Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *

Showing posts with label White House Council of Economic Advisors. Show all posts
Showing posts with label White House Council of Economic Advisors. Show all posts

Wednesday, December 28, 2016

The "Obama Jobs' Are Not As Good As The Administration Would Like You To Believe



The New Jobs Report Obama Doesn’t Want You to See

 217  37  5  140  418 
 

  4

capture-a-a-aoopk
During his time in office, President Barack Obama has loved to crow about many things, but one of his boilerplate recitations is how many jobs have been created under his administration. It’s been very important to Obama to be able to say that he’s single-handedly rescued the country from the Great Recession caused by the 2008 subprime lending crisis.
His Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) spouted rosy job numbers recently that claimed that more people were working than ever before. “Since I signed Obamacare into law [in 2010], our businesses have added more than 15 million new jobs,” stated Obama at his final presidential press conference the other day, offering up a number that represented a gross amount, rather than a net figure. But according to a new study by Princeton and Harvard economists Alan Krueger and Lawrence Katz, not all was as it seemed.
From 2005 to 2015, the number of Americans occupied by what the two professor’s term “alternative work” soared from 10.7 percent in 2005 to 15.8 percent in 2015. The term “alternative work” is their appellation for work performed by “temporary help agency workers, on-call workers, contract company workers, independent contractors or freelancers” — what other commentators have referred to as the “gig economy.” In the gig economy, work is unsteady, comes without a fixed paycheck and provides virtually zero benefits.
In the economists’ study, the percentage of people working in each of the aforementioned categories — temporary help workers, on-call workers, independent contractors and contract company workers — grew substantially between 2005 and 2015; temporary help workers went from .9 percent to 1.6 percent of all American workers, on-call workers went from 1.7 percent to 2.6 percent of workers, independent contractors went from 6.9 percent to 8.4 percent of workers and contract company workers went from 1.4 percent to 3.1 percent of workers.
Professor Krueger, who actually served as the chairman of Obama’s White House Council of Economic Advisors, noted that “94 percent of net job growth in the past decade was in the alternative work category.”
Of that figure, he wrote, “60 percent was due to the [the rise] of independent contractors, freelancers and contract company workers.” Stated another way, almost all of the approximately 10 million net jobs created in the period from 2005 to 2015 were nonstandard, non-9-to-5, untraditional roles.
“Workers seeking full-time, steady work have lost,” declared Krueger, while sarcastically admitting that “many of those who value flexibility and have a spouse with a steady job have probably gained.” For both types of workers, wage growth has been nonexistent because career advancement is usually not an option in these categories.
Corroborating this data were numbers released by the BLS that showed that in October and November of this year, the number of part-time workers grew at a far greater rate than full-time workers. In October, the number of U.S. full-time workers fell by 103,000 while the number of part-time workers grew by 90,000.
November saw an increase in full-time workers of 9,000 and an increase in part-time workers of 118,000. When discounting seasonal jobs, the November figures are worse; 628,000 full-time jobs were lost while 678,000 part-time (largely retail) jobs were created.
Other bad news included the number of people holding multiple jobs due to insufficient wages or other reasons. On a seasonally adjusted basis, this amount rose by 61,000 persons to a total of 7.8 million. On an unadjusted basis, the number was still a large increase of 57,000 to 8.1 million — the highest number in more than 100 years. If one goes back to the total number of jobs added for November, one is then forced to ponder how many of those jobs were actually held by the same person.
These figures may also explain people’s hourly average earnings slipping by .1 percent in November, the worst change in more than two years.
Among other discoveries cited by the economic study was the fact that young workers made up the largest growth component of contractors who don’t receive any type of benefits, even if they work full-time. This is often the case in the entertainment industry, where young freelancers are hired on a long-term basis without benefits being offered, an arrangement known as “permalance” employment.
All of this adds up to workers who are more leveraged, more disenfranchised, and less well taken care of than those who were employed prior to the post-2008 Great Recession. It also points out why, despite the lowest unemployment numbers in nearly a decade (4.6 percent nationally as of November), the growth in people’s real, disposable personal income has fallen since 2014 and remains mired at 2011 levels.
Also left out of the employment numbers is the figure for people who have opted out or are locked out of the workforce, which currently stands at an all-time high of more than 95 million.
For these reasons and many more, President-Elect Donald Trump’s Inauguration Day can’t come soon enough. Ideally, Trump, in conjunction with Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, will be able to reverse these trends and start spitting out more honest numbers that reflect “real” job gains rather than illusory ones.
Regards,
Ethan Warrick
Editor
Wealth Authority

Wednesday, December 9, 2015

More Bad News For The Biggest Obama Failure--ObamaCrapCare

Obamacare to cut work hours

 by equivalent of 2 million 

jobs: CBO

President Barack Obama's healthcare law will reduce American workforce participation by the equivalent of 2 million full-time jobs in 2017, the Congressional Budget Office said on Tuesday, prompting Republicans to paint the law as bad medicine for the U.S. economy.
In its latest U.S. fiscal outlook, the nonpartisan CBO said the health law would lead some workers, particularly those with lower incomes, to limit their hours to avoid losing federal subsidies that Obamacare provides to help pay for health insurance and other healthcare costs.
The biggest impact would begin in 2017, CBO said, because major provisions of the law will be well under way by then. The CBO said there would be smaller declines in work hours that would occur before then.
Work hours would be reduced by the equivalent of 2.5 million jobs in 2024, said the agency, which earlier predicted 800,000 fewer fulltime jobs by 2021. The bottom line would be a slower rate of growth for employment and compensation in the coming decade, according to the report.
The link that the CBO drew between the health law and slower employment growth is likely to become fodder for partisan attacks in this year's congressional election battle, which will determine who controls Congress in the final years of the Obama presidency. Obamacare is unpopular with many voters and its botched October rollout was accompanied by a public outcry by millions of people who saw their health plans cancelled as a result of its implementation.
Republicans, who have already made Obama's Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) a top campaign issue for November, seized on the CBO report to press their argument that Obamacare is putting a damper on jobs growth and the economy.
"The president's healthcare law creates uncertainty for small businesses, hurts take-home pay, and makes it harder to invest in new workers. The middle class is getting squeezed in this economy, and this CBO report confirms that Obamacare is making it worse," House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner said in a statement.
But the White House pushed back on the argument that Obama's signature domestic policy achievement would mean an actual reduction in jobs.
"It's not that the businesses are cutting those jobs," said Jason Furman, who chairs the White House Council of Economic Advisers. He said the CBO report showed an impact on labor supply rather than demand for workers from employers.
The CBO report offered some bright spots on the broader fiscal front, saying the U.S. budget deficit would be a smaller than expected $514 billion in the fiscal 2014 year ended September 30. That is down from a previous estimate of $560 billion and a fiscal 2013 deficit of $680 billion.
But it said sluggish economic growth and stubbornly high unemployment would cause the improvement to be short-lived.
The CBO also said Obamacare would enroll 1 million fewer uninsured Americans than initially expected as a result of technical glitches that largely paralyzed the federal website HealthCare.gov in the first two months of open enrollment.
In a fresh forecast for 2014, the CBO estimated that 6 million people would sign up for private coverage through new health insurance marketplaces, down from an earlier forecast of 7 million. But the report predicted that the program would eventually overcome the deficit, signing up 24 million people by 2017.
The Obama administration says the health insurance marketplaces now operating in all 50 states and the District of Columbia have enrolled about 3 million people in private coverage so far, with volumes increasing following major fixes to HealthCare.gov.
Despite claims from Obamacare critics about the law's potential effects on hiring, CBO said the expected drop in work hours between 2017 and 2024 would result largely from worker decisions not to participate in the labor force, rather than from higher unemployment or the inability of part-time workers to find full-time hours.
"The estimated reduction stems almost entirely from a net decline in the amount of labor that workers choose to supply, rather than from a net drop in businesses' demand for labor," CBO said.
According to the report, federal subsidies can be substantial, particularly for lower-wage workers who receive more under the law's sliding income scale. But that also means the benefits can be phased out as a worker's income rises.
"The phaseout effectively raises people's marginal tax rates (the tax rates applying to their last dollar of income), thus discouraging work," CBO said.
(Additional reporting by Roberta Rampton in Washington; editing by Caren Bohan andMatthew Lewis)

Read more at Reutershttp://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-fiscal-obamacare-idUSBREA131B120140204#zyjo7i27ZvrBjaVp.99

Wednesday, March 12, 2014

If Obama Gets His Way Businesses Will Pay Significantly More Overtime

Obama Looking to Force Businesses to Pay More Overtime

President Barack Obama has already invested much of the midterm election year strategy to a minimum wage hike. Now, in what might play into the broader strategy of appealing to employees, the president wants to expand overtime pay.
Obama Looking to Force Businesses to Pay More Overtime
President Barack Obama is greeted after arriving on Air Force One at John F. Kennedy Airport in New York, Tuesday, March 11, 2014. Obama is in New York for a pair of fundraisers for the Democrats. (AP/Craig Ruttle)
Without congressional authorization, Obama will direct the Labor Department to change the classification of workers such as fast-food restaurant managers, loan officers, computer technicians and others currently classified as “executive or professional” employees, which provides a means for employers to avoid overtime pay, the New York Times reported.
TheBlaze asked Betsy Stevenson, a member of the White House Council of Economic Advisors, whether an overtime rule would affect more heads of household earners than a minimum wage hike.
“We really have to study the affects of the overtime rule to figure out how we would change,” Stevenson told TheBlaze. “Then of course how we change it determines who would be affected. So I couldn’t answer that question unless I could say how we were going to change the rule.”
Under current regulations, employees classified as executive, administrative or professional can be denied overtime pay under a “white-collar exemption,” the Times reported. Employers are prohibited from denying time and a half overtime pay to salaried workers earning less than $455 per week. Under the new rules, fewer salaried employees could be blocked from receiving overtime pay.
Taking questions from reporters, Stevenson said the White House is not putting forth a threshold at this point.
“What we know right now is that the threshhold has been eroded by inflation, and there are 3.1 million people who if the threshold had kept up with inflation, would automatically be covered by overtime provisions,” Stevenson said.
“What we’re going to be doing in the weeks and months to come is looking deeply at this problem and making sure that the overtime provisions are working as well as they should in today’s economy,” Stevenson continued. “We don’t know what that’s going to lead us to. We’ve got to do the work. We’ve got to dig into it and make sure we’re getting feed back from all key stakeholders and figuring out what’s going to be the best way to modernize this rule.”
This is also another chance for Obama to use executive authority, which he has promised to do more of since January’s State of the Union address and touting his “pen and phone” as avenues around congressional action.
While a minimum wage hike from $7.25 to $10.10 must be approved by Congress, Obama signed an executive order requiring all federal contractors to pay at least $10.10 per hour to employees working on federal contracted work.
Obama’s authority to act unilaterally on the overtime matter comes from the president’s ability to revise the rules that carry out the Fair Labor Standards Act, administration officials told the Times.
In 2004, the Bush administration’s Labor Department loosened the regulations to give businesses more latitude in exempting salaried white-collar workers from overtime pay.
Marc Freedman, the executive director of labor law policy for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, said the nation’s overtime regulations “affect a very wide cross section of employers and our members,” and said, “I expect this is an area we will be very much engaged in.”
(This story was updated to include comments from Betsy Stevenson, a member of the White House Council of Economic Advisors.)