IF you haven't seen the movie, go rent it. You'll learn alot in the time you watch it. I am serious, even if you aren't a baseball person.

This is a great article for anyone who needs to succeed in business......really.

My favorite line from the movie's central character, Billy Beane:
Billy Beane "The problem we're trying to solve is that there are rich teams and there are poor teams. Then there's fifty feet of crap, and then there's us. It's an unfair game..."

= = = = = = =

19 Brilliant Business Lessons From Moneyball

by Dharmesh Shah

Founder and CTO at HubSpot and Blogger at OnStartups.com

January 15, 2013

I'm an idiot. Not all of the time, mind you, but every now and then, I'm an idiot. Like the time my friend and co-founder Brian Halligan asked me to read the book “Moneyball” . This was back when we had first launched our startup, HubSpot. “But, I'm not a baseball guy,” I said. “It's not about baseball. It's about data,” he replied. So, I put it on my reading list, bought the book, but still failed to read it. That was a mistake.

Years later, I watched the movie when it came out. Twice. In one weekend. The first time I felt like I missed so much that I had to watch it again. If you haven't seen the movie yet, you should stop reading this article and go watch it. If you get distracted and never make it back to this article, don't worry, you made the right call.

 

So, without further ado, here are some great quotes and lessons on business and entrepreneurship from Moneyball:

1. He passes the eye candy test. He's got the looks, he's great at playing the part.
Spectacular startup success often becomes a game about scouting and recruiting. A common mistake entrepreneurs make is recruiting team members early on simply because they look the part. In the long run, it doesn't matter if on paper, someone's perfect. You want people that can actually do the job. That VP of Sales candidate that has 15 years of experience at Oracle? Likely not worth it for you. They'll look the part, but they may not be able to deliver the goods. And, like Johnny Damon, she's going to be expensive. Get good at seeing talent where others don't.

2. You're not solving the problem. You're not even looking at the problem.
Identify a fundamental problem in your industry and then focus, focus, focus on solving that problem. Don't get distracted by all the the things that are swirling around the actual problem. Don't listen too closely to those that have deep industry expertise and are emotionally attached to the status quo — it's possible that they're part of the problem. Figure out what the actual issue is, and solve it.

For example, look at Dropbox. My friend Drew Houston (CEO) set out to solve a really hard problem -- getting data to synch across different devices. He had many people (including me) that were telling him that this particular idea had been pursued so many times before. He didn't get distracted by all that noise. He dug in, focused and fixed the problem. Today, Dropbox is valued at billions of dollars and has tens of millions of happy users.

3. We've got to think differently.
This quote reminds me of Apple. Only, Steve Jobs wrote it as ”think different” (intentionally going with the grammatically incorrect version because it “sounded better”). Like the Oakland As, your business is also working under constraints. Often, big constraints. Often, unfair constraints. If you're trying to disrupt the status quo and beat competitors that are much bigger and better funded, you're not going to do it by playing their game. You'll need to think differently. Playing the old way when you're at a disadvantage is a sure-fire way to lose.

This is one that I'm personally very passionate about. When we started HubSpot, everything we had learned about startups -- and the conventional wisdom was "do one thing, and do it very, very well." Generally, that's amazingly good advice. Except when it's not. Like in our case. The problem we saw was not that there weren't great marketing apps out there -- the problem was that none of them were integrated or worked well together. So, we thought different. We decided to do the crazy, crazy thing of doing it all. Why? Because that's what we believed the problem was.

4. First job in baseball? It's my first job anywhere.
Experience is often over-rated. Some of the most successful startup teams consisted of people that lacked relevant experience at the time they joined. But, what they lacked in experience, they more than made up for in sheer talent and hunger. In the early days, hire athletes. People with raw talent and a propensity to get things done. Don't be resistent to recruiting people that are early in their careers. You're looking for arbitrage opportunities. You're looking for the future stars -- because you likely can't afford or convince the current stars.

5. Your goal shouldn't be to buy players, your goal should be to buy wins.
I'm going to illustrate this point with a quick paraphrasing of a conversation I had with an entrepreneur last year. It went roughly like this:
Me: What do you need?
Them: We need to build a management team.
Me: No, what do you actually need right now?
Them: Well, right now we need a VP of Engineering.
Me. What for?
Them: Well, we need someone to head up our product development effort.

Me. No, you actually need to write code and release a product. You need to respond to customer issues. You need to iterate quickly so you can learn quickly. You don't need a VP of anything, you need a doer of stuff that needs to get done. Don't think about buying titles — think about buying outcomes. Think about plugging gaping holes in the company. Are you signing up customers so fast that you can't respond to all the support emails? Don't hire a head of support, hire someone that helps you tackle the support issue. Someone that's maniacally committed to customer happiness. They can become your head of support some day.

6. He really needs to accept this as life's first occupation, a first career.
This statement was made to the young Billy Beane when he was trying to decide between the full scholarship to Stanford and a career in Major League Baseball. Billy's mom asked if he could do both. The answer was, he couldn't. And, that's true in baseball, in startups and just about any hyper-competitive activity. You can't straddle the fence, because you will get your ass kicked by someone who's almost as good as you, but much more committed. You can't take that investment banking job and do a startup. You can't maintain two feet firmly planted on the ground and take the leap of faith. You have to pick. It's not an easy choice, but you have to pick. And, if you're in school, my personal (and unpopular in some startup circles) advice is stay in school . Make learning and building connections your “first occupation”.

But whatever you do, don't sit on the fence. Commit to something. Don't hedge. Give it all you have. Make it your life's first occupation. If you can't get excited about it -- find something else. I've made lots of stupid mistakes in my professional career -- the stupidest was trying to run two startups at the same time. That's a story for another day.

7. Why do you like him? Because he gets on base.
The startup world is filled with superstars that get overlooked or don't quite make it because they're "quirky" or otherwise don't fit preconceived patterns of people think a person in a given role should look and feel like. None of that matters. When recruiting engineers, find brilliant people that write code that solves the problem simply, effectively and can be maintained without brain damage. When hiring sales people find those that have high emotional IQ and care about truly understanding customer problems -- and selling them a solution. Figure out what success looks like for a given role, and ignore the irrelevant details. (Note: Culture fit is not an irrelevant detail. Things that are irrelevant are age, nationality, gender, etc. -- things that have no bearing on the outcome).

10. Hey, anything worth doing is hard. And we're gonna teach you.
Your ability to teach is one of the single biggest levers you have in a startup. Why? First, because it's one of the biggest benefits you can deliver to your team members. They can get a higher salary somewhere else. They can get better perks somewhere else. But, at your startup, they can learn things. Second, it's unlikely you're going to find the "perfect" 5-tool player. Even if you found them, you likely couldn't afford them. If you're willing to help people with a specific super-power fill in gaps in their knowledge/experience, you create lots of value -- for them, and for you.

12. It's day one of the first week. You can't judge just yet.
Be a little bit patient. Often, your best people will take a little time to really shine. Don't judge too early. Determine the context. If someone's not cranking yet, is it because getting up to speed at your company is hard? Everyone's too busy to show them the ropes? Their lack of early performance could be the context, so be patient
But, don't be too patient. If someone isn't at least moderately productive in the first month or two, it's unlikely they're going to be super-productive in the following year. The really great people tend to deliver some value almost immediately.

14. Where on the field is the dollar I'm paying for soda?
It is good to be budget-conscious in an early-stage company. It instills the right kind of discipline that will help long-term. But, don't be penny-wise and a pound foolish. There are little things that don't cost that much, that makes people happier. It's not about the money (they can all afford the soda), it's about the inconvenience and the principle. Remember, deep down inside, people are human. [smile]

One quick example from HubSpot: We launched a book program whereby any employee can request any book they think makes them a better HubSpotter. I personally handle all requests and send out a Kindle version of the book immediately. It magically appears in their account, and they don't have to fill out an expense form or do anything. It's not that expensive, but it's been super-well received.

15. These are hard rules to explain to people. Why is that a problem, Pete?
One of the best segments in the movie. Pete is troubled at how different what they're doing is, and why it's hard to get others to understand and accept it. But, the point was, when you'retransforming something and making massive change, not everyone is going to understand. The important thing is to be right -- and then make the change happen. The best way to convince people that your theory was right is to be right and show them (not tell them) you're right. Most people will never be convinced otherwise.

16. I'm not paying you for the player you used to be, I'm paying you for the player you are right now.
Hard-hitting advice. I'd extend this to say: Recruit on potential but reward on performance. Customers are not going to be delighted by the code a brilliant engineer could have written. On a related note is the quote "If he's a good hitter, why doesn't he hit good?" Or, "If she's such a good sales person, why can't she sell?"

17. That's my bar. My bar is here. My bar is to take this team to the championship.
Although it's often OK to end up being in second place -- that's not what you aim for. You and your team should be in it to win it. If you decide too early that winning is impossible or too hard, you set a ceiling on your success.

18. If we try to play like the Yankees in here, we will lose to the Yankees out there.
Don't play the game using your competitor's rule book -- despite how successful they may or may not be. That's a losing strategy. If they wrote the rules, chances are, they were written to favor them not you.

19. We're going to change the game.
And really, that's what it's all about. It's not about exiting for millions of dollars or going public. It's about changing the game. It's about seeing something that's not quite right in the world, and deciding you want to fix it. For me, personally, it was observing that marketing is broken. Most people hate marketing. we wanted to transform marketing into something people love. It's hugely ambitious, but I have this feeling, deep-down inside, that we're right.

How about you? What is the flaw (big or small) that you're seeing in the universe that you're trying to fix? 

Only vets need apply - Franchise Opportunity for VETS only is a great idea

This shows that one man with a good idea can make a difference for our Veterans

BRAVO ZULU ! ( Navy speak for " Job Well Done ! " )

Only vets need apply: New company offers franchises exclusively to ex-military By Bill Briggs, NBC News contributor

You might view Jerry Flanagan’s entrepreneurial vision for jobless veterans as junk economics. That’s fine. He certainly sees it that way.

The Army veteran has launched what he says is the first company to offer former service members — and only former service members — a chance to buy one of his fledgling franchises. The business: hauling away people’s unwanted appliances, furniture and other household rubbish. In crude terms, junk removal.

Before you trash his plan, listen to Flanagan’s strategy to tidy up the 10.9 percent unemployment rate that’s been dogging post-Sept. 11 veterans (as compared to the 8.1 percent rate afflicting the rest of the nation in August).

“Offering the franchises only to military veterans gives them the opportunity to know, ‘In this program, I don’t have to compete against this guy who has a college degree or against that guy who just went to business school.’ Right now, these people need a leg up,” said Flanagan, who served in the U.S. Army from 1987 to 1989.

“So many veterans are going to be hitting the work force by 2014. I asked myself, ‘How can we put them back to work?’ They’ll be owning their own businesses and hopefully they’ll be hiring other veterans.”

He calls his enterprise JDog Junk Removal. The tasks, territorial duties, and even the logo are purposely intended to carry a military feel, a welcome-home gift, Flanagan said, for ambitious veterans with at least $15,000 to invest. That’s the cost to buy a franchise.

The fee — plus adequate credit to lease or finance a hauling trailer plus either a green H2 Hummer or Jeep Wrangler Rubicon (the only allowable vehicles, each painted with JDog’s trademarked bulldog emblem plus a local phone number) — puts veterans in the driver’s seat to self-employment, Flanagan said.

“I know there are these guys and women coming back, and if they’re jumping into a big, military-style vehicle, if they have some space, I think it helps with the transition,” Flanagan said.

Each franchisee will be assigned his or her own exclusive market — amid population pockets of at least 75,000 people — as well as a social networking push from corporate headquarters, local leads generated by the company website, and advice on peddling the service to area real estate firms, warehouses, commercial properties, churches and senior living facilities.

“There’s no office, no retail space to lease, and within 90 days, you’re booking jobs,” Flanagan said. “I’ve spent the past 17 months building his concept. But I also wanted to keep it simple. A lot of veterans are going to step right in and follow the system, just like they followed the system in the military every day. Veterans are the best qualified franchisees out there because they’re used to following orders.”

Flanagan saved one niche for disabled veterans: They can buy a franchise and hire one or two muscled-up pals to do the heavy lifting while the veterans run the businesses on their mobile devices.

“The cash flow is immediate because you’re paid on the spot. You go out and do four or five jobs that day, and you average $200 to $300 per job because I’ve structured the margins very well,” he added. “I started studying this (business sector) during the recession — junk removal was one of the few areas that did better after 2008. That’s what drew my attention. There’s junk in every state. There are military veterans in every state.

“We’re getting good feedback from the entire (salvage) industry that once veterans — and active duty members who are about to come home — get their heads around what I’m doing, we’re going to have a large turnout interested in franchises,” added Flanagan, who is based in Wayne, Pa. “I want 300 to 500 of these units up in 10 years. Of course, I could be underselling myself there. We could have 10 just in Long Island. We could have 50 in Texas." According to the International Franchise Association in Washington, D.C., the only other American franchisor that offers buy-in opportunities solely to former service members is an outfit called Veteran Tech Brigade, which supplies IT services. Kelly Crigger, co-founder and CEO of Veteran Tech Brigade said, however, that his company is aiming for an 80 percent veteran-owned franchise rate. (Veteran Tech Brigade currently is vetting its first potential franchisees — two veterans, both residing in Florida). The company mainly does government contracting and business-to-business IT consulting. “But that’s why we started this company — to put a dent in the unemployment rate for veterans,” said Crigger, a retired Army lieutenant colonel who served in Afghanistan. “We have 25 veterans now doing IT consulting. “Especially when you consider the immense responsibility levels many veterans had while in combat, you would think” scores of companies would be clamoring for their skills, Crigger said. “I remember one guy told me: ‘Over in Iraq, my responsibility was kicking doors in all day, looking for the enemy. But I get back here and I can’t even get a job laying cement’

How's that Hopey-Changey" thing working out for you ??" - current unemployment rate for young folk is at 16.5%

As a fairly Famous pundit likes to say,

" How's that Hopey-Changey" thing working out for you ??"

Obama and his failed economic plans have hurt his two main constituencies, Younger Voters and Minorities.  Unemployment among both groups is sky high, higher than it has ever been and much higher than when the GOP was in control.

So the overriding question is:

WHY would anyone in either group vote for more of the same ???

Because they are uninformed, voting based on the color of the candidates skin, or they are gullible enough to give President OBOZO another 4 years to muck things up.

The bottom line is that the President has failed and the idea of anyone under 25 giving him another 4 years proves that P.T. Barnum was correct when he said;

"  There's a sucker born every minute. "

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

Recession erases 2.7 million youth jobs, widens employment gap
By Tiffany Hsu - LA Times
July 13, 2012

Had the recession never happened, there would now be an additional 2.7 million jobs for young workers, according to a report this week.

Instead, there’s a Chicago-sized hole in the employment market for people between 16 and 24 years old, according to nonprofit, nonpartisan advocacy group Young Invincibles.
And there’s a good chance that gap will never close, to potentially devastating effect, according to the"No End in Sight?" report.

“The scary thing is that the recession may never end for young people,” said Rory O’Sullivan, policy director for the group, in a statement.

The current unemployment rate for young folk is at 16.5% -- double the national 8.2% rate. More than two in 10 Latino youth are jobless, while three in 10 black youth are unemployed, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

But that’s only considering people still in the job hunt. Fewer than half of young Americans hold any kind of job at all. And the flood of youth who hid in higher education instead of taking their chances looking for a job during the recession doesn’t make up the disparity.
If the youth labor market expands at the rate it did during 2004 – the best year of the last decade – it could reach its pre-recession health by 2016. If it grows at the 1990s rate – during the longest economic expansion in the country’s history – it could recoup its losses by 2021.

The Young Invincibles report, however, takes a more pessimistic stance, echoing earlier predictions from the Bureau of Labor Statistics that young people may never regain their 2007 employment levels.

The high rates of youth unemployment and underemployment will likely lead to lower earnings for life and more young people who are neither in school nor working, according to the report.

The "Oh Sh-t" moment.....we've been living it for the past three 1/2 years.....

Bill Clinton isn't a genius, but he figured it out when the phrase " It's the economy, stupid!" became the catch phrase of his election to the White House.

It should be no surprise that the feckless fool in the White House doesn't have a clue when it comes to the economy.  He spent his time in office trying to wreck the economy and catering to his idiot supporters.

The key quote in this piece is "Another former administration official called it an “ 'Oh, sh-t' moment.” "

That's rich as the American Public has been having an "Oh Sh-t" moment  every day for the past three 1/2 years.

Time to go Mr. President.....really.  You haven't got a clue and it's over. 

Worst. President. Ever.


Jobs report upends 2012 race
 By Amie Parnes - TheHill.com

A dismal May jobs report is being perceived as a possible game-changer in the presidential battle between President Obama and Mitt Romney, with Republicans saying the numbers provide further proof that the economy isn’t improving.

 The report showing unemployment increasing to 8.2 percent and the creation of only 69,000 jobs shook some Democrats, crystallizing their fears that the economy could tip the election in Romney’s favor in November.

It also threatened to turn Obama’s argument that the economy is improving on its head and provided flashbacks to the spring economic slowdown of last year.
“It is a little scary,” said one former White House official. “There’s no sugarcoating this one.”

Another former administration official called it an “ 'Oh, sh-t' moment.”

“It’s not good,” the former official said. “I’ll say this, I’m glad it’s June and not October.”
The bleak report led to a terrible day on Wall Street, where the Dow Jones was down nearly 300 points in trading late Friday afternoon.

Romney seized on the report, calling it “devastating” in a CNBC interview and blasting Obama’s policies as ineffective.

“The president’s policies and his handling of the economy has been dealt a harsh indictment this morning,” Romney said in the interview. “Their policies have not worked; in many respects, their policies have made it harder for the economy to recover.

“And I think that’s why people are looking for a new direction,” Romney added. “The most significant thing we can do in the near term is get a new president.”

With their public remarks, Obama — along with White House officials and other top Democrats — sought to ease concerns that the economy isn’t rebounding fast enough.

In a speech in Minnesota on Friday, the president acknowledged that while the economy is “growing again … it’s not growing as fast as we want it to grow.”

“The economy still isn’t where it needs to be,” he said. “We’ve got a lot of work to do until we are where we need to be."

But, speaking to a crowd at the Honeywell plant, Obama vowed, “We will come back stronger. We do have better days ahead.”

 Reaction to the report on the left and the right highlighted the concern for Obama. The conservative Drudge Report’s lead headline, under a photo of Obama, was “Hell Day.”

In a rare occurrence, the left-leaning Huffington Post went with a similar headline on its website, coupling a picture of a frowning Obama with the headline “Jobs Report Disaster.”

Political observers argued the latest report just doesn’t jibe with Obama’s latest campaign slogan, “Forward.”

“I think it’s a real problem for the president,” said Susan MacManus, a professor of political science at the University of South Florida. “The argument was that we’re going forward, and all of a sudden it comes to a screeching halt.”

And MacManus said the timing, right before the thick of summer, couldn’t be worse for Obama. “This is kind of the last big thing people will pay attention to before they tune out during the summer doldrums,” she said. “You’d rather enter the summer on a high note than a reverse note.”
 But one former White House aide said it’s a minor blip on what the White House and the campaign see as a broader picture.

“Look, we obviously wanted a bigger number, but it’s a continuum. It’s not a snapshot,” the former aide said. “But if we would’ve had today’s numbers in 2008, people would’ve been thrilled.

“Things have gotten better,” the former aide said. “That’s the bottom line.”
One prominent economist said the White House should take heart because Friday’s report didn't capture the true growth of the labor market.

"I really do think that underlying job growth is higher than this, and we're going to see that in the coming months," said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics.
Vicki Needham contributed.

A Day Off / Being "situationally aware"

After an extended stay on the bench, one would think a " day off " would be the last thing a guy like me would look for.  Well the program I am on in the sandbox provides a "day off" once a week, unlike the DOD ones I worked before where you were locked into a 7 day a week, 12 hour a day schedule for the term of the contract.  Even though those who work on the 7 day a week schedule get R&R, working 5-6 months straight on a 84 hour a week schedule w/o a day off wears down even the strongest of workers.  So the 6 day week deal seems like a better idea.

The key thing is there isn't anywhere to go on the day off.  Unlike being at home, you can't take a ride to the beach, visit friends or even go out for a bite.  The nature of this assignment means you accept certain "limitations" along with the assignment.  No worries, as I was aware of what would be required before heading out overseas. I understand the issues presented and I am glad to be here, helping others who need it and also providing what is needed for my family.

Working overseas is not ideal but there are situations that many face today which are much much worse.  Middle aged workers out of work and/or underemployed, families facing foreclosure, people that sacrificed to provide a college education for their kids see them graduate into a rough economy and a general feeling that there is a complete lack of leadership from the present administration and those in charge on our state level.
 
People at home are scared of what the future holds. Many are presently still out of work in a morbid economy that has produced stagnant wage levels, no opportunity for workers who have spent their lives building a solid career with hard work, while local/state/federal employees have rewarded themselves with lifetime income & benefits on the taxpayers to the detriment of all others by rigging the system. Add to that politicians who are dedicated only to their own reelection.

Yeah, it is a depressing set of circumstances all the way around.  Sorry to be a real buzz kill.  I'd be lying to you if I didn't tell it like it is.

What can each of us do ?  Too many sit on the sidelines when it comes to voting and being aware of what is going on in your local town and state politics.  Like baseball, you can't tell the players without a score card. Be aware of what is going on.

One of the first rules of being in an area that is problematic and/or dangerous is to be " situationally aware".  To wit, understand the nature of your location and/or battlefield, where the problems can be and how you can best prepare yourself to face adversity.  The average family at home finds itself facing much adversity.  If this is so, why are so many willing to ignore the actions of those who game the system and make it tougher for families to provide for themselves and their future?  If you don't think daily life for most is a "battle", you are not willing to see the reality of things.

Getting involved, participating in local government by being aware, voting and making sure those in decision making positions know you are aware goes a long way toward changing things.  Yeah, I understand each of us already has a lot on our plates but not taking this aspect of your responsibility as a citizen seriously could be more harmful than you can imagine to your life and the lives of your kids.  How much better would things be if 90-100% of those eligible to vote would vote ?  You need to take personal action to make your situation better.  At the same time, you'll be helping others too.

The toughest part of a day off with no where to go is it gives you a lot of time to think about what is important and what is required of each of us. I'm doing my part and will keep aware even from afar.  I'd advise you to spend some time thinking about what you could do to improve your "situational awareness" on your day off.  Yeah, there are more fun things to do on a day off, but this one is kinda important.  Take it from me, we'll all be better off if you do.

Job recovery not occurring for Americans in prime working years

Some people asked me why I would accept working on a contract in a War Zone....The article below provides a good overview as professionals with my years of experience are not being employed at the same rate as before. Too many have been shut out in favor of less expensive workers with less experience.

Two key quotes sum it up - " real wages have been stagnant since 2008" and " The economy is just really messed up right now”

This should make your choice in the upcoming election down to the simple question,

" Are you better off now than you were 4 years ago?? "  If not, vote the bums out.  Especially the Village Idiot from Chicago in the White House.

Job recovery is scant for Americans in prime working years

By Peter Whoriskey, WASHINGTON POST -Published: May 30

The proportion of Americans in their prime working years who have jobs is smaller than it has been at any time in the 23 years before the recession, according to federal statistics, reflecting the profound and lasting effects that the downturn has had on the nation’s economic prospects.

By this measure, the jobs situation has improved little in recent years. The percentage of workers between the ages of 25 and 54 who have jobs now stands at 75.7 percent, just a percentage point over what it was at the downturn’s worst, according to federal statistics.

Before the recession the proportion hovered at 80 percent.

While the unemployment rate may be the most closely watched gauge of the economy in the presidential campaign, this measure of prime-age workers captures more of the ongoing turbulence in the job market. It reflects “missing workers” who have stopped looking for work and aren’t included in the unemployment rate.

During their prime years, Americans are supposed to be building careers and wealth to prepare for their retirement. Instead, as the indicator reveals, huge numbers are on the sidelines.

“What it shows is that we are still near the bottom of a very big hole that opened in the recession,” said Heidi Shierholz, an economist at the Economic Policy Institute, a left-leaning think tank.

The falloff has been sharpest for men, for whom the proportion had been on a slow decline before the recession. The percentage of prime-age men who are working is smaller now than it has been in any time before the recession, going all the way back to 1948, according to federal statistics. The proportion of prime-age women is at a low not seen since 1988.

The nation’s unemployment rate has shown signs of improvement, ticking down from 10 percent to 8.1 percent. But if it tallied people who have given up looking for jobs, it would certainly be higher.

The ratio of employment to population, which economists refer to as “epop,” “is a much better measure for what people are experiencing in the job market,” Shierholz said. “The unemployment rate is screwy right now because the labor market is so weak that people have stopped trying.”

For example, last month, the unemployment rate ticked down from 8.2 percent to 8.1 percent. Ordinarily, a drop in unemployment would be interpreted as a sign of improving economic health. But it dropped largely because so many people stopped looking for jobs.

Shierholz estimates that about 4 million workers have simply stopped looking, and so do not show up in the tally used for the unemployment rate.

As the presidential race heads into the summer, the health of the economy — and how voters view it — becomes critical, and for many people, the job market is their most significant contact with the economy.

According to the most recent Washington Post-ABC News poll, the issue of paramount interest to voters is the economy and jobs, with more than half describing it as the “single most important issue.”

By comparison, the next most important issue, health care, trailed far behind at 7 percent, and moral and family values followed at 5 percent.

The polls also show that, while the official statistics show improvement, voters offer gloomy economic diagnoses

About 83 percent of those in the poll, conducted in mid-May, rated the state of the economy as “poor” or “not so good,” a much higher portion of negative views than at any other time in the 10 years preceding the recession.

The job market “feels like a game of musical chairs — if you didn’t have a job when the market crashed, well, that chair is gone,” said Karen Akers, 50, of Vienna, who lost two jobs to budget cuts during the recession.

She just reentered the workforce in March, although at a lower salary in client relations at a sprinkler company.

“I don’t know that people trust any of these economic numbers these days, anyway, because they were all good before the crash,” she said. “Whatever economists are telling us, I don’t know that we can believe it any more than what we see in the job market — and what you find there is not good.”

Indeed, in interviews outside the unemployment office in Alexandria on Friday morning, people looking for work said that finding a job today, three years after the recession’s official end, seems just as hard as it did during the recession.

“In 2008, it was much easier — I got a job right away,” said 41-year-old Rob from Arlington, who last worked in sales for a defense contractor. Like other workers interviewed at the unemployment office, he declined to give his last name to protect his privacy.

“It’s definitely more negative, which really caught me off guard,” he said. “Employers have gotten used to doing pretty much what they want to do in this market.”

“I’m actually considering a position in retail,” said a 53-year-old Northern Virginia woman who had held a senior position in international sales and recently earned a master’s degree in management. She has been looking for a job for three years. “I can’t tell you how many women I know, one of whom was a bank vice president, who have already taken these kinds of jobs — they’re working at Joann’s Fabrics, Sur la Table and Crate & Barrel.”

The impact of these difficulties reaches far beyond those looking for work.

For those working, real wages have been stagnant since 2008, Shierholz said.

Moreover, the number of people quitting jobs — a figure that tends to rise when jobs seem plentiful and fall when they seem scarce — remains lower than it was at any time in the years leading up to the recession, according to government statistics.

Some of the workers have sensed a slight strengthening in their outlook, however: a few more calls, a few more openings, a few more interviews than they’d previously seen. Indeed, the “epop” figure for prime-age workers has risen since October.

Mark, 50, a heating and AC technician from Alexandria, was out of work in 2009 but found a job right away. He was laid off again about six months ago and, standing outside the Alexandria unemployment office, said it seems harder this time around.

“The economy is just really messed up right now,” he said

Middleboro Jones and the next great adventure

Belloq: " Doctor Jones however did you get yourself into such a nasty place ?"

Jones: " Why don't you come down here and find out..."

It seems that I have found my services requested for another adventure off to the distant parts of the globe. The economy is driving this more than a pursuit for the Ark of the Covenant or chasing nefarious villains. The economic forces have created a bit of a perfect storm where my skill set has more value over there than here at home.

This will limit the posting I can accomplish until I arrive and get situated later this week. Posting while in transit is possible but sometimes difficult. Like any adventure, there will be high points and low points...traveling to the "dusty" side of the globe is always an adventure...

Hope to have some good stuff to share and as always, try to provide a unique point-of-view while making sure things go as smoothly for me as they do for my buddy Indiana...

Brody: Marion's the least of your worries right now, believe me, Indy.

Indiana: What do you mean?

Brody: Well, I mean that for nearly three thousand years man has been searching for the lost ark. It's not something to be taken lightly. No one knows its secrets. It's like nothing you've ever gone after before.

Indiana: [laughing] Oh, Marcus. What are you trying to do, scare me? You sound like my mother. We've known each other for a long time. I don't believe in magic, a lot of superstitious hocus pocus. I'm going after a find of incredible historical significance, you're talking about the boogie man. Besides, you know what a cautious fellow I am.

POTUS just doesn't get it.....IT'S THE ECONOMY STUPID !!

Which is why we are where we are....record numbers on food stamps, highest number of unemployed & under employed, record foreclosures, loss of faith in our government... 

" Are you better off than you were 4 years ago ?" - That is the correct question. For the majority of Americans, the answer is no. The President has focused on other issues and we are headed in the wrong direction. We need to make a " course correction" in November and place Obama in the "unemployed" category.

If the Feds stopped " cooking the books", the real unemployment rate would be 10.9%

This should come as no surprise to anyone....They are cooking the books to try to make things " look" better for OHB electioneering.....what a scam.

Lies, damned lies and government liars.

Lies, Damned Lies and Government Jobs Data
By Elizabeth MacDonald


Emac's Bottom Line - Published May 02, 2012 - FOXBusiness

There is lots of talk about the "fiscal cliff" the U.S. faces at year end, as stimulus and tax cuts go away.



So the last thing the government needs now is market distrust in its job numbers. But, as analysts dig into the government job numbers, questions are increasingly being raised about the reliability of the data, from questionable revisions in the weekly jobless numbers to the odd changes in unemployment rates.


For 59 out of the last 60 weeks, the weekly jobless numbers have been revised, after the fact, always in the same direction: higher. That's unheard of.


Those revisions higher make the present week’s unemployment number look better in comparison, more so since the markets often treat the prior week’s revision as an afterthought.


And there is statistical manipulation in the unemployment rate, too. The government’s reported unemployment number doesn’t include people who stopped looking for work, but who want jobs.


The Bureau of Labor Statistics says the unemployment rate is dropping, and fell from 10% in October 2009 to 8.2% now. That’s got the White House and media pundits saying an economic recovery has taken place, and that the President’s stimulus bill, which cost more than $750 billion to date, has driven unemployment down towards 8% as promised.


However, the unemployment rate is the number of people out of work but who are actively looking. The government doesn’t count in that rate the now 6.3 million who have given up and stopped looking for work, but want jobs. That number has grown from 5.7 million in January 2009.


So, this "improvement" in the unemployment rate is artificial -- it was due to workers giving up and dropping out of the labor force.


The statistic to look at simply counts the people who are either working or not working. It sets aside the idiosyncratic manipulation whether they’re actively looking for work or not.


If the adult labor force participation rate stayed the same today as it was when the Great Recession ended in June 2009, at 67.5%, the unemployment rate would be 10.9%.


“Some 80% of the reduction” in the unemployment rate from 10% hit in October 2009 to today’s 8.2% “has been from adults quitting the labor force,” says economist Peter Morici.


Morici adds the unemployment rate “rises to 14.5% if you factor back in those who’ve stopped looking for work but would re-enter if there were jobs, as well as part-time workers who would prefer full-time positions.”


Yes, the number of people who have given up looking for work include retiring baby boomers. Still, there is no decent government data showing the number of actual, retiring baby boomers, only estimates. And there are no solid data showing the number of boomers retiring who still want to work.


Overall, government estimates show we have less people wanting to look for work as the population ages, and that’s bad for Social Security, which depends on workers funding it. The “labor force participation rate is declining as baby boomers retire, and what is striking is that decline even includes the number of students and immigrants looking for jobs,” says James Farrell, FOX News analyst.


So ask yourself this: As more people drop out looking for a job, is it right that the government counts it so the unemployment rate looks lower than it really is?


What’s important is the broader trend. Since President Obama took office, America has lost a net 740,000 jobs. But during the first 30 months of President Ronald Reagan’s economic recovery, which started in December 1982, total U.S. employment increased by 8.9 million jobs.


All of this was borne out in the disappointing April ADP employment report today on new private sector jobs, which arrives two days before the Dept. of Labor’s payrolls report for last month.


The ADP number came in showing 119,000 jobs were created in the private sector in April, while analysts had expected it would show that U.S. employers added 177,000 workers (still lower than the 209,000 increase recorded in March.)


It's important to note that the ADP jobs report has tracked the Labor Department’s numbers closely for the last 10 years, according to Charles Brady, senior editor at FOX Business.


“While there is often a wide variance between the two readings, the directional correlation is very strong -- they move in the same direction,” Brady says.


The engine of U.S. job growth, small businesses (those with 1-49 employees), reported a weak 58,000 jobs created, the third straight monthly decline and the lowest since August. Small businesses that produce goods lost jobs, too. Large businesses with more than 500 employees added just 4,000 jobs.


ADP says weather may have played a factor. Better hiring in the mild winter months could be leading to a “payback” in the spring, as businesses have already done the hiring they need for now. Still, all of this means it is unlikely there will be a decline in the unemployment rate Friday, unless the labor force shrinks again, which would not be good, either.


This Friday, forecasters expect the Labor Department to report the economy added 165,000 jobs in April -- better than the 120,000 in March, but still under the 212,000 rate for the first quarter, when the U.S. economy grew at just a 2.2% annualized rate.


The U.S. economy is creating jobs, but it is struggling, adding jobs at a rate of just 131,000 a month in 2011, which is not enough to reduce the unemployment rate.


Morici says the U.S. economy “must add 13 million jobs over the next three years -- 362,000 each month -- to bring unemployment down to 6%. GDP would have to increase at a 4% to 5% pace.”


So there you have it.


Since when does a nation’s labor force shrink during a recovery? It should not shrink, it should grow in a recovery. The labor force participation rate is at the rate it was in 1979 and 1982, even around the same rate it was back in 1969, while the worker population has grown dramatically since.


The rate now is 63.8%, trending at the 30-year low it just hit this past January, at 63.7%. Today there are 154.7 million people over age 16 who either have jobs or want jobs, but out of a much bigger total U.S. population of 16 or older, 242.6 million.


That’s around the same level in July 1982, when the labor force participation rate was 65.3%. There were 110.3 million people working or who wanted to work out of a smaller population of 172.2 million people aged 16 or older.


The labor force participation rate has stayed pretty much the same as it was in 1969, at 60.1%, and 63.8% in February 1979, when the total U.S. population of 16 or older was smaller. The same holds true for more than a decade ago, in April, 2000, when the employment-to-population ratio was 64.7%. That’s when the overall population was lower. at 282 million, versus the 310 million today

Unemployment is the key issue we presently face

On Presidents Day, many in the private sector are working. This is because this is one of the holidays that private companies don't offer, but rest assurred, your local, state & federal employees are enjoying a long weekend.

For others, it is just another day of looking for work. This is the defining issue of the upcoming election. Gay marriage,immigration and other issues are important, but until Americans can get back to work and at a good wage, there is no more pressing issue for deciding our next election.


CBO: U.S. enduring the longest period of high unemployment since the Great Depression
By ALEX M. PARKER- US News
February 16, 2012

After three years with unemployment topping 8 percent, the U.S. has seen the longest period of high unemployment since the Great Depression, the Congressional Budget Office noted in a report issued today.

And, despite some recent good news on the economic front, the CBO is still predicting that unemployment will remain above 8 percent until 2014. The report also notes that, including those who haven't sought work in the past four weeks and those who are working part-time but seeking full-time employment, the unemployment rate would be 15 percent.

The CBO made its comments in a report examining the long-term effects of joblessness, and possible policy options to boost employment, including unemployment insurance reforms and job training programs. The report came at the request of Democratic Michigan Rep. Sander Levin, but Republicans quickly jumped on the chance to bash President Obama's stimulus program, which is also reaching its three-year anniversary today.

"The stimulus is a stark reminder of how the president got the policies he wanted, and how those policies have failed the American people and are making things worse," said Texas Republican Rep. Jeb Hensarling

If The Economy Is Improving….

Another week and the labor numbers were released. They "say" that unemployment went down but this is the number used to record who is on benefits. Those that fell off benefits after 26 weeks or more are not included.

These are some serious questions. Read through and see if you come to a conclusion.

If The Economy Is Improving….

Everywhere you turn these days, someone is proclaiming that the economy is improving. Barack Obama is endlessly touting the "improvement" in the economy, the mainstream media is constantly talking about "the economic recovery" and an increasing number of Americans seem to be buying into this line of thinking. A new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll found that 37 percent of Americans believe that the economy will improve over the next year, while only 17 percent of Americans believe that it will get worse. But is the economy actually improving? Not really. At the moment things are relatively stable. Some economic statistics are improving slightly and some continue to get even worse. However, it is very important to keep in mind that one of the biggest reasons why things have stabilized is because the federal government is pumping more than a trillion dollars a year into the economy that it does not have.

The Obama administration is engaging in a debt binge unlike anything America has ever seen before, and yet many economic indicators are still in decline. So what is going to happen when the federal government stops injecting gigantic waves of borrowed money into the economy? That is a frightening thing to think about. The best efforts of our "leaders" in Washington D.C. are not accomplishing a whole lot. The Federal Reserve has pushed interest rates as low as they can go and the federal government is spending unprecedented amounts of money. But even with the federal government and the Federal Reserve pushing the accelerator all the way to the floor, the economy is still not improving much at all. Millions upon millions of Americans out there are anticipating some sort of a "great economic recovery", and they are going to be bitterly disappointed.

But right now there are some "bright spots" in the economy, and you are bound to run into family and friends that will repeat to you the nonsense that they are hearing on the television about how the economy is recovering.

When they try to convince you that the economy is getting better, ask them these questions....

If the economy is getting better, then why did new home sales in the United States hit a brand new all-time record low during 2011?

If the economy is getting better, then why are there 6 million less jobs in America today than there were before the recession started?

If the economy is getting better, then why is the average duration of unemployment in this country close to an all-time record high?

If the economy is getting better, then why has the number of homeless female veterans more than doubled?

If the economy is getting better, then why has the number of Americans on food stamps increased by 3 million since this time last year and by more than 14 million since Barack Obama entered the White House?

If the economy is getting better, then why has the number of children living in poverty in America risen for four years in a row?

If the economy is getting better, then why is the percentage of Americans living in "extreme poverty" at an all-time high?

If the economy is getting better, then why is the Federal Housing Administration on the verge of a financial collapse?

If the economy is getting better, then why do only 23 percent of American companies plan to hire more employees in 2012?

If the economy is getting better, then why has the number of self-employed Americans fallen by more than 2 million since 2006?

If the economy is getting better, then why did an all-time record low percentage of U.S. teens have a job last summer?

If the economy is getting better, then why does median household income keep declining? Overall, median household income in the United States has declined by a total of 6.8% since December 2007 once you account for inflation.

If the economy is getting better, then why has the number of Americans living below the poverty line increased by 10 million since 2006?

If the economy is getting better, then why is the average age of a vehicle in America now sitting at an all-time high?

If the economy is getting better, then why are 18 percent of all homes in the state of Florida currently sitting vacant?

If the economy is getting better, then why are 19 percent of all American men between the ages of 25 and 34 living with their parents?

If the economy is getting better, then why does the number of "long-term unemployed workers" stay so high? When Barack Obama first took office, the number of "long-term unemployed workers" in the United States was approximately 2.6 million. Today, that number is sitting at 5.6 million.

Put Americans back to work and the economy will be fixed - It's a no brainer

Over the last week, beyond the stories about the Super Bowl, Obama's failed SOTU address, etc., the election campaigns have been putting out non-stop information about what they will do if they are elected.

The President has sat on his hands for three years, so his sudden interest in jobs is disengenious and his only effort on jobs is if he can provide lots of government $$$ for the unions. This will not get more Americans working, only fatten the cofferes of his political allies. The GOP'ers are also talking jobs but in a different fashion working with the private sector. That is where jobs need to be created.

From USA Today on 01/26/12 - " Applications for unemployment benefits have been trending downward the past few months. Just two week ago, applications had plummeted to their lowest level since April 2008. And the average has fallen about 9% since Oct. 1.

But the week ending Jan. 21, initial claims increased 21,000, the Labor Department said Thursday. The four-week average, a less volatile measure, fell to 377,500, the government added."

To fix the economy, get America on track again and resolve issues at home, we need to put people back to work. It is that simple. Not busy work jobs like the President offered with his road repair & signs debacle but real jobs. Career positions that pay a good wage and offer benefits that people can afford. The kind of jobs where you can build a future.

No amount of hot-air out of Washington, DC will fill the need until we can get people back to work. Those with degrees should be able to do more than apply to Starbucks. Those with techincal educations should be able to do more than run a register at Target. By creating good paying jobs for them, we will open positions at these other places for younger workers who need the experience of a starter job.

It is that simple. If you can understand, and I understand this simple concept, why can't we get the ones who make the key decisions at companies to understand also ?

Until this changes, and jobs are available, the economy will plod along as no one has extra $$$ to spend. That is why the average age of a car on the road in America is 10.8 years old, the higest average ever. No one can afford to replace the cars they are driving.

10 months until the election and American workers need a new President who understands this simple need to get America back on track. If we hire Americans and provide them with good jobs, the economy will improve. It is that simple

Politics vs. Jobs - Obama rejects Keystone XL pipeline from Canada

It just doesn't make sense....Jobs, energy & better relations with our neighbor Canada. But then again, nothing the President does has made much sense.

OMG...Obama Must Go.

Re-Election Obsessed Obama Goes Political On Keystone
By ROBERT J. SAMUELSON
Posted 01/19/2012 Investors.com

President Obama's rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico is an act of national insanity. It isn't often that a president makes a decision that has no redeeming virtues and — beyond the symbolism — won't even advance the goals of the groups that demanded it.

All it tells us is that Obama is so obsessed with his re-election that, through some sort of political calculus, he believes placating his environmental supporters will improve his chances.

Aside from the political and public relations victory, environmentalists won't get much. Stopping the pipeline won't halt the development of tar sands, to which the Canadian government is committed; therefore, there will be little effect on global warming emissions.

Indeed, Obama's decision might add to them. If Canada builds a pipeline from Alberta to the Pacific for export to Asia, moving all that oil across the ocean by tanker will create extra emissions. Then there's the risk of added spills.

Now consider how Obama's decision hurts the United States. For starters, it insults and antagonizes a strong ally; getting future Canadian cooperation on other issues will be harder.

Next, it threatens a large source of relatively secure oil that, combined with new discoveries in the U.S., could reduce (though not eliminate) our dependence on insecure foreign oil.

Finally, Obama's decision forgoes all the project's jobs. There's some dispute over the magnitude. Project sponsor TransCanada claims 20,000, split between construction (13,000) and manufacturing (7,000) of everything from pumps to control equipment.

Apparently, this refers to "job years," meaning one job for one year. If so, the actual number of jobs would be about half that spread over two years. Whatever the figure, it's in the thousands and important in a country hungering for work. And Keystone XL is precisely the sort of infrastructure project that Obama claims to favor.

The big winners are the Chinese. They must be celebrating their good fortune and wondering how the crazy Americans could repudiate such a huge supply of nearby energy. There's no guarantee that tar-sands oil will go to China; pipelines to the Pacific would have to be built. But it creates the possibility when the oil's natural market is the U.S.

There are three things to remember about Keystone and U.S. energy policy.

First, we're going to use lots of oil for a long time. The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) estimates that American oil consumption will increase 4% between 2009 and 2035

The increase occurs despite highly optimistic assumptions about vehicle fuel efficiency and bio-fuels. But a larger population (390 million in 2035 versus 308 million in 2009) and more driving per vehicle offset savings.

The more oil we produce domestically and import from neighbors, the more we're insulated from dramatic interruptions of global supplies. After the U.S., Canada is the most dependable source of oil — or was until Obama's decision.

Second, barring major technological breakthroughs, emissions of carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas, will rise for similar reasons. The EIA projects that America's CO2 emissions will increase by 16% from 2009 to 2035. Stopping Canadian tar-sands development, were that possible, wouldn't affect these emissions.

Finally, even if — as Keystone critics argue — some Canadian oil were refined in the United States and then exported, this would be a good thing. The exports would probably go mostly to Latin America. They would keep well-paid industrial jobs (yes, refining) in the U.S. and reduce our trade deficit in oil, which exceeded $300 billion in 2011.

By law, Obama's decision was supposed to reflect "the national interest." His standard was his political interest. The State Department had spent three years evaluating Keystone and appeared ready to approve the project by year-end 2011. Then the administration, citing opposition to the pipeline's route in Nebraska, reversed course and postponed a decision to 2013 — after the election.

Now, reacting to a congressional deadline to decide, Obama rejected the proposal. But he also suggested that a new application with a modified Nebraska route — already being negotiated — might be approved, after the election. So the sop tossed to environmentalists could be temporary. The cynicism is breathtaking

Hire a VETERAN

The news for Veterans in the job market is not good. This article simplifies the issue to a question of how VETS present their experience but it also comes down to companies not making a concerned effort to give VETS an interview as you can always learn more in person than by just scanning a resume. Our military VETS have served the country, and companies need to make an effort to give them a chance to land a job.

Veterans are mission driven and dependable. You will find that hiring a VET is one of the best moves any company can make.

Vet jobless rate 2.6 pct higher than general population
As wars wind down, lawmakers and groups focus on issue
By Roy Strom / Reuters


NAPERVILLE, Ill, Oct 29 (Reuters) - When Matthew Burrell left the U.S. Army after eight years of service, he landed a job as a public relations contractor in Iraq. With a salary of $170,000, he figured military experience had finally paid off.

But five months after returning home to Chicago, 33-year-old Burrell is unemployed and his search for a job in the private sector has left him disheartened.

Despite having six years of experience as a public relations officer in the Army, he said he is treated as though he had just graduated from college.

"I can tell you for a fact that definitely in my field in public relations and marketing, private-sector companies do not value (military experience)," Burrell said.

Burrell, along with many of what the Department of Labor says are 235,000 unemployed veterans from the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, has run into a vexing problem.

Many U.S. companies, and sometimes veterans themselves, do not know how to translate military experience into civilian skills. There is a disconnect between companies demanding a college degree and veterans giving confusing descriptions of their military experience to civilian employers.

That disconnect has contributed to veterans having an unemployment rate 2.6 percent higher than the general population, according to September's Bureau of Labor Statistics unemployment report.
As U.S. involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan winds down, lawmakers and organizations are starting to address the issue.

The Obama administration this week announced steps that include encouraging community health centers to hire 8,000 veterans over the next three years, and improving training opportunities for military medics to become physician assistants.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce said it hopes to get 15,000 veterans hired through 100 job fairs around the country for veterans this year. One of those job fairs was held recently in Naperville, a Chicago suburb, giving 86 companies the chance to meet more than 600 veterans.

'TONE THAT DOWN'

One problem is that veterans need to explain more clearly to companies the value of their experience, said Kevin Schmiegel, vice president of veterans' employment programs at the Chamber of Commerce.

Hiring managers who have not served in the military are often bewildered by the jargon used by soldiers and weapons specialists, said Becky Brillon, who heads a program at the Community Career Center in Naperville.

A military job title might be listed like this: "25 Romeo visual and media equipment operator and maintainer."

"If somebody was artillery, or a sharpshooter or a sniper, you have to tone that down in the civilian world. It's more about being detail-oriented, precise and focused," she said.

On the flip side, private employers should give more credit to the experience and skills veterans acquire in the military, Schmiegel said.

Some military jobs, like a mechanic or technician, are fairly easily adapted to the private sector. But military credentials and certificates for other forms of training do not seem to carry much weight.

Rick Combs, a 27-year-old who retired as a sergeant in the Army, says he was given management training in the military. So far that training has not translated into a comparable private-sector job.

"You can come in, and slap something down that says, 'Here, the military says I can lead people. Give me a department and I will make it dance for you,'" Combs said. "I haven't had the opportunity on the civilian side yet."

Fixing the economy....

This gentleman from California pretty much sums it up. He has a bit of an advantage over others as he will be eligible for some pensions and union membership gives them access to affordable healthcare. In many respects, the issue he describes is the key issue of why things are off track.

Workers who have a job haven't seen a decent raise in years, the costs of everything has gone up and the uncertainty of the whole system makes one not want to spend or increase your debt load. Until this aspect of things change, the POLs in Washington can bleat on about things but things won't get better.

What we need is for businesses to get people back to work and go back to giving people a decent increase in pay for the hard work & effort they provide the businesses. Many companies have seen record profits but the workforce who provides that is not given their share as workers who complain can be replaced by others very easily. Companies have been hording cash for the past few years and not enough has been given back to the workforce in lower costs for healthcare and raises.

Until this paradigm shifts back to normal, consumers will be hesitant to spend their meager incomes and the economy will remain morbid. The answer is a simple one if the businesses will listen as they need consumers otherwise who will buy their products?


Why we quit spending ...
Postcards from the recession
... and how our cautious consumption, and that of many others, creates a drag on the country's economy.

Cautious spending by consumers slows down the economy.
October 23, 2011By Scott Martelle - LA TIMES

I may owe the nation an apology. It turns out I'm a prime reason why the U.S. economy can't regain its footing. Because as a wage-earner, and as a consumer, I'm not what I used to be.

My full-time newspaper job was cut in September 2008, and since then I have worked as a freelance journalist, the author of history books, a part-time university instructor and an occasional writer-for-hire for various non-journalistic projects. My wife, an elementary school teacher, has faced furloughs and stagnant wages, but (thanks to her union) we have healthcare coverage we can afford.

It's how we and others in our situation are living now that helps explain the persistence of the economic crisis, and hints at the troubles of the future.

Our household income is less than two-thirds what it was when I had a full-time staff job, and at my age — 53 — I'm unlikely to land another job with wages and benefits similar to the one I had (ageism in this jobs marketplace is pervasive, but that's another issue).

With one son in college and another in his senior year of high school, we're treading financial water in the short term. Better off than others, yes; we're not at risk of losing our home (we bought in 1997, far ahead of the bubble). Yet we're spending significantly less than we once did, forming an incremental drag on the economic recovery. Ironically, we have more money salted away in our savings account now than before my job was cut. That's what financial fear does; it makes you hoard cash.

So we patronize fewer restaurants, buy fewer books (a painful cutback for an author; if I'm not buying their books, are they not buying mine?), and rarely contemplate a weekend train getaway to Santa Barbara or San Diego. Take in a professional hockey or baseball game with the family? Um, no.

But a recovery needs us to spend. So we're not helping. And that's why the future is worrisome. We never were high-debt spenders (at the moment, mortgage, car payments and a small credit card balance are our only outstanding debts), but it's highly unlikely our household spending will ever again be what it was.

Part of that is a personal refocus on frugality — that financial fear thing again. Part of it is financial reality. Less money coming in necessitates less money going out. And looking ahead, what once promised to be a comfortable retirement is now a big question mark. I will get checks from Social Security (if it, and I, are still alive), small pensions from two former jobs (nine years' credit in each) and the proceeds from a 401(k) that, unfortunately, mirrors the economy, and to which we're no longer adding money at exactly the point in our lives when we should be.

My wife will also qualify for a pension as a teacher, but if she works until age 65, she will have 28 years in the California system where we live. Because of state laws, she will not be able to collect Social Security from her previous jobs. Given the ongoing assault on public employees — and on Medicare — we don't know what shape our medical coverage will take then. Our house will be paid for, but we'll still be on the hook for property taxes.

What all this means is that we both probably will need to work until we are closer to age 70, taking up slots that younger workers — like our sons — will be anxious to fill. And in the interim, our impulse will be to save rather than spend.

Three years ago we were part of the consuming class that helped drive the economy, thinking nothing of spending a couple of hundred bucks on a new piece of stereo equipment, dining out a couple of times a week, throwing patio parties for our friends or going to concerts. And we made regular investments in a 401(k) that both put money in Wall Street and offered the promise that we would be able to continue spending in retirement.

Now, we're an anchor on the economy, adding little to the national investment pool and quicker to save a buck than to spend one — personal patterns that are likely to continue for years, if not decades.

We're just one little choke point in the national recovery. But extrapolate our spending decisions across the millions of others who have lost their jobs, many of whom have had less luck managing these doldrums than we have. Add in a generation — our sons, having witnessed this at an impressionable age, are not likely to become profligate — and the macro problem comes into focus.

A consumer economy without consumers does not make for a robust future.

Scott Martelle, an author and former Los Angeles Times staff writer, lives in Irvine. http://www.scottmartelle.com