Unemployment hits 9.8%

[mawilson 2,133]

It is uncertainty more than demand right now that is holding back employment.

I agree with you; however, I don't think it's the 3 percent tax increase that's holding back

employment - it's the ongoing threat of a double-dip recession and general uncertainty about

the economy. Will there be another stock market crash? Will home prices keep falling,

forcing the government to bail out more banks and businesses? Are we out of the woods yet?

[JohnSmith2007 353]

I agree with you; however, I don't think it's the 3 percent tax increase that's holding back

employment - it's the ongoing threat of a double-dip recession and general uncertainty about

the economy. Will there be another stock market crash? Will home prices keep falling,

forcing the government to bail out more banks and businesses? Are we out of the woods yet?

And this is where the government and the president have the most power. Right now we have no idea what is coming. What is going to come out of Washington, taxes included. Oh, while the tax increase isn't stopping him from hiring it does slow down his decision on when to hire. All you have to do is effect each of these small companies in a small way to get a really big result in the overall economy. Most people work for small business. So anything that effects them has a huge effect.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

How has it been stimulative? What effect can you point to that shows the economy being stimulated? My definition of the success of the stimulus, and I admit it is a narrow one, is how fast people get back to work. Without people working the economy has no hope of coming back. The jobs must come first.

They always come last. Employment has always lagged on both ends of a recession. That's nothing new, really. The bleeding stopped on the employment front and the contraction of the economy stopped - the latter pretty immediately and the former fairly close following the passage of the stimulus package. Both indicators point to the stimulation of the economy.

[JohnSmith2007 353]

They always come last. Employment has always lagged on both ends of a recession. That's nothing new, really. The bleeding stopped on the employment front and the contraction of the economy stopped - the latter pretty immediately and the former fairly close following the passage of the stimulus package. Both indicators point to the stimulation of the economy.

And yet, two years later almost 20% of the workforce is either unemployed or underemployed. Nice stimulation there.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Oh, while the tax increase isn't stopping him from hiring it does slow down his decision on when to hire.

No it isn't. The uncertainty about the demand in the next few quarters is what's keeping him from hiring. That uncertainty is fueled even more now that extended unemployment benefits have effectively expired. That's a blow to consumer demand in the early stages of the still fragile recovery and might yet turn out to be one of the worst decisions Congress has made.

And yet, two years later almost 20% of the workforce is either unemployed or underemployed. Nice stimulation there.

Yes, because that number would be significantly higher had the stimulation not occured. It's really not that hard to see.

[JohnSmith2007 353]

No it isn't. The uncertainty about the demand in the next few quarters is what's keeping him from hiring. That uncertainty is fueled even more now that extended unemployment benefits have effectively expired. That's a blow to consumer demand in the early stages of the still fragile recovery and might yet turn out to be one of the worst decisions Congress has made.

Yes, because that number would be significantly higher had the stimulation not occured. It's really not that hard to see.

Nope, not even close. How many small business owners do you know personally? I know quite a few. It is exactly as I stated. I hear this directly from dozens of small business owners. In my job I interact every day with them. I have worked with some of them for decades. Trust me, it is uncertainty over what the government is going to do next more than demand. We have the demand for 3 more employees where I work. My boss is just working the employees he has more rather than take a chance and hire. This is coming from the mouths of dozens of small business owners themselves. Don't tell me what is holding up employment, I am living it.

[JohnSmith2007 353]

Yes, because that number would be significantly higher had the stimulation not occured. It's really not that hard to see.

So you say. It cannot be proven. I think we would be better off without the stimulus. Didn't help the company I work for at all.

[Ban Hammer 13,334]

And yet, two years later almost 20% of the workforce is either unemployed or underemployed. Nice stimulation there.

20% perhaps in some areas, more around 10% or so averaged across the nation.

[JohnSmith2007 353]

20% perhaps in some areas, more around 10% or so averaged across the nation.

It is 17% from the last data. This includes the unemployed and the underemployed. Look at the OP.

A broader measure of the unemployment rate, which includes people who stopped looking for work and those settling for part-time jobs, remained high at 17% in November, the same as the previous month.

Edited December 3, 2010 by JohnSmith2007

[luckytxn 2,264]

I agree with you; however, I don't think it's the 3 percent tax increase that's holding back

employment - it's the ongoing threat of a double-dip recession and general uncertainty about

the economy. Will there be another stock market crash? Will home prices keep falling,

forcing the government to bail out more banks and businesses? Are we out of the woods yet?

3 percent tax increase in pretty hefty when most businesses have slim profit margins. Think of what a tax increase like that can do if the business is operating at an 4-5 profit margin to stay competitive.

Edited December 3, 2010 by luckytxn

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

None of this is in agreement with Steven's posts.

[ready4ONE 5,400]

None of this is in agreement with Steven's posts.

But it probably is the fault of illegal aliens...

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

No it isn't. The uncertainty about the demand in the next few quarters is what's keeping him from hiring. That uncertainty is fueled even more now that extended unemployment benefits have effectively expired. That's a blow to consumer demand in the early stages of the still fragile recovery and might yet turn out to be one of the worst decisions Congress has made.

Yes, because that number would be significantly higher had the stimulation not occured. It's really not that hard to see.

Thank you Obama. Right?

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

But it probably is the fault of illegal aliens...

Why do you hate illegal aliens? They are only trying to do the best they can for their families and submit themselves to, basically, slavery to do so. Why do you not support tax incentives to hire Americans instead of illegals? Why do you not support minimum wage for anyone but white people?

Seems like we know all the tax incentives to stimulate the economy and debate over whether a tax cut for people earning more than...or less than, XXX amount will benefit the economy but NO ONE suggests that a HUGE tax for hiring illegals aliens (I mean "put you out of business" tax) would do the same for employment in the USA.

You cannot PUNISH American emplyers for hiring Americans with payroll taxes, insurance requirments, safety requirements, etc. and then ALLOW them to avoid all that and hire illegal aliens and pocket the difference.

It is NOT the "illegal's fault" it is the government's fault for allowing this to happen.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

3 percent tax increase in pretty hefty when most businesses have slim profit margins. Think of what a tax increase like that can do if the business is operating at an 4-5 profit margin to stay competitive.

FYI, Walgreen Company, a pharmacuetical giant, has been providing very excellent returns on investment to its stockholders for more than 100 years and is one of the most consistent performers on the stock market. Buy 100 shares of their stock when your child is born, at $25 to 50 per share, and when the child is 18 you will have their college fund for them.

Walgreens has a profit margin of about 3%.