Well Said, Friend.
March 1st, 2004
An interesting point from Tim Blair’s Weblog, regarding how the media can twist figures to fit their political bias. unemployment is around 5.5% right now, give or take. one tenth of a percentage point a few years ago was ‘low’, now a it’s a huge number.
Welcome! If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
March 1st, 2004 at 11:52 pm
In January 2004, 112,000 jobs were created. Since August, a total of 366,000 jobs have been created.
• Despite five months of job growth, there are still more than 2.3 million fewer jobs than at the start of the recession in March 2001.
• Also, there are more than 700,000 fewer jobs than at the start of the recovery in November 2001.
• Compared to job growth in a typical recovery, employment was down more than 8.8 million jobs in January.
A ‘5.6′ or ‘5.3′ doesn’t make a shitload of difference if you don’t understand the real numbers behind it.
March 2nd, 2004 at 9:15 am
Jobs are certainly important, and I agree that we are kind of behind in that area right now. But I think the topic that very few people understand is how much productivity has increased in the last year or so. Productivity is how many dollars of value are created by each worker per hour. The reason we’ve been seeing increases in GDP despite the slow growth in jobs is precisely because the people that are working are more productive than they were before. It has been said, and it’s something I personally believe, that many of the jobs that were created in the late 90’s were not needed. Tons of people had good paying jobs but they were essentially providing little or no service. I think we are now seeing a little backlash from this.
So while I agree that our economy is lacking enough jobs, I am glad to see that businesses are becoming more efficient with their current workforce. I don’t think I’ve heard a single politician yet praise the more efficient economy that is coming out of the ashes of the last recession. Until worker productivity reaches a maximum, I think it is unlikely we will see much of an increase in jobs. But we could already be at that point. Many economists are forecasting a large increase in jobs in the next six months.
March 2nd, 2004 at 9:56 am
first of all - it seems as you’re missing the point. i’m talking about media bias here, not the actual numbers. but …
‘In January 2004, 112,000 jobs were created. Since August, a total of 366,000 jobs have been created.’
i’m assuming you’re taking your stats from the bureau of labor stats( http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm) that 112,000 figure, while partially true, is slightly misleading. you’re quoting this:
Nonfarm payroll employment increased by 112,000
but, leaving this out:
Total employment rose by 496,000 in January after accounting for the adjustment to population controls. The employment-population ratio–the proportion of the population age 16 and older with jobs–increased to 62.4 percent over the month.
moreover, the American work force is at an all time high of 138.5 million right now. in the past year, 2 million jobs have been created by private and public companies.
Self employed americans (which are not accounted for in these ‘job creation statistics) are at an all time high as well, at 16.4 million. this number has increased by almost 1 million in the past year as well.
‘Compared with a typical recovery…’
it’s hard to say that any economic growth or change is ‘typical’. cory made a good point about economic productivity, and i’ll add what i read: apparently, despite a 6% increase in the ‘economy’ last fall, jobs have not followed suit as quickly as hoped. productivity usually accelerates as businesses invest during the early stages of economic growth, but then subsides. instead, productivity has soared, eliminating the need for new workers.
basically, increased demand for goods/services generated by the growing economy has been MORE than met by the gains in productivity. for example, if there is a growth of 6% in demand, but your employees can produce 6% more per hour … there is no need for new employees. most of the ‘blame’ seems to have fallen on massive investment in the IT industry during the late 90’s, using technology to make employees work much more efficiently, and creating this surge in productivity. eventually, the gains in demand will outweigh what the current workforce can handle, and then jobs should skyrocket. the prediction is around 4-5 million jobs by the end of this year alone, as per whitehouse.gov (take that with a grain of salt, obviously).
‘Despite 5 months of job growth…’
you said it yourself. more jobs are being created. you don’t get out of a recession overnight, but as long as things are going UP, things could be a lot worse.
honestly, all i care about is growth. we can talk about numbers from 2 years ago versus now all day long, and we can copy and paste stats till the cows come home. all i know is this month is better than last month, and next month will be better than this one. job growth takes time, especially when you factor in what kind of economic turmoil we’ve gone through in the past 5 years or so. a recession, the whole 9/11 thing, 2 wars, and some of the biggest corporate implosions in modern history.
my point all along was not the numbers, really. i was pointing out another person’s observation regarding the ‘bias’ of the media … or simply how one word can change the entire perception of a number.
March 2nd, 2004 at 9:57 am
EXACTLY. To cut costs, companies have finally realized that by paying less people to do the same job, you can sometimes make a profit. Which the last time I checked is the goal of most firms in the economy, PROFIT MAXIMIZATION.
Let’s just hope that that prick Kerry can get elected just in time for the economy to swing back, so he can take all the credit. How’s that sound? Then Kerry can pour all the excess money into welfare programs and 8 years later hand a fucked up economy back to the next Republican president.
BTW, anyone else notice that legless one-armed troll of a man Max Cleland clapping last night, by banging his only functional limb onto his tattered stump. That almost made me puke my communist guts out.
March 2nd, 2004 at 12:15 pm
Maybe the real job problem is a population issue. Here is a good way to reduce unemployment: the govt should just kill off a few thousand people looking for jobs. A new department could be created called, “The Department of Unemployment Correction.” It would essentially be a slaughterhouse, but disguised of course as a typical government building. You walk in, fill out a form, and take a number. If you filled out, “Looking for a job, currently unemployed” then you go through the door on the left, the curtain closes, and thwack! One less unemployed person at a time! We could drastically reduce unemployment this way. I like it.
March 2nd, 2004 at 1:23 pm
…and then the employees could molest the bodies of the dead women and children while they’re still warm…
March 2nd, 2004 at 7:10 pm
You guys are really pathetic.
Maybe this country isn’t being as productive because the jobs are going elsewhere?
March 2nd, 2004 at 7:42 pm
I believe the point WAS, this country is being MUCH MORE productive, hence fewer workers for the same amount of tasks. What does jobs moving elsewhere have much to do with productivity in the US anyway? Are you actually John Kerry in disguise?
March 2nd, 2004 at 9:52 pm
Amber - employees are being MORE productive, not less. that’s the problem, as we’ve already spoken to great length about.
regarding outsourcing: it’s called competition. kerry wants to raise the minimum wage, and penalize companies for taking their business elsewhere, where they can find cheaper labor. if the minimum wage continues to increase, more jobs will be lost eventually.
think of it like a pie: there is only one pie to go around. if we raise the minimum wage over and over, there will be fewer people to be able to eat said pie. eventually, people will look to go find another pie to split up. kind of a crappy analogy, but it’ll work.
March 2nd, 2004 at 10:28 pm
Another side of the outsourcing debate that is again rarely discussed by politicians is that prices decrease when jobs go to countries where production is cheapest. We work jobs to earn money and then we use the money to buy things. Having more money doesn’t necessarily mean that we can buy more things. If we were to take the totally protectionist approach (ie we don’t trade with other countries at all) we would find prices to be astronomically high. There are tons of examples, both theoretical and empirical where trade can be shown to be beneficial.
But I think one of the deeper problems with outsourcing jobs to other countries is that fact that certain jobs, or maybe an individuals particular career choice, is over-romanticized. Being a “family farmer” is considered morally “good” by many people in the US. US consumers could enjoy lower prices if we moved most (not all) farming to different countries. But the idea is somehow that being a family farmer is a good profession, and those that are doing it should continue. I think a much smarter lesson to teach is that learning to be flexible is “good”. Learn skills that will enhance the your abilities in many jobs, rather than learning the specific facts of one particular job. Then when your job is outsourced to a foreign country, you don’t have to sit at home and cry about jobs moving overseas.
Another example about the benefits of productivity comes from the now deceased USSR. In that country EVERYONE had a job. It was a state mandate that everyone have a job. In hindsight it appears that most people sat on their ass all day. Sometimes I think this is the communist dream; to sit around all day and do nothing, yet be considered employed. It is easier to tell yourself, “I am a productive member of society.” This of course is not the case.
If you are not doing something the best way possible, then you are wasting your life, and you should let someone else take over; you’ve been beat.
March 2nd, 2004 at 10:31 pm
we need some good liberals on this site cory. we just agree with each other all day ;)
March 2nd, 2004 at 10:35 pm
We do. Although I’ve only met a small handful of good liberals in my lifetime. They are a strange breed. I would say that being a liberal is just more trendy than being a conservative. It’s more an image thing than an issue thing.
The good liberals I have met have some convincing points, but all of them would fully agree with us here.
March 2nd, 2004 at 10:58 pm
Sooo .. you don’t want your wages to be raised? Or hey .. your overtime to well .. actually be PAID to you??? That’s fine. Daniel I know just as well as you more than $6 an hour (after taxes) might actually be nice.
Productivity might be UP here because we have less people doing more jobs!
Whatever go to move to India.
I’m going to Vancouver in April 2005 if the Neocons pass the new draft movement under the noses of Americans.
No matter age 18-26, being a woman, being in school, having kids, or being married won’t matter a bit. Go ahead though stay ignorant to bills in front of Congress. I refuse to get screwed over.
Let’s go fight for a war which we were lied to and was unnecessary in the first place! YAY PNAC!
When are you people going to get it through your thick skulls THEY LIED?! You’re so quick to call someone a ‘commie’ or a stupid ‘liberal’ .. but this isn’t a partisan issue you fools. Has George Bush done ANYTHING for us as young adults? No. NO!
Grow the hell up and GET OVER the partisan shit and look at the facts. Or course I’m sure those big bugs up your asses are preventing that… Get some common sense. I believe most in the Libertarian Party platform so you all can fuck off for continuing to call me some left-wing liberal commie nut. I just look at what the hell is going on. Read some .gov press releases and briefings and gaggles. You’ll realize WTF the press wants to know and what Scott McClellan has no conscience lying about. They’re all liars.
No WMD?
Kelly not a suicide?
UK/US spied on UN?
War debt?
Retirement age = 70?
No tax cuts for *US*
War that you might be shipped OFF TO.
Water with arsenic in it.
Half the groceries at Kroger made elsewhere?
Bush never attending a soldiers funeral?
Rumsfeld fucking up everything?
If you guys are so “anti-lib” or whatever you’re trying to show off to be .. explain to everyone …
WHAT HAS GEORGE BUSH DONE FOR YOU?
Please. Inform me.
GROW THE FUCK UP AND OPEN YOUR EYES.
March 2nd, 2004 at 11:51 pm
Amber, basically George Bush as stepped up to the plate and said to terrorists or other people that try to harm this country that we’re not going to take shit from anyone. “Water with arsenic in it.” What’s your factual basis for that?? Come on, you actually believe that? The government, which i have certain disagreements with, is not this big bad entity that you liberals make it out to be. What is this draft you speak of?? Where is your evidence for that? Don’t give me some bullshit link to some conspiracy website either, show me factual basis behind your arguments and maybe people will get off your case. George Bush has rebuilt the economy that Clinton ran into the ground. You people are quick to say that Bush had some conspiracy to let 9/11 happen, theres more factual proof that Clinton knew more about Bin Laden than Bush. If anything, the problem with Bin Ladan should have been taken care of under his regime. Clinton didn’t do shit about the previous attacks on the Trade Center or the USS Cole, hence why 9/11 happened. Like Erik said a liberal president fucks shit up and the next republican president that comes into office takes the blame. If this post seems all over the place I apoligize, i know the logic in this comment is a little hard to follow, but i think all of you get my general points. That is all for my debut post on this site.
March 2nd, 2004 at 11:59 pm
Oh yea, in address to the original point of the post, it’s true that the media can warp things. One of the first things that we were taught in my media classes was the concept of agenda setting. The general media is more or less a form of entertainment that sometimes has factual basis. The media, much like other forms of entertainment, is a buisness; so the goal is to reach the highest audience possible. The only way to do this is for the reporter, or anchor to add a certain level of personal opinion that is geared to the target audience. I’m not sure if this is completely bad. I’m a firm believer that the general public is uneducated and as a news source you want to try to get those people to buy your paper, or watch your newscast. Whether your newscast or paper is 100% factual or not doesnt matter. People still side with a general political party regardless of their education, so the media acts on that. No one news source is greater than another because of the fact that theres bias no matter where you get your news from. It’s impossible to be objective when it comes to the media because of the fact that people are biased by nature, no matter how objective they try to be. The goal is to read as much as you can about a certain subject and form your own opinion about it.
March 3rd, 2004 at 6:46 am
Amber, do you ever re-read your posts? Half the things you say aren’t even english. You switch subjects so fast I’m rarely sure I know what you are talking about. My suggestion: take a deep breath before you start typing.
March 3rd, 2004 at 9:24 am
Hey Amber?…You brilliant genius, Cory’s right, print out copies of the things you say, and the conspiracy websites that you believe, and put them in a little box under your bed. Open them in 10 years, and see what you think then. Most of us don’t know about this shit you’ve been spewing, because 99.9% of it is completely made up, so don’t preach it to me as fact, because I don’t believe a word. I think you need to get a job, make a life for yourself, and stop blaming the evil tyrannical government for all of your pathetic failures and personal problems. Vote for who you feel is best qualified, and if the outcome really bothers you that much…GET THE FUCK OUT. I DARE YOU to find a better country, anywhere in the world, at any time in history that will give a whiny, insecure, angry young lady such as yourself a second glance. Please, PLEASE grow up.
March 3rd, 2004 at 9:25 am
Sorry, make that a BIG box.
March 4th, 2004 at 8:12 pm
Rick I won’t even bother returning those insults. You should feel sorry for yourself.
Hey Daniel said I’d be a failure too. You guys are awesome.
March 4th, 2004 at 8:26 pm
http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20040304-112720-3622r.htm
http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_1420258,00.html
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=4496104
http://www.tallahassee.com/mld/democrat/8100422.htm
http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1077690879566&p=1012571727172
http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=134-03022004
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F10715FA3E580C768EDDAB0894DC404482
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28525-2004Mar3.html
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2001870042_iraqdig03.html
http://www.epinet.org/issuebriefs/198/ib198.pdf
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A26446-2004Mar3?language=printer
Rick for you:
http://webserver.cr.usgs.gov/trace/pubs/fs-063-00/
(Bush won’t drink Washington DC water.)
March 5th, 2004 at 9:19 am
not sure how strongly i’d put my faith in an article from the “Tallahassee Democrat”, but that’s just me…
March 5th, 2004 at 11:05 am
it was off google news .. *shrug*
so what about the other ones?