26 Million Americans Underemployed

[Guest]

An unprecedented 26 million American are now underemployed.

Economists say the high number of underemployed workers is a sign of the tough economic times. "One of the things that seems to be happening these days is that companies in an uncertain environment are tending to take people on part-time instead of full-time because they don't want to make that full-time commitment,"

Read more: http://money.usnews.com/money/careers/articles/2011/10/19/the-ranks-of-the-underemployed-continue-to-grow#ixzz1bKTzGwDl


http://www.businessinsider.com/the-number-of-underemployed-people-keeps-growing-2011-10

[Guest]

An unprecedented 26 million American are now underemployed.



Read more: http://money.usnews.com/money/careers/articles/2011/10/19/the-ranks-of-the-underemployed-continue-to-grow#ixzz1bKTzGwDl


http://www.businessinsider.com/the-number-of-underemployed-people-keeps-growing-2011-10


Much of the full-time/part-time issue is benefits. Medical costs are crippling businesses and it has nothing to do with Obamacare. Medical costs have been skyrocketing for many years.

I used to work for a multinational company that was self insured. They were spending in excess of $500m/year for health care 5 years ago.

But, no doubt about it, it's a tough economy right now... Lots of folks are hurting.

[Guest]

Not only the healthcare issues are killing jobs, but also the uncertainty of other added expenses with the anti- business regulations that have been in-acted and many of those proposed.

[Guest]

An unprecedented 26 million American are now underemployed.



Read more: http://money.usnews.com/money/careers/articles/2011/10/19/the-ranks-of-the-underemployed-continue-to-grow#ixzz1bKTzGwDl


http://www.businessinsider.com/the-number-of-underemployed-people-keeps-growing-2011-10

The American economy was losing seven to eight hundred thousand jobs a month toward the end of the Bush presidency. American corporations who now make most of their profits overseas are sitting on the sidelines with two trillion dollars in their mattresses.

Stop blaming Obama for not being able to reverse the slide during his first three years. Last time it took ten years to dig out of an economic calamity this grave.

[Guest]

Much of the full-time/part-time issue is benefits. Medical costs are crippling businesses and it has nothing to do with Obamacare. Medical costs have been skyrocketing for many years.

I used to work for a multinational company that was self insured. They were spending in excess of $500m/year for health care 5 years ago.

But, no doubt about it, it's a tough economy right now... Lots of folks are hurting.

You are right on the money. Imagine what would happen to corporate retirement plans if Medicare wasn't there to contain some of their costs.

[Guest]

Read the article on the first link but couldn't get anything at the second one.
The one that I read didn't even mention Obama or Obamacare...Curious to know why the post from Tonyafd says to "stop blaming Obama"...

[Guest]

The American economy was losing seven to eight hundred thousand jobs a month toward the end of the Bush presidency. American corporations who now make most of their profits overseas are sitting on the sidelines with two trillion dollars in their mattresses.

Stop blaming Obama for not being able to reverse the slide during his first three years. Last time it took ten years to dig out of an economic calamity this grave.

I know for a fact that when McCain was selected to run against B. Hussein Obama businesses cut back on hiring and capital spending. Many months before the election. They anticipated McCain losing as every body else did. That's why they pulled the "hail Mary" and selected Palin to run as Vice President.

[Guest]

I know for a fact that when McCain was selected to run against B. Hussein Obama businesses cut back on hiring and capital spending. Many months before the election. They anticipated McCain losing as every body else did. That's why they pulled the "hail Mary" and selected Palin to run as Vice President.

Why did McCain lose?

[Guest]

Read the article on the first link but couldn't get anything at the second one.
The one that I read didn't even mention Obama or Obamacare...Curious to know why the post from Tonyafd says to "stop blaming Obama"...

Take a look at post #7. I'm not psychic, but I know where predictable people will go.

[Guest]

Why did McCain lose?

McCain lost because of the lamestream media's hateful (IMHO) slanted coverage against George Walker Bush's administration and the Republican Party coupled with it's messianic depiction of the wonder of Barack Hussein Obama.

[Guest]

please someone show me where the current administration has initiated any efforts with corporate America to embark upon any job creation initiatives. I won't lose sleep waiting. I don't know if the current administration is against business, but they sure are NOT pro business.

The jobs creation problem is very easy to ignite...it cannot and will not be done by those with political agendas in general and Obama's agendas in specific.

Those trillions of dollars of profits sitting off shore are there to avoid the current tax structure for repatriating those profits back to the USA. It has been discussed and summarily rejected each time to reduce the corporate tax rate for expatriated profits. That translates into the ignorant conclusion of doing corporations a favor. Really? A lesser rate on trillions of dollars equals a substantial amount of money to be paid in taxes and significant millions/billions of dollars back in America to be invested in America. VS the current rate times zero dollars coming back = zero.

Someone help me understand why the business as usual makes sense?

btk

[Guest]

.........The jobs creation problem is very easy to ignite...it cannot and will not be done by those with political agendas in general and Obama's agendas in specific.

Those trillions of dollars of profits sitting off shore are there to avoid the current tax structure for repatriating those profits back to the USA. It has been discussed and summarily rejected each time to reduce the corporate tax rate for expatriated profits. That translates into the ignorant conclusion of doing corporations a favor. Really? A lesser rate on trillions of dollars equals a substantial amount of money to be paid in taxes and significant millions/billions of dollars back in America to be invested in America. VS the current rate times zero dollars coming back = zero.

Someone help me understand why the business as usual makes sense?

btk

This is key (in bold above) and it's exactly why people are responding so much to the flat tax proposals coming out among the republican candidates.

Plus, the U.S. would become a business and entrepeneurial haven, producing jobs, jobs, jobs, if the current tax sucking structure were abolished and replaced with low corporate taxes.

[Guest]

McCain lost because of the lamestream media's hateful (IMHO) slanted coverage against George Walker Bush's administration and the Republican Party coupled with it's messianic depiction of the wonder of Barack Hussein Obama.

Bush's own economic policies lost McCain the election. There is no defense against the loss of seven to eight hundred thousand jobs a month in October and November of 2008. I will admit that the overturn of Glass-Stiegel made the economic environment more treacherous and Clinton was responsible for that, but Bush had six years with a sympathetic congress to recognize the danger.

Glass-Stiegel was a law passed during the Depression to separate the banking and investment communities. It kept the bank investments in very stable investment vehicles.