Why Are Companies NOT Hiring???

[privateinvestor]

With more than 14 million people seeking work in this country, economists would really like to be seeing employers adding hundreds of thousands of jobs to their payrolls each month.

Instead, we’ve had to settle for just a small fraction of that.

The economy added a paltry 18,000 jobs in June, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The government will report employment figures for July on Friday, but already many are fretting that job growth will again be anemic.

Many companies are reporting that business is improving, but that’s not necessarily translating into new jobs. A survey of chief executives, released in June by the trade group Business Roundtable, found that 87 percent expect sales to increase in the coming six months. But just around half said they expected to add jobs during that period.


www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44006656/ns/business-eye_on_the_economy/


ETA: The Unemployment Numbers for the month of July are due to be released tomorrow AM..and with the debt crisis and other factors the numbers are NOT expected to be very strong so stay tuned

[privateinvestor]

Here's the expected unemployment numbers for tomorrow:

Nonfarm payrolls likely increased 85,000 last month, according to a Reuters survey, after rising only 18,000 in June. The unemployment rate is expected to hold steady at 9.2 percent.

It will of course be interesting to see Wall St reaction to these numbers which are due just before the markets open for trading... you could see a slight bump if they are higher than 85,000 but traders want to see more than one month of unemployment number increases before they buy into all the spin and hype by the Obama White House advisors..

[billisonboard]

Aug 4, 2011 16:18:36 GMT -5 @toughtimes said:

People are not hiring because the entire economy has been living on credit for at least the last ten years. The party is now over. When the music stopped there were not enough chairs.

U.S. Is Bigger Debtor Nation
Reuters
Published: July 04, 1989
Sign In to E-Mail

Print

The United States, already the world's largest debtor, sank an additional $154.2 billion into the red last year as foreign money poured in to plug the nation's balance-of-payments gap.

The value of foreign investments in the United States, ranging from stocks to factories, exceeded American investments abroad by $532.5 billion at the end of 1988, up from $378.3 billion a year earlier, the Commerce Department said last week.

As recently as 1984, the United States was a net creditor to the rest of the world by about $3.3 billion.

In 1981, before the American budget and current-account deficits started to balloon, the net investment position was a positive $140.9 billion, the Commerce Department said.

The increasing debt is likely to mean that American living standards will rise a bit more slowly than they otherwise would, as interest and dividend payments to foreigners siphon off an increasing share of the United States' output of goods and services. www.nytimes.com/1989/07/04/business/us-is-bigger-debtor-nation.html

At least the last 22 years.

[mmhmm]

In times when unemployment is high, companies are aware people will do more for less. It's a fact of life, and to the companies it's a way to increase profits. If one can get one person to do the job of three people, why hire two more? That's the thinking I hear.

[deziloooooo]

They are not hiring because the order books are if not empty, then they are filled with orders that the current work force of many businesses can fill with the workers they have now..most american major businesses ar back in sales and profits to the levekll before the crash..and doing it with 7 million less employees..this isn't a IMHO but the figures and reasons are what CEO's are sayin to the talking heads as they are intervierwed on those shows..now with the possibiolity of down grade of by rating agencies , because of how they feel the debt is being handled..if they do down grade, even a 1/2 of a point say as a penalty..the cost to borrow will be even higher ..so it to might have something to do with hiring practices but the major reason is, order books are not filled.

Companies are doing good business, profitable business..with less workers then before...

[Don Perignon]

Decreased production translates into a decreased GNP ("Gross national Product").
Attempts to disguise this one salient point by doctoring the books... is what gave us ENRON, the dot.com bust, and the Housing bubble.

[privateinvestor]

They’re nervous.
Business owners are a gun-shy bunch these days. When asked why they aren’t hiring, you’ll often hear the word “uncertainties.” Those range from not knowing whether taxes might increase at some point to worries about how health care reform could add to employee costs in the future.

Running a business is always going to be fraught with uncertainties, but these days business owners are feeling especially on edge about taking any sort of risk with hiring, Mayland said.

You’re nervous.
Maybe you were going to buy a car, but then you started seeing how the stock market was slumping, or you heard more news about friends who weren’t able to find work. That caused you to think twice about making such a big purchase.

The fact that Americans are nervous about spending money is, in turn, causing companies to worry that they might hire a new worker only to find there aren’t enough customers to justify that person’s salary.

But again, that’s a chicken-and-egg scenario. Until companies start adding jobs, consumers may not feel confident enough to spend money.

Our country has @17 million unemployed, unemployment compensations costs, welfare costs, food stamps and etc are subjects that the Obama Administration needs to address and the spin and hype about things are improving is not going to play anymore to the nation...

Meanwhile Obama is campaigning in Chicago trying to increase his campaign war chest and giving speeches that blame the Bush Administration and the Republicans for all that has gone wrong since he took over as our President.

[deziloooooo]

Aug 4, 2011 17:43:49 GMT -5 @privateinvestor said:

They’re nervous.
Business owners are a gun-shy bunch these days. When asked why they aren’t hiring, you’ll often hear the word “uncertainties.” Those range from not knowing whether taxes might increase at some point to worries about how health care reform could add to employee costs in the future.

Running a business is always going to be fraught with uncertainties, but these days business owners are feeling especially on edge about taking any sort of risk with hiring, Mayland said.

You’re nervous.
Maybe you were going to buy a car, but then you started seeing how the stock market was slumping, or you heard more news about friends who weren’t able to find work. That caused you to think twice about making such a big purchase.

The fact that Americans are nervous about spending money is, in turn, causing companies to worry that they might hire a new worker only to find there aren’t enough customers to justify that person’s salary.

But again, that’s a chicken-and-egg scenario. Until companies start adding jobs, consumers may not feel confident enough to spend money.

Our country has @17 million unemployed, unemployment compensations costs, welfare costs, food stamps and etc are subjects that the Obama Administration needs to address and the spin and hype about things are improving is not going to play anymore to the nation...

Meanwhile Obama is campaigning in Chicago trying to increase his campaign war chest and giving speeches that blame the Bush Administration and the Republicans for all that has gone wrong since he took over as our President.

No matter what they want to do to help these folks out, the TP has given their answer.."Let them eat cake" I think was their suggestion" so....

[Deleted]

Why Are Companies NOT Hiring???

It's a right wing conspiracy. If they hire then the economy will improve. If the economy improves then we might get 4 more years of Obama. (Just thought that I would say it before a democrat came up with it).

[privateinvestor]

Aug 4, 2011 19:12:20 GMT -5 @oldtex said:

Why Are Companies NOT Hiring???

It's a right wing conspiracy. If they hire then the economy will improve. If the economy improves then we might get 4 more years of Obama. (Just thought that I would say it before a democrat came up with it).

What is troubling is that with @17 million unemployed, you have to wonder how many will never find another job and end up homeless. And with the economy slowdown or a possible double dip recession who knows what the next few years will be for these unemployed folks??

[djAdvocate]

two words:

CONSUMER
DEMAND

consumers are the one true job creator. nobody else even comes close.

[handyman2]

For one thing technology has made the demand for more people un-necessary. In many industries automation has replaced the need for large numbers of employees. This is the computer age where much manufacturing has up graded to a computer run system. The original investment is high but the long term cost is lower than hiring people.
What needs to be focused on in developing new industries to create jobs. Once we get the core people back to work so they can afford to buy homes, cars etc then the trend will move upward.
At my company we contract installing automated systems and the core idea is to do the same job faster and better than if you had people on the job. Three techs can keep things going where it used to take 20. This is the down side of the new era of technology.

[MN-Investor]

Twowords:

CONSUMER
DEMAND

consumers are the one true job creator. nobody else even comes close.

If consumers were buying, companies would be producing goods as fast as their factories could manufacture them. Nothing would stop them.

It's funny to watch CEO's now. They're not going to blame it on lack of demand. Heck no! That doesn't get them anything except upset stockholders. So instead they blame it on "regulations" or "uncertainties" or "too high taxes." That's a bandwagon the Republicans can jump on.

But, like I said, if demand truly existed, factories would be cranking out product. What CEO is going to produce product if there are no buyers??? And what CEO is going to forgo sales if there is a demand? What, they'll sit back and watch their competitors fill the need? Geez, think it out!

[floridayankee]

Aug 4, 2011 16:18:36 GMT -5 @toughtimes said:

People are not hiring because the entire economy has been living on credit for at least the last ten years. The party is now over. When the music stopped there were not enough chairs.

It seems consumers have finally started figuring that out. Now, if only our fearless leaders in Washington would.....

"The financial situation of the household sector has improved far faster than everyone thought it would two years ago," says James W. Paulsen, the chief investment strategist for Wells Capital Management in Minneapolis. "People are still locked into the view that consumers are facing record burdens, and they are not."
U.S. consumers have reduced debt by more than $1 trillion in the 10 quarters ended in March, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Households spent 16.4% of their earnings on debt payments in the first quarter, including lease and rental payments, homeowners insurance and property taxes. That's down from 18.9% in the third quarter of 2007, before the recession started.

money.msn.com/credit-rating/escape-from-the-great-debt-trap-bloomberg.aspx?gt1=33001

[djAdvocate]

Aug 4, 2011 21:16:54 GMT -5 MN-Investor said:

Twowords:

CONSUMER
DEMAND

consumers are the one true job creator. nobody else even comes close.

If consumers were buying, companies would be producing goods as fast as their factories could manufacture them. Nothing would stop them.

It's funny to watch CEO's now. They're not going to blame it on lack of demand. Heck no! That doesn't get them anything except upset stockholders. So instead they blame it on "regulations" or "uncertainties" or "too high taxes." That's a bandwagon the Republicans can jump on.

But, like I said, if demand truly existed, factories would be cranking out product. What CEO is going to produce product if there are no buyers??? And what CEO is going to forgo sales if there is a demand? What, they'll sit back and watch their competitors fill the need? Geez, think it out!

this is especially true since American companies are floating on a sea of cash right now. they are ready to respond if demand picks up. but they are obviously not going to engender the demand all by themselves, despite what the pundits say.

[djAdvocate]

Aug 4, 2011 16:18:36 GMT -5 @toughtimes said:

People are not hiring because the entire economy has been living on credit for at least the last ten years. The party is now over. When the music stopped there were not enough chairs.

the contraction in credit and demand are pretty much the same phenomena. when people are nervous about employment, they cut back on demand and pay down credit. that is precisely what has occurred.

[thyme4change]

Why Are Companies NOT Hiring???

Because sales and earnings do not justify additional payroll.

Although, this would be a great time to miss earnings big but make vast, long term investments. It is much easier to be down when everyone else is down, but come out stronger vs. just cutting and holding the line and emerge weaker. But, it isn't my money they are spending - so my opinion is pretty useless.

[privateinvestor]

Basically big companies are sitting on tons ofr cash without hiring because they are all very worried about the economy or another double dip recession... But small companies may not have tons of cash and they are not hiring because of the economy, regulations, healthcare costs, taxes, and lack of confidence in the government.

[djAdvocate]

Aug 5, 2011 11:36:26 GMT -5 @privateinvestor said:

Basically big companies are sitting on tons ofr cash without hiring because they are all very worried about the economy or another double dip recession... But small companies may not have tons of cash and they are not hiring because of the economy, regulations, healthcare costs, taxes, and lack of confidence in the government.

no. they are not hiring because of lack of demand. if they had increased demand, they would hire.

now, if you are asking why consumers are not buying, it is primarily because of a weak economy.

and thus, the vicious cycle continues.

[Deleted]

I would bet it's a little of both.

[djAdvocate]

Aug 5, 2011 11:53:22 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

I would bet it's a little of both.

economic uncertainty delays hiring.
economic reality assures it.

in other words:

if i THOUGHT i had the demand, i MIGHT hire.
if i had the demand, i would hire.

[deziloooooo]

Aug 5, 2011 11:36:26 GMT -5 @privateinvestor said:

Basically big companies are sitting on tons ofr cash without hiring because they are all very worried about the economy or another double dip recession... But small companies may not have tons of cash and they are not hiring because of the economy, regulations, healthcare costs, taxes, and lack of confidence in the government.

There was a founder of a Tea Party organization in his area on a recent TV round table, CNN I think, guy has a beard, no shaker or mover but a small business man..and as the round table pointed out..large corporations still sending jobs, sections of their corporations over seas ..a few biggies were mentioned.

His suggestion and wants, and I see it, agree with him, since job growth will probably come from the smaller industries, companies, I agree, government regulations should be looked at , eliminated, modified, to remove barriers of growth.

No , not to the days of sweat shops. Controls and safety and environmental are still important and to expect all small businesses or large ones for that matter to be good partners of employees , in business for the greater good, ..not going to happen, history shows us that..

However, over regulation has taken over , to much nit picking..crimping growth and raising expenses to much..especially in times like this.

I agree..now is that a conservative thought , a liberal one or just common sense?

Where will the suggestion to do so come from..conservative, liberal..or where it should IMHO, the Administration, no matter what his party feels should be done.

We do need growth, jobs..and most likely that will come from the small business section first...

The problem I see it , being a realist..if it came from the TP, after being so obstinate, IMHO, and non helpful, also , IMHO, I wonder how the Administration would receive such ideas from those folks..

Human nature being the same with all individuals, , if you kicked me in the you know where..I am not so happy or willing to take your hand as you offer to help me up from the ground I fell on..even though , with out that helping hand, I may lie there for a much longer time.[

{Think that is a paraphrase of a Confucius thought ;D}

[zibazinski]

DF would love to add 7 employees but it costs too much to do it. Salary is the least of it.

[Deleted]

What is troubling is that with @17 million unemployed, you have to wonder how many will never find another job and end up homeless. And with the economy slowdown or a possible double dip recession who knows what the next few years will be for these unemployed folks??

Maybe the democrat plan is to let homeless people vote twice (after all they suffer the most). Of course that could backfire on them.

[djAdvocate]

Aug 5, 2011 14:03:11 GMT -5 zibazinski said:

DF would love to add 7 employees but it costs too much to do it. Salary is the least of it.

not following this comment. what is a higher cost of employment than salary?

[bubblyandblue]

Laborers knowing that science and invention have increased enormously the power of labor, cannot understand why they do not receive more of the increased product, and accuse capital of withholding it. The employer, finding it increasingly difficult to make both ends meet, accuses labor of shirking. Thus suspicion is aroused, distrust follows, and soon both are angry and struggling for mastery.
It is not the man who gives employment to labor that does harm. The mischief comes from the man who does not give employment. Every factory, every store, every building, every bit of wealth in any shape requires labor in its creation. The more wealth created the more labor employed, the higher wages and lower prices.
But while some men employ labor and produce wealth, others speculate in lands and resources required for production, and without employing labor or producing wealth they secure a large part of the wealth others produce. What they get without producing, labor and capital produce without getting. That is why labor and capital quarrel. But the quarrel should not be between labor and capital, but between the non-producing speculator on the one hand and labor and capital on the other.
Co-operation between employer and employee will lead to more friendly relations and a better understanding, and will hasten the day when they will see that their interests are mutual. As long as they stand apart and permit the non-producing, non-employing exploiter to make each think the other is his enemy, the speculator will prey upon both.
Co-operating friends, when they fully realize the source of their troubles will find at hand a simple and effective cure: The removal of taxes from industry, and the taxing of privilege and monopoly. Remove the heavy burdens of government from those who employ labor and produce wealth, and lay them upon those who enrich themselves without employing labor or producing wealth.

[mwcpa]

As a small business owner and an adviser to many of the same...

Over-regulation is not the issue, during the Bush years it became the wild west with all of the de-regulations and dismantling and mismanagement that was going on (not saying that today their is no mis-management or issues in government, there is a ton in my opinion).... the rules are set up to favor the big guy..... and they always have been.... Congress knows who will butter their bread when they leave office (or when a child needs a job)

Small firms have always been the backbone of the country.... and they are the ones struggling since banks, no matter what rhetoric they provide, are still not lending.... big corporate profits are increasing, cash is stockpiled, yet jobs are going to China, India and other places... I actually know someone who works for a big company and her latest job is to come up with justification to ship 1000+ jobs to India (and these are "service" jobs that the last administration noted in a state of the union that we were becoming, a service based economy), the decision has already been made, they just need to dot i's and cross t's to "justify" it... she is sick over it....

Six months ago I had to make a large equipment purchase to upgrade computers, software and the like... the cost was about 25-30K.... I went to the bank to finance about 1/2 of it.... bank said I was a credit risk and turned me down, instead I had to pay cash, leaving me with less resources to hire staff that I could have used during my busy season, instead I had to work more hours for the same net... I have heard the same from others... heck I have a client that was going to buy his first home, he was putting down over 50% (actually closer to 60%) and the bank kept breaking his chops asking for another document, and then another, and another.... until he just fired them.... now he has to start the process all over again... and hopefully he does not lose the home he wants to buy....

We all have been asked to sacrifice at various points of our lives and many are at this time, but Congress and Big corporate America have not had to do that in a long time...sacrifice to Congress is having to come to work over the July 4th week....and with all of the issues we face, where are they all... vacation....

[bubblyandblue]

The ones that created this mess - what we call the To Big To Fail TBTF institutions are the omes who have done the least. These very fims have literaly created terror in the minds of many suffering Americans and businesses. These TBTF institutions have literaly thrown people out of homes, are resposible for people losing health care with the attendant possibility that some of these folks died as a result. These TBTF institutions are the speculators and the job destroyers. They had detonated economic weapons of mass destruction among the civilians in every country and, quite possibly aided the deaths of American citizens. We cal them TBTF or Sytemically Important when, in fact, they are too dangerous to exist TDTE.
When will our elcected representatives represent us instead of being the lapdogs of these institutions.
We need tax reform to close all the loopholes (special privelege) these TDTE firms bought for themselves.

just an old artical below:
Let the right person, or the right number of persons, suggest a plausible, but utterly impossible idea, and shortly millions of people will acclaim its truth.
At the present moment there is a popular obsession that everybody is dishonest, particularly those holding public office. To be an office holder, runs the popular belief, is to be a tax-eater, a tax-eater is a politician, and a politician is a grafter.
Unfortunately some men are dishonest, and some of them get into office, where they betray the interest of the public. They should be brought to light as fast as possible, and summarily punished. But the fact of individual dishonesty should not be made an excuse for impeaching the human race.
The greatest enemy of good government is not knavery, but ignorance. Where the knave filches from us one dollar, the fool costs us a thousand. No law should be ignored by the executive, nor misinterpreted or modified by the judiciary; it should be either enforced or repealed.
But to honestly enforce a law based upon a false principle will result not in good but harm. Honesty and efficiency in public office are desirable in and of themselves; but until directed by intelligence and understanding they can accomplish little.
Party chiefs promise, if elected by the people, to “drive the rascals out”. Then what? A dishonest pilot at the wheel is safer for the ship than an honest man who knows not the channel.
The “letting down”, or “slowing up,” of business, the closing of banks. The growing unemployment, the high cost of living are not due to official grafting, scandalous though it has been, but to our unsound revenue system.
The first man who asked Congress for a special privilege, that is, the first man who confessed to our law making body that he could not conduct his affairs unless a special law was passed to protect him from the competition of another man who could operate without such protection, set in motion an evil train of effects.
Every man’s product is a raw material to the man who buys it. If government interferes with private business to the extent of enabling one man to charge more than the market rate for his product, it to that extent handicaps the man who buys that product and sooner or later the victim seeks similar relief from government.
The second special privilege lays a burden upon other consumers, who in turn seek relief. When the last man who commands sufficient political influence to secure a privilege has been favored, the first privilege-seeker finds that his raw materials have been raised in price, and in order that he may conduct his business at a profit he must have a greater privilege. When the second round of privileges has been distributed, the first man applies for a third; and so on without end.
If that were all of the story, if privileges could be distributed forever, it might be endured, except for two things. First, there are large numbers of people to whom these privileges are useless. Second, our higher scale of prices handicaps us in outside markets.
The result of this special privilege policy was inevitable from the beginning. Only the country’s exceptional resources, and the remarkable era of science and invention through which we are passing have enabled us to carry the burden this long.
The answer to our dilemma is not to be found in granting more special privileges, but in repealing as rapidly as may be those already in force. Every privilege taken from one man cheapens the raw materials of others. When all special laws have been repealed, all citizens will stand on a footing of equality, each engaged in the business for which he is best fitted.

[deziloooooo]

Aug 5, 2011 16:14:44 GMT -5 mwcpa said:

As a small business owner and an adviser to many of the same...

Over-regulation is not the issue, during the Bush years it became the wild west with all of the de-regulations and dismantling and mismanagement that was going on (not saying that today their is no mis-management or issues in government, there is a ton in my opinion).... the rules are set up to favor the big guy..... and they always have been.... Congress knows who will butter their bread when they leave office (or when a child needs a job)

Small firms have always been the backbone of the country.... and they are the ones struggling since banks, no matter what rhetoric they provide, are still not lending.... big corporate profits are increasing, cash is stockpiled, yet jobs are going to China, India and other places... I actually know someone who works for a big company and her latest job is to come up with justification to ship 1000+ jobs to India (and these are "service" jobs that the last administration noted in a state of the union that we were becoming, a service based economy), the decision has already been made, they just need to dot i's and cross t's to "justify" it... she is sick over it....

Six months ago I had to make a large equipment purchase to upgrade computers, software and the like... the cost was about 25-30K.... I went to the bank to finance about 1/2 of it.... bank said I was a credit risk and turned me down, instead I had to pay cash, leaving me with less resources to hire staff that I could have used during my busy season, instead I had to work more hours for the same net... I have heard the same from others... heck I have a client that was going to buy his first home, he was putting down over 50% (actually closer to 60%) and the bank kept breaking his chops asking for another document, and then another, and another.... until he just fired them.... now he has to start the process all over again... and hopefully he does not lose the home he wants to buy....

We all have been asked to sacrifice at various points of our lives and many are at this time, but Congress and Big corporate America have not had to do that in a long time...sacrifice to Congress is having to come to work over the July 4th week....and with all of the issues we face, where are they all... vacation....

I almost wonder if, now this is just a hair brained idea..and yes there is a risk..but if banks are not lending..honestly could you say you were not a risk when you went for your loan, possible if they honestly showed you why, but possible offered a loan but a bit more interest, you might have considered it, or do you feel they were busting your chops..just because of..they are earning plenty with no risks just by moving their $ around..so no real incentive tom loan today.

The government should finance their own bank..give more out as business loans, yes still make sure loans are viable as far as risk, charge interest of course..my feelings is if the private section won't do their job, their job is to loan money, then ok, the government does it..they did for Gm , I know you won't be looking for $50 Billion, LOL...

I know spoken, suggesting like a damn liberal, but only spoken by a middle to the left one.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

We cannot hire due to ObamaCare. In fact, we're going to fire if it stands. It's just that simple. We're not going to put up with it. We already have established an off-shore company and we'll have only arms-length dealing in the US before too long.