The Loss Of Government Jobs Is Holding Back The Economy

[Lakhota]

laktose fails again

Actually, there is a very good point to this. If you look at the Reagan recovery, public sector jobs increased dramatically as did government spending at all levels. We've pretty much done everything the exact opposite of what Reagan did. In the long run it won't matter. The recovery has started slowly but it's going to pick up steam in the near future, regardless of all the blunders.

Exactly! Look at the increase in public sector jobs that fueled the Reagan recovery and the Bush recovery - compared to Obama. House Republicans know this - but they just hate Obama. It ain't rocket science.

 

[MeBelle]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/annou...22-2013-starting-new-threads.html#post7136082

Rule Amended 4/22/2013 Starting New Threads
When starting a new Thread, please first check and confirm that there are not Current Threads, on the Same Topic, This will Avoid Merges. Please select the forum that best relates to the subject matter of your topic. Opening Posts require more than a Copy and Paste with a Link, You need to include relevant, on topic material of your own. When posting a new topic do not use the CAPS lock.

New part is in Bold Red, here. This was discussed in the past amongst us. It was constructed to battle Spam Posting New Threads off of the headlines of certain web pages both left and right. Too much of that going on for too long.

OP's (Opening Posts) need Relevant content from the Poster, not just a Copy and Paste with a link. This is limited to OP's.

By Bryce Covert

The jobs report out this morning was full of good news: unemployment fell to 7.5 percent as the economy added 165,000 jobs, while big upward revisions to the past two months’ jobs numbers were added. The private sector carried those figures, adding 176,000 jobs in April. Yet the number was dragged down by the loss of 11,000 public sector jobs.

This has been a steadily recurring trend with each monthly jobs report: even when the private sector adds a solid number of jobs, the overall figure is pulled down by losses in the public sector. 741,000 jobs have been lost in the government sector since the beginning of the recovery period in June 2009, with 89,000 gone since this time last year.

Overall, the government has shed 718,000 net jobs since President Obama took office. While often accused of bloating the government, the trends show exactly the opposite: Obama has overseen a sharp decline in public sector payrolls as compared to his predecessor President George W. Bush, as can be seen in this chart from Calculated Risk:

More: The Loss Of Government Jobs Is Holding Back The Economy

Calculated Risk: Public and Private Sector Payroll Jobs: Bush and Obama

Starving the Beast - NYTimes.com

The Unemployment Rate Would Be A Full Point Lower Without Public Sector Job Losses

It doesn't take an economics genius to know this is a real drag on the economy and recovery.

 

[Rozman]

So we take taxpayer dollars to create public sector jobs that don't produce anything so people that produce have less money to spend.And this is a good thing?

Public sector workers provide services such as teaching our children, protecting our citizens, maintaining our roads, and fighting fires. They pay taxes. With their paychecks they buy goods and services which fuel our economy.

Sure, not everyone can work for the government. We need a private sector. However i grow tired of the mantra that government workers produce nothing.

If you are printing money,borrowing money or taking more taxes from those who produce and use it to make a job for someone that is just moving money around.

 

[The Rabbi]

I thought that this was so obvious, that it hardly required any comment.

Of course a loss in consumption will trickle down.

No, you didnt think.
If that were the case then gov't should just hire everyone, right?

We have had 80 years of this crap, long enough to know it doesnt work and the very theory is wrong. You cannot keep spending to avoid bankruptcy, sorry Joe. You do not stimulate the economy with wasteful gov't spending. You do not throw money at consumers and count on them spending to make the economy better. Those are failed policies. They do not work. They have never worked. There is no "multiplier effect" of gov't spending. They are based on flawed discredited economic analysis. The wonder is anyone still believes that crap.

 

[The Rabbi]

laktose fails again

Actually, there is a very good point to this. If you look at the Reagan recovery, public sector jobs increased dramatically as did government spending at all levels. We've pretty much done everything the exact opposite of what Reagan did. In the long run it won't matter. The recovery has started slowly but it's going to pick up steam in the near future, regardless of all the blunders.

Correlation is not causality. There were many other things at play too. Like a simplified tax regime with lower across the board rates.
You are right we've done the opposite of Reagan. Reagan didnt want budget busting "stimulus" spending. Reagan didnt enact new entitlements that made it punitive to hire new workers. Reagan didnt write thousands of new pages of regulation a day.
The recovery, if there was one, is dead. The economy is declining.

 

[TemplarKormac]

The rich have totally gamed the stock markets. Now, they just let computers loaded with algorithms do their trading for them (high-frequency trading). These sophisticated platforms even search the internet, news sites and social media for selected keywords - then fire off orders. The little guys only get a few crumbs.

Mark Cuban: High-Frequency Traders Are the Ultimate Hackers - MarketBeat - WSJ

Algorithmic trading - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Oh geez, you can't force life to be fair. That's all this is. You wanna prosper? Get your head in the game.

 

[editec]

So we take taxpayer dollars to create public sector jobs that don't produce anything so people that produce have less money to spend.And this is a good thing?

I've emboldened the part that makes you look like a damned fool, lad.

 

[Care4all]

laktose fails again

Actually, there is a very good point to this. If you look at the Reagan recovery, public sector jobs increased dramatically as did government spending at all levels. We've pretty much done everything the exact opposite of what Reagan did. In the long run it won't matter. The recovery has started slowly but it's going to pick up steam in the near future, regardless of all the blunders.

Correlation is not causality. There were many other things at play too. Like a simplified tax regime with lower across the board rates.
You are right we've done the opposite of Reagan. Reagan didnt want budget busting "stimulus" spending. Reagan didnt enact new entitlements that made it punitive to hire new workers. Reagan didnt write thousands of new pages of regulation a day.
The recovery, if there was one, is dead. The economy is declining.

uhhhhhhhh, didn't Reagan give us the largest tax increase in our History with the 100% payroll tax increase for Social Security taxes on BOTH individuals and businesses?

Tryng to REWRITE history again Rabbi???

 

[The Rabbi]

Actually, there is a very good point to this. If you look at the Reagan recovery, public sector jobs increased dramatically as did government spending at all levels. We've pretty much done everything the exact opposite of what Reagan did. In the long run it won't matter. The recovery has started slowly but it's going to pick up steam in the near future, regardless of all the blunders.

Correlation is not causality. There were many other things at play too. Like a simplified tax regime with lower across the board rates.
You are right we've done the opposite of Reagan. Reagan didnt want budget busting "stimulus" spending. Reagan didnt enact new entitlements that made it punitive to hire new workers. Reagan didnt write thousands of new pages of regulation a day.
The recovery, if there was one, is dead. The economy is declining.

uhhhhhhhh, didn't Reagan give us the largest tax increase in our History with the 100% payroll tax increase for Social Security taxes on BOTH individuals and businesses?

Tryng to REWRITE history again Rabbi???

NO, that was passed by the Dems in Congress.
ANyway, thanks for the deflection. It's all you got, I know. I would gladly trade Obama's stagnant economy for Reagan's dynamic economy--best performance post WW2 of its time.

 

[The Rabbi]

So we take taxpayer dollars to create public sector jobs that don't produce anything so people that produce have less money to spend.And this is a good thing?

I've emboldened the part that makes you look like a damned fool, lad.

Actually you're the fool here, s0n, if you thnk gov't actually produces something.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Actually, there is a very good point to this. If you look at the Reagan recovery, public sector jobs increased dramatically as did government spending at all levels. We've pretty much done everything the exact opposite of what Reagan did. In the long run it won't matter. The recovery has started slowly but it's going to pick up steam in the near future, regardless of all the blunders.

Correlation is not causality. There were many other things at play too. Like a simplified tax regime with lower across the board rates.
You are right we've done the opposite of Reagan. Reagan didnt want budget busting "stimulus" spending. Reagan didnt enact new entitlements that made it punitive to hire new workers. Reagan didnt write thousands of new pages of regulation a day.
The recovery, if there was one, is dead. The economy is declining.

uhhhhhhhh, didn't Reagan give us the largest tax increase in our History with the 100% payroll tax increase for Social Security taxes on BOTH individuals and businesses?

Tryng to REWRITE history again Rabbi???

When Obamacare was ruled as a tax last year, that made it the fourth largest tax increase in American history. Still broke his promise not to raise taxes on the Middle Class, which it did, regardless of what dubious distinction it garners.

 

[Care4all]

Correlation is not causality. There were many other things at play too. Like a simplified tax regime with lower across the board rates.
You are right we've done the opposite of Reagan. Reagan didnt want budget busting "stimulus" spending. Reagan didnt enact new entitlements that made it punitive to hire new workers. Reagan didnt write thousands of new pages of regulation a day.
The recovery, if there was one, is dead. The economy is declining.

uhhhhhhhh, didn't Reagan give us the largest tax increase in our History with the 100% payroll tax increase for Social Security taxes on BOTH individuals and businesses?

Tryng to REWRITE history again Rabbi???

When Obamacare was ruled as a tax last year, that made it the fourth largest tax increase in American history. Still broke his promise not to raise taxes on the Middle Class, which it did, regardless of what dubious distinction it garners.

Wasn't it the penalty for NOT buying insurance that was ruled a tax? So, ONLY the people who can afford to buy insurance who choose not to, are going to be charged this 'penalty tax'? The people who can't afford to buy insurance will be subsidized by gvt???

 

[NYcarbineer]

[ Reagan didnt enact new entitlements that made it punitive to hire new workers. .

That is wrong. The Social Security reform of 1983 imposed payroll tax increases on businesses.

 

[TemplarKormac]

uhhhhhhhh, didn't Reagan give us the largest tax increase in our History with the 100% payroll tax increase for Social Security taxes on BOTH individuals and businesses?

Tryng to REWRITE history again Rabbi???

When Obamacare was ruled as a tax last year, that made it the fourth largest tax increase in American history. Still broke his promise not to raise taxes on the Middle Class, which it did, regardless of what dubious distinction it garners.

Wasn't it the penalty for NOT buying insurance that was ruled a tax? So, ONLY the people who can afford to buy insurance who choose not to, are going to be charged this 'penalty tax'? The people who can't afford to buy insurance will be subsidized by gvt???

No. The Individual Mandate itself was ruled as a tax. According to the ruling, the penalty was a penalty, not a tax.


How To Explain The Obamacare Ruling To A Five-Year-Old - Forbes

 

[The Rabbi]

[ Reagan didnt enact new entitlements that made it punitive to hire new workers. .

That is wrong. The Social Security reform of 1983 imposed payroll tax increases on businesses.

Which is why unemployment went down massively?
Fail.
If you're gonna play with the big boys get your facts straight first.

 

[Oddball]

So we take taxpayer dollars to create public sector jobs that don't produce anything so people that produce have less money to spend.And this is a good thing?

I've emboldened the part that makes you look like a damned fool, lad.

The damned fool is you, pal.

Parable of the broken window

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The Golden Gate Bridge was built in the middle of the Depression, as was the Empire State Building and the Hoover Dam. That put lots of people to work.

I guess we could build some pipelines now, to put people to work......wait....what? LOL!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Why is the OP a fail? Government (public sector) job losses are government (public sector) job losses. Obama has tried to stimulate the public sector but Congress keeps blocking him.

Obama has tried to stimulate the public sector but Congress keeps blocking him.

He's spent us nearly $6.2 trillion deeper into debt, how much more wasteful spending does he need until he succeeds?

And why stimulate the public sector?
Do something that actually increases GDP.

You can thank Bush's two wars and his tax cuts for most of the increased debt. Bush was the first president to cut taxes during time of war - let alone TWO wars.

Blaming Bush for wars Obama was ending? That should reduce spending.
Is spending less under Obama?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The Rich Have Gained $5.6 Trillion in the 'Recovery,' While the Rest of Us Have Lost $669 Billion

Rich people own stuff......that's awful!

Kill the greedy kulaks, eh comrade?

 

[The Rabbi]

The Golden Gate Bridge was built in the middle of the Depression, as was the Empire State Building and the Hoover Dam. That put lots of people to work.

I guess we could build some pipelines now, to put people to work......wait....what? LOL!

And the pipelines would bring revenue rather than cost money.

In the middle of the great depression Roosevelt's programs also had 7 men in a car driving around the county counting caterpillers and other make work crap. The New Deal was the most wasteful binge of spending on record. It also ushered in the era of bribing people to get votes, as much of the money was used for patronage jobs to assure Dem majorities.