Temp work is also masking the true problem. I'm just tired of all the BS shell games played upon us from our government. They are trying their best to blow some bubbles back up. All the politicians care about is how things are perceived, not how things are in the real world.

Until the masses start catching on to the game, the politicians will keep the game going. I think with the current economic pain, people are maybe, just maybe, starting to see the game. The game is also the government giving handouts to people for votes. It doesn't matter about financial ethics or if we can afford it, it is about herding groups of people into the corral that will vote for them.

Throughout history the countries that are survivors will have people that are self reliant, have economies that produce, have possibilities to move up the economic ladder and wages that support the chances to make economic moves.

A long time ago I took the pill from Morpheus to try and see the real world. I have a lot of friends that refuse to take the pill and are willing to stay fat, happy and uninformed.

How can you look for a job when there are no jobs? Most of the jobs in my field are reserved for those under H1b. Oh well, that's the change we voted for..where are the 3 million jobs?

Indian CEO says that some Americans are unemployable:

http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2009/06/top_indian_ceo...

And this shameless innanity from Bloomberg:

"Job Losses in U.S. Slow More Than Estimated in Sign Recession Is Abating"

I mean, really, talk about cheerleading! A reduction in the collosal monthly rate of job losses over the last year or so is interpreted here as a slow-down in the recession? How so? A slow-down in job losses, perhaps, and probably a monthly blip, but an improving recession? How is that connection established? I'd say there's about as much substance to that statement as Bush's remark that "We don't torture".

This kind of yahooism is endemic at Bloomberg. Every day more than half of their headlines require confirmation from economic commentary elsewhere. What clearer example of the Big Lie might one have these days other than the constantly hyped hysteria over a supposed Iranian "nuclear weapons program". Both of these causes operate from much the same premise and serve, in all too many instances, the interests of the same people. When unemployment hits 12% sometime next year, the market is back down in the 6500 range, and we've had a couple of large scale demonstrations that have turned violent, will we still be hearing that an additional 325,000 monthly job losses are a sign of improvement?

Hourly wage (fictitious only for illustration)
India - $1.25
USA- $ 13.00

Now how are we to get the above numbers on parity?
Answer, we aren't, at least for a long, long time.

Globalization is a scheme, it is false and was developed to end the American middle class. I get sick when I listen to economists discuss the benefits of globalization.

For this scheme to work:

People in America must lower their standard of living but by how much is an unknown.

On higher taxes. Read today that MS will outsource jobs if taxes increase. I can't remember which tax plan was referenced.

India (others like India) must have an increasing standard of living.

Eventually they will come up far enough, the USA will have gone down far enough and things will be a bit more level. I will be dead and buried by the time it happens. I am guessing 50 years.

All along the way those controlling the purse strings are not losing anything. I believe it is the opposite and they have a better income as the middle class loses its standard of living. At least it is what my research has shown me.

Where is that missing TARP/Stimulus money?

It is very odd. I have a friend of 40 years that for his company, goes to Russia and surrounding States. He says they are on their way up and are more capitalistic than the US. But he says they sure aren't ready to see him move there. Except he does like Moscow. Never been there so I don't know.

Ailing, Banks Still Field Strong Lobby at Capitol

As Congressional Democrats and the White House crow about multiple victories over the financial industry, including new rules for credit card issuers, banks are quietly savoring an even bigger victory of their own.

The defeat of the bankruptcy proposal is a testament to the enduring influence of banks, even as the industry struggles financially and suffers from its role in the economic crisis.

It also shows that in the coming legislative battles that will shape the future of the economy, the financial industry — through a powerful and well-financed lobbying force — may have a far stronger hand to play than might seem evident.

Thank God we have someone that is finally going to investigage Medicare fraud.

"WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration Wednesday announced a mission to combat chronic Medicare scams operating from Miami to Los Angeles that are costing taxpayers billions of dollars a year." Investigating fraud is included in the administration figures of private companies. Do you think that the increased Medicare scrutiny that Obama proposes will be added in the much touted low Medicare administration figure. If they don't count the labor of CMS in the admin figure they sure won't count the increased fraud investigations.

I wonder, will the investigations be included in the Medicare administration figures. Probably not.  If they don't include labor costs of CMS in the admin figures, why include fraud investigations.  Wish I could run my business like the government.  I could call my income expenses.

I kind of think the UK - should do this, it will save money.

From the UK Daily Mail

Sorry, why should the NHS treat people for being fat?

Could you ever have imagined an age in which young mothers dying of breast cancer would literally have to fight to the death to be given the drug Herceptin, while obese women have access to stomach-stapling operations, anti-obesity pills, gastric bypasses and any other weight-loss 'cure' that takes their fancy, all on the NHS?

Yes, the same NHS that denied about half a million Alzheimer's sufferers the £2.50-a-day drug Aricept to delay the onset of dementia, yet spends millions to treat the symptoms of those whose only "illness" is overeating.

As figures published yesterday revealed, the number of patients being treated for being grossly overweight has gone up sevenfold in the past decade; in the past year alone, the number has increased by 30 per cent.

The fact is, the current politically correct non-judgmental policy is not only failing to solve Britain's obesity crisis, it is actually fueling it. What's needed instead is some tough love.

In principle, I'm against any form of NHS rationing. The great joy of the health service is that it is free at the point of use, regardless of the medical condition that necessitates it. But obesity isn't an illness. It's a self-induced condition.

Why, then, should the NHS pay for gastric bands, stomach-stapling, or expensive medication, simply because the 'victims' can't be bothered to lose weight the correct way?

I'll wager that if the NHS stopped offering these treatments, it would shock a huge number of the overweight into taking responsibility for their own condition, instead of seeking a miracle cure at our expense.

But the crucial difference is that you cannot cure cancer by stopping smoking, nor replace a liver by becoming teetotal. The vast majority of the chronically overweight, by contrast, could 'cure' themselves simply by following a healthier lifestyle.

Quite simply, with a cash-strapped NHS that can't even afford to treat the dying, we must stop indulging the self-indulgent.

I also think we should have a law like the Matching Act in the Netherlands. It would save the $$$$$ billions. The Dutch system is currently being held as a beacon of national planning.

Brigit Toebes joined the law school as a lecturer in 2005. She was previously employed as a legislative advisor at the Netherlands Council of State, an advisory body to the Dutch government. Among other things, she was involved in advising on the reorganisation of the Dutch health care sector and on the restructuring of the supervisory mechanisms in the financial sector.

"Due to the so-called ‘Matching Act’, only people with legal status are covered by the sickness fund. This means that illegal aliens are excluded from access to the health care package provided under the fund. In order to prevent inhumane situations from arising, the Matching Act provides that people without legal status may claim subsidised medical help in cases of ‘medical necessity’. This means that they have access to a limited health care package. What should be provided under this package has been heavily debated in the Netherlands. As part of the discussion, before the term ‘ medical necessity’ was introduced, the term ‘ emergency medical care’ was applied, which is stricter than ‘ medical necessity’. 

A practical implication of the system is that, in practice, people without legal status do not have access to treatment for HIV/AIDS."

The rest of the world does have unique ways to cut costs.

Oh and one more thing.  The health care industry is more than one group.  It is the HVAC people that charge hospitals double the amount, the inside painters that use special paints (such as low VOC), the printers, the secretaries, the list is long.   The biggest and remaining large employer in my town is one of our two hospitals.  It is the remaining place that pays a good wage.  My neighbor lost his carpenter job in the down turn but found a job at the hospital.  Their benefits are good, their pay is good.

So when we do cut back on the cost, that cut is going to ripple through a big, big pond.  Imagine that ripple happening in their current deep, deep recession.

It will be interesting.

I guess I can be glad I am not on Medicare.  My personal physician has dropped out and isn't taking new Medicare patients.  I pay my doc $78 for a visit.  He gets $49 from Medicare and says it doesn't pay to see them.  I guess if Medicare paid him a bit more I might be  be paying less than $78.

I also fire clients that take too much time but I am not in the medical field.

Dr. Gottlieb, a former official at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services

Government insurance programs also shift compliance costs directly onto doctors by encumbering them with rules requiring expensive staffing and documentation. It's a way for government health programs like Medicare to control charges. The rules are backed up with threats of arbitrary probes targeting documentation infractions. There will also be disproportionate fines, giving doctors and hospitals reason to overspend on their back offices to avoid reprisals.

When reading your comment and there is Angry Bear with a "I told you so" post.

I was thinking they are going after SS and any Medicare/Medicaid to deny benefits. They have been after any social safety net for decades, managed to wipe out retirement and that's pretty much all that is left.

for it is fairly amusing that there is this aghast at the deficits considering how they lobbied Congress to do them not 6 months ago.

Things are severely broken and there is no easy way out. The way I see it we have basically two options:

1. Stimulus with money we don't have. Deficits go up, we're under a crushing debt load for the foreseeable future, it's going to be a long hard slog to recovery.

2. Do nothing, or try fiscal austerity. We get a deflationary spiral, people out of jobs and failed businesses don't pay taxes, revenues drop, deficits go up, we're under a crushing debt load for the foreseeable future, it's going to be a long hard slog to recovery. Especially without jobs. (Unless of course, you have enough cash to pick up distressed assets for pennies on the dollar.)

So why are Bill Gross and company in such a lather NOW? If they're so concerned about their long term prospects why didn't they erupt in arms when Greenspan kept interest rates so low for so long? When Bush cut instead of increased the top marginal tax rates? When Cheney said "Deficits don't matter"? Why were they piling into derivatives and derivatives of derivatives?

Why is Congress so concerned about deficits NOW? Why are all the pundits and the WSJ and CNBC and the rest of the financial media prophesying gloom and doom NOW? And why do they have ANY credibility?

It's all great to be worried about the structural problems caused by asset bubbles and massive deficits, but that ship sailed a long time ago. "The moving finger writes/And having writ moves on" and all. The less we pay attention to the people who got us into this mess the sooner we can get to the job at hand.