BoatBanter.com

BoatBanter.com (https://www.boatbanter.com/)
-   General (https://www.boatbanter.com/general/)
-   -   ( OT ) Jobless rate at 20-year high (https://www.boatbanter.com/general/3422-ot-jobless-rate-20-year-high.html)

Jim March 4th 04 10:50 AM

( OT ) Jobless rate at 20-year high
 
Jobless rate at 20-year high

Area health and education gains fail to offset manufacturing losses.

By Michael Wentzel
Staff Writer

(March 4, 2004) — More area residents were out of work in January than
at any time in the last 20 years.

The unemployment rate in the six-county Rochester area jumped to 7
percent, representing about 39,600 people looking for work, according to
statistics released Wednesday by the state Department of Labor.

In January 1984, the unemployment rate was 8.5 percent and 41,800 people
were unemployed.

“These numbers are part of the continuing loss of manufacturing jobs,”
said Tammi Marino, a department economist.

Since January 2003, the number of manufacturing jobs in the Rochester
area fell to 78,300, a decline of 9,300 or more than 10 percent,
according to state estimates.

The area has lost almost 5,000 manufacturing jobs since December alone.

Kent D. Gardner, director of economic analysis with the Center for
Governmental Research, called January “not a good month at all.”

“But I’m confident the unemployment rate is a statistical anomaly and
we’ll see it come back down in February to the same range it’s been,”
Gardner said.

The unemployment rate in the Rochester area in January was up from 5.7
percent in December and 6.5 percent in January 2003. The number of
people unemployed was 32,700 in December and 37,300 in January 2003.

The area’s strongest job- growth sector since January 2003 was
educational and health services with 100,100 jobs, an increase of 4,000
in one year but down 400 from December 2003.

Marino said the statistics indicate a “bottoming-out” in job losses in
telecommunications and trade and suggest that improvement should occur
later in the year.

The state estimates the area had 5,700 telecommunications jobs in
January, down 5 percent in a year. About 60,300 had retail trade jobs,
down almost 3,000 since December but equal to January 2003. Finance and
insurance jobs increased 4.8 percent to 15,200 in a year.

The Rochester metropolitan area covers Monroe, Genesee, Livingston,
Ontario, Orleans and Wayne counties.

The unemployment rate for the state was 7.2 percent, up from 6.2 percent
in December and 7 percent in January 2003.




NOYB March 4th 04 01:15 PM

...in Rochester NY due to the Kodak plant closings
 
You guys are pathetic and predictable. Your "the-sky-is-falling" reports on
jobs always precede the Bureau of Labor Statistics *actual* employment
numbers by one or two days. I guess you can call it a preemptive
strike...'cause you know that tomorrow's report ain't gonna be good for the
Democratic candidate...and will be *VERY GOOD* for Bush's reelection
chances. I predict another 0.2 drop in the Unemployment rate.

Prediction: 5.4% unemployment rate.



John H March 4th 04 01:42 PM

...in Rochester NY due to the Kodak plant closings
 
On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 13:15:50 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:

You guys are pathetic and predictable. Your "the-sky-is-falling" reports on
jobs always precede the Bureau of Labor Statistics *actual* employment
numbers by one or two days. I guess you can call it a preemptive
strike...'cause you know that tomorrow's report ain't gonna be good for the
Democratic candidate...and will be *VERY GOOD* for Bush's reelection
chances. I predict another 0.2 drop in the Unemployment rate.

Prediction: 5.4% unemployment rate.


Good morning, Florida!

John H

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

John H March 4th 04 01:46 PM

( OT ) Jobless rate at 20-year high
 
On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 07:23:26 -0500 (EST), "Harry Krause"
wrote:

Jim wrote:

Jobless rate at 20-year high

Area health and education gains fail to offset manufacturing losses.

By Michael Wentzel
Staff Writer

(March 4, 2004) — More area residents were out of work in January than
at any time in the last 20 years.

The unemployment rate in the six-county Rochester area jumped to 7
percent, representing about 39,600 people looking for work, according to
statistics released Wednesday by the state Department of Labor.

In January 1984, the unemployment rate was 8.5 percent and 41,800 people
were unemployed.

“These numbers are part of the continuing loss of manufacturing jobs,”
said Tammi Marino, a department economist.

Since January 2003, the number of manufacturing jobs in the Rochester
area fell to 78,300, a decline of 9,300 or more than 10 percent,
according to state estimates.

The area has lost almost 5,000 manufacturing jobs since December alone.

Kent D. Gardner, director of economic analysis with the Center for
Governmental Research, called January “not a good month at all.”




Perhaps your local Chamber of Commerce should retain our buddy, Noyby,
to fly up and give a pep talk to the unemployed, and to let them know
how much Bush has done to help them find new jobs that pay enough to
support their families.

After all, flipping burgers is manufacturing, according to the
Bush-****ters, and they also believe sending American jobs to India
helps working Americans.


Harry, if you search hard enough you should be able to find an area
with 100% unemployment. Then you could post that and everyone would
vote for your choice of candidates because you are always correct.

In my house, the unemployment rate is 50%. That excludes part-time
employment, of course.

Using that statistic as a starting point, you should have no trouble
finding a totally unemployed area. Try certain sections of northeast
D.C.

John H

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

John H March 4th 04 02:02 PM

...in Rochester NY due to the Kodak plant closings
 
On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 08:53:36 -0500 (EST), "Harry Krause"
wrote:

NOYB wrote:

You guys are pathetic and predictable. Your "the-sky-is-falling"

reports on
jobs always precede the Bureau of Labor Statistics *actual* employment
numbers by one or two days. I guess you can call it a preemptive
strike...'cause you know that tomorrow's report ain't gonna be good

for the
Democratic candidate...and will be *VERY GOOD* for Bush's reelection
chances. I predict another 0.2 drop in the Unemployment rate.

Prediction: 5.4% unemployment rate.


An unemployment rate that falls because unemployed workers are running
out of benefits?

An unemployment rate that falls because long-out-of-work workers are
forced to take crappy jobs that pay a third of the good jobs that were
lost while Bush was standing watch?


Here's an interesting stat, possibly related to the failed Bush economy:

Pew Research Center for the People & the Press survey conducted by
Princeton Survey Research Associates. Feb. 24-29, 2004. N=1,000 adults
nationwide. MoE ± 3.5.

"Now thinking about our country, overall, are you satisfied or
dissatisfied with the way things are going in our country today?" Trend
includes slight variation in question wording.

Satisfied Dissatisfied No Opinion
% % %
2/24-29//04 39 55 6

12/19/03 - 1/4/04 45 48 7

12/15-17/03 44 47 9


Oh, and let's not forget to factor in that a growing number of Americans
now feel that Bush lies - about things that are important.


Notice that ratings have gone down with the onslaught TV coverage of
the Democrat primary coverage. What you are seeing here is a
reflection of the satisfaction of television content. Now that other
things can occupy the news, these numbers will get better.

John H

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

basskisser March 4th 04 07:42 PM

...in Rochester NY due to the Kodak plant closings
 
John H wrote in message . ..
On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 08:53:36 -0500 (EST), "Harry Krause"
wrote:

NOYB wrote:

You guys are pathetic and predictable. Your "the-sky-is-falling"

reports on
jobs always precede the Bureau of Labor Statistics *actual* employment
numbers by one or two days. I guess you can call it a preemptive
strike...'cause you know that tomorrow's report ain't gonna be good

for the
Democratic candidate...and will be *VERY GOOD* for Bush's reelection
chances. I predict another 0.2 drop in the Unemployment rate.

Prediction: 5.4% unemployment rate.


An unemployment rate that falls because unemployed workers are running
out of benefits?

An unemployment rate that falls because long-out-of-work workers are
forced to take crappy jobs that pay a third of the good jobs that were
lost while Bush was standing watch?


Here's an interesting stat, possibly related to the failed Bush economy:

Pew Research Center for the People & the Press survey conducted by
Princeton Survey Research Associates. Feb. 24-29, 2004. N=1,000 adults
nationwide. MoE ± 3.5.

"Now thinking about our country, overall, are you satisfied or
dissatisfied with the way things are going in our country today?" Trend
includes slight variation in question wording.

Satisfied Dissatisfied No Opinion
% % %
2/24-29//04 39 55 6

12/19/03 - 1/4/04 45 48 7

12/15-17/03 44 47 9


Oh, and let's not forget to factor in that a growing number of Americans
now feel that Bush lies - about things that are important.


Notice that ratings have gone down with the onslaught TV coverage of
the Democrat primary coverage. What you are seeing here is a
reflection of the satisfaction of television content. Now that other
things can occupy the news, these numbers will get better.

John H

I hope they DO get better. I certainly don't want it to be a close
race, it would be too risky, and Bush may win.

John H March 4th 04 08:51 PM

...in Rochester NY due to the Kodak plant closings
 
On 4 Mar 2004 11:42:04 -0800, (basskisser) wrote:

John H wrote in message . ..
On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 08:53:36 -0500 (EST), "Harry Krause"
wrote:

NOYB wrote:

You guys are pathetic and predictable. Your "the-sky-is-falling"

reports on
jobs always precede the Bureau of Labor Statistics *actual* employment
numbers by one or two days. I guess you can call it a preemptive
strike...'cause you know that tomorrow's report ain't gonna be good

for the
Democratic candidate...and will be *VERY GOOD* for Bush's reelection
chances. I predict another 0.2 drop in the Unemployment rate.

Prediction: 5.4% unemployment rate.

An unemployment rate that falls because unemployed workers are running
out of benefits?

An unemployment rate that falls because long-out-of-work workers are
forced to take crappy jobs that pay a third of the good jobs that were
lost while Bush was standing watch?


Here's an interesting stat, possibly related to the failed Bush economy:

Pew Research Center for the People & the Press survey conducted by
Princeton Survey Research Associates. Feb. 24-29, 2004. N=1,000 adults
nationwide. MoE ± 3.5.

"Now thinking about our country, overall, are you satisfied or
dissatisfied with the way things are going in our country today?" Trend
includes slight variation in question wording.

Satisfied Dissatisfied No Opinion
% % %
2/24-29//04 39 55 6

12/19/03 - 1/4/04 45 48 7

12/15-17/03 44 47 9


Oh, and let's not forget to factor in that a growing number of Americans
now feel that Bush lies - about things that are important.


Notice that ratings have gone down with the onslaught TV coverage of
the Democrat primary coverage. What you are seeing here is a
reflection of the satisfaction of television content. Now that other
things can occupy the news, these numbers will get better.

John H

I hope they DO get better. I certainly don't want it to be a close
race, it would be too risky, and Bush may win.


Amen!

John H

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

Harry Krause March 4th 04 09:36 PM

...in Rochester NY due to the Kodak plant closings
 
NOYB wrote:

You guys are pathetic and predictable. Your "the-sky-is-falling" reports on
jobs always precede the Bureau of Labor Statistics *actual* employment
numbers by one or two days. I guess you can call it a preemptive
strike...'cause you know that tomorrow's report ain't gonna be good for the
Democratic candidate...and will be *VERY GOOD* for Bush's reelection
chances. I predict another 0.2 drop in the Unemployment rate.

Prediction: 5.4% unemployment rate.



Prediction, little or no change in the unemployment rate and the
addition of some low-paying jobs most beloved by Republicans.

Charles March 5th 04 01:35 AM

( OT ) Jobless rate at 20-year high
 


WaIIy wrote:

On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 07:23:26 -0500 (EST), "Harry Krause"
wrote:


The unemployment rate in the six-county Rochester area jumped to 7
percent, representing about 39,600 people looking for work, according to
statistics released Wednesday by the state Department of Labor.


Gee, Rochester is a one industry town. Kodak was slow to respond and is
going down the ****ter.
I'm surprised the rate isn't 40% there.


Precisely. I have a friend who works for Fuji and he says Kodak did not
think digital photography would have the impact it has, and did not
aggressively pursue it.

You can't blame Bush for poor corporate decisions. Kodak missed the boat
and has let its competition pass it by.

-- Charlie

Harry Krause March 5th 04 01:38 AM

( OT ) Jobless rate at 20-year high
 
WaIIy wrote:


On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 07:23:26 -0500 (EST), "Harry Krause"
wrote:


The unemployment rate in the six-county Rochester area jumped to 7
percent, representing about 39,600 people looking for work, according to
statistics released Wednesday by the state Department of Labor.


Gee, Rochester is a one industry town. Kodak was slow to respond and is
going down the ****ter.
I'm surprised the rate isn't 40% there.


So...I suppose we jsut dispose of everyone unfortunate enough to be
stuck there?

Charles March 5th 04 01:43 AM

...in Rochester NY due to the Kodak plant closings
 


Harry Krause wrote:


Prediction, little or no change in the unemployment rate and the
addition of some low-paying jobs most beloved by Republicans.


Prediction, you will remain a democratic liberal whore, whose sphere of
influence remains a boating newsgroup on usenet.

-- Charlie

John H March 5th 04 01:48 AM

( OT ) Jobless rate at 20-year high
 
On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 20:35:57 -0500, Charles
wrote:



WaIIy wrote:

On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 07:23:26 -0500 (EST), "Harry Krause"
wrote:


The unemployment rate in the six-county Rochester area jumped to 7
percent, representing about 39,600 people looking for work, according to
statistics released Wednesday by the state Department of Labor.


Gee, Rochester is a one industry town. Kodak was slow to respond and is
going down the ****ter.
I'm surprised the rate isn't 40% there.


Precisely. I have a friend who works for Fuji and he says Kodak did not
think digital photography would have the impact it has, and did not
aggressively pursue it.

You can't blame Bush for poor corporate decisions. Kodak missed the boat
and has let its competition pass it by.

-- Charlie


Charlie, what does your friend think of the new Fuji Digital SLR
camera? (FinePix S3 Pro)

John H

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

Jim March 5th 04 01:56 AM

( OT ) Jobless rate at 20-year high
 
Not so -- at it's highest employment, Kodak had about 15% of the jobs in
Rochester.

Rochester is also the home of Xerox, B&L, Paycheck, Gleason works
(gears) GM (Delco and Roch Carbs (now renamed)), Case Hoyt (printing)
and several smaller printers. Hickey Freeman (clothing) ANd Corning
build (and quickly sold) a fiber optics plant. Perhaps other locals can
add more

All fed by hundreds of small machine/job shops

I believe the biggest employer today is Strong health Care, followed by
Wegmans (regional supermarket chain)

WaIIy wrote:

On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 07:23:26 -0500 (EST), "Harry Krause"
wrote:



The unemployment rate in the six-county Rochester area jumped to 7
percent, representing about 39,600 people looking for work, according to
statistics released Wednesday by the state Department of Labor.



Gee, Rochester is a one industry town. Kodak was slow to respond and is
going down the ****ter.
I'm surprised the rate isn't 40% there.



Jim-- March 5th 04 10:41 AM

( OT ) Jobless rate at 20-year high
 

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


On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 07:23:26 -0500 (EST), "Harry Krause"
wrote:


The unemployment rate in the six-county Rochester area jumped to 7
percent, representing about 39,600 people looking for work, according

to
statistics released Wednesday by the state Department of Labor.


Gee, Rochester is a one industry town. Kodak was slow to respond and is
going down the ****ter.
I'm surprised the rate isn't 40% there.


So...I suppose we jsut dispose of everyone unfortunate enough to be
stuck there?


Nope, we offer them the opportunity for an education and training for a new
job.

The liberals offer welfare. The Republicans offer a chance to better
themselves for the rest of their lives.



basskisser March 5th 04 05:16 PM

( OT ) Jobless rate at 20-year high
 
"Jim--" wrote in message
Nope, we offer them the opportunity for an education and training for a new
job.

The liberals offer welfare. The Republicans offer a chance to better
themselves for the rest of their lives.


How the hell are you going to do that? You rights want to cut every
program available to people who want to better themselves.

Charles March 5th 04 06:04 PM

( OT ) Jobless rate at 20-year high
 


John H wrote:

Charlie, what does your friend think of the new Fuji Digital SLR
camera? (FinePix S3 Pro)


John, he says it hasn't been released yet, so he hasn't seen it yet.
He's a warehouse manager for Fuji, BTW.

-- Charlie

NOYB March 7th 04 03:49 AM

...in Rochester NY due to the Kodak plant closings
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
news:c3dhc2g=.606e7062a1d4900a89f1e2a9d725c4c8@107 8496293.nulluser.com...

(March 2001...who was in the White House when the rececession began?


Bush was President for 2 months. A better question is: what policies could
Bush possible have enacted in a 2 month period that could have caused a
recession in only 2 months?

Methinks the disease was there many months before the diagnosis.



NOYB March 7th 04 04:04 AM

...in Rochester NY due to the Kodak plant closings
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
news:c3dhc2g=.606e7062a1d4900a89f1e2a9d725c4c8@107 8496293.nulluser.com...

the recession ended in
November 2001.*


This bears repeating. The recession ended in November 2001...which means
the economy has been improving for over 2 years.

Employment stats are a lagging indicator. We've had 8 straight months of
*GAINS* in employment. 8 months!

I don't care if the number is 1000 or 100000. Either way, more people are
working today than the month before...and the month before that...and the
month before that...dating all the way back to June 2003.

You guys were saying "3 million jobs". Then it was 2.5 million. Now it's
2.35 million. Bush could use the Dem's own ads to show the improvement in
the job market. By November, he can say: "first they said 3 million, then
2.5 million, then 2.35...and now they say 1.5 million. We've gained 1.5
million jobs in the last 16 months. Why stop now?"


When Bush puts this trend on a chart and holds it up before the American
people, the message will be "Taxes were too high before I took office, and
manufacturing started laying off people en masse starting in August 2000...5
months before I took office. My administration led the fight to cut taxes
in early 2003, and since then, we've had 16 straight months of job growth.
Why would you want John Kerry to raise your taxes and stop the growth?"

Historical data showing 16 straight months of job growth will completely
destroy the argument that we're on the wrong track economically. Only a
fool would make such an assertion.







Mark Browne March 7th 04 04:01 PM

...in Rochester NY due to the Kodak plant closings
 

"NOYB" wrote in message
om...

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
news:c3dhc2g=.606e7062a1d4900a89f1e2a9d725c4c8@107 8496293.nulluser.com...

the recession ended in
November 2001.*


This bears repeating. The recession ended in November 2001...which means
the economy has been improving for over 2 years.

Employment stats are a lagging indicator. We've had 8 straight months of
*GAINS* in employment. 8 months!

I don't care if the number is 1000 or 100000. Either way, more people are
working today than the month before...and the month before that...and the
month before that...dating all the way back to June 2003.

You guys were saying "3 million jobs". Then it was 2.5 million. Now it's
2.35 million. Bush could use the Dem's own ads to show the improvement in
the job market. By November, he can say: "first they said 3 million, then
2.5 million, then 2.35...and now they say 1.5 million. We've gained 1.5
million jobs in the last 16 months. Why stop now?"


When Bush puts this trend on a chart and holds it up before the American
people, the message will be "Taxes were too high before I took office, and
manufacturing started laying off people en masse starting in August

2000...5
months before I took office. My administration led the fight to cut taxes
in early 2003, and since then, we've had 16 straight months of job growth.
Why would you want John Kerry to raise your taxes and stop the growth?"

Historical data showing 16 straight months of job growth will completely
destroy the argument that we're on the wrong track economically. Only a
fool would make such an assertion.

Dr. Tooth,

I will add that I have two sons seeking work right now. So far I can't fault
the effort they are putting into their search. The pickings seem pretty
lean. Tell me again, where are all these jobs you are crowing about?

Just for fun, comment on the crop of reservists returning to the job market
when the come back from the big sandbox?

After you answer that, tell me what will happen when this years crop of
graduates hits the streets and can't find meaningful jobs?

Since you are such a wiz with figures, how much of this spectacular growth
has anything to do with little Bushes tax cuts, and how much is due to the
unusually low interest rates?

I was just reading how the American population is borrowing money to finance
their purchases at a rate never seen before. Much of this is borrowing on
the inflated values of homes combined with low interest rates; this is a
one-time trick and I don't expect to see it repeated. The rest is massive
credit card debt. At some point this personal debt load will choke personal
finances to the point where the average consumer simply can't take on
additional debt. When these people stop living beyond their means and start
to simple survive while they service the debt they have taken on, they won't
buy as much as they do now. What do you have to say about this potential
blot you your rosy view of the future growth?

For the 10 point extra credit, what will happen when the interest rates
start to come back up? Address home sales, big ticket sales, and corporate
investments.

Mark Browne
PS - You see the glass as half full, I see that little Bush has been peeing
in it!



John H March 7th 04 04:13 PM

...in Rochester NY due to the Kodak plant closings
 
On Sun, 07 Mar 2004 16:01:11 GMT, "Mark Browne"
wrote:


"NOYB" wrote in message
. com...

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
news:c3dhc2g=.606e7062a1d4900a89f1e2a9d725c4c8@107 8496293.nulluser.com...

the recession ended in
November 2001.*


This bears repeating. The recession ended in November 2001...which means
the economy has been improving for over 2 years.

Employment stats are a lagging indicator. We've had 8 straight months of
*GAINS* in employment. 8 months!

I don't care if the number is 1000 or 100000. Either way, more people are
working today than the month before...and the month before that...and the
month before that...dating all the way back to June 2003.

You guys were saying "3 million jobs". Then it was 2.5 million. Now it's
2.35 million. Bush could use the Dem's own ads to show the improvement in
the job market. By November, he can say: "first they said 3 million, then
2.5 million, then 2.35...and now they say 1.5 million. We've gained 1.5
million jobs in the last 16 months. Why stop now?"


When Bush puts this trend on a chart and holds it up before the American
people, the message will be "Taxes were too high before I took office, and
manufacturing started laying off people en masse starting in August

2000...5
months before I took office. My administration led the fight to cut taxes
in early 2003, and since then, we've had 16 straight months of job growth.
Why would you want John Kerry to raise your taxes and stop the growth?"

Historical data showing 16 straight months of job growth will completely
destroy the argument that we're on the wrong track economically. Only a
fool would make such an assertion.

Dr. Tooth,

snipped

Just for fun, comment on the crop of reservists returning to the job market
when the come back from the big sandbox?

snipped

Just to answer one of your comments - you may be interested in the
following excerpt:

Employment and Reemployment Rights


The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994
(USERRA), enacted October 13, 1994 (Title 38 U.S. Code, Chapter 43,
Sections 4301-4333, Public Law 103-353), significantly strengthens and
expands the employment and reemployment rights of all uniformed
service members.

Who's eligible for reemployment?

"Service in the uniformed services" and "uniformed services" defined
-- (38 U.S.C. Section 4303 (13 & 16)

Reemployment rights extend to persons who have been absent from a
position of employment because of "service in the uniformed services."
"Service in the uniformed services" means the performance of duty on a
voluntary or involuntary basis in a uniformed service, including:

· Active duty

· Active duty for training

· Initial active duty for training

· Inactive duty training

· Full-time National Guard duty.

· Absence from work for an examination to determine a person's
fitness for any of the above types of duty.


· Funeral honors duty performed by National Guard or reserve
members.

· Duty performed by intermittent disaster response personnel for
the Public Health Service, and approved training to prepare for such
service (added by Pub. L. 107-188, June 2002). See Title 42, U.S.
Code, section 300hh-11(e).

For more info, go to:
http://www.dol.gov/vets/whatsnew/userraguide0903.rtf




John H

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

Mark Browne March 7th 04 05:01 PM

...in Rochester NY due to the Kodak plant closings
 

"John H" wrote in message
...
snip
Dr. Tooth,

snipped

Just for fun, comment on the crop of reservists returning to the job

market
when the come back from the big sandbox?

snipped

Just to answer one of your comments - you may be interested in the
following excerpt:

Employment and Reemployment Rights


The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994
(USERRA), enacted October 13, 1994 (Title 38 U.S. Code, Chapter 43,
Sections 4301-4333, Public Law 103-353), significantly strengthens and
expands the employment and reemployment rights of all uniformed
service members.

Who's eligible for reemployment?

"Service in the uniformed services" and "uniformed services" defined
-- (38 U.S.C. Section 4303 (13 & 16)

Reemployment rights extend to persons who have been absent from a
position of employment because of "service in the uniformed services."
"Service in the uniformed services" means the performance of duty on a
voluntary or involuntary basis in a uniformed service, including:

· Active duty

· Active duty for training

· Initial active duty for training

· Inactive duty training

· Full-time National Guard duty.

· Absence from work for an examination to determine a person's
fitness for any of the above types of duty.


· Funeral honors duty performed by National Guard or reserve
members.

· Duty performed by intermittent disaster response personnel for
the Public Health Service, and approved training to prepare for such
service (added by Pub. L. 107-188, June 2002). See Title 42, U.S.
Code, section 300hh-11(e).

For more info, go to:
http://www.dol.gov/vets/whatsnew/userraguide0903.rtf




John H

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


John,

I was already aware of the right to return to their previous jobs. There is
no question about the right of these people to return to their jobs, if the
job still exists.

A lot of self employed folk will have a hard time re-building their
companies after a years absence. They have been away long enough that their
clients have had to find another source of supply for their services.
Consider how this could affect a news-group regular, such as Dr. Tooth. If
Nobby had to go away for a year of service, it might take a long time to
re-build his practice to the point where it is at now. Those huge loans
might even pose a serious burden for him. Naturally, this is a hypothetical
situation because he was much too smart to sign up for the guard!

Primarily, the question I posed for NYOB is about the folks that will be
bumped when the military guy comes back for his job. These newly unemployed
persons will add to the glut of job seekers. The first wave will be
released back to the market just before the 2004 graduation class hits.

If I were a betting man, I would go for good odds on a rise in the number of
job seekers that can't find meaningful work.

Mark Browne



NOYB March 7th 04 05:44 PM

...in Rochester NY due to the Kodak plant closings
 

"Mark Browne" wrote in message
news:bHH2c.516919$na.1173373@attbi_s04...

"NOYB" wrote in message
om...

"Harry Krause" wrote in message

news:c3dhc2g=.606e7062a1d4900a89f1e2a9d725c4c8@107 8496293.nulluser.com...

the recession ended in
November 2001.*


This bears repeating. The recession ended in November 2001...which

means
the economy has been improving for over 2 years.

Employment stats are a lagging indicator. We've had 8 straight months

of
*GAINS* in employment. 8 months!

I don't care if the number is 1000 or 100000. Either way, more people

are
working today than the month before...and the month before that...and

the
month before that...dating all the way back to June 2003.

You guys were saying "3 million jobs". Then it was 2.5 million. Now

it's
2.35 million. Bush could use the Dem's own ads to show the improvement

in
the job market. By November, he can say: "first they said 3 million,

then
2.5 million, then 2.35...and now they say 1.5 million. We've gained 1.5
million jobs in the last 16 months. Why stop now?"


When Bush puts this trend on a chart and holds it up before the American
people, the message will be "Taxes were too high before I took office,

and
manufacturing started laying off people en masse starting in August

2000...5
months before I took office. My administration led the fight to cut

taxes
in early 2003, and since then, we've had 16 straight months of job

growth.
Why would you want John Kerry to raise your taxes and stop the growth?"

Historical data showing 16 straight months of job growth will completely
destroy the argument that we're on the wrong track economically. Only a
fool would make such an assertion.

Dr. Tooth,

I will add that I have two sons seeking work right now. So far I can't

fault
the effort they are putting into their search. The pickings seem pretty
lean. Tell me again, where are all these jobs you are crowing about?



Florida!


Unemployment rates down in Collier, Lee counties
By Daily News staff
March 6, 2004

Florida's unemployment rate fell to 4.3 percent in January, down from 4.9
percent a month earlier, according to the Florida Agency for Workforce
Innovation.

In January 2003, the state's unemployment rate was 5.3 percent. Florida
continues to outperform the job market nationally.

In Collier County, the unemployment rate in January was 3.2 percent, down
from 4.1 percent a year ago. The labor force grew to 125,501.

In Lee County, the jobless rate dropped to 3.3 percent in January, down from
4.4 percent a year ago. The labor force stood at 219,473, up from 213,221 in
January 2003.

In Florida, there were 357,000 unemployed residents in January. That was the
lowest in the state since April 2001.

Florida's unemployment rate of 4.9 percent in December put the state at the
second lowest among the nation's ten largest cities. The state with the
lowest jobless rate was Georgia, at 4.3 percent in December.




NOYB March 7th 04 05:45 PM

...in Rochester NY due to the Kodak plant closings
 

"Mark Browne" wrote in message
news:bHH2c.516919$na.1173373@attbi_s04...

"NOYB" wrote in message
om...

"Harry Krause" wrote in message

news:c3dhc2g=.606e7062a1d4900a89f1e2a9d725c4c8@107 8496293.nulluser.com...

the recession ended in
November 2001.*


This bears repeating. The recession ended in November 2001...which

means
the economy has been improving for over 2 years.

Employment stats are a lagging indicator. We've had 8 straight months

of
*GAINS* in employment. 8 months!

I don't care if the number is 1000 or 100000. Either way, more people

are
working today than the month before...and the month before that...and

the
month before that...dating all the way back to June 2003.

You guys were saying "3 million jobs". Then it was 2.5 million. Now

it's
2.35 million. Bush could use the Dem's own ads to show the improvement

in
the job market. By November, he can say: "first they said 3 million,

then
2.5 million, then 2.35...and now they say 1.5 million. We've gained 1.5
million jobs in the last 16 months. Why stop now?"


When Bush puts this trend on a chart and holds it up before the American
people, the message will be "Taxes were too high before I took office,

and
manufacturing started laying off people en masse starting in August

2000...5
months before I took office. My administration led the fight to cut

taxes
in early 2003, and since then, we've had 16 straight months of job

growth.
Why would you want John Kerry to raise your taxes and stop the growth?"

Historical data showing 16 straight months of job growth will completely
destroy the argument that we're on the wrong track economically. Only a
fool would make such an assertion.

Dr. Tooth,

I will add that I have two sons seeking work right now. So far I can't

fault
the effort they are putting into their search.


Perhaps it has nothing to do with their effort. What is their work
background/training?



NOYB March 7th 04 06:00 PM

...in Rochester NY due to the Kodak plant closings
 

"Mark Browne" wrote in message
news:bHH2c.516919$na.1173373@attbi_s04...

"NOYB" wrote in message
om...

"Harry Krause" wrote in message

news:c3dhc2g=.606e7062a1d4900a89f1e2a9d725c4c8@107 8496293.nulluser.com...

the recession ended in
November 2001.*


This bears repeating. The recession ended in November 2001...which

means
the economy has been improving for over 2 years.

Employment stats are a lagging indicator. We've had 8 straight months

of
*GAINS* in employment. 8 months!

I don't care if the number is 1000 or 100000. Either way, more people

are
working today than the month before...and the month before that...and

the
month before that...dating all the way back to June 2003.

You guys were saying "3 million jobs". Then it was 2.5 million. Now

it's
2.35 million. Bush could use the Dem's own ads to show the improvement

in
the job market. By November, he can say: "first they said 3 million,

then
2.5 million, then 2.35...and now they say 1.5 million. We've gained 1.5
million jobs in the last 16 months. Why stop now?"


When Bush puts this trend on a chart and holds it up before the American
people, the message will be "Taxes were too high before I took office,

and
manufacturing started laying off people en masse starting in August

2000...5
months before I took office. My administration led the fight to cut

taxes
in early 2003, and since then, we've had 16 straight months of job

growth.
Why would you want John Kerry to raise your taxes and stop the growth?"

Historical data showing 16 straight months of job growth will completely
destroy the argument that we're on the wrong track economically. Only a
fool would make such an assertion.

Dr. Tooth,

I will add that I have two sons seeking work right now. So far I can't

fault
the effort they are putting into their search. The pickings seem pretty
lean. Tell me again, where are all these jobs you are crowing about?

Just for fun, comment on the crop of reservists returning to the job

market
when the come back from the big sandbox?

After you answer that, tell me what will happen when this years crop of
graduates hits the streets and can't find meaningful jobs?

Since you are such a wiz with figures, how much of this spectacular growth
has anything to do with little Bushes tax cuts, and how much is due to the
unusually low interest rates?


I dunno. When corporate tax returns are all submitted and accounted for,
let's see how much businesses spent on their Section 179 expenses...which
was increased to $100,000 in 2003.


I was just reading how the American population is borrowing money to

finance
their purchases at a rate never seen before. Much of this is borrowing on
the inflated values of homes combined with low interest rates; this is a
one-time trick and I don't expect to see it repeated. The rest is massive
credit card debt. At some point this personal debt load will choke

personal
finances to the point where the average consumer simply can't take on
additional debt. When these people stop living beyond their means and

start
to simple survive while they service the debt they have taken on, they

won't
buy as much as they do now. What do you have to say about this potential
blot you your rosy view of the future growth?


I'm in the process of purchasing a new home and a new car. After I close,
you will have just described my personal situation perfectly...except for
the credit cards, which I pay off in full every month. In due time,
however, the short-term debt will be retired, and my income will rise...and
I'll be spending again. That's the normal cycle for most people.


For the 10 point extra credit, what will happen when the interest rates
start to come back up? Address home sales, big ticket sales, and corporate
investments.


The giant jumps in Quarterly GDP growth that we've been seeing will begin to
moderate and level off. The stock market will see yearly returns of
10-15%...instead of the 35-40% returns we've seen in the 12 months.



NOYB March 7th 04 06:16 PM

...in Rochester NY due to the Kodak plant closings
 

"Mark Browne" wrote in message
news:KzI2c.497548$I06.5339699@attbi_s01...

"John H" wrote in message
...
snip
Dr. Tooth,

snipped

Just for fun, comment on the crop of reservists returning to the job

market
when the come back from the big sandbox?

snipped

Just to answer one of your comments - you may be interested in the
following excerpt:

Employment and Reemployment Rights


The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994
(USERRA), enacted October 13, 1994 (Title 38 U.S. Code, Chapter 43,
Sections 4301-4333, Public Law 103-353), significantly strengthens and
expands the employment and reemployment rights of all uniformed
service members.

Who's eligible for reemployment?

"Service in the uniformed services" and "uniformed services" defined
-- (38 U.S.C. Section 4303 (13 & 16)

Reemployment rights extend to persons who have been absent from a
position of employment because of "service in the uniformed services."
"Service in the uniformed services" means the performance of duty on a
voluntary or involuntary basis in a uniformed service, including:

· Active duty

· Active duty for training

· Initial active duty for training

· Inactive duty training

· Full-time National Guard duty.

· Absence from work for an examination to determine a person's
fitness for any of the above types of duty.


· Funeral honors duty performed by National Guard or reserve
members.

· Duty performed by intermittent disaster response personnel for
the Public Health Service, and approved training to prepare for such
service (added by Pub. L. 107-188, June 2002). See Title 42, U.S.
Code, section 300hh-11(e).

For more info, go to:
http://www.dol.gov/vets/whatsnew/userraguide0903.rtf




John H

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


John,

I was already aware of the right to return to their previous jobs. There

is
no question about the right of these people to return to their jobs, if

the
job still exists.

A lot of self employed folk will have a hard time re-building their
companies after a years absence. They have been away long enough that

their
clients have had to find another source of supply for their services.
Consider how this could affect a news-group regular, such as Dr. Tooth. If
Nobby had to go away for a year of service, it might take a long time to
re-build his practice to the point where it is at now. Those huge loans
might even pose a serious burden for him. Naturally, this is a

hypothetical
situation because he was much too smart to sign up for the guard!

Primarily, the question I posed for NYOB is about the folks that will be
bumped when the military guy comes back for his job. These newly

unemployed
persons will add to the glut of job seekers. The first wave will be
released back to the market just before the 2004 graduation class hits.

If I were a betting man, I would go for good odds on a rise in the number

of
job seekers that can't find meaningful work.


How many reservists are you talking about? How many will actually be
reentering the job market and displacing other workers?

We have approximately 146.43 million potential workers in this country. 8.2
million of them are unemployed...giving us an unemployment rate of 5.6%.

If you add 150,000 people to our labor market (although there won't be
150,000 returning all at once), and NONE of them find a job (very unlikely),
then we'd have an increase that wouldn't even be noticed by any of the major
statistics that the BLS uses.

Example:
We'd then have 146.58 million workers
We'd have 8.15 million unemployed
We'd still have an unemployment rate of 5.6%!!!







John H March 7th 04 06:22 PM

...in Rochester NY due to the Kodak plant closings
 
On Sun, 07 Mar 2004 17:01:30 GMT, "Mark Browne"
wrote:


"John H" wrote in message
.. .
snip
Dr. Tooth,

snipped

Just for fun, comment on the crop of reservists returning to the job

market
when the come back from the big sandbox?

snipped

Just to answer one of your comments - you may be interested in the
following excerpt:

Employment and Reemployment Rights


The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994
(USERRA), enacted October 13, 1994 (Title 38 U.S. Code, Chapter 43,
Sections 4301-4333, Public Law 103-353), significantly strengthens and
expands the employment and reemployment rights of all uniformed
service members.

Who's eligible for reemployment?

"Service in the uniformed services" and "uniformed services" defined
-- (38 U.S.C. Section 4303 (13 & 16)

Reemployment rights extend to persons who have been absent from a
position of employment because of "service in the uniformed services."
"Service in the uniformed services" means the performance of duty on a
voluntary or involuntary basis in a uniformed service, including:

· Active duty

· Active duty for training

· Initial active duty for training

· Inactive duty training

· Full-time National Guard duty.

· Absence from work for an examination to determine a person's
fitness for any of the above types of duty.


· Funeral honors duty performed by National Guard or reserve
members.

· Duty performed by intermittent disaster response personnel for
the Public Health Service, and approved training to prepare for such
service (added by Pub. L. 107-188, June 2002). See Title 42, U.S.
Code, section 300hh-11(e).

For more info, go to:
http://www.dol.gov/vets/whatsnew/userraguide0903.rtf




John H

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


John,

I was already aware of the right to return to their previous jobs. There is
no question about the right of these people to return to their jobs, if the
job still exists.

A lot of self employed folk will have a hard time re-building their
companies after a years absence. They have been away long enough that their
clients have had to find another source of supply for their services.
Consider how this could affect a news-group regular, such as Dr. Tooth. If
Nobby had to go away for a year of service, it might take a long time to
re-build his practice to the point where it is at now. Those huge loans
might even pose a serious burden for him. Naturally, this is a hypothetical
situation because he was much too smart to sign up for the guard!

Primarily, the question I posed for NYOB is about the folks that will be
bumped when the military guy comes back for his job. These newly unemployed
persons will add to the glut of job seekers. The first wave will be
released back to the market just before the 2004 graduation class hits.

If I were a betting man, I would go for good odds on a rise in the number of
job seekers that can't find meaningful work.

Mark Browne

Your comment, "Just for fun, comment on the crop of reservists
returning to the job market when the come back from the big sandbox?"
indicated no such knowledge. Sorry.

Unless you are a believer in the Household Survey, self-employed
people don't count anyway, right?

Most of the troops in Iraq are active duty, and won't be flooding the
job market. As of September, 2003, there were 122,000 Army personnel
in Iraq, including 3,000 National Guard soldiers and 5,000 reservists,
Army officials told the Post. Another 5,000 Guard soldiers and 7,000
reservists are serving in Kuwait. That would mean a "flood" of about
20,000. Maybe some percent of those will not have jobs waiting. Most
companies do not want the negative publicity associated with *not*
having a job for returning military.

Also, most companies don't hire someone knowing they will have to fire
them upon the return of the soldier. The growth in the economy over
the past year will more than compensate for the *at most* flood of
20,000 reservists.

As for NOYB, he, like other dentists with whom I'm familiar, would
probably have on tap someone to handle his patients while he was
mobilized. Would you immediately switch dentists if you knew your
regular would return in a year? I wouldn't. Many dental procedures can
be postponed. If a patient *had* to go to a different dentist, and
liked that dentist better, well, that's life in the big city.

If I had a dental practice, I surely wouldn't join the reserves. The
country is not suffering for people to join the military, so
patriotism is not an issue. Joining the Navy, during the Vietnam war,
was a good way to avoid going to Vietnam. Usually! For many, joining
any of the services other than the Army was a way to avoid the draft
and almost certain service in Vietnam.

(Don't know what prompted that tangent, but since you're surely
anti-Kerry you shouldn't care much.)

John H

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

NOYB March 7th 04 06:28 PM

...in Rochester NY due to the Kodak plant closings
 
I'd have an associate come in to handle my patient load...and I'd have them
sign a non-compete clause so that when I came back, they couldn't open up
shop across the street and take any of the patients with them.


"John H" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 07 Mar 2004 17:01:30 GMT, "Mark Browne"
wrote:


"John H" wrote in message
.. .
snip
Dr. Tooth,
snipped

Just for fun, comment on the crop of reservists returning to the job

market
when the come back from the big sandbox?

snipped

Just to answer one of your comments - you may be interested in the
following excerpt:

Employment and Reemployment Rights


The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994
(USERRA), enacted October 13, 1994 (Title 38 U.S. Code, Chapter 43,
Sections 4301-4333, Public Law 103-353), significantly strengthens and
expands the employment and reemployment rights of all uniformed
service members.

Who's eligible for reemployment?

"Service in the uniformed services" and "uniformed services" defined
-- (38 U.S.C. Section 4303 (13 & 16)

Reemployment rights extend to persons who have been absent from a
position of employment because of "service in the uniformed services."
"Service in the uniformed services" means the performance of duty on a
voluntary or involuntary basis in a uniformed service, including:

· Active duty

· Active duty for training

· Initial active duty for training

· Inactive duty training

· Full-time National Guard duty.

· Absence from work for an examination to determine a person's
fitness for any of the above types of duty.


· Funeral honors duty performed by National Guard or reserve
members.

· Duty performed by intermittent disaster response personnel for
the Public Health Service, and approved training to prepare for such
service (added by Pub. L. 107-188, June 2002). See Title 42, U.S.
Code, section 300hh-11(e).

For more info, go to:
http://www.dol.gov/vets/whatsnew/userraguide0903.rtf




John H

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


John,

I was already aware of the right to return to their previous jobs. There

is
no question about the right of these people to return to their jobs, if

the
job still exists.

A lot of self employed folk will have a hard time re-building their
companies after a years absence. They have been away long enough that

their
clients have had to find another source of supply for their services.
Consider how this could affect a news-group regular, such as Dr. Tooth.

If
Nobby had to go away for a year of service, it might take a long time to
re-build his practice to the point where it is at now. Those huge loans
might even pose a serious burden for him. Naturally, this is a

hypothetical
situation because he was much too smart to sign up for the guard!

Primarily, the question I posed for NYOB is about the folks that will be
bumped when the military guy comes back for his job. These newly

unemployed
persons will add to the glut of job seekers. The first wave will be
released back to the market just before the 2004 graduation class hits.

If I were a betting man, I would go for good odds on a rise in the number

of
job seekers that can't find meaningful work.

Mark Browne

Your comment, "Just for fun, comment on the crop of reservists
returning to the job market when the come back from the big sandbox?"
indicated no such knowledge. Sorry.

Unless you are a believer in the Household Survey, self-employed
people don't count anyway, right?

Most of the troops in Iraq are active duty, and won't be flooding the
job market. As of September, 2003, there were 122,000 Army personnel
in Iraq, including 3,000 National Guard soldiers and 5,000 reservists,
Army officials told the Post. Another 5,000 Guard soldiers and 7,000
reservists are serving in Kuwait. That would mean a "flood" of about
20,000. Maybe some percent of those will not have jobs waiting. Most
companies do not want the negative publicity associated with *not*
having a job for returning military.

Also, most companies don't hire someone knowing they will have to fire
them upon the return of the soldier. The growth in the economy over
the past year will more than compensate for the *at most* flood of
20,000 reservists.

As for NOYB, he, like other dentists with whom I'm familiar, would
probably have on tap someone to handle his patients while he was
mobilized. Would you immediately switch dentists if you knew your
regular would return in a year? I wouldn't. Many dental procedures can
be postponed. If a patient *had* to go to a different dentist, and
liked that dentist better, well, that's life in the big city.

If I had a dental practice, I surely wouldn't join the reserves. The
country is not suffering for people to join the military, so
patriotism is not an issue. Joining the Navy, during the Vietnam war,
was a good way to avoid going to Vietnam. Usually! For many, joining
any of the services other than the Army was a way to avoid the draft
and almost certain service in Vietnam.

(Don't know what prompted that tangent, but since you're surely
anti-Kerry you shouldn't care much.)

John H

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




Mark Browne March 7th 04 07:05 PM

...in Rochester NY due to the Kodak plant closings
 

"NOYB" wrote in message
m...
snip
Dr. Tooth,

I will add that I have two sons seeking work right now. So far I can't

fault
the effort they are putting into their search.


Perhaps it has nothing to do with their effort. What is their work
background/training?


One is a Unix sys-admin with the right credentials; the other one has a high
school diploma. Oddly enough, they are both getting about the same response
in the job market - nothing.

Now, lets move on to your fascinating implied statement.

You seem to be validating Kerry's (and Deans) assertion about two Americas!

One for well to do folks like yourself, and one for the left behind. You are
implying that because they did to choose to be part of the minority that
made the right (or lucky) moves and is doing OK right now, that they are not
going to be part of the good times.

You do realize that with your income, you are definably part of the
minority, the top few percent of the economy. You might not think that there
was any luck in your achieving the position you are in but reflect on this;
there are doctors that have spent as much time as yourself in medical
training (maybe more) and are working for an HMO pulling down crappy wages.
When they started their training many years ago, the HMO thing was not even
on the radar screen.

Since this is almost at one-person, one-vote country, the coming elections
may well sample the number of people that think they are doing well under
the current administration, and the number of people that think that they
are not and want a change. They both get the same right to vote.

Mark Browne





Mark Browne March 7th 04 07:18 PM

...in Rochester NY due to the Kodak plant closings
 

"NOYB" wrote in message
om...
snip
How many reservists are you talking about? How many will actually be
reentering the job market and displacing other workers?

We have approximately 146.43 million potential workers in this country.

8.2
million of them are unemployed...giving us an unemployment rate of 5.6%.

If you add 150,000 people to our labor market (although there won't be
150,000 returning all at once), and NONE of them find a job (very

unlikely),
then we'd have an increase that wouldn't even be noticed by any of the

major
statistics that the BLS uses.

Example:
We'd then have 146.58 million workers
We'd have 8.15 million unemployed
We'd still have an unemployment rate of 5.6%!!!

The monthly job creation figures are in the 100,000 to 200,000 range.
Current estimates are 20,000 returning from the big sand box. Each of these
people, directly or indirectly, will be competing for these new jobs. Twenty
thousand is a fair sized number when balanced against the number of new jobs
created.

It may not make a difference in your constant Pollyanna posts of how
wonderful things are, but if these folk experience the same kind of problems
getting work that my sons are going through, that's a lot of pain.

Mark Browne



NOYB March 7th 04 08:22 PM

...in Rochester NY due to the Kodak plant closings
 

"Mark Browne" wrote in message
news:coK2c.517748$na.1175331@attbi_s04...

"NOYB" wrote in message
m...
snip
Dr. Tooth,

I will add that I have two sons seeking work right now. So far I can't

fault
the effort they are putting into their search.


Perhaps it has nothing to do with their effort. What is their work
background/training?


One is a Unix sys-admin with the right credentials; the other one has a

high
school diploma. Oddly enough, they are both getting about the same

response
in the job market - nothing.


I don't know anything about Unix, other than it's an operating system. My
knowledge of operating systems, as limited as it is, is Windows-based. I
remember that the operating system at my engineering school was Unix...but
that was more than 10 years ago. Is it still used a lot? Perhaps that's
part of the problem? A change in technology?

As for your other son with a high school diploma...
What kind of jobs is he applying to? I find it hard to believe he can't
find "any" job. I can't blame him for not wanting a job at minimum wage,
but what skills does he have and what makes him more "employable" than
somebody else that is earning minimum wage?





Now, lets move on to your fascinating implied statement.

You seem to be validating Kerry's (and Deans) assertion about two

Americas!

One for well to do folks like yourself, and one for the left behind. You

are
implying that because they did to choose to be part of the minority that
made the right (or lucky) moves and is doing OK right now, that they are

not
going to be part of the good times.


There is some "luck" to choosing the right career path that will be
lucrative for a lifetime. I don't fault someone for choosing the wrong one.
However, there's a point where that person has to accept the fact that they
may have chosen the wrong path, and then pursue another one. Perhaps your
sons could attend community college or a vo-tech school and get trained in
something that will make them more marketable to an employer.



You do realize that with your income, you are definably part of the
minority, the top few percent of the economy. You might not think that

there
was any luck in your achieving the position you are in but reflect on

this;
there are doctors that have spent as much time as yourself in medical
training (maybe more) and are working for an HMO pulling down crappy

wages.
When they started their training many years ago, the HMO thing was not

even
on the radar screen.


A degree doesn't guarantee success...no matter what degree one obtains. For
the longest time, that wasn't true for doctors. Unfortunately, the
med/dental schools don't teach enough business classes, and doctors, as a
group, make poor business people.

There are doctors that have found ways to work with the HMO gorilla and
still make a lot of money. Most of those doctors are seeing more patients
than ever, and usuing more licensed nurse practioners and doctor's
assistants, however...so patient care suffers. Some doctors have privatized
their practices and now let the patients fight it out with the insurnace
company for reimbursement. That model obviously can work in a more affluent
area, but not in less affluent areas where there might be one or two
principal employers that provides coverage for 2/3's of the town people.




Since this is almost at one-person, one-vote country, the coming elections
may well sample the number of people that think they are doing well under
the current administration, and the number of people that think that they
are not and want a change. They both get the same right to vote.


Can't argue with you there.



NOYB March 7th 04 08:26 PM

...in Rochester NY due to the Kodak plant closings
 

"Mark Browne" wrote in message
news:tAK2c.80876$PR3.1149716@attbi_s03...

"NOYB" wrote in message
om...
snip
How many reservists are you talking about? How many will actually be
reentering the job market and displacing other workers?

We have approximately 146.43 million potential workers in this country.

8.2
million of them are unemployed...giving us an unemployment rate of 5.6%.

If you add 150,000 people to our labor market (although there won't be
150,000 returning all at once), and NONE of them find a job (very

unlikely),
then we'd have an increase that wouldn't even be noticed by any of the

major
statistics that the BLS uses.

Example:
We'd then have 146.58 million workers
We'd have 8.15 million unemployed
We'd still have an unemployment rate of 5.6%!!!

The monthly job creation figures are in the 100,000 to 200,000 range.
Current estimates are 20,000 returning from the big sand box. Each of

these
people, directly or indirectly, will be competing for these new jobs.

Twenty
thousand is a fair sized number when balanced against the number of new

jobs
created.

It may not make a difference in your constant Pollyanna posts of how
wonderful things are, but if these folk experience the same kind of

problems
getting work that my sons are going through, that's a lot of pain.


I can't address your son's hardships since I don't know enough about them.
What skills do they have? Has there been a change in technology that might
have made those skills obsolete? What area in the country do they live in?
What area are they willing to move to? Do they expect to be paid the same
pay that they were receiving before they became unemployed? What,
specifically, could Bush have done differently which would have assured that
both of your sons could find employment?

Finger-pointing is easy. It's harder, sometimes, to look in the mirror and
find where the problem lies.



Bert Robbins March 7th 04 08:35 PM

...in Rochester NY due to the Kodak plant closings
 

"Mark Browne" wrote in message
news:coK2c.517748$na.1175331@attbi_s04...

"NOYB" wrote in message
m...
snip
Dr. Tooth,

I will add that I have two sons seeking work right now. So far I can't

fault
the effort they are putting into their search.


Perhaps it has nothing to do with their effort. What is their work
background/training?


One is a Unix sys-admin with the right credentials; the other one has a

high
school diploma. Oddly enough, they are both getting about the same

response
in the job market - nothing.


The high school diploma son should be able to get a job anywhere, 7-11,
warehouse, auto shop, retail clerk. The Unix Sys-Admin son might have to
move to an area that has employers seeking his skills.

Now, lets move on to your fascinating implied statement.

You seem to be validating Kerry's (and Deans) assertion about two

Americas!

One for well to do folks like yourself, and one for the left behind. You

are
implying that because they did to choose to be part of the minority that
made the right (or lucky) moves and is doing OK right now, that they are

not
going to be part of the good times.


Nobody is being held back. If you want it work hard for it, don't sit around
and complain about people not giving it to you.

Depending upon your defintion of well to do folks you could be talking about
80% or less of the population. What is your criteria for well to do folks.

You do realize that with your income, you are definably part of the
minority, the top few percent of the economy. You might not think that

there
was any luck in your achieving the position you are in but reflect on

this;
there are doctors that have spent as much time as yourself in medical
training (maybe more) and are working for an HMO pulling down crappy

wages.
When they started their training many years ago, the HMO thing was not

even
on the radar screen.


Just because you pick a career when you are young doesn't mean that society
owes you a job in that field for the rest of your life. Times change, needs
change and those that don't change sit around wondering why they don't have
any money.

Since this is almost at one-person, one-vote country, the coming elections
may well sample the number of people that think they are doing well under
the current administration, and the number of people that think that they
are not and want a change. They both get the same right to vote.


It will be an interesting election, a Liberal vs. a Moderate.



Mark Browne March 23rd 04 02:08 AM

...in Rochester NY due to the Kodak plant closings
 

snip
I don't know anything about Unix, other than it's an operating system.

My
knowledge of operating systems, as limited as it is, is Windows-based. I
remember that the operating system at my engineering school was Unix...but
that was more than 10 years ago. Is it still used a lot? Perhaps that's
part of the problem? A change in technology?


Hmmm, it would seem that the zeitgeist of technology is not your strong
suit. It is a virtual certainty that your post came via a Linux or BSD Unix
system. The bulk of ISPs currently use Linux or BSD as they are *bunches*
more reliable in production internet plumbing than anything Microsoft has
every produced. If you use google or Amazon you are using Linux. I have
noticed many reference to Linux use from members of this mailing list. The
bulk of supercomputers and mainframes are running some sort of UNIX system.
It is far from behind the times, and Minneapolis is certainly not out of the
loop when it come to IT technology. On my local TCLUG mailing list, several
members who were IBM employees members have had their jobs outsourced to
India. I am not aware that any of them have found work yet.

You pose the question, "a change in technology"? I say a change in the
entire IT infrastructure. For the few that can find work there has been a
15% to 25% drop in wage rates. So much for my son training for a better
job - It's looks like it has been shipped off to a low wage country.

A few leeks later, my techno-geek son is still looking for suitable
employment.


As for your other son with a high school diploma...
What kind of jobs is he applying to? I find it hard to believe he can't
find "any" job. I can't blame him for not wanting a job at minimum wage,
but what skills does he have and what makes him more "employable" than
somebody else that is earning minimum wage?

snip

Oddly, when I sit down with him and do the math, if he works 37.5 hours a
week he will *not* make enough to pay for rent, utilities, food and medical
care. If he works two jobs he will not have the time to go to school and get
more education to get a better job. Even then, health care is a deal buster.
I certainly can't imagine that you, a staunch conservative, would recommend
that he *not* accept personal responsibility and carry health insurance.

Fortunately, he has a support system with us, so he can do things like go
back to school and gain the training he needs for a better job. We have been
trying to work out what will do OK in tomorrow's out-sourced job market. If
you look at most jobs with an open mind, you find that a big chunk of
potential jobs are vulnerable; precious few are a sure bet. And the few jobs
that are left will be flooded with the outsourced.

I wonder about all the McJobbers who do not have a support system such as my
son has. Certainly a Hobson's choice if ever I heard one. It would seem that
they are doomed to work at a McJob until they get too sick to work. Then
they will join the ranks of the welfare population so you can pay for them
with your generous tax contribution. Many have found that they can't get
off the dole because they can't get needed health care working at a McJob.

Of course, If we manage "starve the beast" to the point where there are not
more social programs we can get back to the glorious days depicted in
Dickens literature; you can still see what this sort of unfettered free
market capitalism looks like in many third-world countries. I am sure that
this thought warms the cockles of your conservative heart!

Don't get me wrong, I don't advocate a swing to protectionism. The free
market is a very powerful engine of market efficiency. But like any powerful
tool, if must be used with adult supervision. I can't help but think that
there is a workable middle ground between laze fair capitalism and
communism. From where I sit, we are not at that point right now.

Mark Browne




NOYB March 23rd 04 03:31 PM

...in Rochester NY due to the Kodak plant closings
 

"Mark Browne" wrote in message
news:c_M7c.61530$Cb.927821@attbi_s51...

snip
I don't know anything about Unix, other than it's an operating system.

My
knowledge of operating systems, as limited as it is, is Windows-based.

I
remember that the operating system at my engineering school was

Unix...but
that was more than 10 years ago. Is it still used a lot? Perhaps

that's
part of the problem? A change in technology?


Hmmm, it would seem that the zeitgeist of technology is not your strong
suit. It is a virtual certainty that your post came via a Linux or BSD

Unix
system. The bulk of ISPs currently use Linux or BSD as they are *bunches*
more reliable in production internet plumbing than anything Microsoft has
every produced. If you use google or Amazon you are using Linux. I have
noticed many reference to Linux use from members of this mailing list. The
bulk of supercomputers and mainframes are running some sort of UNIX

system.
It is far from behind the times, and Minneapolis is certainly not out of

the
loop when it come to IT technology. On my local TCLUG mailing list,

several
members who were IBM employees members have had their jobs outsourced to
India. I am not aware that any of them have found work yet.

You pose the question, "a change in technology"? I say a change in the
entire IT infrastructure. For the few that can find work there has been a
15% to 25% drop in wage rates. So much for my son training for a better
job - It's looks like it has been shipped off to a low wage country.

A few leeks later, my techno-geek son is still looking for suitable
employment.


As for your other son with a high school diploma...
What kind of jobs is he applying to? I find it hard to believe he can't
find "any" job. I can't blame him for not wanting a job at minimum

wage,
but what skills does he have and what makes him more "employable" than
somebody else that is earning minimum wage?

snip

Oddly, when I sit down with him and do the math, if he works 37.5 hours a
week he will *not* make enough to pay for rent, utilities, food and

medical
care. If he works two jobs he will not have the time to go to school and

get
more education to get a better job.


The answer isn't to work two jobs. The answer is to work *one* job to pay
*some* of the expenses...and get Stafford student loans to pay his school
and any additional expenses. He may need to meet a minimum number of credit
hours to maximize the the loans however. When he graduates, he can
consolidate any student loans and amortize them out to 30 years with a very
low fixed interest rate.




All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:50 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com