President Obama's pollyanish comments on the jobs crisis: The Obama Administration is out of touch.

"The Obama Administration is out of touch with everyday Americans engulfed by the jobs crisis"

Five Washington Excuses for Ignoring the Jobs Crisis
By Les Leopold
Les Leopold is the author of The Looting of America: How Wall Street's Game of Fantasy Finance destroyed our Jobs, Pensions and Prosperity, and What We Can Do About It
August 19, 2010



President Obama's pollyanish comments coupled with Press Secretary Robert Gibbs' outburst against "the professional left" reveal just how out of touch the Obama Administration is with the tens of millions of everyday Americans who are engulfed by the jobs crisis. Obama and Gibbs are miffed at liberal pundits for complaining about the Administration's concessions on everything from health care and financial reform to jobs creation. But Obama's real problem isn't Arianna Huffington or Paul Krugman. For now, liberals have no place else to go--and they'll never cross over to the Republican Party.

Instead, the Administration should be very worried about the more than 29 million Americans who have lost their jobs or are forced into part-time work. Unemployment is stuck at 9.5 percent--and that's just the narrowest measure of joblessness. The more accurate Bureau of Labor Statistics jobless rate (U6) is over 16.5 percent. (This includes people who have stopped looking for jobs and those working part-time involuntarily.) Five workers are competing for every job opening while the average length of unemployment is over 35 weeks. If it weren't for unemployment insurance and food stamps, we'd have Depression era soup kitchen lines going round the block.

Since the 1930s struggling workers like these have flocked to the Democratic Party, which they viewed as the party of jobs. Now they're not so sure, and the party risks losing its mass base

Wall Street gamblers tore an enormous hole in our economy, destroying 8 million jobs in a matter of months. Those jobs still haven't come back and may never return. Therefore, it is the fundamental purpose of government to relentlessly attack the problem, just as we did during the Depression, with long-term funding to get people into decent, sustainable jobs. But instead of shouldering this responsibility, far too many politicians and public officials of both parties hide behind spurious arguments. Here are a few of the most outrageous:

1. "The unemployed have only themselves to blame"

2. "Unemployment is a lagging indicator -- the jobs are coming"

3. "We can't afford a job creation program -- it'll increase the deficit"

4. "US workers are overpaid. Cut wages by about 20 percent and the jobs will come back"

5. "Government interference is creating uncertainty in the private sector and keeping companies from creating new jobs"

We can't tackle the jobs crisis until we're willing to tackle Wall Street. Both Democrats and Republicans have stood idly by as the wage gap has turned into a Grand Canyon of inequality. (In 1970, the top 100 CEOs made 45 times more than the average worker; in 2008, they made 1,081 times more. See The Looting of America) Almost no one in Washington has the nerve to challenge Wall Street's socially useless and reckless financial games. They're afraid to say that it's wrong that the top 25 hedge fund managers made as much money during 2009 as 658,000 teachers -- or that the top ten hedge fund managers "earn" $900,000 an hour. The money for job creation is right there, in the hands of the elites who profited so handsomely from the financial meltdown they helped create.

Unless the Obama Administration finally organizes a major assault on the jobs crisis, there will be no relief for Mr. Gibbs or his boss. Many angry Americans -- liberals and conservatives -- will turn against the party in power.


Please read the full article and the detailed response to the five excuses used for ignoring the jobs crisis at:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/les-leopold/five-washington-excuses-f_b_687381.html

I do agree that US workers are over paid
We need to start at the top and cut CEO pay by 20 to 50%
and then after 40 years it should trickle down to the
bottom 95%

Seems to be the m.o. for far too many here...

are employed. He needs to go to the unemployment office, rather than some car battery plant where the people he is addressing are already gainfully employed.

See what ultimately happens to people with no jobs, no health care, and no hope.

The President's comments are absolutely correct, and have been for many months now.

Then he's cherry picking the presidents comments to make him look unsympathetic to the unemployed, and sticking words in his mouth.

The writer's a worthless fuck.

The point is taking bold action to create millions of jobs.

And writer did not "stick words in his (Obama's) mouth." That's an accurate quote.

Now beyond child like name calling, "The writer's a worthless fuck", can you present a serious critique of the article?

Please be specific.

Thanks.

So maybe Obama is not that out of touch after all. :eyes:

If they do, good for them!

But, the reality is they are in a very small minority of those who have been thrown out of work.

Most who have found work after months of joblessness have been forced to accept work at much lower pay and few if any benefits such as good health insurance coverage. And several million have been unable to find any kind of work whatsoever.

Typical *I got mine, f*ck y'all* attitude.

Of course, those folks called 99ers don't count, the folks living in tent cities don't count, the unemployment offices with overflowing parking areas don't count, those 30 THOUSAND people in Atlanta looking for housing don't count. etc.

All because your friends have jobs now.

:wow:



:eyes:

Neither the president nor I have suggested that the unemployment problem is solved. It's getting better. I'm sure everyone knows at least 2 people who are working again (unless in a really small town).

:sarcasm:

You do realize that whether or not you manage to get a job after extended unemployment has more to do with accidental location than economic improvement, right? The real state of employment is based on *payroll* indicators, not who is or isn't collecting or looking at a given moment.

Yeah, I was out of work for a long time. I now have a job. Hell, I even recently got a 20% raise.

But I don't kid myself. My job was not "new" work. The company simply moved their call center to a cheaper location. So my "new" job came at somebody else's expense.

Oh, and that 20% raise? That was for a starting salary of <$12.00/hour. I used to make 6 figures. And my predecessor in my new job probably made double. So that's half the money now being fed back into the economy and instead of taxes collected, I get all my fed income tax bacn and then some, so less into government coffers too. But hey, that's more money into wall street (literally -- since my great job is a call center for wall street company) so it's all good, right?

And now, having been forced to burn through my retirement savings, I'm struggling to make ends meet. I'm also still unable to sell my house -- even at at huge loss over what I paid for it -- to downsize my existance to something I can afford on my new pay. So my new job at best has bought me a little more time, and that's about it...

You'd be completely wrong. NONE of my unemployed friends have a job, or even the promise of one.

Furthermore, I have not been gainfully employed for more than two years--even though I've been lucky enough to cobble together three jobs that have JUST BARELY netted me enough money to get by (although, I've had to borrow money three times from various family members when my car required major repairs).

I suspect that you are trying to convey the message "the glass is half full," and I can appreciate the merit of remaining optimistic. Still, it's hard to say the glass is half full when you don't even have a glass.

Perhaps it's regional, or industry-specific, and thus difficult to judge based on personal anecdotes?

and every credible economist advised that recovery would take years and employment would lag. In reality there is not much the administrative branch can do beyond what it is already doing. Constantly bashing Pres. Obama as he tries to encourage American industry and small business is not constructive in the least. He's already getting plenty of that from the people who are eager for failure.

That's a fact that can't be seriously disputed. Just look at the stats.

"In reality there is not much the administrative branch can do beyond what it is already doing."

I disagree and so do most progressive economists. And we've read many sound proposals to create the kind of massive jobs programs we need.

I think the Obama Administration should reconsider Congressman Oberstar's proposal to upgrade the U.S. highway, mass transit and high speed railroad ground transportation systems that would create 6 million living wage jobs. And other members of Congress have presented other sound proposals for massive useful federal job creation programs that can put America back to work.

It would be nice if President Obama would ignore his Wall Street advisor's and just do the right thing by putting Main Street first!


------------------------------------------


$500 billion plan to upgrade U.S. transportation hits federal pothole
By SCOTT SMITH
Scott Smith is director of strategic initiatives for HNTB Corporation
KansasCity.com
July 13, 2009

Our roads, highways and bridges are crumbling under the strain of overuse and old age.

But a comprehensive solution may have encountered a bottleneck that will postpone for 18 months or longer a push to correct the sorry state of our surface transportation system. Delay is something we can no longer afford ....

We find ourselves in this predicament because we have not had a national transportation plan since the interstate highway system was launched in 1956.

U.S. Rep. James Oberstar, a Minnesota Democrat and chairman of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, addressed these huge needs by introducing the Surface Transportation Authorization Act of 2009. Oberstar proposes spending $500 billion over the next six years to transform our antiquated system into the reliable, sophisticated network we need to safely and efficiently move people and goods.

The legislation would provide approximately:

•$337 billion for highway construction, including at least $100 billion to begin long-awaited repairs to our national highway system and bridges.

•$100 billion for mass transit, including $12 billion for repairs.

•$50 billion to fund 11 high-speed rail corridors linking major metropolitan areas.

The total investment would create or sustain about 6 million family-wage jobs, many here in the Midwest as our region continues to grow in importance as a transportation hub.

Unfortunately, Oberstar’s bill has collided with a proposal put forth by Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. The secretary wants Congress to pass an 18-month highway authorization bill that would put off a comprehensive, long-term solution and instead perpetuate a piecemeal mix of half-measures and temporary remedies for our nation’s transportation woes.

This collision need not turn into a pileup — if we make the right choice. Oberstar’s approach is the right way to go.

Please read the complete article at:

http://www.kansascity.com/business/story/1322647.html


-------------------------------

Will Oberstar’s Grand Highway Plan Stall?
By Colby Itkowitz, CQ Staff
June 27, 2009

Oberstar recently made public the outline of an authorization bill for the government’s highway and transit programs that he hopes will be the capstone of his long legislative career: a six-year, $450 billion package he describes as rivaling President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s creation of the Interstate Highway System more than a half-century ago.

The approximately 800-page draft measure that Oberstar has been refining for months envisions an ambitious overhaul, consolidating more than 100 individual federal programs into four broad categories, while pumping billions of dollars into new highway and high-speed rail projects. Most significant, it would require that federal money be spent to achieve specific goals and measures — cutting congestion in a city by a particular amount, for example — rather than distributing it only by formula among states or through congressional earmarks.

This moment, which is the apex of his political career, could not have come at a worse time for a chairman who puts such a high value on policy purity and such a relatively low value on political posturing. It’s been clear for months that President Obama and Oberstar’s fellow Democrats who are higher up in the congressional power structure are in no hurry to tackle a multi-year highway and transit bill, because they would have to find a way to pay for it — and the White House has said a flat “no” to the notion of raising the gasoline tax, even temporarily, as Oberstar has proposed.

In fact, no sooner had Oberstar arranged to release an outline of his proposal than Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood went to Capitol Hill to reveal the administration’s own plan: an 18-month extension of current programs combined with a few of Obama’s favorite ideas — nothing like the full-blown overhaul of which Oberstar dreams.

“They cut the legs out from under him,” said the top Republican on Oberstar’s committee, John L. Mica of Florida.

It’s not that Oberstar wasn’t warned about how difficult it would be. At the very outset of this Congress, his party’s leaders sharply limited his role in assembling the economic stimulus bill (PL 111-5), which Oberstar and others thought was tailor-made for financing transportation projects that could quickly put people to work. He had written his own proposal and held hearings, gathering testimony from economists and from state and local leaders who vowed that investments in transportation infrastructure were the greatest short-term stimulus. But as the measure grew, Oberstar was edged out, and transportation became just a sliver in the overall package.

Obama, congressional leaders and governors no doubt agree with Oberstar that the nation’s road and rail networks are in desperate need of repair and expansion. But persuading them to pay for it is another matter.

Please read the complete article at:

http://www.kansascity.com/business/story/1322647.html


-----------------------------------------------

Oberstar bucks Obama on transportation vision
The veteran Minnesota congressman is ready to take on the administration over a delay in policy makeover.

By KEVIN DIAZ, Star Tribune
July 16, 2009 - 7:54 PM

WASHINGTON - Moments before Minnesota Democrat Jim Oberstar planned to roll out his $450 billion transportation makeover last month, he was called to an adjoining room in the Rayburn House Office Building. There, he was confronted by Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, who told him that the Obama administration wanted him to hold off on his bill for 18 months.

Floored by the news, Oberstar pressed forward with the legislation anyway -- setting him on a collision course with the White House over his plan to transform the nation's transportation policies in the next six years by improving infrastructure and speeding up investments in trains and mass transit.

Though it appears to be an uphill climb in the Senate, where some key Democrats have acquiesced to the president, Oberstar has become increasingly critical of the White House. He continued the drumbeat Thursday. "We don't need an 18-month learning curve," he told members of the House Transportation Committee, which he chairs.

He also made clear his intention to pass the bill in the House with support from Republicans, some of whom have expressed sympathy for his predicament. "I've never seen a chairman undermined by an administration in the 30 years I've been around this place like they hosed our chairman," said Rep. John Mica of Florida, the ranking Republican on the committee.

Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif, who heads the Senate committee that deals with public works, moved this week to approve the 18-month delay, arguing that it would be difficult to increase the gas tax in the near term even with the support of labor groups and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which has called on Congress to pass Oberstar's bill.

State officials say the highway bill could serve as a permanent stimulus to supplement the $787 billion package Congress approved this year to create jobs and lift the nation out of recession. "Our concern is whether the funding for projects continues the momentum of the stimulus," said Serge Phillips, federal relations manager for the Minnesota Department of Transportation.

Please real the complete article at:

W3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUUI" target="_blank">http://www.startribune.com/politics/state/50981057.html ...


The first two links no longer work but you can read the original post at:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

I've always wondered, is it hard to breathe with one's head in the sand for months at a time? I would think that gravity would force some of that sand into one's nasal passages. :eyes: :sarcasm:

How about demand. As we type, Whirlpool is sending hundreds of decent jobs to Mexico.

How about demanding Congress repeal tax benefits for off-shoring? How about demanding pay caps for Wall Street?

Small business doesn't need encouragement or tax incentives to hire people. They need customers. With jobs to buy their products. I used to be a small business owner. A mainly carry-out and delivery restaurant. Our biggest customer, employees at Capitol One, got all their jobs shipped to India. Many of our other customers had the same thing happen.

Then, what we had left started getting laid off. I talked to a ton of them. The final nail was when gas hit $4 a gallon, and took what little discretionary income they had left.

There's a whole shitload of things that the President could be doing to "encourage" business to hire. A couple of those are using his position and bully pulpit to demand and embarrass Republicans to stop obstructing for political gain.

Instead, they can vote against a stimulus, and sit back with a check from the stimulus, and say "Gee, looky here what I got for us", without any consequenses. Only rewards.

Just because your body hits the floor and you bounce after initial impact doesn't mean you're necessarily standing up. We're going to need something a bit bigger to reverse the lack of aggregate demand for products and services. People aren't spending money because they have no jobs. We need a jobs programs, creating jobs that last.

an artificial boost in the stock market, generated due to massive bailout of wallstreet, does not signal an end to a recession. Which, by they way, has never been officially declared over by the official recession-callers. Not that it matters.

Becase the official way to measure "recessions" is a joke, anyway. Healthcare expenses tend to skyrocket during recessions due to the number of people getting sick from the stress. So GDP going up does not automatically mean a healthy economy. I remember decades ago when I worked at a manufacturer of heart gadgets. My boss told me once how it was kind of macabre, but their business always did quite well during recessions. All those heart attacks, dontcha know?

The worst is yet to come.

you have the wrong name too.

Obama sounds every bit as out of touch with reality as Bush did when Bush used to issue bullshit statements that were the exact opposite of reality. Either that or just deliberately lying.

And the same vipers want to destroy Social Security, just as they've maimed our economy.
When will we realize they are the problem rather than the solution.

Can't you just fall in line and understand How "Robust" it is, and that it is "Strong And Getting Stronger?"

I know you're scared and intimidated by the Intensity of it all, but you've got to wake up and accept reality.


You're just making yourself miserable.

You've still got time to come around before they start rounding up people like you who "Shed light on the Truth", and putting you in Quiet Rooms, where you'll get the best Numb Out Meds that Merck can offer, and you'll be safely tucked away from the rest of the Sane Public, no longer a danger to yourself or others.

Please, think of your family and your freedom.

Submit, Shop, and Spend.

It's OK.

Come To The Light.

Happiness is just an iPad and an episode of Real Housewives Of New Jersey Away.

Weekly Jobless Claims Soar Past 500,000
By: David Dayen
August 19, 2010

The rule of thumb in the economic world is that weekly initial jobless claims must be in the 300,000 range in order to get to actual job growth. We haven’t been at 300,000 since the beginning of the recession in December 2007. During the worst spell of the recession, in early 2009, the number was at 650,000. But today’s jump brings us to 500,000, a high for the year.

We’ve basically gone sideways since last year, but the last month has moved upwards. “The economy ran into a wall in August,” according to one analyst quoted in the story.

In 1982, the unemployment rate added a full point, from 9.8 to 10.8, between August and December, right in the middle of the midterm elections. Democrats regained 26 seats in the House, although they split even in the Senate. It would be a miracle if Democrats could hold losses to that level this year if the same dynamic happens with unemployment.

Somebody should do something.

http://news.firedoglake.com/2010/08/19/weekly-jobless-claims-soar-past-500000/

The stats are very bad and some people don't comprehend this.

Weekly jobless claims hit nine-month high
Unexpected climb is yet another setback for already frail recovery
Associated Press
August 19, 2010

WASHINGTON — U.S. employers appear to be laying off workers again as the economic recovery weakens. The number of Americans applying for unemployment benefits reached the half-million mark last week for the first time since November.

It was the third straight week that first-time jobless claims rose. The upward trend suggests the private sector may report a net loss of jobs in August for the first time this year.

Homebuilders and other construction firms are laying off more workers as the housing sector slumps after the expiration of a popular homebuyers' tax credit. State and local governments are also cutting jobs to close large budget gaps.

"The rise in initial jobless claims over the past three weeks makes it difficult to maintain confidence in the recovery and suggests the labor market is backtracking more than we first expected," Ryan Sweet, an economist at Moody's Analytics, wrote in a note to clients.

The increase suggests the economy is creating even fewer jobs than in the first half of this year, when private employers added an average of about 100,000 jobs per month. That's barely enough to keep the unemployment rate from rising. The jobless rate has been stuck at 9.5 percent for two months.

In a healthy economy, jobless claims usually drop below 400,000. But the recent increases in claims provide further evidence that the economy has slowed and could slip back into a recession. Many analysts are worried that economic growth will ebb further in the second half of this year.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38768775/ns/business-eye_on_the_economy

The Federal Reserve must change its funding policy to force big banks and multinationals to start hiring. Without capital controls and regulation of multinational corporations to force domestic hiring, there will be none. Many of the same 25 biggest multinational corporations that are now sitting on the largest amounts of cash -- money handed to them at negative interest rates by the Fed, and as part of the stim -- have shed 700,000 jobs. See, "The Layoff Kings: The 25 Companies Responsible for 700,000 Lost Jobs", http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/the-layoff-kings-the-25-companies-responsible-for-700-000-lost/19588515/

Fed policy and the provision of liquidity has to be tied again to employment policy, which is part of the Fed's original mandate, severed during the Reagan era. Time to revive that mandate, and put it back to work creating domestic jobs.

Here's the 25, and this would be a good place to start targeting a new policy that ties federal funds to hiring. The list includes some companies that have problems due to uncompetitive products or a a declining market, and we might instead focus upon those multinationals that enjoy rising global shares that have simply offshored their operations, marked with an asterisk (*):

1. General Motors (*)
Number of jobs cut since recession began: 107,357

The entire auto industry felt the pain of the recession -- U.S. car sales dropped from an average 16 million a year in 2005 to 11 million in 2009. GM was especially hard hit, forcing it to cut tens of thousands of workers. The largest layoffs came in February 2009, when the company let go of 50,000 people -- almost 20% of its workforce. Those cuts, however, weren't enough to keep the company solvent. GM ended up filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection four months later.

2. Citigroup (C)(*)
Number of jobs cut since recession began: 73,056

In October 2008, a desperate Vikram Pandit, CEO of Citi, said the financial firm had no alternative than to cut 50,000 jobs as part of a plan to knock down expenses by 20%. The bank was reeling from subprime mortgage losses that had driven its stock down from $35 to under $4 in less than a year. Lehman Brothers had just collapsed, and investors holding shares in America's largest banks were in a panic. Pandit began the downsizing process earlier in 2008 after severe criticism that his predecessor Chuck Prince had allowed Citi to become bloated with expenses.

3. Hewlett-Packard (HPQ)(*)
Number of jobs cut since recession began: 47,540

The huge jobs cuts at HP will always be known at the Mark Hurd firings. Hurd, himself, was let go earlier this month. Much of Hurd's success at HP was based on cost-cutting. Previous CEO Carly Fiorina sharply expanded the company's employee and cost base with the acquisition of Compaq. The new CEO bought info-tech consulting firm EDS in 2008 and decided to dismiss 24,600 "redundant" employees. The world's largest tech company also let go almost 6,000 workers in 2009 as it combined two divisions and 9,000 in its struggling enterprise services operation in June.

4. Circuit City Stores
Number of jobs cut since recession began: 41,495

Circuit City slowly succumbed to pricing pressure and competition from both Best Buy and Wal-Mart. It began with aggressive layoffs in 2007 and completely shut its doors in 2009, bringing total layoffs to more than 40,000 after it closed 567 stores.

5. Merrill Lynch
Number of jobs cut since recession began: 40,650

In early 2008, the investment bank and brokerage cut 15% of its workforce as the credit crisis gripped the sector and the company's earnings dropped. When Bank of America (BAC) took over Merrill at the end of 2008, it announced that another 30,000 people would be out of work -- some of whom worked at Merrill and others at Bank of America.

6. Verizon Wireless (VZ)(*)
Number of jobs cut since recession began: 39,000

Verizon Wireless laid off a large number of employees after it bought Alltel in 2009. While the move was more about consolidating costs than about the recession, it couldn't have come at a worse time for the thousands of workers who found themselves without jobs.

7. Pfizer (PFE)(*)
Number of jobs cut since recession began: 31,771

Pfizer suffered from a slowdown in sales after many of its drugs went off patent and generic-drug companies poached sales. The drugmaker was forced to cut R&D spending and pare the size of its sales force in 2008. Then, after its mega-merger with Wyeth, Pfizer instituted even more layoffs. It now says it will continue major downsizing through 2012.

8. Merck & Co. (MRK)(*)
Number of jobs cut since recession began: 24,400

As a result of Merck losing patent protection on many of its major drugs, it has embarked on several rounds of jobs cuts.The biggest blow came when the company decided to cut 15,000 people who were considered "redundant" after Merck bought rival Schering-Plough.

9. Lehman Brothers
Number of jobs cut since recession began: 23,340

The investment bank went out of business. Everyone lost their jobs.

10. Caterpillar (CAT)(*)
Number of jobs cut since recession began: 23,024

Severely hurt by the downturn in construction and infrastructure building that occurred during the recession, Caterpillar cut staff to bring costs in line with revenue. The axe came down hard in January 2009 when the company cut 20,000 people.

11. JPMorgan Chase (JPM)(*)
Number of jobs cut since recession began: 22,852

The credit crisis caused the near-collapse of big mortgage lender Washington Mutual. JPMorgan bought most of the faltering company and cut redundant staff, including 9,200 workers in December 2008.

12. Starbucks (SBUX)
Number of jobs cut since recession began: 21,316

Starbucks is a victim of its own success. Its rapidly expanding popularity caused it to open thousand of stores between 2000 and 2007. But when the recession sparked consumers to cut back on the $4 lattes, it started to feel the pain of sliding sales. The company even called back founder Howard Schultz to be CEO. To bring costs in line with falling revenue, Schultz closed 300 stores and fired 6,000 workers in January 2009.

13. AT&T (T)(*)
Number of jobs cut since recession began: 18,401

Another victim of the recession and the severe drop in its legacy landline business -- customers have moved to cell phones and Internet calling services. Ma Bell cut 12,000 people, announced at the end of 2008.

14. Alcoa (AA)(*)
Number of jobs cut since recession began: 17,655

Lower aluminum prices hit the world's third-largest aluminum company hard in early 2009, leading it to shed 13,500 people. "These are extraordinary times, requiring speed and decisiveness to address the current economic downturn," the company's CEO said. Unlike many of his employees, however, he kept his job.

15. Dow Chemical (DOW)(*)
Number of jobs cut since recession began: 17,530

A drop in commodities prices and the recession hurt Dow in much the same way as Alcoa. Dow decided to focus on highly profitable specialty chemicals and cut its workforce by 5,000 in early 2009. It made further cuts when it bought rival Rohm & Haas.

16. DuPont (DD)(*)
Number of jobs cut since recession began: 17,000

DuPont is yet another company that had its sales undermined by a drop in commodities prices and sales damaged in the global downturn. It canned 2,500 employees and 4,000 contractors in late 2008.

17. Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.A)(*)
Number of jobs cut since recession began: 16,900

Berkshire Hathaway has over 80 operating units. It instituted layoffs at half of them in 2008 and 2009. Among the types of companies hardest hit: insurance and manufacturing.

18. Ford Motor (F)(*)
Number of jobs cut since recession began: 15,912

Like many other automakers, Ford felt the pain of nosediving sales. Not only did the company have to cut workers at its core business but also at its Ford Motor Credit unit, which recorded a net loss of $228 million in the last quarter of 2008. The company also had to write down $2.1 billion in leases and car loans.

19. KB Toys
Number of jobs cut since recession began: 15,100

KB Toys has posted weak numbers since 2004, when it cut 3,500 people and closed 375 stores. In December 2008, the company filed for bankruptcy, closing 431 stores and firing most of the balance of its workers.

20. United States Postal Service
Number of jobs cut since recession began: 15,000

Competition from faxes, email and overnight mail carriers, as well as rising costs, took a toll on the U.S. Postal Service. In March 2009, it closed eight of it 60 district offices, offered buyouts for the rank and file and sharply cut administrative staff.

21. DHL Express USA
Number of jobs cut since recession began: 14,900

DHL couldn't keep up with competition from UPS and FedEx, and it laid off almost 10,000 workers when it decided to exit the ground- and air-delivery business in U.S. completely in November 2008.

22. Sprint Nextel (S)(*)
Number of jobs cut since recession began: 14,500

The third-largest cellular service provider in the U.S. cut 4,000 people and closed 125 retail outlets in January 2008. News of the layoffs came on the heels of Sprint's quarterly report, which divulged that the carrier had lost 100,000 subscribers during the last three months of 2007.

23. Sun Microsystems (*)
Number of jobs cut since recession began: 14,000

Sun Microsystems tried to cut its way to profitability for years before it was purchased by Oracle (ORCL) in 2009. The company's core server business couldn't compete with larger rivals IBM and HP. In November 2008, Sun cut almost 6,000 people -- over 15% of its workforce.

24. Boeing (BA)
Number of jobs cut since recession began: 13,715

Slow sales in 2008 caused 10,000 layoffs in early 2009. The fact that the firm's flagship Dreamliner 787 delivery has been delayed half a dozen times didn't help matters.

25. Chrysler
Number of jobs cut since recession began: 13,672

The bad fortunes of the car industry caused the third-largest U.S. carmaker to lay off 12,000 people in late 2007. Later, the company fired another 5,000 employees -- or about 25% of its salaried workers. Unfortunately, even after all those cuts, Chrysler still filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.

If those are Democratic quotes, surely those "Dems" should get to stepping. Victim-blaming and belief in Laissez-fail shouldn't be Democratic characteristics.

Also, can we shoulder a lion's share of the economic blame on Corporate America and the wealthy that run it? Why are we not asking THEM what THEY'RE going to do about the problem THEY caused? Why is no one asking the wealthy how they're going to clean up THEIR mess?

Of course, if you ask them, they'll likely blame everyone and everything except themselves.

Exorbitant executive pay never comes into play. Corporate fire-a-thons for the sake of firing never comes into play. Job offshoring never comes into play. The obvious failure of Laissez-Faire economics never comes into play.

It's always Washington's fault. I'd hire here, but those mean ol' Democrats TAX us to death. Incidentally, how many times is the conservative punditocracy going to continue milking this "second highest corporate tax rate in the world" garbage? Businesses aren't taxed as individuals are and the TMTR is the lowest it's been in 75 YEARS, so that Cato talking point is nonsensical.

Or it's the workers. "American workers MAKE too much. American workers are dumb and not prepared. Job offshoring and globalization are a fact of life, and if you get left behind because I fire you for cheaper workers . . . that's not MY fault . . . it's YOUR fault."

Is anyone going to make these unfeeling sons of bitches own up that maybe, just maybe . .. this recession and zero job growth in ten years . . . IS their fault?

I'm just not getting how this should be up to a president. Yes, he can make a jobs program, but how long will those jobs last? Will they be permanent or more "Census" stop-gaps? A wholesale infrastructure rebuild likely won't get many unemployed white collar workers back on the job.

I'm not really concerned about appeasing deficit hawks: their credibility was blown to smithereens when they by and large had zipped lips during Bewsh's whiskey-throttle borrow-n-waste-o-rama.

The first step is making sure these goddamned Bewsh tax cuts for the rich expire and expire ON TIME. No extensions. No compromise. Really, I think taxes should return to Clinton levels for everyone (and raised 4% AFTER that for the $500k or greater set), because we're in an emergency and deluded to think a massive jobs program is going to be paid on nothing.

the "glad" game actually DID make positive changes.

What message would people want the President to give us? Attitude matters-

:shrug:

Just what would "a major assault on the jobs crisis" entail? And would any program that was suggested be able to get through the gridlock of partisan politics?

"And would any program that was suggested be able to get through the gridlock of partisan politics?"

Yes. If the President of the United States were a bold leader who actually wanted such a program. All ya need is 50 votes in the Senate plus a tie breaking vote by the Vice-President to pass any job legislation the President wants. If the Democrats, led by President Obama, wanted to challenge and defeat Republican obstructionism they would do so.


Of course, President Obama doesn't like confrontational politics with Republicans.

He's a uniter, not a partisan fighter.

un fucking rec'd

Now, yank...
:rofl: