Most Layoff Events for a January
 

From the Bureau of Labor Statistics:

MASS LAYOFFS IN JANUARY 2004


In January 2004, there were 2,428 mass layoff actions by employers, as
measured by new filings for unemployment insurance benefits during the
month, according to data from the U.S. Department of Labor's Bureau of
Labor Statistics. Each action involved at least 50 persons from a
single establishment, and the number of workers involved totaled 239,454.


This marked the most events for a January and the third highest
January level of mass-layoff initial claims since the series began.
Both the number of layoff events and initial claims were higher than a
year ago. January 2004 marked only the third time in the last two years
that initial claims had increased over the year.


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

Bush fiddles while employment burns

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

The Facts Show Increase of Jobs Under Bush

Wednesday, Feb. 25, 2004

The media and Democrats keep repeating it over and over: "2.3 million jobs
lost" since President Bush took office. His could be the worst job record
since before World War II, they claim.
One little problem: It's not true.

Not only has there been no net loss of jobs during the Bush administration,
there has been a net gain, even with the devastation of 9/11. At least 2.4
million jobs have been created since the president took office, 2 million of
those in 2003. The gains more than offset the losses.

While Democrats continue to beat their election-year drums about
outsourcing, manufacturing losses, unemployment and slow growth in
employment, America's economy has been steadily creating jobs.

At least 366,000 jobs have been created in the last five months, over
100,000 of those in January, White House press secretary Scott McClellan has
noted. And though the eight-month recession "officially" ended in November,
economic indicators are surprising economists and pointing toward a take-off
in the recovery.

The signs:


a.. The 5.6 percent unemployment rate is the lowest in two years and below
the average of the 1980s (7.3 percent) and '90s (5.8 percent), and still
continues to drop.

a.. The nation's economic output revealed the strongest quarterly growth in
20 years. The data for the fourth quarter of 2003 show that the civilian
labor force rose by 333,000, while the number of unemployed in the labor
force dropped by 575,000. Even better, the number of so-called discouraged
workers declined in December.

a.. Consumer spending grew between 4 percent and 5 percent last year, and
real hourly earnings rose 1.5 percent. Real earnings have risen over the
last three years.

a.. Exports doubled to 19 percent in the fourth quarter, compared to less
than 9 percent in the third.

a.. The number of American workers is at an all-time high of 138.5 million,
a level never before attained in U.S. history.

a.. Jobless claims are 10 percent below the average of the last 25 years and
still falling.

a.. Hiring indices are up, even in manufacturing.

a.. Productivity growth is extremely high.

Now the doomsayers are criticizing the validity of the unemployment rate,
which at 5.6 percent does not fit their gloomy story.


Faulty Counting


The problem is the areas of biggest job growth are usually not even being
counted at all.


Though 75 percent of jobs are created by small companies, according to the
Small Business Administration, this sector's entrepreneurial activity and
the jobs it creates are left out by Washington bean counters when
calculating official new job numbers.


The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) does its Payroll Survey by phoning
businesses to crunch the number of jobs that have been gained or lost. This
is where Democrats grabbed onto their lifeline, the 2.3 million figure. Look
only at the Payroll Survey, and there has been a gain of only 522,000 jobs
since Bush took office.

But here's the rub. The Household Survey is used to determine the
unemployment rate and accounts for those who are self-employed, and small
emerging businesses that might be overlooked by the Payroll Survey. But the
number of U.S. firms isn't static, and the "fixed list" used by the BLS for
phoning established businesses does not reflect new entrepreneurial
activity.

People are called at home and asked if they have jobs, or if they are in the
market for a job. In contrast to the Payroll Survey, the Household Survey
shows that 2.4 million jobs have been created so far during Bush's time in
office.

As Economy.com writer Haseeb Ahmed recently wrote, "something is amiss in
the [Payroll] survey."

Credit Where Credit Is Due

That's not all. When doomsayers, and media spoiling for a fight in an
election year, laughed at Bush's prediction of 2.6 million new jobs this
year, not everyone was scoffing.

Ahmed, Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan and others hardly batted an
eye. Greenspan said it was "probably feasible" the economy would reach the
Bush administration's forecast of adding 2.6 million jobs this year,
provided growth continues and the productivity rate slows to more typically
levels.

"I don't think it's 'Fantasyland,'" Greenspan said.

"I agree with him," said John Ryding, chief market economist at Bear
Stearns. "I think that we will create 2.5 million, possibly more, jobs over
the balance of the year."

Ahmed is convinced that "the revision patterns of the early-1990s recovery
cycle" will be repeated. A total of 1.4 million job gains were revised
upward to 2.9 million in the first 21 months after the end of the last
recession, just after Bush Sr. was voted out of office.

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

Well Harry, here is more proof that your unions have made more disasters for
the west. You show your ignorance by even mentioning Bush after this
article. It is clearly obvious that this is a result of unions and labor
here in the west. Bush has never belonged to a union, he is a conservative,
who are typically not associated with unions (of course there are some
conservatives on unions).
Teachers and unions, full blame for this.






"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
From the Bureau of Labor Statistics:

MASS LAYOFFS IN JANUARY 2004


In January 2004, there were 2,428 mass layoff actions by employers, as
measured by new filings for unemployment insurance benefits during the
month, according to data from the U.S. Department of Labor's Bureau of
Labor Statistics. Each action involved at least 50 persons from a
single establishment, and the number of workers involved totaled 239,454.


This marked the most events for a January and the third highest
January level of mass-layoff initial claims since the series began.
Both the number of layoff events and initial claims were higher than a
year ago. January 2004 marked only the third time in the last two years
that initial claims had increased over the year.


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

Bush fiddles while employment burns

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 07:43:18 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

From the Bureau of Labor Statistics:

MASS LAYOFFS IN JANUARY 2004


In January 2004, there were 2,428 mass layoff actions by employers, as
measured by new filings for unemployment insurance benefits during the
month, according to data from the U.S. Department of Labor's Bureau of
Labor Statistics. Each action involved at least 50 persons from a
single establishment, and the number of workers involved totaled 239,454.


This marked the most events for a January and the third highest
January level of mass-layoff initial claims since the series began.
Both the number of layoff events and initial claims were higher than a
year ago. January 2004 marked only the third time in the last two years
that initial claims had increased over the year.

American people with the bill."

Of course, Kerry has the problem solved, according to today's
Washington Post:

snipped

"Kerry's speech, however, underscored the challenge for Democrats on
the issue. The only new proposal he offered would do nothing to stop
companies from moving jobs overseas, but would give government and
workers more advance notification.

Kerry said he would require companies to give three months' notice
before moving jobs abroad; the notice would go to workers and
government agencies tasked with offering laid-off employees assistance
and training. He said he would also require the Labor Department to
gather statistics on the number of jobs that have gone abroad, by
company, and to report them to Congress on an annual basis.

The Kerry campaign estimated that about 1 million jobs have moved
overseas since President Bush took office. Gene Sperling, a top
economic adviser in the Clinton White House, who briefed reporters,
acknowledged that the steps Kerry proposed Wednesday would not, by
themselves, do much to change the behavior of such companies. "

snipped

Wow, three months notice and gathering statistics. That ought to solve
all our job problems. What a joke!


John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 10:49:15 -0500, " Tuuk"
wrote:

Well Harry, here is more proof that your unions have made more disasters for
the west. You show your ignorance by even mentioning Bush after this
article. It is clearly obvious that this is a result of unions and labor
here in the west. Bush has never belonged to a union, he is a conservative,
who are typically not associated with unions (of course there are some
conservatives on unions).
Teachers and unions, full blame for this.






"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
From the Bureau of Labor Statistics:

MASS LAYOFFS IN JANUARY 2004


In January 2004, there were 2,428 mass layoff actions by employers, as
measured by new filings for unemployment insurance benefits during the
month, according to data from the U.S. Department of Labor's Bureau of
Labor Statistics. Each action involved at least 50 persons from a
single establishment, and the number of workers involved totaled 239,454.


This marked the most events for a January and the third highest
January level of mass-layoff initial claims since the series began.
Both the number of layoff events and initial claims were higher than a
year ago. January 2004 marked only the third time in the last two years
that initial claims had increased over the year.


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

Bush fiddles while employment burns



How the hell, again, are teachers responsible for this?

John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

John H wrote:

On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 07:43:18 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

From the Bureau of Labor Statistics:

MASS LAYOFFS IN JANUARY 2004


In January 2004, there were 2,428 mass layoff actions by employers, as
measured by new filings for unemployment insurance benefits during the
month, according to data from the U.S. Department of Labor's Bureau of
Labor Statistics. Each action involved at least 50 persons from a
single establishment, and the number of workers involved totaled 239,454.


This marked the most events for a January and the third highest
January level of mass-layoff initial claims since the series began.
Both the number of layoff events and initial claims were higher than a
year ago. January 2004 marked only the third time in the last two years
that initial claims had increased over the year.

American people with the bill."

Of course, Kerry has the problem solved, according to today's
Washington Post:

snipped

"Kerry's speech, however, underscored the challenge for Democrats on
the issue. The only new proposal he offered would do nothing to stop
companies from moving jobs overseas, but would give government and
workers more advance notification.

Kerry said he would require companies to give three months' notice
before moving jobs abroad; the notice would go to workers and
government agencies tasked with offering laid-off employees assistance
and training. He said he would also require the Labor Department to
gather statistics on the number of jobs that have gone abroad, by
company, and to report them to Congress on an annual basis.

The Kerry campaign estimated that about 1 million jobs have moved
overseas since President Bush took office. Gene Sperling, a top
economic adviser in the Clinton White House, who briefed reporters,
acknowledged that the steps Kerry proposed Wednesday would not, by
themselves, do much to change the behavior of such companies. "

snipped

Wow, three months notice and gathering statistics. That ought to solve
all our job problems. What a joke!


John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!


Kerry has announced a number of plans to help stop the flood of jobs
heading overseas. Your reference is to today's speech (or perhaps
yesterday's), in which he only announced one idea he didn't previously
discuss.

If this is an example of a military man's ability to research and
abstract, it's no wonder we lost in Korea and Vietnam, and are reduced
to fighting the crappy little armies of third-rate dictators these days.
It takes smart people to win a real war, which may explain why our win
record since WW II has been mediocre.

Or are you just trying to be disingenuous?

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
news:c3dhc2g=.6411803546648fe5e76cec188a5e909f@107 7816413.nulluser.com...
NOYB wrote:

The Facts Show Increase of Jobs Under Bush

Wednesday, Feb. 25, 2004

The media and Democrats keep repeating it over and over: "2.3 million
jobs
lost" since President Bush took office. His could be the worst job
record
since before World War II, they claim.
One little problem: It's not true.

Puh-lease...these apologeticas

Well, then you explain the large disparity between the Payroll Survey data
and the Household Survey data. Can't? I didn't think so. The Payroll
Survey (that'd be the piece of crappola you Dems keep bringing up) is
flawed...and fails to account for those employed by new businesses...or
those who are self-employed.

Look at the Unemployment Rate. It's at 5.6%...which is 0.2% below its
*average* for the 90's.

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:23:46 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

John H wrote:

On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 07:43:18 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

From the Bureau of Labor Statistics:

MASS LAYOFFS IN JANUARY 2004


In January 2004, there were 2,428 mass layoff actions by employers, as
measured by new filings for unemployment insurance benefits during the
month, according to data from the U.S. Department of Labor's Bureau of
Labor Statistics. Each action involved at least 50 persons from a
single establishment, and the number of workers involved totaled 239,454.


This marked the most events for a January and the third highest
January level of mass-layoff initial claims since the series began.
Both the number of layoff events and initial claims were higher than a
year ago. January 2004 marked only the third time in the last two years
that initial claims had increased over the year.

American people with the bill."

Of course, Kerry has the problem solved, according to today's
Washington Post:

snipped

"Kerry's speech, however, underscored the challenge for Democrats on
the issue. The only new proposal he offered would do nothing to stop
companies from moving jobs overseas, but would give government and
workers more advance notification.

Kerry said he would require companies to give three months' notice
before moving jobs abroad; the notice would go to workers and
government agencies tasked with offering laid-off employees assistance
and training. He said he would also require the Labor Department to
gather statistics on the number of jobs that have gone abroad, by
company, and to report them to Congress on an annual basis.

The Kerry campaign estimated that about 1 million jobs have moved
overseas since President Bush took office. Gene Sperling, a top
economic adviser in the Clinton White House, who briefed reporters,
acknowledged that the steps Kerry proposed Wednesday would not, by
themselves, do much to change the behavior of such companies. "

snipped

Wow, three months notice and gathering statistics. That ought to solve
all our job problems. What a joke!


John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!


Kerry has announced a number of plans to help stop the flood of jobs
heading overseas. Your reference is to today's speech (or perhaps
yesterday's), in which he only announced one idea he didn't previously
discuss.

If this is an example of a military man's ability to research and
abstract, it's no wonder we lost in Korea and Vietnam, and are reduced
to fighting the crappy little armies of third-rate dictators these days.
It takes smart people to win a real war, which may explain why our win
record since WW II has been mediocre.

Or are you just trying to be disingenuous?


Oh, I just pasted what appeared to be the best of his proposals.
Others were mentioned in the article. Here's another selection:

"Sperling noted that there is not a "silver bullet" when it comes to
outsourcing. But he said Kerry has made other proposals, including a
manufacturing tax credit, a health care plan that he said would cut
corporate costs and an energy plan that would lower production costs
for U.S. companies and make it more attractive for them to keep their
plants in this country."

A manufacturing tax credit sure sounds like a tax cut for the wealthy
corporations. If health care costs were reduced by 95%, corporations
would still save money by outsourcing. Notice how specific Kerry is
about the 'energy savings' he will provide. Yeah, right!

I suppose there *are* people who believe this. I sure hope you aren't
one of them, Harry.

John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
news:c1m2mm$1i79b5$1@ID-

Kerry has announced a number of plans

Oh yeah? Then name *one*.

Come on , Harry, name just *one* little plan Kerry has laid forth to stem
the flow of manufacturing jobs.

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
news:c3dhc2g=.6411803546648fe5e76cec188a5e909f@107 7816413.nulluser.com...
NOYB wrote:

The Facts Show Increase of Jobs Under Bush

Wednesday, Feb. 25, 2004

The media and Democrats keep repeating it over and over: "2.3 million
jobs
lost" since President Bush took office. His could be the worst job
record
since before World War II, they claim.
One little problem: It's not true.

Puh-lease...these apologeticas

Well, then you explain the large disparity between the Payroll Survey data
and the Household Survey data. Can't? I didn't think so. The Payroll
Survey (that'd be the piece of crappola you Dems keep bringing up) is
flawed...and fails to account for those employed by new businesses...or
those who are self-employed.

Ah, yes...the newly self-employed...laid-off workers who can't find work.

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message

news:c3dhc2g=.6411803546648fe5e76cec188a5e909f@107 7816413.nulluser.com...
NOYB wrote:

The Facts Show Increase of Jobs Under Bush

Wednesday, Feb. 25, 2004

The media and Democrats keep repeating it over and over: "2.3 million
jobs
lost" since President Bush took office. His could be the worst job
record
since before World War II, they claim.
One little problem: It's not true.

Puh-lease...these apologeticas

Well, then you explain the large disparity between the Payroll Survey
data
and the Household Survey data. Can't? I didn't think so. The Payroll
Survey (that'd be the piece of crappola you Dems keep bringing up) is
flawed...and fails to account for those employed by new businesses...or
those who are self-employed.

Ah, yes...the newly self-employed...laid-off workers who can't find work.

Many a millionaire started off as a laid-off worker who became self-employed
out of necessity. Working for a corporation leaves a lot to be desired.
For many of the workers, getting laid-off may be a blessing in disguise.

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

Harry have you read his web site, I would have thought he would have some
concrete plans, but nope, nothing there besides nice sound bites.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message

news:c3dhc2g=.6411803546648fe5e76cec188a5e909f@107 7816413.nulluser.com...
NOYB wrote:

The Facts Show Increase of Jobs Under Bush

Wednesday, Feb. 25, 2004

The media and Democrats keep repeating it over and over: "2.3 million
jobs
lost" since President Bush took office. His could be the worst job
record
since before World War II, they claim.
One little problem: It's not true.

Puh-lease...these apologeticas

Well, then you explain the large disparity between the Payroll Survey
data
and the Household Survey data. Can't? I didn't think so. The Payroll
Survey (that'd be the piece of crappola you Dems keep bringing up) is
flawed...and fails to account for those employed by new businesses...or
those who are self-employed.

Ah, yes...the newly self-employed...laid-off workers who can't find work.

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message

news:c3dhc2g=.6411803546648fe5e76cec188a5e909f@107 7816413.nulluser.com...
NOYB wrote:

The Facts Show Increase of Jobs Under Bush

Wednesday, Feb. 25, 2004

The media and Democrats keep repeating it over and over: "2.3 million
jobs
lost" since President Bush took office. His could be the worst job
record
since before World War II, they claim.
One little problem: It's not true.

Puh-lease...these apologeticas

Well, then you explain the large disparity between the Payroll Survey
data
and the Household Survey data. Can't? I didn't think so. The Payroll
Survey (that'd be the piece of crappola you Dems keep bringing up) is
flawed...and fails to account for those employed by new businesses...or
those who are self-employed.

Ah, yes...the newly self-employed...laid-off workers who can't find work.

Many a millionaire started off as a laid-off worker who became self-employed
out of necessity. Working for a corporation leaves a lot to be desired.
For many of the workers, getting laid-off may be a blessing in disguise.


Are you testing the next dumb statement to come out of the Bush
Administration?

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 01:13:37 +0000, NOYB wrote:


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
news:c1m2mm$1i79b5$1@ID-

Kerry has announced a number of plans

Oh yeah? Then name *one*.

Come on , Harry, name just *one* little plan Kerry has laid forth to stem
the flow of manufacturing jobs.

Geez guy, this is the internet, read for yourself:

http://www.johnkerry.com/

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 01:13:37 +0000, NOYB wrote:


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
news:c1m2mm$1i79b5$1@ID-

Kerry has announced a number of plans

Oh yeah? Then name *one*.

Come on , Harry, name just *one* little plan Kerry has laid forth to
stem
the flow of manufacturing jobs.

Geez guy, this is the internet, read for yourself:

http://www.johnkerry.com/

Thanks for the link. I saw where Kerry blamed Bush for the loss of
manufacturing jobs...but there is no detailed plan on how Kerry would deal
with the issue. Go ahead and look for yourself. See if you can post one
Kerry plan for stopping the loss of manufacturing jobs overseas.

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

Harry ,,, why do you accuse someone else of making a dumb statement ?? When
you said,,

""Ah, yes...the newly self-employed...laid-off workers who can't find
work.""

You know these newly laid off workers, they are the uncompetitive ones, the
ones who have landed in this position because of their own stupidity. The
reason they cannot find work there Harry is because they will only work for
a ridiculous amount of money, with all the fringes. They are so spoiled by
the ridiculous packages they have had historically that they now are ruined
and will not work for anyone for less than 50,000 per year, even if it is
picking cherries.
The union mentality. Cannot find work??? I think not, I think they are
ruined, I wouldn't want to hire an ex union worker, never.






"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message


news:c3dhc2g=.6411803546648fe5e76cec188a5e909f@107 7816413.nulluser.com...
NOYB wrote:

The Facts Show Increase of Jobs Under Bush

Wednesday, Feb. 25, 2004

The media and Democrats keep repeating it over and over: "2.3
million
jobs
lost" since President Bush took office. His could be the worst job
record
since before World War II, they claim.
One little problem: It's not true.

Puh-lease...these apologeticas

Well, then you explain the large disparity between the Payroll Survey
data
and the Household Survey data. Can't? I didn't think so. The
Payroll
Survey (that'd be the piece of crappola you Dems keep bringing up) is
flawed...and fails to account for those employed by new
businesses...or
those who are self-employed.

Ah, yes...the newly self-employed...laid-off workers who can't find
work.

Many a millionaire started off as a laid-off worker who became
self-employed
out of necessity. Working for a corporation leaves a lot to be desired.
For many of the workers, getting laid-off may be a blessing in disguise.


Are you testing the next dumb statement to come out of the Bush
Administration?

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

"NOYB" wrote in message
om...

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 01:13:37 +0000, NOYB wrote:


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
news:c1m2mm$1i79b5$1@ID-

Kerry has announced a number of plans

Oh yeah? Then name *one*.

Come on , Harry, name just *one* little plan Kerry has laid forth to
stem
the flow of manufacturing jobs.

Geez guy, this is the internet, read for yourself:

http://www.johnkerry.com/

Thanks for the link. I saw where Kerry blamed Bush for the loss of
manufacturing jobs...but there is no detailed plan on how Kerry would
deal
with the issue. Go ahead and look for yourself. See if you can post
one
Kerry plan for stopping the loss of manufacturing jobs overseas.



He has no room to talk about divisiveness either ......from his web site

"As president, I will put American government and our legal system back
on the side of women."

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

" Tuuk" wrote in message
...
Harry ,,, why do you accuse someone else of making a dumb statement ??
When
you said,,

""Ah, yes...the newly self-employed...laid-off workers who can't find
work.""

You know these newly laid off workers, they are the uncompetitive ones,
the
ones who have landed in this position because of their own stupidity.
The
reason they cannot find work there Harry is because they will only work
for
a ridiculous amount of money, with all the fringes. They are so spoiled
by
the ridiculous packages they have had historically that they now are
ruined
and will not work for anyone for less than 50,000 per year, even if it
is
picking cherries.
The union mentality. Cannot find work??? I think not, I think they are
ruined, I wouldn't want to hire an ex union worker, never.

Actually, those recently laid off self employed are the ones that have the
drive and determination to make it on their own, the union slobs would be in
line at the unemployment office waiting for the guvmint handout.







"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in
message



news:c3dhc2g=.6411803546648fe5e76cec188a5e909f@107 7816413.nulluser.com...
NOYB wrote:

The Facts Show Increase of Jobs Under Bush

Wednesday, Feb. 25, 2004

The media and Democrats keep repeating it over and over: "2.3
million
jobs
lost" since President Bush took office. His could be the worst
job
record
since before World War II, they claim.
One little problem: It's not true.

Puh-lease...these apologeticas

Well, then you explain the large disparity between the Payroll
Survey
data
and the Household Survey data. Can't? I didn't think so. The
Payroll
Survey (that'd be the piece of crappola you Dems keep bringing
up) is
flawed...and fails to account for those employed by new
businesses...or
those who are self-employed.

Ah, yes...the newly self-employed...laid-off workers who can't find
work.

Many a millionaire started off as a laid-off worker who became
self-employed
out of necessity. Working for a corporation leaves a lot to be
desired.
For many of the workers, getting laid-off may be a blessing in
disguise.


Are you testing the next dumb statement to come out of the Bush
Administration?

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

Tuuk wrote in message
...
snip usual idiotic blathering...
The union mentality. Cannot find work??? I think not, I think they are
ruined, I wouldn't want to hire an ex union worker, never.

I suppose you'd rather hire those poor illegal immigrants smuggled in on a
regular basis.
They will work for peanuts and keep their mouths shut......as you exploit
them for your own gain.
Shame on you!

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:26:26 +0000, NOYB wrote:


Thanks for the link. I saw where Kerry blamed Bush for the loss of
manufacturing jobs...but there is no detailed plan on how Kerry would deal
with the issue. Go ahead and look for yourself. See if you can post one
Kerry plan for stopping the loss of manufacturing jobs overseas.

To me, issues and campaign promises aren't very important in a President.
I look for two qualities, honor and competence, then, if both candidates
have those qualities, I'll look at the issues. Unfortunately, I rarely
get to the issues. I'm still judging Kerry, but have more than enough
information to judge Bush incompetent.

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:26:26 +0000, NOYB wrote:


Thanks for the link. I saw where Kerry blamed Bush for the loss of
manufacturing jobs...but there is no detailed plan on how Kerry would
deal
with the issue. Go ahead and look for yourself. See if you can post
one
Kerry plan for stopping the loss of manufacturing jobs overseas.

To me, issues and campaign promises aren't very important in a President.
I look for two qualities, honor and competence, then, if both candidates
have those qualities, I'll look at the issues. Unfortunately, I rarely
get to the issues. I'm still judging Kerry, but have more than enough
information to judge Bush incompetent.



Well, if Kerry doesn't have a plan to stop the export of manufacturing jobs,
then it's hypocritical for him to blame Bush for the exact same
short-coming.

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

"Don White" wrote in message
...

Tuuk wrote in message
...
snip usual idiotic blathering...
The union mentality. Cannot find work??? I think not, I think they are
ruined, I wouldn't want to hire an ex union worker, never.

I suppose you'd rather hire those poor illegal immigrants smuggled in on a
regular basis.
They will work for peanuts and keep their mouths shut......as you exploit
them for your own gain.
Shame on you!

Most of those illegal immigrants are among the hardest working members of
our society. The smart ones apply that hard work ethic and venture out on
their own. I have a Mexican patient with a very succesful dry-walling
business. 5 years ago, you would have been calling him "exploited"...but I
doubt you'd hear him complaining today about his success.

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 18:00:44 +0000, NOYB wrote:


Well, if Kerry doesn't have a plan to stop the export of manufacturing jobs,
then it's hypocritical for him to blame Bush for the exact same
short-coming.

I didn't say he didn't have a plan, I just don't spend to much time on
campaign promises. They rarely amount to much. Some are just BS. Some
never make it past congress. For instance, GWB has fulfilled less than
half of his 2000 campaign promises:

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/7729783.htm

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

Strike 3, your out!

*ploink*

--
-Netsock

"It's just about going fast...that's all..."
http://home.insight.rr.com/cgreen/
"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 18:00:44 +0000, NOYB wrote:


Well, if Kerry doesn't have a plan to stop the export of manufacturing
jobs,
then it's hypocritical for him to blame Bush for the exact same
short-coming.

I didn't say he didn't have a plan, I just don't spend to much time on
campaign promises. They rarely amount to much. Some are just BS. Some
never make it past congress. For instance, GWB has fulfilled less than
half of his 2000 campaign promises:

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/7729783.htm

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

Harry Krause wrote in message Your
posts read as if you were tossed out of school permanently in the
third grade. Either that, or you've been bungee-jumping with too long a
cord.

he he he....that's probably why he keeps 'shaking the head'. That ground is
hard when you keep trying to bury your noggin in it.

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

Come on there Don White,,, give your head a shake..
My friend has a beautiful Asian wife. Mixed marriage, you should talk to
him. He sees your racist type every day. Especially women. Women hate to see
the younger looking and much petite women who take so much better care of
their husband. Western women just hate and want to scratch the eyes out of
these Asian women who are making it harder for the fat and lazy western
woman to stay that way.
Exactly the same for the western labor attitude. When they see an Asian who
is here in the west working and doing the job more efficiently, more
cooperatively, more accurately and simply better and of course for less, you
labor union slobs just hate that. So you throw mud or insults at them. This
just shows you are racists there Don White. They laugh at you, you try and
insult them but they know they are smarter and better in both ethics and
economics and loyalty. You union dummies steal more from the firm every day
then your worth.

Hey , get used to it, the Asians will run the west soon enough, and finally
you union slobs and dummies will be forced into reality and the west may be
saved.
You wait, in Canada now there are more Asians than french speaking
Canadians. When they take majority vote, then those french who simply want
to destroy the country and the lazy union dummies will all see an eye
opening.








"Don White" wrote in message
...

Tuuk wrote in message
...
snip usual idiotic blathering...
The union mentality. Cannot find work??? I think not, I think they are
ruined, I wouldn't want to hire an ex union worker, never.

I suppose you'd rather hire those poor illegal immigrants smuggled in on a
regular basis.
They will work for peanuts and keep their mouths shut......as you exploit
them for your own gain.
Shame on you!

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

Either that or I am right.

And you know you won the argument when your opponent flings some mud at you
or insults your family members.

Not that I needed the flowers there Scarry and Dum WHite,,, but thanks for
admitting it.





"Don White" wrote in message
...

Harry Krause wrote in message Your
posts read as if you were tossed out of school permanently in the
third grade. Either that, or you've been bungee-jumping with too long a
cord.

he he he....that's probably why he keeps 'shaking the head'. That ground
is
hard when you keep trying to bury your noggin in it.

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

"Don White" wrote in message ...
Tuuk wrote in message
...
snip usual idiotic blathering...
The union mentality. Cannot find work??? I think not, I think they are
ruined, I wouldn't want to hire an ex union worker, never.

I suppose you'd rather hire those poor illegal immigrants smuggled in on a
regular basis.
They will work for peanuts and keep their mouths shut......as you exploit
them for your own gain.
Shame on you!

Yeah, without Harry we will all be working 130 hours a week again, for
$1.25 per hour... AAAAAARRRRRRRRGGGGGG! At least that is what Harry
wants you to think. Don, you know nothing about unions beyond party
line and Harry is a liar. Stick to what you know, ooooops too late,
you are already considered by most here as just another political
whore for the left, no credibility, no respect..

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

thunder wrote:

To me, issues and campaign promises aren't very important in a President.
I look for two qualities, honor and competence, then, if both candidates
have those qualities, I'll look at the issues.

Yea, ok.

When you find honor in *any* politician, let us know.

-- Charlie

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 18:00:44 +0000, NOYB wrote:


Well, if Kerry doesn't have a plan to stop the export of manufacturing
jobs,
then it's hypocritical for him to blame Bush for the exact same
short-coming.

I didn't say he didn't have a plan, I just don't spend to much time on
campaign promises. They rarely amount to much. Some are just BS. Some
never make it past congress. For instance, GWB has fulfilled less than
half of his 2000 campaign promises:

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/7729783.htm


"Despite his mixed record of success, Bush has at least tried to follow
through on the vast majority of his commitments. Most have been presented to
Congress as part of his annual budget or in the form of legislation."



You think Kerry would try to follow through on the vast majority of his
commitments? I doubt it...since he's not even sure what those commitments
are.

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

Well let's see......
I've belonged to unions for my entire 32 year working life...
Was the longest serving treasurer in my local..
1979-1991
1993 1997
president 1997-1998 until we were combined with another union.
vice president of CMG location 1998-2001
treasurer CMG unit 2001-2003
What's your history?

Backyard Renegade wrote in message
Yeah, without Harry we will all be working 130 hours a week again, for
$1.25 per hour... AAAAAARRRRRRRRGGGGGG! At least that is what Harry
wants you to think. Don, you know nothing about unions beyond party
line and Harry is a liar. Stick to what you know, ooooops too late,
you are already considered by most here as just another political
whore for the left, no credibility, no respect..

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

"Don White" wrote in message
...
Well let's see......
I've belonged to unions for my entire 32 year working life...
Was the longest serving treasurer in my local..
1979-1991
1993 1997
president 1997-1998 until we were combined with another union.
vice president of CMG location 1998-2001
treasurer CMG unit 2001-2003
What's your history?


I was with laborers, carpenters, iron workers, electricians and (heavy
equipment) operators union members all day today on various institutional
and industrial construction jobs. It was below freezing all day with a
stiff wind. The jobs were mainly in the initial steel erection state,
although caissons, footers and foundations were still being trenched,
excavated, framed and poured.

I have nothing but the utmost respect for those union workers and the work
they do. They certainly earn every cent they make.

My problem is with the unions representing non skilled factory workers, such
as the Chrysler Motors floor sweepers making $25/hour, the same wage as the
construction laborers working in mud in freezing conditions while lifting
heavy loads in dangerous conditions.

Not all unions are bad. However I do have a problem with the industrial
(factory), retail and educational unions.

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

On Sat, 28 Feb 2004 00:28:30 +0000, NOYB wrote:


"Despite his mixed record of success, Bush has at least tried to follow
through on the vast majority of his commitments. Most have been presented to
Congress as part of his annual budget or in the form of legislation."

I don't have figures for other Presidents, but I suspect GWB's numbers are
on the high side. He has had the advantage that his party has controlled
Congress for much of his administration.


You think Kerry would try to follow through on the vast majority of his
commitments? I doubt it...since he's not even sure what those commitments
are.

I'm not excited about Kerry, but have no reason to doubt his veracity.
However, since Iraq, I am definitely anti-Bush.

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

What it sounds like, is you had to belong to the union because of your own
skills didn't secure your job. You had to collectively hold the strong arm
with the gun to your employers head in order to get your demands met. The
union was your replacement for your own worth, self worth, it was your
protection. I have never worked for a union, never had the need. I performed
for my employers and met all required targets and have what is called
performance analysis regularly. My performance is measured, should I not
meet my targets or budgets then my rewards are not as comforting as when I
meet my objectives.
The union is simply a tool to use against your employer and maximize your
takings from your firm. You are right what you say about most labor unions
and educational unions, they are the worst and do the most damage.
Also, I was denied a job because I refused to join a union, I was press
mechanic at a printing press, keeping the machines running and repairing
them and worked for 30 consecutive days, this meant my turn for the union, I
asked not to, and was told I either joined or worked elsewhere, and this was
a big printing firm. The best thing that ever happened to me was to leave
that firm because of the union rules. Allowed me to finish another program
and on to bigger and better things.
Nope, I didn't need the union to protect me, my skills and work habits were
enough, I didn't need a gun or picket sign or bunch of rebels throwing rocks
through anyone's home windows or shutting down production anywhere because
of me. I get paid market wages, its all market driven, and the unions are
driving the market downward in a deadly spiral.






"Don White" wrote in message
...
Well let's see......
I've belonged to unions for my entire 32 year working life...
Was the longest serving treasurer in my local..
1979-1991
1993 1997
president 1997-1998 until we were combined with another union.
vice president of CMG location 1998-2001
treasurer CMG unit 2001-2003
What's your history?

Backyard Renegade wrote in message
Yeah, without Harry we will all be working 130 hours a week again, for
$1.25 per hour... AAAAAARRRRRRRRGGGGGG! At least that is what Harry
wants you to think. Don, you know nothing about unions beyond party
line and Harry is a liar. Stick to what you know, ooooops too late,
you are already considered by most here as just another political
whore for the left, no credibility, no respect..

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

Tuuk wrote:


The union is simply a tool to use against your employer and maximize your
takings from your firm.

The union is a group of workers who band together to help level the
playing field when negotiating with their employer over wages, hours and
working conditions.

United we stand; divided we fall. Works for countries, works for workers.

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

United we stand ???/ Come on harry,,, look what is happening to
manufacturing now,, jobs are vanishing left and right,, all because of your
"'United we stand""" theory.


Harry, you said

"""The union is a group of workers who band together to help level the
playing field when negotiating with their employer over wages, hours and
working conditions.''"

You think this was necessary? For these people to "band" together, to force
unreasonable remunerations, hours, working conditions, etc etc? You think
that is necessary? Why because your own self worth is nothing? So why should
the employer who has the most risk have to keep you hired on, costing
everyone in the firm money, because you cannot carry your own.
So you need the gun to the head leverage, all this does is drive your
product to far too expensive and knock you out of the competitive league.
I think your spinning here Harry,,,, Lets look at what else you said...

"""United we stand; divided we fall. Works for countries, works for
workers."""

Come on harry, you do not sound too united to me, all see you do is bash
your country's objectives to rid the world of terrorism and American and
Christian killers. Your objecting to your country's efforts to make the
world a more peaceful place, with less poverty and less disease.
Unless you were visited by three ghosts last night in your sleep, I figured
you were so much against Bush's agendas that you were ready to leave
America. Now your saying ""United we stand""" """Works for countrys, works
for workers""" Well, to get back on point,, there is a difference between
workers and unionized workers.
Non unionized workers are compensated based on their skills, performance,
where as unionized labor is compensated based on their collective, banded
together, strong arm, many times violent, fighting, (or you call it
negotiating) efforts.

See, me, I am paid for what I am worth,,, You harry ,,, not the same, I
think your remunerations are more like welfare, you get it, but you do not
earn it. Sure you are successful in your "negotiations" whether they are
violent negotiations or not. Because you threaten to shut the plant down
should you not get your demands,,, some negotiations,,, LOL,, Well, now you
managed to shut the country's manufacturing down. You unions are directly
responsible for today's economic uncompetitiveness.
When Henry Ford brought in the Army when that union rebelled, they should
have made a more stronger message.
Besides, I do not need a union leader to tell me when to work, when to have
break, when to have a ****, when to speak, when to eat, when to drink
another coffee, when to breath, when to push that button and not do this
job, or that job, only do my job, and nothing more, etc etc. I feel more
pride and self worth doing things my way. Remember, only 17% of U.S. is
unionized and only 28% of Canadian workers are unionized. So collectively
you strong arms have violently managed to chock the entire workforce.
Sorry, but it fits so well here harry,,,, looks like ya gotta give the old
coconut another shaking,,,,






"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Tuuk wrote:


The union is simply a tool to use against your employer and maximize
your
takings from your firm.

The union is a group of workers who band together to help level the
playing field when negotiating with their employer over wages, hours and
working conditions.

United we stand; divided we fall. Works for countries, works for workers.

Most Layoff Events for a January
 

Get it straight who you're replying to...
Jim_ _ mentioned the factory unions.

Tuuk wrote in message
...
What it sounds like, is you had to belong to the union because of your own
skills didn't secure your job. You had to collectively hold the strong arm
with the gun to your employers head in order to get your demands met. The
union was your replacement for your own worth, self worth, it was your
protection. I have never worked for a union, never had the need. I
performed
for my employers and met all required targets and have what is called
performance analysis regularly. My performance is measured, should I not
meet my targets or budgets then my rewards are not as comforting as when I
meet my objectives.
The union is simply a tool to use against your employer and maximize your
takings from your firm. You are right what you say about most labor unions
and educational unions, they are the worst and do the most damage.
Also, I was denied a job because I refused to join a union, I was press
mechanic at a printing press, keeping the machines running and repairing
them and worked for 30 consecutive days, this meant my turn for the union,
I
asked not to, and was told I either joined or worked elsewhere, and this
was
a big printing firm. The best thing that ever happened to me was to leave
that firm because of the union rules. Allowed me to finish another program
and on to bigger and better things.
Nope, I didn't need the union to protect me, my skills and work habits
were
enough, I didn't need a gun or picket sign or bunch of rebels throwing
rocks
through anyone's home windows or shutting down production anywhere because
of me. I get paid market wages, its all market driven, and the unions are
driving the market downward in a deadly spiral.






"Don White" wrote in message
...
Well let's see......
I've belonged to unions for my entire 32 year working life...
Was the longest serving treasurer in my local..
1979-1991
1993 1997
president 1997-1998 until we were combined with another union.
vice president of CMG location 1998-2001
treasurer CMG unit 2001-2003
What's your history?

Backyard Renegade wrote in message
Yeah, without Harry we will all be working 130 hours a week again, for
$1.25 per hour... AAAAAARRRRRRRRGGGGGG! At least that is what Harry
wants you to think. Don, you know nothing about unions beyond party
line and Harry is a liar. Stick to what you know, ooooops too late,
you are already considered by most here as just another political
whore for the left, no credibility, no respect..