Assorted links

Comments

The "office kid" link is dead.

Comments for this post are closed

Trunk, or whatever her name is these days is obnoxious and narcissistic.... Why would I want to be associated with her or her linked-in clone?

Comments for this post are closed

1. Ms. Trunk is fine, but careerism is the personal version of fiat currency. Expertise on the other hand is slower, less flashy, and real, like gold.

Comments for this post are closed

Or is it because it is "purveyed" by chains that it is "bad food"?

How reliably does the use of the word "purveyed" indicate snobbishness?

It's not like I use it a lot in daily conversation....

Comments for this post are closed

You would think that this fact:

"The employment report shows that private sector employment in August 2009 was lower than it was in August 1999"

would be worthy of more than poorly named link in a daily linkfest.

Why in the hell is private employment lower 10 years than it was 10 years later? Thats a pretty damn big issue, recession or no recession.

Comments for this post are closed

Government pork in everything : SFW but for the heading: http://www.thelocal.se/21870/20090903/

Comments for this post are closed

"The employment report shows that private sector employment in August 2009 was lower than it was in August 1999"

Mike S, it's kind of like saying stocks are lower now than 10 years ago. It's a problem, but I don't think any useful conclusions can be drawn directly from those facts alone.

Part of the problem and more important is that federal government payrolls are now double private sector. But, even that needs detailing. Adjusted for education? State and local gov't? Including part-time work? etc. However, it is indicative of a problem that federal payrolls went from 166% in 2000 to 200% today. People get dumped into Medicare for the big dollar days. I'm not sure that health insurance is the big tax on employment. Maybe taxes are.

Comments for this post are closed

"Mike S, it's kind of like saying stocks are lower now than 10 years ago. It's a problem, but I don't think any useful conclusions can be drawn directly from those facts alone."

Sorry this is just poor analysis. If the private sector hasn't created any net jobs for a decade, it is a huge problem for workers and our economy. We should examine why this is the case despite the lowest tax burden in a generation.

At the depths of the early 80's recession, we had 17% more private sector jobs than a decade prior. These numbers are not population adjusted, so we are talking about raw jobs. Because we have a working age population that has grown by 150,000 a month, we now have around 18,000,000 more people competing for the same number of jobs.

I do not know how you can compare this to the stock market. In the stock market, we have not discovered any absolute valuation metric that decides value.

Let me assure you the FAJ would find your thesis unpublishable.

Comments for this post are closed

I gree with it!

Comments for this post are closed

I don't think "undemocratic" means what you think it means

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed