell Dave!

Then, around 3:05, he wanted to wish a happy Thanksgiving to

"every service member at home or in harm's way..."

Some might say, after the Fort Hood shooting, that that is a distinction without a difference.

Cross Posted at Say Anything

$45 Million to Create One Job in San Diego

Could this be why Barbara "Bouncer" had so much trouble balancing her checkbook when she was in the House? As a different Barbie used to say: "Math is hard!"





H/T theblogprof