Fastest growing job market: federal government!

[blackangst1]

Someone in here's sig says the next bubble will be government...a prophet he is!

http://www.gallup.com/poll/127628/Federal-Government-Outpaces-Private-Sector-Job-Creation.aspx

Gallup's Job Creation Index for April reveals significantly more hiring within the federal government than in the private sector. Both show a substantially more positive picture than state and local governments, where firing far eclipses hiring.

Gallup's Job Creation Index clearly indicates that state and local governments are in the midst of significant downsizing, no doubt reflecting budgetary issues resulting from recessionary pressures on the tax (and other) revenue that funds these governments.
Hiring at the federal level has apparently to date escaped these same fiscal pressures. Indeed, the federal government appears to be significantly outpacing the private sector in terms of the relative number of jobs created.



Well, at least Obama can claim jobs are being created...although I dont think this is the right direction, personally.

 

[NoStateofMind]

Someone in here's sig says the next bubble will be government...a prophet he is!

http://www.gallup.com/poll/127628/Federal-Government-Outpaces-Private-Sector-Job-Creation.aspx

Gallup's Job Creation Index for April reveals significantly more hiring within the federal government than in the private sector. Both show a substantially more positive picture than state and local governments, where firing far eclipses hiring.

Gallup's Job Creation Index clearly indicates that state and local governments are in the midst of significant downsizing, no doubt reflecting budgetary issues resulting from recessionary pressures on the tax (and other) revenue that funds these governments.
Hiring at the federal level has apparently to date escaped these same fiscal pressures. Indeed, the federal government appears to be significantly outpacing the private sector in terms of the relative number of jobs created.



Well, at least Obama can claim jobs are being created...although I dont think this is the right direction, personally.

That'd be Jaskalas.

It is the normal from D.C. though, ever expanding never cut spending type of thing.

 

[her209]

How many of these hirings are for processing income tax returns and for the 2010 census?

 

[blackangst1]

How many of these hirings are for processing income tax returns and for the 2010 census?

Given the sample of those surveyed Id say very few if any.

BUT

There's no evidence either way so we can all make guesses to justify why we believe this is happening.

 

[bobsmith1492]

All that stimulus money had to go somewhere! It's obviously not anywhere useful though...

 

[Jhhnn]

And this has changed since the Bush presidency in what way?

It's part and parcel of the trickledown deception- people gotta have jobs if you're gonna fool 'em, and since american capitalists won't hire 'em, they'll loan the money to the govt to do it... Win-win, right?

 

[IndyColtsFan]

And this has changed since the Bush presidency in what way?

It's part and parcel of the trickledown deception- people gotta have jobs if you're gonna fool 'em, and since american capitalists won't hire 'em, they'll loan the money to the govt to do it... Win-win, right?

 

[blackangst1]

indeed

 

[Slew Foot]

Hey I had this sig for a year or so now

I feel like its 2005 again and Im telling people about the housing bubble

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Good luck actually finding a job through USAJobs.gov. Boatloads of people are applying for them. If you aren't eligible for the Veterans' Preference, good luck.

 

[Jhhnn]

Anything meaningful to say, guys? Maybe you'd like to claim that govt employment didn't grow at the greatest rate since the great society under Bush's "leadership"? Or that the "Free Market" is gonna step up RSN, bring back all the offshored jobs, or what?

Shee-it, Sherlock, a big part of the employment growth in the Bush years was in govt jobs, even as your heroes promised "smaller govt"... or am I gonna get the Ronald Reagan answer- "I don't recall"? And, uhh, didn't they simultaneouslly cut taxes and start a war, borrow the money to make up the difference? Is there something I'm missing, something y'all can see reflected in your blinders of denial?

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Anything meaningful to say, guys? Maybe you'd like to claim that govt employment didn't grow at the greatest rate since the great society under Bush's "leadership"? Or that the "Free Market" is gonna step up RSN, bring back all the offshored jobs, or what?

Bush was an incompetent buffoon, and you guys think you score points by saying "Well Obama is just doing what Bush did!" with respect to federal job growth. Seriously?

Shee-it, Sherlock, a big part of the employment growth in the Bush years was in govt jobs, even as your heroes promised "smaller govt"... or am I gonna get the Ronald Reagan answer- "I don't recall"? And, uhh, didn't they simultaneouslly cut taxes and start a war, borrow the money to make up the difference? Is there something I'm missing, something y'all can see reflected in your blinders of denial?

You post this as if this is new news. Bush was an incompetent buffoon. We get that. We need someone willing to make the tough decisions and make cuts where necessary (the war efforts, defense budget, social programs), and Obama isn't that person. I don't care if there is a D, R, I, or L after this person's name either -- someone has to restore sane fiscal practices.

 

[Jhhnn]

One thing you forgot to mention, blanghorst, that great rightwing taboo, the one thing that has to go along with it if we're to have any lasting effect, and that's to raise taxes, particularly at the top, and to enact meaningful financial reforms to close down the rigged casino of modern banking and investment, cut the lootocracy down to size...

Go ahead- balance the federal budget on cuts alone, as if that's not a quixotic adventure...

 

[IndyColtsFan]

One hting you forgot to mention, blanghorst, that great rightwing taboo, the one thing that has to go along with it if we're to have any lasting effect, and that's to raise taxes, particularly at the top, and to enact meaningful financial reforms to close down the rigged casino of modern banking and investment, cut the lootocracy down to size...

I am a realist -- we will have to raise taxes at some point. Many on the right hate that concept, but it is reality. The loopholes work both ways -- some people are getting larger tax refunds than the total amount withheld during the year, and that quirk needs to be addressed as well. ALL of these loopholes need to be corrected.

Tax raises need not be huge, however. We can DRASTICALLY cut spending on things like wars, military, and yes, social programs. We can enact policies to increase the size of the tax base. We need MEANINGFUL tax credits for businesses -- when I say MEANINGFUL, I mean, tie the breaks to the number of people employed. That increases the tax base. And yes, penalize companies that outsource jobs -- that decreases the tax base.

 

[CycloWizard]

One thing you forgot to mention, blanghorst, that great rightwing taboo, the one thing that has to go along with it if we're to have any lasting effect, and that's to raise taxes, particularly at the top, and to enact meaningful financial reforms to close down the rigged casino of modern banking and investment, cut the lootocracy down to size...

Go ahead- balance the federal budget on cuts alone, as if that's not a quixotic adventure...

Let's see... In Obama's 2011 budget, we can cut Medicare ($498 billion), Social Security ($738 billion), and Income Security ($567 billion) for starters. That would give us a healthy surplus despite the current problem with the top 50% only paying 100% of the taxes.

edit: Source for the budget: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/02/01/us/budget.html

 

[Jhhnn]

Let's see... In Obama's 2011 budget, we can cut Medicare ($498 billion), Social Security ($738 billion), and Income Security ($567 billion) for starters. That would give us a healthy surplus despite the current problem with the top 50% only paying 100% of the taxes.

edit: Source for the budget: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/02/01/us/budget.html

And Marie Antoinette said "Let them eat cake!"... we all know how that turned out... She lived in a fantasy, just like you, CycloWizard...

 

[Kappo]

I am a realist -- we will have to raise taxes at some point. Many on the right hate that concept, but it is reality. The loopholes work both ways -- some people are getting larger tax refunds than the total amount withheld during the year, and that quirk needs to be addressed as well. ALL of these loopholes need to be corrected.

Tax raises need not be huge, however. We can DRASTICALLY cut spending on things like wars, military, and yes, social programs. We can enact policies to increase the size of the tax base. We need MEANINGFUL tax credits for businesses -- when I say MEANINGFUL, I mean, tie the breaks to the number of people employed. That increases the tax base. And yes, penalize companies that outsource jobs -- that decreases the tax base.

So, you think being invaded for our land (the companies and jobs went to more profitable countries and not needing to be taxed in triplicate) is a good thing?

I can think of a dozen different things that is, but none of them are "realist"

Not to mention, the entire POINT of owning/starting a company is to make as large of a profit as possible. Having human cubicle fillers for tax breaks (if they show up at all) kinda goes against all that.

 

[CycloWizard]

And Marie Antoinette said "Let them eat cake!"... we all know how that turned out... She lived in a fantasy, just like you, CycloWizard...

Why not make it a reality? The fantasy is that we can keep this up. Did you read the bottom line on the budget I linked - $3.69 trillion? Can you estimate what the revenue will be? I'll speculate that it will be considerably less than $3 trillion and probably less than $2.5 trillion.

 

[sandorski]

When you're the only one Hiring, it's easy to be the #1 Hirer.

 

[Kappo]

When you're the only one Hiring, it's easy to be the #1 Hirer.

Especially after you kill off any of your competition.

 

[sandorski]

Especially after you kill off any of your competition.

..and that would be?

 

[Kappo]

..and that would be?

Um, the OTHER people who WOULD hire workers? You know, the ones Hussein says, "You have made enough money" to?

 

[sandorski]

Um, the OTHER people who WOULD hire workers? You know, the ones Hussein says, "You have made enough money" to?

There must be an example you can give?

 

[RedChief]

And Marie Antoinette said "Let them eat cake!"... we all know how that turned out... She lived in a fantasy, just like you, CycloWizard...

Time for a history lesson....

Did you know that in France during that time period that cake meant fine bread (aka bread made with eggs, such as pastries, etc)? Did you also know that there was a law the dictated to french bakers that if they were to run out of their cheap bread that they were to sell their fine bread at the cheap rates?

Whats does this mean?

Let them eat cake actually meant let them eat fine bread. When it was reported to the palace that there was no bread in the bakeries, the response from Marie was basically if theres no cheap bread then the bakeries need to sell them the fine bread at the cheap prices (as that was the law). Also, the size, weight and price of bread was regulated from medieval ties to the 1980's to the point where a baguettes price was on a fixed formula. So due to government price controls, bakers just didnt bake much bread because every sales was at a loss. Maybe this had something to do with the food riots?

Oh, and the Marie in this case? Well the original saying (Qu'ils mangent de la brioche) comes from Roussou's Confessions. A book published when Marie Antoinette was only 10 years old and still living in Austria. The most probably person to have said this was Queen Marie Therese, 100 years previous.

 

[Hacp]

And Marie Antoinette said "Let them eat cake!"... we all know how that turned out... She lived in a fantasy, just like you, CycloWizard...

Well, considering that our poor are the fattest poor people in the world, they're eating plenty of cake.