-
Neighborhood Watch, Anyone?
May 14, 2013 | 19 comments
-
We’re Still Going Backward
April 18, 2013 | 30 comments
-
Street Level Anti-Capitalism
April 8, 2013 | 71 comments
-
Snazzy Sequestered Screeners
March 8, 2013 | 13 comments
-
Welfare’s Failure Amid Red Ink
February 7, 2013 | 23 comments
Another Perspective
Mixed Messages
The continuing madness of centralized economics.
The holiday message from the D.C. politicians to millions of unemployed workers is that they’ll be kicked off the rolls for jobless benefits by Christmas. As they say, have yourself a merry little Christmas!
Holidays are tough enough for people who are struggling in situations that don’t exactly match up with Norman Rockwell’s picture perfect image of the idealized family sitting around the perfect dining room table looking appreciatively at the all-time perfect Christmas turkey (I always thought that Norman Rockwell, as talented and nice as he was, was inadvertently responsible for more suicides than Jim Jones. Who can live up?), without the politicians adding to the holiday blues by letting long-term jobless benefits lapse during what is a deep and continuing economic downturn that is already the longest recession since the Great Depression of the 1930s.
Nationally, with the Bureau of Labor Statistics reporting that there are 500 unemployed workers for every 100 job openings, the Labor Department estimates that just short of 2 million jobless workers will lose their unemployment benefits by Christmas.
The maddening thing in all this is that it is the politicians of both parties who have directly created this recession, the joblessness, and the nation’s debt and deficits with their anti-growth, anti-business, big-spending, big-government agenda of ever-expanding levels of taxation, litigation, mandates, regulation, fraud and waste.
And now, instead of post-haste enacting a pro-growth, pro-business agenda that could cut unemployment, instead of cutting their own excessive paychecks and benefits, instead of reducing their swollen numbers in the legislatures and downsizing the unwarranted size of their staffs, this same political establishment that played a key role in creating this recession and the record-breaking levels of red ink is now telling the nation’s long-term jobless worker to move into his mother’s basements or take a high dive off a nearby bridge.
This isn’t the way for new members of Congress to keep the voters they just won over to their side after Obama’s first two years of flops and mismanagement.
The first and immediate step for the Washington politicians of all stripes should be to clear away the anti-growth, anti-jobs mess that they’ve created, rather than furthering weakening the victims of their inept policies.
In other federal news, President Obama proposed a two-year freeze on federal pay, except in the military. That might sound good, except for the fact that the average wage of federal civilian workers last year was $81,258, according to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, or over $30,000 higher than the average private-sector wage last year of $50,462.
Include benefits and pensions and the gap between average compensation in the federal and private sectors jumps to $62,000, i.e., $123,049 versus $61,051, respectively, in the federal and private sectors.
Additionally, on top of government jobs being more secure and generally less arduous, the gap between government and private pays is increasingly growing, with the number of federal salaries above $150,000, for instance, doubling between late 2007 and mid-2009 while the private sector was simultaneously cutting jobs, reducing benefits and freezing paychecks.
Obama’s proposed freeze, in short, simply preserves the waste and inequities.
More locally here in Pittsburgh, the unionized teachers in the suburb of Bethel Park are back at school by government decree and no longer wearing the AFT blue T-shirts that became a standard part of their picketing attire for the past five weeks. I didn’t see one of those union T-shirts that included the oft-quoted statement from Albert Shanker, President of the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) from 1974 to 1997: “When school children start paying union dues, that’s when I’ll start representing the interests of school children.”
Shanker got it wrong, completely. The kids, via their parents, pick up the entire tab for the teachers’ salaries, the teachers’ dues, the millions for the building where the teachers work, plus the tab for all the heat, light and chalk in the building.
About the Author
Ralph R. Reiland is the B. Kenneth Simon professor of free enterprise and an associate professor of economics at Robert Morris University in Pittsburgh.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (37) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Ralph R. Reiland
More Articles From Another Perspective
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/12/06/mixed-messages
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 12.6.10 @ 6:28AM
If the Republicans had any guts they would have been all over Obama's call for a freeze, demanding that it be accompanied with a 1% cut in the federal budget every year until unemployment falls below 5.9%.
They should also take Obama's logic and throw it right back at him. Obama is fond of pointing out that it would cost 700 billion to extend the Bush tax cuts for those making over $250,000 per year. The Republicans should simply call him on it and tell them they will pass his version if Obama agrees to cut 700 billion out of the federal budget as an offset. If Obama doesn't agree to that then he doesn't have any further claim to stopping the Bush tax cuts for all.
Unfortunately, the Republicans appear long on vague talk and short on specifics.
Archon| 12.6.10 @ 6:50AM
Being long on vague talk and short on specifics comes naturally to all politicians regardless of ideology.
Alan Brooks| 12.7.10 @ 3:36AM
The persistent worry is you will elect another 2nd (or 3rd) rate GOP POTUS.
Such is in the back of many minds. What good is opposing Obama if you continue to screw it up?
Then you are merely opposing Obama, to be contrarian and for no other reason.
Appleby| 12.6.10 @ 7:04AM
What did they earn for the total waste of a Saturday they all came in to posture and preen and prance for the cameras? Couldnt they have had a videoconference and been paid on commission?
beebop| 12.6.10 @ 9:28AM
About the same thing Obama earned with a three hour cruise to Afghanistan. At $180K per hour to gas up and send AF-1, he could have "awarded" stimulus jobs that top out at $135K each and still had a little something left for White House mistletoad.
Cheers.
Ken (Old Texican)| 12.6.10 @ 7:14AM
Ralph,
You must have missed the news segment re-aired on NRO featuring Jim DeMint and Mike Pence.
They were both saying precisely the same things, and how they were going to attempt to change the policies.
coal carrier| 12.6.10 @ 7:59AM
"Obama's proposed freeze..."
Let's put it in perspective. Take a look at this short example.
http://www.wimp.com/budgetcuts/
Redstateboy| 12.6.10 @ 8:30AM
In my and in the opinions of many.. the answer is simple - Cut Corporate tax to 15%, make the Bush tax cuts permanent, defund EPA, HEW, HUD, PBS, OSHA, ObamaCare and get the Federal Government out of our lives. Our Economy can revive and thrive if we just throw of the shackles of Liber-ulism.
Louis Jenkins| 12.6.10 @ 8:59AM
"That might sound good, except for the fact that the average wage of federal civilian workers last year was $81,258, according to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, or over $30,000 higher than the average private-sector wage last year of $50,462."
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain! There's more than one way to skin a cat.
Petronius| 12.6.10 @ 9:25AM
The problem is not skinning cats. It's forcing the hoards of infantile supplicants called liberals to grow up. That's why our money has In God We Trust printed on the back. It doesn't say "I want my mommy."
Michael L. Hauschild| 12.6.10 @ 9:41AM
In 1972 after my return from Viet Nam I worked as a heavy equipment operator. For ten to twelve hours a day, six days a week (weather permitting), I either operated a D7 Cat or a WABCO 222 Scraper. It was a HUGE income, $4.50 at hour, but as many construction jobs it was seasonal. The ground freezes around the first of December in my state. I was eligible for unemployment benefits so I applied for the $101.00 dollars a week and figured a short vacation from the sixty five hours a week average I had labored under was not out of the question till the first of the year where I would get an indoor or “hard surface” job.
I went up to the unemployment office stood in line with all the other seasonal works and signed up. On the way home I stopped at the local small town bar and thought it would be nice to get a beer. (My relatives owned the bar so I was recognized immediately and asked, “Aincha ya workin today?” I stated, “Naw, I got twenty four (24) weeks of unemployment coming, I’m gonna draw it for a while.” The rest of the dialog included, “lazy”, “We never had unemployment in the depression”, “You kids really do not know how to work”, and “worthless.” (I left out the profanity).
I never finished the beer, walked out the door to the local lumber company, and literally climbed on their fork lift and went to work for $1.95 an hour, which pulled in $78.00 dollars a week, forty three percent of my previous hourly wage and 25 hours less than I normally worked.
Nobody even knew what an unemployment rate was, but work was work and you were, by your God given abilities, moral code, and patriotic duty to avoid welfare at any price supposed to have a job.
I tell this story to you not as a derogatory insult to the lazy bastards who will sit on their ass knowing that they can draw $300.00 dollars a week out of my social security lockbox (oh, you bet that exists) but because I am kind of proud that I actually sought out work simply because I could, and I knew economically it was best for all concerned.
Sam Vaughn| 12.6.10 @ 10:07AM
ditto, for better or worse I grew up hard-working men who worked their lives in the factories of Waterbury, CT. I can remember sitting in the basement machine shop of my gramp, when the subject of unemployment came up there was a lot of shame associated with unemployment. Worse still a man was not a man if he sat on his ass, he was a coward, a low-life, a sissy. As harsh as those words sounded in the PC era of today, the message was "when the going get's tough the tough get going". Whenever I here somebody complaining how rough things are, woe is me, I remember those long gone men in my grandfather's basement, they could be hard, but they could be "counted on in the foxhole"
BackToBasics| 12.6.10 @ 11:40PM
I agree with the sentiments but there are some differences from then until now.
1. For the most part, companies simply refuse to even consider hiring people in their 50's and 60's who have lost their jobs.
2. There may have been discrimination against hiring blacks back then but now there is discrimination against hiring white me today, or let's say white men are NOT on anyone's HIRING QUOTA lists.
3. The Federal governemnt's policies today seem totally anti-business. They want control and the fastest way to get it is to destroy not only our economy but the spirits of those who want to work hard. Unemployment can also dispirit people and I do not want to see unemployment benefits extended forever. I'd rather the Feds get out of the way economically-speaking. But if they will not do it this way, then I'd rather see a WPA or CCC-like program in place for those who are now collecting unemployment rather than these contining unemployment extensions.
Many are truly lazy but there are also many who want to find work who cannot.
Thankfully, I am not unemployed but I fear that if I lost my job that I would not be able to find another for quite some time.
I think those same stalwarts you speak of would today perhaps be venting their righteous anger against the government instead of those who are UNFAIRLY kept out of the labor force ON PURPOSE. They are also kept on the dole ON PURPOSE but it is not entirely their fault. I think it is better though to vent our anger towards the federal governemnt people who want to continue these bad policies for purposes of gaining more and more control over our lives.
beebop| 12.6.10 @ 11:25AM
Many of today's recipients would call you a "chump" not realizing that it is the attitude you displayed that is the real American Exceptionalism 0bama doesn't see.
I just accepted a full time position that starts in January. I believe the decision turned on the fact that I currently work three part time jobs trying to cobble together what we used to call "a living."
Anyone who believes that 99 weeks of unemployment is going to look "good" on an application is not facing the reality. Plenty of part time jobs out there if you decide that work is what you really want to do!
Bill| 12.6.10 @ 3:27PM
I don't know whether our society has gotten softer over the past generation or so, since I've always had at least one job (and have had three jobs for the past 20 years), but I DO know (since one of my jobs is running my business) that 99 weeks of unemployment WILL result in the following question: "What kept you from getting a job during the past two years?"
CalMark| 12.6.10 @ 8:18PM
Goodness gracious, but aren't you noble. Don't break your arm, patting yourself on the back--or busting all those "sissies" in the nose. Too bad the world has changed and you don't realize it.
First, inconvenient fact. There are 5 applicants ("sissies" who "sit on their butt") for every job opening. Kind of hard to take a lower-paying job in that situation.
Second, these days you just CAN'T GET a lower-paying or lower-status job. Prospective employers mark you "overqualified" and your resume or application gets circular-filed. Because of employment costs and government red tape, they'd just as soon not hire someone who will leave when something more in line with their skills and experience turns up.
Michael L. Hauschild| 12.6.10 @ 9:06PM
Bullshit! I came out of retirement and went to work to fund my quest to elect conservitives in 2009. I have used that part time money to donate to practically every worthwhile conservative candidate I could find. I have two degrees, worked as a research scientist, and wasn't even asked what my qualifications were. I applied and went to work as a clerk the very next day for one of the local sporting goods stores. (Yes, scientists can sell sporting firearms.)
I don't kow how qualified you are to obtain work, but you sure are not qualified to speak of whether it exists or not. It is there for the asking.
CalMark| 12.6.10 @ 10:32PM
First, don't cuss at me. Second, you "Noble Worker" types can sure dish it out, but you can't take it.
Job availability depends on where you live; in places with big populations, there aren't any jobs. Hiring managers brag about positions going unfilled for months, even years, waiting for that "perfect match."
And, news flash: retirees--people like you--get to play under much easier rules. That's been written about a lot. You're talking about working in the "casual labor" market: retirees go to the head of the hiring line because they're presumed to be mature, stable, reliable, not looking for benefits, and not prone to bolt. In other words, your gun shop employer doesn't worry about you ditching him for a career-track Research Scientist job.
During the Great Depression, lots of people just plain couldn't find work. That's true of something like 7% of the population today. In your book, I suppose that makes them bad people who aren't trying hard enough.
Before you cuss people out, especially in a public forum, get your facts straight. Context is everything: we're in a depression and hiring is very tight. So that means not everyone who isn't working is a dirtbag.
Whatever you Noble Worker types say.
BackToBasics| 12.6.10 @ 11:58PM
I agree. I personally know 5 ex-engineers all intheir 50's who have worked hard all their lives. A couple have current skills (one to 2 years old) but still cannot find work in their fields. The others may not have as current a skill-set but they had the BRAINS to be engineers before regardless of having skill sets that may be a little rusty through no fault of their own (and continuing-ed has not helped them either by the way for those who want to argue that).
But hey, lets just outsource some more of these jobs or else just bring in more Indians and Chinese on H1-B visas who ALWAYS seem have current skills and the right skin color to boot! Lowest-wage foreigners who are not white seems to be the perfect skill-set employers are looking for these days. That's true for engineers as well as McDonald's workers too.
4 out of 5 have managed to find work but it is piecemeal and requires only an 8th grade education to perform as do most of these service-type jobs. The 5th has looked continously for 14 months to get a job in her field but will soon have to join the ranks of the grossly underemployed.
What a travesty to treat these hard-working people all in their 50's this way.
Redstateboy| 12.6.10 @ 10:10AM
it is my understanding that in certain People's Republics like: NY, NJ, CA or MI - your unemployment Insurance could be a few grand per Month!
vtwin| 12.6.10 @ 2:54PM
Sure, I can’t speak for the other Republics but in California the top tier is 450.00/month. But you pay more into unemployment insurance fund when you are working so you can collect more out when you are not working. It’s like any other insurance policy; the higher the premiums paid in the higher the potential benefits out.
vtwin| 12.6.10 @ 3:20PM
Sorry, correction $450.00/week.
idalily| 12.6.10 @ 11:19PM
You mean people in CA have money taken out of their check to cover them for unemployment insurance? Huh. In my state, the company you work for pays the unemployment insurance.
Spoonman| 12.6.10 @ 3:41PM
In Massachusetts, you can max out at over $900 per week!
Redstateboy| 12.6.10 @ 4:38PM
$3600 a Month??!! DadGum.. I'm working 40 hrs a week dream'n of $3600 per Month!! Then again.. I'm in East Tennessee..
buckeyeman| 12.6.10 @ 11:48AM
Not to worry. The Republicrats will "compromise" by trading another WHOLE YEAR of unemployment benefits for a brief continuation of the current tax rates which are already "TOO DAMN HIGH"
Intelligent Design| 12.6.10 @ 11:53AM
Since Obama took office federal employment has climbed 10% while private employment has declined almost 7%. The federal government is a bloated pig sucking capital away from the private sector, and that's why we have a stagnant economy which is getting weaker every day that Obama and his fellow Demo-Socialists are in office. The November election was a step in the right direction, but we need to finish the job by throwing a lot more Democrats and RINO's out of office. About the last thing we need is to have a charlatan such as Mitt Romney of Massachusetts Romneycare fame, or another light-weight such as Palin get nominated for president. We need $2 trillion in federal spending cuts yesterday, combined with enactment of the Fair Tax, which would eliminate the federal income tax and the IRS, replacing them with a simple national sales tax. See www.fairtax.org
MoeBlotz| 12.6.10 @ 12:21PM
Circa 1967 I had an opportunity to join the 26/52 club,or $52.00 per week for 26 weeks,when I was laid off from my trucking job with an Allied Van Lines agent in Trenton,NJ. My employer paid the unemployment compensation insurance premium,so I was obligated to collect. Sitting around collecting free $$$$ got boring,so as Mr.Hauschild did I sought something more stimulating than just sitting on my arse and started twisting wrenches for a local garage. Eventually I advanced in my transportation career and bought a big truck,then a second one. When work slowed down and the second truck broke,I told my driver I was going to lay him off and go collect unemployment. Why not? I was paying our greedy uncle futa and my profligate state suta. When the dough runs out,send the slobs back to work.
Joe D.| 12.6.10 @ 1:23PM
Mr. Ralph R. Reiland, I agree with your point about what was done but not by whom. The Republicans, by and large are not the party that put us in this mess. I would add Bernacki and Paulson (big Demo liberal) who convince Bush to the Tarp and scared the public first.
And if you think that Washington's scare tatics had no effect. Just remember where unemployment was before the scaring and after. The fact that we were at 6.5% after a year and a half of recession and what happen after.
George| 12.6.10 @ 3:24PM
I remember that just before Tarp was passed, Bush said he wouldn't sign it unless Obama asked him to. Why does no one remember this but me? And why does everyone forget that the Dems had House & Senate majority for 2 years already by the time Obam got into office?
Louis Jenkins| 12.6.10 @ 2:13PM
http://www.federaltimes.com/ar.....60301/1001
See how many federal employees really have their wages frozen. Follow the link.
KW-37| 12.6.10 @ 5:31PM
How long are we going to stop batting around this false government/private-sector comparison?
"Average private-sector wage" includes everything from flipping burgers to cleaning toilets. Those are both noble professions, but we don't employ government workers to do those jobs.
The majority of paychecks in the private sector are for unskilled labor. The majority of paychecks in government jobs are for skilled labor.
Don't take these figures on faith! Think about it!
The Left owns disingenuous statistics. It is embarrassing to see the Right use the same underhanded tactics to make a point.
JeffT| 12.6.10 @ 6:55PM
Government jobs are "skilled" labor? You've got to be kidding. What exactly are government seat warmers skilled at? Paperwork, regulations, fiats, rules, mind-boggling paperwork. Please, don't use the word skilled when referring to government workers. They produce nothing of value (save for the military). Heck, they produce nothing at all. And yet, in the last two years, only one segment of the labor force has grown:government jobs, at all levels. This is sick and will portend the doom of our Republic if it keeps up. There are not enough people working to pay for these deadbeats.
Nite| 12.6.10 @ 10:42PM
I have been a nurse for 35 years. The last 19 years was spent working for a State government and then a City. I was highly specialized in my field. I could have made more in hospitals, but I wanted to have off weekends and holidays, after giving them up for years. I made less in those settings, but I was happier. Big pension? NOT HARDLY!
DixieDrifter| 12.6.10 @ 11:29PM
If what is proposed regarding extension of the Bush Tax Cuts becomes law, I don't see the prospects of our economy improving anytime soon. As a small businessman, extending the Bush Tax Cuts for an additional twenty-four months does not instill long term confidence that our legislators will abstain from pulling the rug out from under the feet of small business once some semblance of a recovery is under way. Repubs and Dems alike will be only too eager to ramp up Federal spending, if they smell that "good times" have returned. Our economy is in serious trouble, the majority of those elected to conduct the nation's business have never had to make payroll, negotiate a "moving target" of Federal and State regulations, or survive in an environment of crippling taxation. Unfortunately, the selfish attitude displayed by a large segment of today's citizenry brings out the worst in our elected representatives. Maybe a complete collapse of our economy will be necessary in order to "wake up" the sleeping masses. Easy street is nowhere in sight!
Adult toys | 7.4.11 @ 4:03AM
Q:what is the strongest muscle?
A:the tongue—it can raise a woman’s hips.
Q:what is the lightest muscle?
A:the penis—it can be raised by a tongue.