White House Sees “Hopeful Signs” in Jobs Numbers

I know alot of people who have lost their
jobs and they get no responses after
sending out 50-100 resumes??? Only 11,000
lost their jobs but how many got one?

Back in March, two weeks after signing the $787 billion “stimulus” bill, Obama publicly stated that 400,000 jobs of the estimated 3.5 million jobs either created or saved were involved in rebuilding infrastrucuture, updating transit or laying broadband line.
Eight months have passed. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ latest report, the manufacturing and construction (“shovel-ready”) sectors shed 68,000 jobs last month.
So how’s that Hope and Change working for you?

“How is it that that job losses continued in November (in fairness, much less than projected) and unemployment has dropped? Simply because more and more Americans have given up looking for work and are no longer considered “unemployed”.”
True, but there’s a second factor. A lot of companies have simply run out of people to fire. They’re running extremely lean and are very cautious about hiring since they are unsure of the tax and regulatory burdens this administration and Congress will place on them. This is being voiced by business leaders and entrepreneurs across the country.

The WH has no clue, about how they are going to solve the jobs problem.

“BUT we can’t let it deflate the urgency of job creation.”
Enron advisor Paul Krugman is right: If jobs don’t get created soon, Dems are sunk in 2010. Thus the urgency.

“So you DISAGREE and think the only urgency is political.”
Yes, I do. It is no surprise to thinking individuals that unemployment has continued to increase. Poll, after poll, after poll this year indicate by a wide margin that the #1 concern of Americans is the economy. Yet, Obama and his hacks Pelosi and Reid have focused almost all their efforts on “reforming” healthcare. You’ll probably point out the Obama talking point that “we have to reform healthcare to fix the economy” but how does a $2,500,000,000,000+ (over 10 years) health care bill “fix” the economy?
Team Obama and the Dems are scared out of their minds at this point because they have finally begun to take their polling data seriously and realize they must do something to avoid a disaster in 2010.
Honestly, I really don’t believe if he cares if Americans are unemployed (I’m sure I’ll receive a boatload of responses to this). “Never let a crisis go to waste” says Rahm Emanuel. Unemployment is a crisis and provides Obama/Pelosi/Reid an excuse to expand influence of government by increasing the number of Americans dependent on government. Need proof? Look at the “stimulus” package. It was supposed to create millions of jobs (4 million? 80% or 90% in the private sector?) yet turned into a bailout for state governments who then funneled to favored constituencies (e.g., education). The “stimulus package” is an epic failure in the sense that it has not (and will not) create jobs. It has been a success in that it has provided the vehicle to funnel tons o’ cash to favored constituencies (even ACORN/ACORN-like orgs. are slated to get a cut).

“Quite the claim with nothing backing it up, and no definition of “huge waste.” Sorry– I don’t just buy the latest talking point from armchair experts. I suppose everybody can find someone to back up their preconceived opinion on the internet.”
Well, of course you don’t because it conflicts with your myopic worldview. This is a very simple math exercise.
On average, how much did each job created by the “stimulus” bill cost taxpayers?
Now please share that figure with us and defend it as beneficial to taxpayers. I won’t hold my breath for a reply.

Cara A, thank you for a long-winded non-answer.

True, but there’s a second factor. A lot of companies have simply run out of people to fire. They’re running extremely lean and are very cautious about hiring since they are unsure of the tax and regulatory burdens this administration and Congress will place on them. This is being voiced by business leaders and entrepreneurs across the country.
Posted by: Jenn | Dec 4, 2009 1:20:51 PM
Wow! Two people I’ve read today who are actually reasoning this out!
Wait for the end of the 1st and 2nd quarters of 2010, when “real” bottom line results can be analyzed and another round of layoffs will start if necessary.
This with the state and local layoffs coming next year and “we’re in for some chop!”

Though I wonder about the vast majority of Republicans in the Senate and Congress– and some of the Dems too.
Posted by: Cara A | Dec 4, 2009 1:51:28 PM
It’s always about getting back in power. That’s all the losers really care about – with few exceptions. This is one reason why Congress’ ratings are so low. They aren’t fooling anyone.

Posted by: tjp612 | Dec 4, 2009 2:31:51 PM
“Honestly, I really don’t believe if he cares if Americans are unemployed”
He only cares to the extent on how it impacts his agenda. He’s not thinking beyond himself, IMO.
“yet turned into a bailout for state governments who then funneled to favored constituencies (e.g., education).”
Don’t forget the Bank Bailout that under Bush was supposed to help homeowners anf free up credit and turned into a big bailout for Friends of Paulsen, GM, etc. (At least we can admit Bush’s failings. Try to get a lib to admit failings. They would rather stick needles in their eyes!)

“(At least we can admit Bush’s failings. Try to get a lib to admit failings. They would rather stick needles in their eyes!)”
Yes – Liberals assume that conservatives hold our politicians in the same regard as their liberal infallible heroes. I would say that they place “party over country” but that might be a bit much, right?

Posted by: Cara A | Dec 4, 2009 2:59:23 PM
“You still didn’t define waste”
How about not knowing where money went. Is that waste? I believe there have been plenty of examples of phantom districts and made up job numbers. Where did the money REALLY go? If it can’t be accounted for, it’s waste in my book.
“On jobs, it’s been a disappointment, but the President and Congress always said it would take 18 months. We’re not there yet– and only 3.5 million jobs were estimated.”
I believe Obama himself said this was primarily a jobs bill to be implemented in two years. Here’s one quote from an interview with George S. on 1/11:
“Well, let’s look at the package as a whole. The bulk of the package is direct government spending… Now there is no doubt that that probably gives you the most bang for the buck in terms of stimulus, in terms of getting the economy started, putting people back to work,” he said. “But there are only so many projects that you can do quickly of that sort. And so then the question becomes, do tax cuts also provide a stimulus? Do they also help? And they may not help as much as some of the direct spending projects do, but they still provide a stimulus, especially if they are targeted towards people who are really in need.”
I’ll repeat the relevent part so you can read it again:
“Now there is no doubt that that probably gives you the most bang for the buck in terms of stimulus, in terms of getting the economy started, putting people back to work,” he said.”
Some in his administration have said that the primary affect of the stimulus will end in 2009 and 2010 will have a minor impact. I’ll go look for the quotes if you want…

including on the wars.
Posted by: Helene | Dec 4, 2009 4:29:47 PM
So I take it you disagree with the President sending more troops and we should bring our troops home immediately?

Posted by: Helene | Dec 4, 2009 4:29:47 PM
Bush, Cheney and Halliburton ‘lost’ $9 BILLION dollars in Iraq . .. . whoops. The simply lost it.
Those fiscally responsible Republicans using our money wisely.

Finally some good news for Obama. He was practically giddy today during his townhall in PA. I expected to hear–”Fired up, ready to go”.
Lately No Drama Obama has been one big gaffe or tabloid scandal after another almost every week.

deficits in Obama’s first year (2009)
________________________________________
tjp – I’m surprised you know so little about government budgeting. The government fiscal year (2009) runs October 2008 – October 2009. The budget for the 2009 fiscal year was set BEFORE the beginning of that fiscal year – ie. before October 2008. That budget was established before Obama was even elected. It is estimated the deficit in that budget was already at $1.2 Trillion dollars BEFORE Obama took office.

“tjp – I’m surprised you know so little about government budgeting. The government fiscal year (2009) runs October 2008 – October 2009. The budget for the 2009 fiscal year was set BEFORE the beginning of that fiscal year – ie. before October 2008.”
NO, NO, NO Tierra. I’m NOT surprised at how LITTLE YOU KNOW. Don’t you remember that Nancy Pelosi and her Dem pals held up passage of the 2009 budget last year as they held out hope a Dem would be elected (therefore avoiding signature/approval by Bush)? Remember the Omnibus bill passed early in the year? Besides all this, are you familiar with the ARRA aka “stimulus” package? WHERE DO YOU THINK THIS MONEY COMES FROM? IT IS BORROWED, NOT INCLUDED WITHIN THE BUDGET, AND THEREFORE INCLUDED WITHIN THE DEFICIT!
Your propensity to reach for “Bush did it!” excuse leads you to some grossly inaccurate (dishonest? stuck on stupid?) statements. Wise up. Shed the “Bush did it!” excuse. We get it – You don’t like Bush.
What you forget (time and time again) is that Obama campaigned for this job. Everything – the economy, the wars, etc. – became his responsibility on 1/21/09. Time to move on.

CNN/Money this evening: “The nation’s tally of 2009 bank casualties hit 126 Friday when state regulators shuttered two Georgia banks. The Buckhead Community Bank in Atlanta, Ga., and First Security National Bank in Norcross, Ga., were closed.
An average of 11 banks have failed per month this year, and the federal agency’s deposit insurance fund has slipped into the red for the first time since 1991.
At the end of the quarter on Sept. 30, the value of the fund was $8.2 billion in the hole, but the figure includes $21.7 billion the agency has accounted for future bank failures. Friday’s closure will cost the FDIC an estimated $271.5 million.
Last week, the FDIC announced that 552 banks are at risk of going under, the highest level since 1993, when the agency had red-flagged 575 banks.”
No worries, sheeple! Obama has brought the economy back from the brink! *wink*

Its a little early for a Victory lap. The numbers are good and we are all glad to see them. But, unemployment numbers have a tendency to get revised since the data sources are typically unreliable. Regardless, it is good thing for all of us and I hope it continues -
I am just hesitant to see this Administration take a Victory lap too soon. This was a heck of a miss from a forecasted 125K lost jobs and the 11K that were counted. (I still feel bad for the 11K that lost their jobs, by the way – that is still a lot of people.) And, with the President in hot pursuit of jobs talk – well, let’s just say, this has the potential of being ‘bad news later’ type of thing. I mean, what if they forgot to count all the jobs lost say, west of the Mississippi or east of Ohio, or both? That would be a huge bummer. I think it is more prudent to find out why there were less job loses and get real specific before we take out the Champagne bottles and start partying.