| Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Inflation and Unemployment take a big jump | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Feb 18 2010, 06:23 AM (896 Views) | |
| Luke's Dad | Feb 18 2010, 06:23 AM Post #1 |
![]()
Emperor Pengin
|
Cheery news to start the day with. |
| The problem with having an open mind is that people keep trying to put things in it. | |
![]() |
|
| Luke's Dad | Feb 18 2010, 06:30 AM Post #2 |
![]()
Emperor Pengin
|
Good thing the Stimulus Package saved our collective ass.
|
| The problem with having an open mind is that people keep trying to put things in it. | |
![]() |
|
| 1hp | Feb 18 2010, 09:44 AM Post #3 |
|
Fulla-Carp
|
Here's my unofficial indicator. One year ago you could not get through, by phone, to the California EDD. By mid August last year you had no problem getting through by phone. At present, one can no longer get through, by phone, to California EDD - you get the "we are receiving more calls than we can handle" message. Somethings caused the increase in phone calls. |
| There are 10 kinds of people in this world, those that understand binary and................ | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Feb 18 2010, 10:57 AM Post #4 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
Time to start tracking the misery index. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| Mikhailoh | Feb 18 2010, 11:00 AM Post #5 |
|
If you want trouble, find yourself a redhead
|
Say goodbye to the Democratic majorities, then to Obama. AMFs. |
|
Once in his life, every man is entitled to fall madly in love with a gorgeous redhead - Lucille Ball | |
![]() |
|
| John D'Oh | Feb 18 2010, 11:05 AM Post #6 |
|
MAMIL
|
The GOP are going to fix the economy! IOW, we're f*cked. |
| What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket? | |
![]() |
|
| Mikhailoh | Feb 18 2010, 11:33 AM Post #7 |
|
If you want trouble, find yourself a redhead
|
They'll come closer than accepting $1.3 trillion annual deficits as far as the eye can see. |
|
Once in his life, every man is entitled to fall madly in love with a gorgeous redhead - Lucille Ball | |
![]() |
|
| Copper | Feb 18 2011, 05:47 PM Post #8 |
|
Shortstop
|
A year later, some progress. |
|
The Confederate soldier was peculiar in that he was ever ready to fight, but never ready to submit to the routine duty and discipline of the camp or the march. The soldiers were determined to be soldiers after their own notions, and do their duty, for the love of it, as they thought best. Carlton McCarthy | |
![]() |
|
| George K | Feb 18 2011, 05:50 PM Post #9 |
|
Finally
|
|
|
A guide to GKSR: Click "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08 Nothing is as effective as homeopathy. I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles. - Klaus, 4/29/18 | |
![]() |
|
| Axtremus | Feb 18 2011, 06:09 PM Post #10 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Can you explain how "reducing the deficit" can lead to more employment? (Or conversely, how "increasing the deficit" can lead to more unemployment?) |
![]() |
|
| Jolly | Feb 18 2011, 06:17 PM Post #11 |
![]()
Geaux Tigers!
|
|
| The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.- George Soros | |
![]() |
|
| Copper | Feb 18 2011, 06:21 PM Post #12 |
|
Shortstop
|
As unbelievable as it may have been years ago government workers now cost more than real workers. Let's cut all federal spending. Ohhh let's say about 50% to start. Now all that money can stay in the private sector where it can buy more workers. Unemployment reduced, simple. |
|
The Confederate soldier was peculiar in that he was ever ready to fight, but never ready to submit to the routine duty and discipline of the camp or the march. The soldiers were determined to be soldiers after their own notions, and do their duty, for the love of it, as they thought best. Carlton McCarthy | |
![]() |
|
| garrett2 | Feb 18 2011, 06:32 PM Post #13 |
|
Junior Carp
|
I'm not sure I follow. How can you conclude that if the federal gov't reduces the amount of money they are spending (assuming they are still running at a deficit, albeit a smaller deficit) that this would leave more money in the private sector? Reducing the annual deficit doesn't automatically equate to lower taxes. |
![]() |
|
| Axtremus | Feb 18 2011, 06:33 PM Post #14 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Can you explain how "cutting government spending" will lead to "having more money stay in the private sector"? After that, please explain how you go from "it can buy more workers" to "it will buy more workers." The S&P 500 companies, as a group, sit on a pile of cash in excess of $1.18 Trillion, a historical high. They "can" buy a lot of workers, yet they do not. They are cutting spending, lowering head counts. Support you manage to explain how the money "will" buy more workers, please also explain why the workers bought will be Americans instead of foreigners not living in US territories. |
![]() |
|
| George K | Feb 18 2011, 06:34 PM Post #15 |
|
Finally
|
Why do you think that is? |
|
A guide to GKSR: Click "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08 Nothing is as effective as homeopathy. I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles. - Klaus, 4/29/18 | |
![]() |
|
| Axtremus | Feb 18 2011, 06:40 PM Post #16 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
For the time being, I'm just noting an example showing "having money that can buy many workers" do not automatically translate to "having money will buy many workers." I have my theory why, but I don't want to derail the line of questioning just yet, as I'm still trying to see how some one can explain how "reducing the deficit" can lead to "more employment." |
![]() |
|
| Steve Miller | Feb 18 2011, 06:45 PM Post #17 |
|
Bull-Carp
|
And just what sort of work would have these workers do, exactly? |
|
Wag more Bark less | |
![]() |
|
| George K | Feb 18 2011, 06:47 PM Post #18 |
|
Finally
|
Businesses (like mine) are in the habit of trying to maximize profits. To do that, they have to anticipate what future profits will be. Those profits are a function of taxes and expenses, as well as of income. If the cost of hiring more people (particularly full-time people with all of their attendant benefits) exceeds the income gained from growing the business, they won't do so. If the business expects taxes to rise, they won't hire either. Those are the decisions that my small business has had to make. I can't speak to S&P 500 companies, and that's why I asked the question. I can only speak to my little business that has 4 partners and 10 employees (of which 6 are part-time). |
|
A guide to GKSR: Click "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08 Nothing is as effective as homeopathy. I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles. - Klaus, 4/29/18 | |
![]() |
|
| Copper | Feb 18 2011, 07:04 PM Post #19 |
|
Shortstop
|
Whatever the market will bear. That's the beauty of free markets without government interference. |
|
The Confederate soldier was peculiar in that he was ever ready to fight, but never ready to submit to the routine duty and discipline of the camp or the march. The soldiers were determined to be soldiers after their own notions, and do their duty, for the love of it, as they thought best. Carlton McCarthy | |
![]() |
|
| Copper | Feb 18 2011, 07:05 PM Post #20 |
|
Shortstop
|
I'm depending on Mr. Obama's word for that. |
|
The Confederate soldier was peculiar in that he was ever ready to fight, but never ready to submit to the routine duty and discipline of the camp or the march. The soldiers were determined to be soldiers after their own notions, and do their duty, for the love of it, as they thought best. Carlton McCarthy | |
![]() |
|
| Copper | Feb 18 2011, 07:12 PM Post #21 |
|
Shortstop
|
If the feds (government) take less of my (private) money that's where it stays. I think explaining how to reduce the deficit is enough work for a Friday night. |
|
The Confederate soldier was peculiar in that he was ever ready to fight, but never ready to submit to the routine duty and discipline of the camp or the march. The soldiers were determined to be soldiers after their own notions, and do their duty, for the love of it, as they thought best. Carlton McCarthy | |
![]() |
|
| garrett2 | Feb 18 2011, 08:06 PM Post #22 |
|
Junior Carp
|
You're going to need a bigger snorkel
|
![]() |
|
| Steve Miller | Feb 18 2011, 08:49 PM Post #23 |
|
Bull-Carp
|
But the decision to hire isn't. I hire more people when hiring more people makes me more money than not hiring them does. That decision is based solely on whether or not there is profitable work for them to do. If you gave me back 100% of the taxes I pay I wouldn't hire a single employee unless I had profitable work for them to do. And neither would you. |
|
Wag more Bark less | |
![]() |
|
| garrett2 | Feb 18 2011, 09:08 PM Post #24 |
|
Junior Carp
|
I don't think that's necessarily true for many small businesses. For some businesses, an owner may want to hire a bookkeeper (so that they don't have to work 80+ hours per week), but simply can't afford to. If 'they' gave that business owner 100% of their taxes back, then that business owner might just decide that it would be "personally" worthwhile to hire a bookkeeper. Maybe it's just semantics with regard to how you define profit, but for many small business owners hiring that bookkeeper represent the reality of making a profit versus a loss. |
![]() |
|
| George K | Feb 18 2011, 09:11 PM Post #25 |
|
Finally
|
But the decision of whom to hire is.
If the person you hire cost you more in FICA, health benefits, etc, you'll hire part-time, as long as the work gets done. Our corporation, unlike yours, has a fixed workload. We have to provide "X" number of bodies per day to do the work that's required of our corporation. That's our contract. The "X" doesn't change, and so, it's up to us to minimize the costs to achieve "X". Your "X" is variable. Your corporation can grow the business. We can't, because our business has a fixed responsibility, and yours doesn't. We maximize profits by decreasing the amount it costs us to achieve "X". If it costs us more, we hire cheaper people. It's not a decision of whether to hire, it's a decision of how and whom to hire. The "underemployment" rate is estimated to be between 18 and 20 percent. I would guess that it's because businesses are looking to maximize their profits by not paying the expenses of having employees that cost them too much. At the moment, part-time is cheaper than full time. That hasn't always been the case, has it? It strikes me as being pretty simple. If it costs more to hire Joe than |
|
A guide to GKSR: Click "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08 Nothing is as effective as homeopathy. I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles. - Klaus, 4/29/18 | |
![]() |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic » |








6:27 AM Jul 11