Replies

Job Growth Lacking in the Private Sector (over the last decade)

FOR the first time since the Depression, the American economy has added virtually no jobs in the private sector over a 10-year period. The total number of jobs has grown a bit, but that is only because of government hiring.

The accompanying charts show the job performance from July 1999, when the economy was booming and companies were complaining about how hard it was to find workers, through July of this year, when the economy was mired in the deepest and longest recession since World War II. For the decade, there was a net gain of 121,000 private sector jobs, according to the survey of employers conducted each month by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. In an economy with 109 million such jobs, that indicated an annual growth rate for the 10 years of 0.01 percent.

Until the current downturn, the long-term annual growth rate for private sector jobs had not dipped below 1 percent since the early 1960s. Most often, the rate was well above that.

(Excerpt)

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/08/business/economy/08charts.html

This should come as no surprise. The government and many citizens think the private sector is ‘evil’. Greedy, selfish and whatever. The problem is the private sector creates new businesses, creates new jobs, and pays taxes.

The government creates nothing. It is a parasite and lives off the private sectors profits. The very sector it is, along with many envious and jealous citizens, trying its very best to destroy. And when it does, all but those few in power and control, will live in misery. That should make everyone happy. Especially the politicians.

(this is what Wisconsin is all about)

** Despite budget cuts and layoff warnings, California still hiring and workforce still growing **

http://www.sacbee.com/politics/story/2094403.html

The Sacramento Bee
Aug. 9, 2009

** State job number on upswing despite recession **

California’s state government has managed to add thousands of jobs during this past year, defying a mammoth budget deficit and a brutal recession.

The job growth for state workers contrasts with the loss of 759,000 jobs in California’s private industry in the past 12 months

http://www.mercurynews.com/topstories/ci_12984385?nclick_check=1&forced=true

not to mention gubermint employees and their pensions...

Reform advocates are spotlighting those with extravagant pensions
— $100,000 or more — as a way to get the public’s attention and
emphasize that the current system is unsustainable.

http://www.modbee.com/editorials/story/803636.html

Perhaps the real reason why public-sector pension costs have not been tackled is that the full bill has never been revealed to taxpayers.

** The great public-sector pension rip-off **

http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13988606

From The Economist print edition
July 9, 2009

JOIN a private-sector company these days and you will be very lucky if you get a pension linked to your final salary. In Britain almost three out of four companies that retain such schemes have closed them to new employees. The cost of paying such benefits, which are partly linked to inflation and offer payouts to surviving spouses, is simply too high now that many retirees are surviving into their 80s.

Yet most new public-sector employees in Britain and America continue to benefit from pensions linked to their salaries. The pension costs facing the public sector are roughly the same as those facing the private sector; their employees are likely to live just as long. But because of the presumed largesse of future taxpayers, governments seem under much less pressure to reduce their pension costs. In 2005 a reform package in Britain raised the retirement age for new state employees, but still left existing employees able to retire at 60.

When it gets to CA, things will get ugly.