»
Discussion
»
The Alley
»
Makes Census to Me
| The Alley |
|
Makes Census to Me |
|
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA 
|
Obama welcomes jobs report as rare good news CHARLOTTE, N.C. – President Barack Obama on Friday hailed a new government report showing the most jobs created in nearly three years. "We are beginning to turn the corner," he told employees of a manufacturing plant that received government stimulus money. Steps taken by the government "have broken this slide and are helping us to climb out of this recession," Obama said several hours after the Labor Department reported that businesses added 162,000 jobs to their payrolls in March. Even so, the Labor Department report was a mixed one. The overall unemployment rate remained unchanged at 9.7 percent, where it has been stuck since January. And 48,000 of the new workers filled temporary government-created Census Bureau positions. Some 8.4 million jobs have evaporated since the recession began in December 2007. "I've often had to report bad news during the course of this year, as the recession wreaked havoc on people's lives. But today is an encouraging day. We learned that the economy actually produced a substantial number of jobs instead of losing a substantial number of jobs," he said. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_obama_jobs So there you have it. Obama has no doubt the American people are idiots. He takes a jobs report, which sets a three-year record because one third of it contains temp jobs due to the census, and he calls it 'turning the corner', even though the unemployment rate remained unchanged. Yes, the economy produced a substantial number of jobs but it didn't produce a number of substantial jobs. Almost 50,000 of them will disappear after the census. This is what he claims to be "encouraging. He can only say this with a straight face if he believes the people he is speaking to are completely stupid. Well, maybe they are. Just as Groucho Marks said that he would never belong to a club that would have him as a member, perhaps Obama feels that he need never respect the intelligence of anyone who would elect him President. He has a point.... |
||
| © Copyright 2010 Michael Mack - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
. Well, no one can say you don't know how to make friends . . . . |
||
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
Those census worker temps don't have to worry, 17,000 new jobs coming up at the IRS and as far as I've heard, no death panel positions have been filled yet. Lots of openings there, too, right? |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
. "17,000 new jobs coming up at the IRS" to collect fines on the illegally uninsured . . . . |
||
|
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
Yep, 17000 IRS goons beating down the doors of the uninsured living on the street, in orphanages, jails, prisons and homeless shelters. HBR have a multi-gazillion dollar contract for the workhouses and gulags yet? |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Better check with mr. grinch, Jen. He has assured me that those jobs will NOT be filled. Thanks, John. I owe my many friendships to my sparkling personality  |
||
|
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
"I have six locks on my door all in a row. When I go out, I lock every other one. I figure no matter how long somebody stands there picking the locks, they are always locking three." - Elayne Boosler |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Take a left, Jen, to find the quote thread...or do you think throwing nonsense in other threads is supposed to serve some point? |
||
|
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/images/docpage-recoverystats1.jpg |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
The people living on the street, in orphanages, jails, prisons and homeless shelters already have access to free government healthcare, Jen. They aren't the ones the government will penalize for not having insurance. |
||
|
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
""I've often had to report bad news during the course of this year, as the recession wreaked havoc on people's lives. But today is an encouraging day. We learned that the economy actually produced a substantial number of jobs instead of losing a substantial number of jobs," he said. He spoke at a Celgard LLC factory, which received a $49 million grant from the U.S. Energy Department last August. The company makes high-tech battery components, including membranes used in advanced lithium batteries The president said the grant was creating nearly 300 direct jobs for the company and more than 1,000 jobs for its contractors and suppliers." |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
If you read the link it is clear that his "encouragement" and joy came from the national figures, not that particular company's. Of course he would pick a company that received stimulus funds and hired more people. What do you think? He'd pick a country that received no funds and had to lay people off? Even Obama is not that stupid. |
||
|
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
"He'd pick a country that received no funds and had to lay people off? " "Instead of a Seeing Eye dog, what about a gun? It's cheaper than a dog, plus if you walk around shooting all the time people are going to get out of the way. Cars, too!"- Jack Handey, again. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
John, in my post 142 in the Plea for Sanity thread, I offer a fact-check reference on the jobs you speak about. You might try checking that out. |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
I heard on the news that the tax credits to small businesses will only last for two years and that they are only applicable to companies that have between 10-20 employees and make less than $25,000. per year. Funny, that wasn't mentioned in his oratory. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
No only that, Denise, but figures came out that less than half of employers with 25 employees or less provide health insurance for their employees. So, in order to get tax credits, they will have to provide insurance. Interesting no one has commented on the main gist of the post, Obama using the almost 50,000 temporary once-in-a-decade census jobs as a reason to declare the job market is improving. |
||
|
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
The White House Office of the Press Secretary For Immediate Release April 01, 2010 Fact Sheet: Small Business Health Care Tax Credit Health reform legislation signed by President Obama includes a Small Business Health Care Tax Credit to help small businesses afford the cost of covering their workers. Key Facts about the Small Business Health Care Tax Credit •The tax credit, which is effective immediately, can cover up to 35 percent of the premiums a small business pays to cover its workers. In 2014, the rate will increase to 50 percent. •The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the tax credit will save small businesses $40 billion by 2019. •Both small for-profit businesses and small not-for-profit organizations are eligible. Key Elements •Available Immediately. The credit is effective January 1, 2010. As a result, small businesses that provide health care for their workers will receive immediate help with their premium costs, and additional firms that initiate coverage this year will get a tax cut as well. •Broad Eligibility. The Council of Economic Advisors estimates that 4 million small businesses are eligible for the credit if they provide health care to their workers. Qualifying firms must have less than the equivalent of 25 full-time workers (e.g., a firm with fewer than 50 half-time workers would be eligible), pay average annual wages below $50,000, and cover at least 50 percent of the cost of health care coverage for their workers. •Substantial Benefit. The credit is worth up to 35 percent of a small business’s premium costs in 2010. On January 1, 2014, this rate increases to 50 percent. •Firms Can Claim Credit for Up to 6 Years. Firms can claim the credit for 2010 through 2013 and for any two years after that. •Non-Profits Eligible. Tax-exempt organizations are eligible for a 25 percent tax credit in 2010. In 2014, this rate increases to 35 percent.[1] •Gradual Phase-Outs. The credit phases out gradually for firms with average wages between $25,000 and $50,000 and for firms with the equivalent of between 10 and 25 full-time workers. •Premium Cost Eligibility. To avoid an incentive to choose a high-cost plan, an employer’s eligible contribution is limited to the average cost of health insurance in that state. Getting the Word Out to Small Businesses To ensure that small businesses know about the credit and how to claim it, the Administration is initiating a nationwide educational campaign for small businesses and tax preparers. •WhiteHouse.gov Web Feature. Starting today, WhiteHouse.Gov will feature a special section on the Small Business Health Care Tax Credit. •Millions of Postcards to Small Businesses: In the coming weeks, IRS will send out postcards to millions of small businesses who may be eligible for the credit, urging them to look at the criteria and take advantage if they qualify. •Over 1,000 Tax Workshops and Small Business Forums. Every year, tens of thousands of small businesses and tax professionals around the country attend Small Business Forums and Tax Workshops where they can hear from IRS representatives about new developments in tax law. This year, IRS outreach will have a special focus on the small business credit to get the word and answer questions about how the credit works and how to claim it. •Email Blast to 175,000 Tax Professionals. IRS will use its IRS e-News for Tax Professionals mailing list to notify over 175,000 tax professionals. •Special Section on IRS.gov. The IRS is featuring a new section on the front page of IRS.gov on new tax tips, detailed frequently asked questions and a worksheet to help small business owners determine if they qualify. Benefit from Small Business Health Care Tax Credit: Four Cases Example 1: Auto Repair Shop with 10 Employees Gets $24,500 Credit for 2010 Main Street Mechanic: •Employees: 10 •Wages: $250,000 total, or $25,000 per worker •Employer Health Care Costs: $70,000 2010 Tax Credit: $24,500 (35% credit) 2014 Tax Credit: $35,000 (50% credit) Example 2: Restaurant with 40 Part-Time Employees Gets $28,000 Credit for 2010 Downtown Diner: •Employees: 40 half-time employees (the equivalent of 20 full-time workers) •Wages: $500,000 total, or $25,000 per full-time equivalent worker •Employer Health Care Costs: $240,000 2010 Tax Credit: $28,000 (35% credit with phase-out) 2014 Tax Credit: $40,000 (50% credit with phase-out) Example 3: Foster Care Non-Profit with 9 Employees Gets $18,000 Credit for 2010 First Street Family Services.org: •Employees: 9 •Wages: $198,000 total, or $22,000 per worker •Employer Health Care Costs: $72,000 2010 Tax Credit: $18,000 (25% credit) 2014 Tax Credit: $25,200 (35% credit) Example 4: Manufacturing Company with 12 Employees Gets $14,700 Credit for 2010 Acme Air Conditioning, LLC: •Employees: 12 •Wages: $420,000 total, or $35,000 per worker •Employer Health Care Costs: $90,000 2010 Tax Credit: $14,700 (35% credit with phase-out) 2014 Tax Credit: $21,000 (50% credit with phase-out) Five Additional Ways Health Reform will Help Small Businesses. Small businesses want to provide health coverage for their workers, but they face extraordinary challenges in doing so, including premiums that are 18 percent higher on average than large businesses pay for the same coverage. Health reform legislation signed by the Presidents includes a number of important benefits to help make coverage more affordable: 1. Creates Health Insurance Exchanges to Increase Bargaining Power and Reduce Administrative Costs. •Status Quo: Small Businesses Have Little Bargaining Power, Face High Administrative Costs. Currently, small businesses face not only premiums that are 18 percent higher than large businesses pay, but also face higher administrative costs to set up and maintain a health plan. The premiums they pay have 3 to 4 times as much administrative cost built into them as plans in the large group market. They are also at a disadvantage in negotiating with insurance companies because they lack bargaining power. •Solution: Health Insurance Exchanges will Provide More Choice, Lower Prices, and Greater Bargaining Power for Firms with up to 100 Employees: Health reform will change this dynamic. Starting by 2014, firms with 100 or fewer workers will be able pool their buying power and reduce administrative costs by purchasing insurance through an exchange. According to CBO, coverage that small businesses purchased through an exchange “would have lower administrative costs, on average, than the policies those firms would buy under current law, particularly for very small firms.” 2. Ends Price Discrimination against Small Businesses with Sick Workers. •Status Quo: Small Businesses with Sick Worker Face Higher Prices, Sudden Price Increases. Currently, small businesses with just one sick worker can face significantly higher premiums, and having a worker fall ill can lead to a precipitous price increase – raising premiums just when insurance is needed most. •Solution: Ending Price Discrimination Based on Illness: Health reform will end this price discrimination. Starting in 2014, “community rating” rules will prohibit insurers from charging more to cover small businesses with sicker workers or raising rates when someone gets sick. 3. Increases Health Care Security to Unlock Entrepreneurship. •Status Quo: Health Insurance Insecurity Creates “Job Lock,” which Inhibits Entrepreneurship. Our current health care system inhibits entrepreneurship and small business formation by locking workers — especially those with families or with any sort of health problem —into jobs at large firms that offer family coverage and have a big enough risk pool to absorb the cost of covering pre-existing conditions. This “job lock” causes many workers to stay at large firms even if they would be more productive working at a small business or becoming an entrepreneur. •Solution: Health Security Empowers Entrepreneurship: By providing health security for every American and eliminating exclusions for pre-existing conditions and price discrimination against those who are sick, health reform will make it easier for small businesses to attract the best workers and easier for entrepreneurs to strike out on their own. 4. Reduces the Hidden Tax on Small Business Employees with Health Insurance. •Status Quo: Hidden Tax Adds $1,000 to Every Premium: Currently, the cost of treating the uninsured adds a “hidden tax” of over $1,000 to every health care premium. •Solution: Reduce Hidden Tax by Dramatically Expanding Coverage: Health reform will significantly reduce this tax by covering an additional 32 million additional Americans by 2019. 5. Reduces Premiums in the Small Group Market. •Status Quo: Higher Premiums Mean Coverage Is Unaffordable for Small Businesses. In a recent national survey, nearly three-quarters of small businesses that did not offer benefits cited high premiums as the reason. •Health Reform Will Lower Costs, Making Coverage More Affordable: Taken together, the measures described above will significantly reduce premiums for small businesses. According to CBO, health reform will reduce the cost of a given plan in the small group market by 1-4 percent by 2016. The credit rates are lower for non-profits to ensure that the value of the credit is approximately equal to that provided to for-profit firms that cannot claim a tax deduction for the amount of the credit claimed white house.gov health care |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
Denise, Which news source were you listening to? Whichever it was they are incorrect, I’d avoid them if I were you. quote: I’ll comment Mike. Obama is using 50,000 temporary jobs but, as the graph Jen posted shows, even without those 50,000 temporary positions and the imaginary 17,000 IRS auditors the job market is still improving. There’s more good news, the average number of hours worked is rising which is normally a standard precursor to an increase in the number of people employed. . |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
If the jobs report had shown 114,000 jobs instead of 162,000, would that be reason enough for Obama's comments? I ask because I couldn't find actual figures for Jan and Feb for 2010. ...and you still can't disregard the fact that the unemployment percentage hasn't dropped. Jennifer's chart is a jobs lost report. It's good that fewer jobs are being lost but we are referring to hires. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
•Employees: 9 •Wages: $198,000 total, or $22,000 per worker •Employer Health Care Costs: $72,000 2010 Tax Credit: $18,000 (25% credit) 2014 Tax Credit: $25,200 (35% credit) Now the large percentage of small business that do NOT provide health insurance for their few employees, of what benefit is the tax credit? In the above case, right now they would pay nothing. If they offer health insurance and receive the tax credit, they will still pay 54,000. What do you think they would choose to do? |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Employment Situation April 02, 2010 Nonfarm payroll employment increased by 162,000 in March, and the unemployment rate held at 9.7 percent. Temporary help services and health care continued to add jobs over the month. Employment in federal government also rose, reflecting the hiring of temporary workers for Census 2010. Employment continued to decline in financial activities and in information. http://www.bls.gov/ |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
What would you chose to do, Mike? |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Ah, not going there, Bob, because all roads would lead to arguments. I'm not the president. I'm not a congressman or an economist. I try to vote in people smart enough to have answers. I don't believe higher taxes or higher restrictions on businesses is the way to promote hiring, that's all. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
You asked what we thought "They" would choose to do? Why is it an unfair question. At essentially no cost to yourself you might chose to help employees get health care or you might chose not to. The Republican answer, face it, looks bad. That's why the new law looks better. The new law, by the way, was the 1994 Republican answer put forward by Bob Dole as I understand it. My preference is for single payer, and it always has been. I'm not thrilled by either of these Republican answers; but of the two, the 1994 answer actually sounds somewhat more humane, doesn't it? I find it somewhat distressing to think of Bob Dole, by the way, as a RINO, which is what I suspect Hannity would have to classify him for his 1994 plan. Maybe Dole has changed his mind now, though; I have no idea. |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
quote: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,589826,00.html Not necessarily Grinch. I must have heard the commentator talking about the two year limit on tax credits once the SHOPs are created by 2014. |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
If you look at the provisions in the bill Denise I believe you’ll find that Fox news got their facts wrong. . |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
You'll have to point me to the particular provisions in the law that you are referring to that Fox has wrong, Grinch. It's not exactly a document with a just a few pages in it that the ordianry person can easily refer to. Does the law say that the tax credits last longer than for the first two years after joing a SHOP? |
||
|
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
Another case of spreading Fox News misinformation without first checking out the facts? |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
You haven’t read the bill Denise? I find that quite astonishing given its importance and your obvious opposition to it, how do you know what it contains and what you don’t like about it if you haven’t even read it? My suggestion is that you don’t take the word of other people, including mine, read the bill and if you have any issues with the contents post the relevant sections and I’ll be happy to discuss them. . |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
I've told you before, several times, Grinch, that I have attempted to read it, and have read a great deal, but certainly not all 2700 pages. That doesn't mean that it is easy to understand with all the legalese. Congressional members themselves have said they would need to sit with an attorney to attempt to understand it. If you have a copy of the section that you are saying that Fox News has interpreted incorrectly, it would be helpful if you shared it with me so that I can see what you are talking about. |
||
|
rwood Member Elite
since 2000-02-29
Posts 3793Tennessee |
quote: Great question, Mike. It seems that many people are overlooking this quandary. In essence, the Government just slapped a growth cap on a large amount of small businesses, especially new businesses that are still in the start-up stages of gaining a foothold. The $54k is equivalent to a nice salary to many small business owner/operators (and most struggle to achieve & exceed that amount themselves in the start-up years.) Even half that much is tough to budget out to a new employee, but that’s where one starts investing in “help,” and if the business does well, more help is hired or current help gets a raise in wages. Everyone grows, but the process is a bit slow in small towns or areas with heavy competition. Unfortunately, many small businesses that would have hired a new employee or two this year won’t be hiring due to the health insurance issues. This doesn’t sound like it really matters in the large scope of things, but small businesses contribute to a LARGE percentage of employment. They are very powerful in helping citizens make the most of where it is they call home. Small businesses also do not usually operate on hefty figurative up-front costs with the expectations of getting a credit once they file taxes. This can ruin them during the slow months. I live in an area that has many seasonal industries: Farming, tourism, landscaping, construction, etc. And the “set-in-stone” policies are too risky to budget out or depend on the Gov for a “credit” or any one of the numerous species of subsidies or debt relief programs. It’s sort of a “count yer chickens before they are injected with growth hormones” type of risk. Businesses should never have been expected to provide insurance to employees, but the people got/get what they wanted and then they cry out because there’s a lack of jobs. Insert bullet into foot. For those able bodies that think they should be provided for and feel they have not been sufficiently by their view? Maybe they can start their own business and see what it’s like to PROVIDE instead of being a constant recipient, for a change. Myself? I am an entrepreneur! Despite political policy, propaganda, and pools of pitiful revenues, I have hired one employee this season. We shall overcome! And your entry post? I suspect that Celgard (without even doing any research) has had a surge in business/hiring due to the demand contracts of the MILITARY, which makes sense, and which also means their surge in job creations has less to do with Obama and everything to do with Afghanistan. |
||
|
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
I always wondered how did it start, employers providing health care insurance. Was it an attempt to keep from having to pay higher wages, offering a wilted carrot large companies could buy from the discount bin instead of doling out a few extra bucks in the pay packet? |
||
Ringo
since 2003-02-20
Posts 3684Saluting with misty eyes |
The funny thing about the health care plan that the Administration has championed, and that everyone is screaming about (pro or con), and that the liberals are saying will allow people to get health care if they don't have insurance.... Hmmmm.... it seems to me that the Emmergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act requires an emergency room to provide care for a patient who is in need of it... As it covers a large part of what the Democrats are screaming about (and the Republicans are screaming just as loudly at), and as it was introduced in 1986 under a Republican President... no one seems to be mentioning it. I wonder why? Before you get started, read the entire post, and notice I did not, in fact, mention standard, routine "I have a cough but no fever... give me drugs" or "I have a headache because the kid is playing the music too loud, give me percocets" style of medicine. That is the responsibilty of the local family doctor, many of whom are willing to provide payment options as long as you let them know in advance and are willing to work with them. The majority of the people this thing is going to "give medical care" to are eligible for Medicade/Medicare... but still, we need to pass a law allowing the people I have described in the entirety of this thread to gain the medical coverage that they are already entitled to. The only ones who are going to be truly helped are the working poor who are making too much for medical assistance, and are not making enough to pay for their employer's medical insurance... oh, wait, the new law says that the employer has to provide the medical insurance... I don't remember... does the employer hold the responsibility of covering the entire cost of premiums, or is the employee required to pay for it? Which leaeds us back to where we started... people truly needing the help not being able to get it... or businesses shutting down becauase they are required to provide insurance for the employees and making the decision to close their doors rather than go bankrupt paying for health care. The winner: THE GOVERNMENT! Game, Set, Match Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting, "WHAT A RIDE |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
My understanding is that the employee pays half. It's nice that the Republicans did something for health care, and they should be congratulated. I'm glad they did it, as are many others. When I go ahead to say why that's not enough, please don't take that as my being ungrateful for what we've already got with that Republican contribution. I'm simply going ahead to talk about why we've needed more. The care that the law mandated was care for people below a certain income level. The care that you're talking about was available at emergency rooms. Emergency rooms are a wonderful source of a certain kind of care. That's why they're called Emergency Rooms: they do their best work for emergencies. They are very expensive to run, and clogging them up with people needing other than Emergency Care makes them less effecient at their primary role. They have to sort through people with sniffles and colds who have no regular doctors and who are using the ER as a substitute because regular doctors do not take them on. The result is that their experiences in the ER are very unpleasant, and they don't get what is called continuity of care. TRhe staff, which is used to seeing a patient just once, for a single emergency, is not used to following patients for long term care. The services these poor patients get, then, is sub-standard, and the various illnesses that a visit to a regular doctor would catch as a matter of course don't get caught. This means that the illnesses of these poor patients tend to be more serious and have a poorer prognosis and to have a more expensive course of treatment than the illnesses of patients who have regular doctors and who are seen regularly. Because their visits are to the ER, it also means that it is likely that follow up visits may be to different doctors, who may not agree with the course of treatment the patient is already following and the treatment tends to be scattershot and ineffective. That's why the model before the current health care bill is not good. That doesn't mean that the new health care bill is as good as the system in the UK or the Canadian system. I don't think it is. But it's an improvement over what we have, even if it's not a huge improvement. If the employer believes that the costs of the health care is too high, it's certain;ly his right to divide up the compensation package as he sees fit, isn't it, as long as he's not falling under other legislation that would come to bear, such as minimum wage laws. The insurance package is part of the employee compensation package, after all. Part of the issue is competitive. As in everything else, you must compete for employees. If you want good employees, you must decide if you want them badly enough to pay for them. If you want to build cars, you must decide if you want to build cars badly enough to pay for building the engines as well. Employees are simply another cost factor in the cost of doing business. It's normal to scream about the cost of steel, and it's normal to scream about the cost of insurance, but the way that we're paying for our insurance now is not effecient. In many other industrialized countries, the state pays that cost through taxes. We need to bring our costs down by finding ways to improve our insurance coverage for more people more cheaply. We've only just begun. |
||
|
rwood Member Elite
since 2000-02-29
Posts 3793Tennessee |
quote: Ah, the fringe benefits and the perks! The perks are/were Incentives that secured the loyalty of valuable employees. And in answer to your question, No: Perks are nothing new as even the rank of Knighthood had its perks, but the general inception of certain health care incentives in America was due to Gov regulation. Companies were not able to give pay raises so they created incentives. “The term "fringe benefits" was coined by the War Labor Board during World War II to describe the various indirect benefits which industry had devised to attract and retain labor when direct wage increases were prohibited.” wiki~ Looks like it was the government who put a cap on wages, and perks were the private sector’s answer to remaining competitive within regulation. Instead of the perks wilting after the war? They got more contractual & creative. The corporate world can truly be a magical place of the “golden frosting” on a cake. If one stands to be a highly sought after individual in the cut-throat private sectors of our nation, there’s no amount of perks unavailable to him or her. Obscene wages, PLUS medical, dental, optical, retirement, stock options, acupuncture, meals, travel, vacation, manicures, season tickets & suites at their favorite arenas, country club memberships, spas, golf or tennis packets, Botox, mocha lattes, drivers, assistants, legal representation, private personal trainers, secured enrollment in the private school of their choice for their children, a private plane, and of course the biggest house on the hill. I’ve seen it all provided by the company and more and what a joy it is, until the company folds. All it takes is one little oversight that creates a regulatory conflict of interest and BAM, the IRS seizes everything: which is the ultimate reigning power-perk of the Gov. Interestingly, too, throughout the history of employment, how so many things began being received for so much less work. I’m surprised we are not in a complete standstill with productivity. Or are we? |
||
|
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
Thanks for the info on the history of perks, I appreciate it. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
My understanding is that while productivity of the American worker has continued to climb, the worker's real wages peaked in 1972 and have been declining ever since. The obscene wages may be in actuality obscene bonuses, which have very much gotten out of proportion with the actual wages paid to folks who do the actual non-managerial labor. But the wages paid on the average to folks who aren't managerial have dropped. I'd be interested in knowing where you got your labor statistics? I heard mine on the radio, so I'll have to do some further checking. Where'd you get yours? |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Here's one source, 1947-2000: http://www.workinglife.org/wiki/index.php?page=REAL+WAGES++1947-2000 It's a start. |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
More stuff coming out from the Healthcare law. Fact or fiction.....a 3.8% tax on the sale of all homes to go to help pay for the healthcare costs? (sorry don't have time to lug out all 2700 pages just this minute) I didn't know that poeple who made less than $250,000 didn't sell houses. |
||
|
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
Is there a prize for knowing the correct answer? If so I'll tell, if not, oh well, shouldn't take you too long to go through all those 2700 pages. |
||
|
rwood Member Elite
since 2000-02-29
Posts 3793Tennessee |
You’re welcome, Jennifer. Perquisites are exquisite!! Mr. Bob, quote: Could this be most true due to American workers buying from the competition? Supply & Demand being met by China & Japan? quote: Well, I don’t know anyone who would file a grievance if he or she is sitting in the receiving chair when such a lucrative offer is tabled, and the really wonderful superiors share the experience. I mean, I know of a time there was a request filed for board review that might alter the provisions offered on a perk: Spa package in exchange for a Golf package, since the employee had no interest in Golf. And she received it, accordingly, with a night’s stay at the hotel of her choice due to the expense of Golf being much more than the expense of the Spa treatment. The package was extended to employees of non-managerial positions if they participated in helping said superior meet the goals necessary! People do choose what line of work they are in, what chair they compete for, and whether they ultimately sign-on for labor, clerical, & management positions. quote: In reference to productivity, people are definitely pushed to meet demands when the demands are there. Where are Da Mands going?? Again, I think this is market-reflective of productivity from foreign suppliers that don’t even viciously compete with our markets, but sell sell sell they do to us, even with their eyes closed--those blasted buggers! AND this is also reflective of investment, whether it’s in one’s self, one’s business, interests or goods, and as a group/whole. So many things are reflective of said drop in productivity/wages. I’m having a very hard time finding shoes & coffee cups that are not made in China or Taiwan! THREE CHEERS FOR NEW BALANCE & CORNINGWARE/CORELLE!! Incidentally, the shoes I wear are usually indicative of how I make food happen upon the table. If I’m barefooted too long? Bare cupboards happen. So much for being a professional hillbilly. But the chart is Great! Those stats give an idea, especially in relative pace with inflation, but I highly doubt it’s an absolute account of private sector dealings with payroll (how employers creatively manage the weight of inflation, or how inflation is creatively manipulated for reporting) for too many reasons to hash, but here’s a few: 1.Overtime is often paid in cash. 2.The convenient 90-day probation period. 3.Loopholes & trends that confuse reporting. Must take a hike now. The weather is too awesome to imagine!! Peace! reg |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
quote: Fiction. . |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Bob says: quote: My understanding is that while productivity of the American worker has continued to climb, the worker's real wages peaked in 1972 and have been declining ever since. [/quote] Reg. Replies: quote: This would not account for increasing productivity from American workers, would it? Nor would it account for American employers relocating overseas to become the competitors. Dropping tariffs that had previously protected American goods and workers would account for some of that, though. Failure for the US to have a state run health system might account for some of that. Countries with such systems, such as Japan, have been able to produce goods more cheaply. American companies have relocated to take advantage of these price breaks in production, hoping that American workers would still provide a steady market for the goods they produce. This only works so long as the cost of the goods remains cheaper than the diminishing salaries of the workers they've abandoned will support this decision. Afterward, it's economic suicide. Bob said: quote: The obscene wages may be in actuality obscene bonuses, which have very much gotten out of proportion with the actual wages paid to folks who do the actual non-managerial labor. [/quote] [Reg Replies" quote: The part of what you say here that I can follow is that people choose what job they hold. I say to you that's hogwash. At the very best, people can choose a general direction, and luck and ability and hard work play a major factor after that. Don't tell me that you chose to be an entrepreneur. I don't believe it. What I believe is that you chose to be a wealthy and successful entrepreneur, not somebody who has trouble keeping her head above water. I could be wrong, but my theory is that few people chose to be somebody who's barely getting along, either working for somebody else or working for themselves. Those who are fortunate, make it big. The great invention that America has come up with is the middle class. You can join the middle class, the dream says, if you work hard, save, and live right; and from the end of the second world war until recently this has been so. Even as a worker, if you joined a union, middle class living was a possibility for you, and this supplied America with a whole class of folks who were proud to go to work at GM or at GE or wherever, even in Coal Mines, because they felt like they were partners in what was going on and because they felt they had a right to be treated right. I can't say that is the case any longer. Bob said: quote: But the wages paid on the average to folks who aren't managerial have dropped. [/quote] And Reg replied: quote: I have no idea what you're talking about in terms of being a barefoot Hillbilly. I know you're right about the drop in wages from 1972 to the present. Why you insist on saying otherwise is beyond my understanding. Why, then, do you persist in saying otherwise? Reg says: quote: The chart was adjusted for inflation. Whether overtime is paid in cash or not, for what you suggest here to make any difference at all, there would have had to have been a change in policy for that payment after 1972 for it to show up in the figures. Unless you can demonstrate such a national payment policy shift over that period of time, when union influence has taken a nose-dive, then there would be little to support such an assumption. The 90 day probationary period is supposed to affect the overall payment in exactly what way? And the loopholes and trends that confuse reporting have proved different than the loopholes and trends prior to 1972 in exactly which way so that they would appear to distort the amount of money being paid out in a downward fashion. Were this in fact the case, we would have a situation where, as in 1972, it would be more common for a single wage earner to be able to support a household. Instead, we now have a situation where it is more common for there to be two wage earners needed to support a household, and even then, the household seems to be stressed in order to make ends meet. Sorry, Reg, I don't think what you say is accurate. Your speculations are interesting, but they need to be buttressed with more reasoning and more facts to be more convincing, in my opinion at least. Must take a hike now. The weather is too awesome to imagine!! Peace! reg |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
Thanks Grinch. I was looking around and found some information that was talking about investment real estate being taxed upon sale, as well as capital gains. So I didn't know if that would apply to all property sold at a certain profit margin or strictly just real estate that is not someone's primary residence that would be taxed upon sale. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Why you insist on saying otherwise is beyond my understanding. Why, then, do you persist in saying otherwise? Yes, Regina, why are you doing that to ole Bob? It's irritating to him....and, since you are inaccurate, according to him...why waste his time?  |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
There is no doubt that Bob can be something of a stuffed shirt from time to time. It's one of the nice things that I have, to be able to count on you to writ me about it when you see it, Mike. Thanks. |
||
|
rwood Member Elite
since 2000-02-29
Posts 3793Tennessee |
Mr. Bob. I believe we’re disagreeing on productivity. You say productivity has increased while wages have decreased. I said: throughout the history of employment, how so many things began being received for so much less work. I’m surprised we are not in a complete standstill with productivity. Wages PLUS benefits, bonuses, PERKS, etc. All that for 40 hours, when the work week was much longer than that with no overtime and demands seemed much grander for our own products than foreign products, once upon a time. I agree. Relocation is a definite problem. We’ve had several of our factories head to Mexico. But, I don’t know how state run insurance would make us more secure in the job place? Our industry here depends on demand. And if we get any cheaper in our manufacturing of Corvette pistons (for example) the Corvette might as well be a Chevette.Maybe they already are. I don't know. Sure, you can wash yer hog if you want to, we do it around here all the time, but I am quite sure I chose every single position that I’ve held within my history of employment. What you really wouldn’t believe is how many different directions I’ve chosen and how many jobs I’ve held at the same time. If I hadn’t struggled to make things happen, there’s a wealth of experience I’d missed out on. But, I still have the most important things I started with: The Grace of God and a crazy schtick. Lordi mercy, I’m sorry, Mr. Bob. I was revealing some of my conflicting personal affections to you: Shoes and being a barefooted hillbilly. I invest in shoes. They matter. Especially on that hike I took, yesterday. But oh how sublime it is to dig my toes into fresh green grass!! Anywho, when did I insist on wages dropping since 1972?? Why are you insisting that I’ve persisted to insist? Have I missed something? And my reference to overtime? Mr. Bob? Cash doesn’t show up correctly in the figures. That’s the point and the purpose of CASH. 90 probationary period means you’re not officially on payroll. They can pay you whatever they want from numerous company funds and let you go prior to the deadline date so not to cover you with insurances or a real starting wage. A factory worker can work at a different factory every 90 days and the wages are not that of full-time employees, but they do get reported, which would cause a drop in payroll figures as a whole. Of course I’m not accurate! I think it’s impossible to be accurate on the likes of wage stats with reporting, and the best problems and stats people become high-paid CEOs and executive accountants. Distortion of figures seems to be their forte. Loopholes and trends are their best friends! In reference to making ends meet in whatever household? I agree the need is more common for two wage earners to support a household. But I’m guessing we didn’t have Plasma TV’s with 500 channels, cell phones, Ipods, 3 or 4 cars, GPS systems, laptops, kids wearing designer clothes from birth, $11 movie ticket prices, dining out each day, yada yado, back in 1972 to present. Some feel that they have no life without those things, so maybe the struggle is also a matter of priority or values? But I didn’t have the security of a second wager earner in my household. I am proof that a single-wage earner can make it, with two kids, without welfare assistance. And I’ve not done as well as some of my friends and family members or other people I admire from a distance. It's ok, Mr. Bob. You can be a stuffed shirt and I'll put on shoes. We need both to shop around here or NO SERVICE! |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear Reg. Here's some hard data: http://www.bls.gov/schedule/archives/prod_nr.htm#2009 I'm rushed right now, so I didn't look for it in table form, but you should be able to check it out pretty well from the year to year and quarter to quarter archives kept here. The definition of "Produuctivity" is included, so we won't need to shout past each other, and we can talk about the same stuff, I hope. Thanks for taking the time, I do appreciate your curiosity. Mr. Bob |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
