Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

WP: U.S. economy grows nearly twice as fast in 3rd quarter


SkinsHokieFan

Recommended Posts

Hopefully we have turned a corner

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/us-economy-grows-nearly-twice-as-fast-in-3rd-quarter/2011/10/27/gIQANfoyLM_story.html?hpid=z1

U.S. economy grows nearly twice as fast in 3rd quarter

Economic growth picked up in the United States in late summer, according to government data released Thursday that shows the most solid rate of expansion in a year.

Gross domestic product rose at a 2.5 percent annual pace during the July through September third quarter, the Commerce Department said, considerably better than the 0.9 percent rate of growth in the first half of 2011.

Click link for rest

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did anyone else feel it?

I don't care about what the economy is doing until these corps start hiring American workers again, their profits can be made from overseas work forces and our economic numbers will look great but it won't change the facts on the ground until they start hiring. And since the recession ended two years ago....we haven't seen the unemployment numbers drop since....so...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But GDP, the broadest measure of economic activity, was not strong enough to represent a “catch-up” effect that could bring the unemployment rate down substantially over time. Rather, 2.5 percent is somewhere around the treading-water rate of U.S. economic growth--the approximate rate of economic expansion that would be expected, given an ever-increasing labor force and rising worker productivity, but not enough to put many of the 14 million unemployed Americans back to work.

Though not necessarily this specific,my first thought/feeling when seeing the headline was what is stated in that quote. One of those wait and see things. Some positive indicators in there as well,but whether it's something that will be consistent or not,remains to be seen. See what happens over the holidays and how that could effect things as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Corporations have learned to survive and now start to show profits using a skeleton staff.

It will take decades for them to hire at the same levels.

Most of the jobs that were lost are never coming back.

Beat me to it.

Why hire more workers when their business model shows they can get by with less?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Beat me to it.

Why hire more workers when their business model shows they can get by with less?

I see it all the time. Think of how long the lapse rate is at your firm, i.e how long it takes to hire someone in a position that is vacant.

We fired one guy in August. His "replacement" was actually already hired and was going to be in addition to the fired guy. Essentially our group, which was to have 5 staff, still only has 4 staff and there haven't been any "productivity" issues. So what is the incentive for another body?

My old company, same thing. Took them a full year to replace someone who quit. Finally that company started to prioritize our role and beefed up staff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or job growth needs to come in new businesses and new industries.

I agree with this, but don't understand the push back against green technology, which seems to me to be an area of new industry that can create this opportunity.

~Bang

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with this, but don't understand the push back against green technology, which seems to me to be an area of new industry that can create this opportunity.

~Bang

I think the pushback is twofold.

1 (and most obvious) is their is a political gain made by fighting "global warming"

2- and more accurate imo, is that most "green tech" investments are just a way of spending Govt money, and arent actually able to sustain themselves in a free market.

I'd rather see a nationwide energy policy that includes everything from green energy to nuclear. The jobs we could create by spending the next 2 decades becoming energy independant would dwarf what we've lost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Beat me to it.

Why hire more workers when their business model shows they can get by with less?

In a nutshell...Businesses can increase profits by cutting expenses or increasing revenue. Most businesses have already trimmed their fat. So, most businesses are going to need to hire again to increase revenues. The problem is, no one wants to hire a lot of employees until they know there is enough new business out there to justify the increased expenditures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the pushback is twofold.

1 (and most obvious) is their is a political gain made by fighting "global warming"

2- and more accurate imo, is that most "green tech" investments are just a way of spending Govt money, and arent actually able to sustain themselves in a free market.

I'd rather see a nationwide energy policy that includes everything from green energy to nuclear. The jobs we could create by spending the next 2 decades becoming energy independant would dwarf what we've lost.

Good luck with that.....who are you...Rick Perry,or Obama before the spill?

Dreaming of exploiting our own resources is evil, much better to pay someone else's wages to pollute the planet

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with this, but don't understand the push back against green technology, which seems to me to be an area of new industry that can create this opportunity.

~Bang

I would not be against it if it were not so expensive and yielded better results. Also, if more of the actual Green Jobs stayed in America.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure, and I personally benefit from the practice. It doesn't, however, do a thing to improve the current situation by piling on the rank and file employees.

Would NOT paying them a bonus help? How?

---------- Post added October-27th-2011 at 11:27 AM ----------

aren't most new technologies more expensive at 1st? If nobody buys in then there is no money to put into further development and improvements. From bluray to energy efficient windows, it seems to usually work that way.

Sometimes. But we're still wating for Ethanol to do more than just ensure that Iowa gets the most influence in our Presidential process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a nutshell...Businesses can increase profits by cutting expenses or increasing revenue. Most businesses have already trimmed their fat. So, most businesses are going to need to hire again to increase revenues. The problem is, no one wants to hire a lot of employees until they know there is enough new business out there to justify the increased expenditures.

Not always true. Increased use of technology could, and does, lead to less jobs needed whlie not always increasing the demand on the company workforce.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If an exec can maximise his profits, while minimizing expenses shouldnt he earn a bonus?

If that means cutting American jobs and continuing to contribute to the 9.1% unemployment rate then no....but I know you'll say he does deserve it.

See this is what gets me, the average American is taught their whole life that they are supposed to do what's best for the country, valuing civil service, fighting our wars wanting to lower unemployment, yet somewhere along the line once people reach a certain annual income all of that changes, people are no longer seen as Americans they are seen instead as lost profits, and for them a rising national unemployment rate coupled with increased annual earnings is a perfect situation. For them it's a gold mine, for the worker on the other hand...well....it's the shaft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...