PDA

View Full Version : The Obama "RECOVERY" visualized!



LWW
03-10-2011, 05:26 AM
Welcome to Obamaville:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">http://mit.zenfs.com/102/2011/03/mcdonalds.jpg

When it comes to jobs, it's not just quantity that matters--it's also quality. It's great news that the economy is finally producing jobs again--even if it'll take another few years of this kind of growth to get us back to where we were before the Great Recession. But that also means it's now time to ask what kind of jobs are being created. And on that front, things are a lot less encouraging.

Several recent studies suggest that the new jobs pay less and offer fewer work hours than the ones they have replaced. Let's look at the numbers:

http://www.dmacdesign.com/portfolio/Now-Hiring!-with-borders.gif

Lower-wage industries -- things like retail and food preparation -- accounted for 23 percent of the jobs lost during the recession, but 49 percent of the jobs gained over the last year, a recent study (pdf) by the National Employment Law Program found. Higher-wage industries, by contrast, accounted for 40 percent of the jobs lost, but just 14 percent of the jobs gained. In other words, low paying jobs are increasing as a percentage of total jobs, while high-paying jobs are on the decline.

http://www.biojobblog.com/uploads/image/part%20time.jpg

Meanwhile, the percentage of those working who have part-time jobs and want full-time ones surged in mid-February to 19.6 percent -- almost as high as it was a year ago before the recovery began, according to Gallup numbers. That suggests, of course, that a large number of the new jobs created over the last year are part-time.

http://scrapetv.com/News/News%20Pages/usa/Images/logo-mr-monopoly.jpg

And a recent Wall Street Journal analysis found that even though productivity rose 5.2 percent from mid 2009 to the end of 2010, wages increased by just 0.3 percent. That means only 6 percent of productivity gains were shared with workers. In past recoveries, that figure has averaged 58 percent. This time around, far more of the gains went to shareholders, in the form of profits, which are at record levels.

</div></div>

News you won't see on the spoon! (http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/20110309/ts_yblog_thelookout/jobs-returning-but-good-ones-not-so-much)

pooltchr
03-10-2011, 07:52 AM
I saw this story yesterday and was going to post it this morning, but you beat me. How can it be a real recovery when the 6 figure jobs we lost are being replaced with $8/hr jobs?

Those government unemployment numbers don't tell that part of the story. And the sheep will cheer and jump for joy and shout from the rooftops that the recovery is underway...Micky D's is hiring again!!!!

Fools!

Steve

LWW
03-10-2011, 05:37 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I saw this story yesterday and was going to post it this morning, but you beat me. How can it be a real recovery when the 6 figure jobs we lost are being replaced with $8/hr jobs?

Steve </div></div>

That one's easy ... to the far left, gubmint dependency is a success.

Whether or not the Obama scheme was a success or not depends entirely on how you define success.