Shocking NYT Front Page Headline: 'Employers Say Jobs Plan Won’t Lead to Hiring Spur'
A day after the New York Times published an editorial praising President Obama for his "ambitious," "robust," and "far-reaching" jobs address the previous evening, the Gray Lady printed a front page story with the shocking headline, "Employers Say Jobs Plan Won’t Lead to Hiring Spur."
The first few paragraphs were just as surprising:
The dismal state of the economy is the main reason many companies are reluctant to hire workers, and few executives are saying that President Obama’s jobs plan — while welcome — will change their minds any time soon.
That sentiment was echoed across numerous industries by executives in companies big and small on Friday, underscoring the challenge for the Obama administration as it tries to encourage hiring and perk up the moribund economy.
The plan failed to generate any optimism on Wall Street as the Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index and the Dow Jones industrial average each fell about 2.7 percent.
As President Obama faced an uphill battle in Congress to win support even for portions of the plan, many employers dismissed the notion that any particular tax break or incentive would be persuasive. Instead, they said they tended to hire more workers or expand when the economy improved.
Checking that link to make sure this really is a Times article?
I understand. I checked it four times, especially as this was in stark contrast to what the editorial staff told readers Friday morning after the President's address:
With more than 14 million people out of work and all Americans fearing a double-dip recession, President Obama stood face to face Thursday night with a Congress that has perversely resisted lifting a finger to help. Some Republicans refused to even sit and listen. But those Americans who did heard him unveil an ambitious proposal -- more robust and far-reaching than expected -- that may be the first crucial step in reigniting the economy.
Perhaps as important, they heard a president who was lately passive but now newly energized, who passionately contrasted his vision of a government that plays its part in tough times with the Republicans' vision of a government starved of the means to do so.
The president's program was only a start, and it was vague on several important elements, notably a direct path to mortgage relief for troubled borrowers. And some of the tax cuts for employers may prove ineffective. Nonetheless, at $447 billion, the plan is large enough to potentially lower the unemployment rate and broad enough to be a significant stimulus.
Now that's more like it!
- Noel Sheppard's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
So to summarize both
Submitted by ThePickle on Sat, 09/10/2011 - 4:45pm.
So to summarize both articles mentioned, the consensus (I know you libs love that word) among those that ACTUALLY hire folk, can be boiled down into a single simple statement.
"He spoke real pretty, but it ain't gonna do shiite to get you a job."
Well Duh!
Submitted by buttercup815 on Sat, 09/10/2011 - 4:47pm.
Did the NYTs really think that all the tax breaks and all the bailouts in the world are going to be an incentive for an american company to hire more people? Not a chance, when they can just buy stuff cheaper from China.
Just the way it works..so grow up NYTs.
Thanks Noel,
Submitted by Grumpy in Arizona on Sat, 09/10/2011 - 4:49pm.
While the NYT editorial board may be enthusiastic... I'll bet over on the news side there will be one less reporter on the staff come Monday morning.
-Grump :o)
for all the media that promote obama's plan
Submitted by MidAmerica on Sat, 09/10/2011 - 5:30pm.
The Times should be asked..."How many additional workers will be hired at the NYT if obama's proposal are enacted?".
No hiring till economy improves...
Submitted by luckbfern on Sat, 09/10/2011 - 5:32pm.
So isn't this an argument that tax cuts won't work? Sounds like the business people are saying: "you can give all the tax cuts you want, but I'm not hiring anyone until I know people are willing to buy what I'm selling." The author unknowingly made an argument against his own position.
Your argument is to broad. If
Submitted by ThePickle on Sat, 09/10/2011 - 6:12pm.
Your argument is to broad. If you were speaking just about corporate tax cuts I might have a tendency to agree, as those type of cuts mostly allow business the opportunity to realize enough profit to expand....however without ensuring that the consumer has sufficient disposable income to to account for the increase in goods, the smart move would be for business to wait until such a time that those conditions are met. They would likely sit on the extra capitol until such a time that expansion made sense.
The long and short of it is that, for right now at least, corporate tax "cuts" without a corresponding "cut" to the rate of consumers would not work.
However if we were to provide the "best" incentive for business to expand and hire, it would be through allowing every day Americans to keep more of their hard earned dollars so that they might spend them on goods and services offered by said expanding businesses.
Stimulus 5 or 6?
Submitted by Scott Trent on Sat, 09/10/2011 - 5:36pm.
The only remedies the president knows are temporary, government-directed fixes, and even if the president’s plan passes, we already know it will FAIL... We`ve seen this plan before...
So the NYT is just now
Submitted by celator on Sat, 09/10/2011 - 5:42pm.
So the NYT is just now figuring out that Obama isn't even slightly interested in proposing policies that will actually help companies create jobs?
One look at the stock market
Submitted by FreeEnterprise on Sat, 09/10/2011 - 6:11pm.
One look at the stock market and you can see that "pass the speech" is pointless, when there is no bill to pass... Only words...
Hey, maybe the 6th try at Keynesian will work?... AMIRITE?
One of the typical
Submitted by Bob K on Sat, 09/10/2011 - 6:54pm.
comments I read at a leftist website was:
"Those f***ers have the profits to hire people...and just choose not to do so for the sake of filling their coffers."
They REALLY do believe this at their very core.
Someone else has more then me!
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Sat, 09/10/2011 - 7:34pm.
Somebody out there has more then I do. They should give it to me. No, I am not a communist. In fact, I don't even know what a communist is.
"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama
That's the scary part.
Submitted by jeff68 on Sun, 09/11/2011 - 9:54am.
That's the scary part.
you mad bro?
Submitted by Rackie on Sat, 09/10/2011 - 7:07pm.
lets make hiring mandatory
that'll fix it
and minorities first
that'll shut'em up
bring back the draft
Submitted by MidAmerica on Sat, 09/10/2011 - 7:54pm.
You do bring up a funny scenario. Imagine these 'hardest hit' long term unemployed suddenly being notified they have a job and it is required that they show up for work!
Obama only cares about PUBLIC-SECTOR & union jobs
Submitted by ChrisNH on Sat, 09/10/2011 - 8:04pm.
If you can't pour cement, lay asphalt, or weld steel as part of his beloved 'infrastructure' boondoggle, or don't have a union card, Obama has no use (or care) for you. You're not among the people he wants to help. We saw that in 2009: The money only went to keep union hacks employed.
So perhaps more than spill hot oil on their beloved Obama, the NYT is instead starting to neuter expectations.
Obama is not getting love from ANYWHERE; I'd hide my children from this train-wreck, too. You'll notice his little girls are nowhere to be seen. It must crush 'Daddy' to know that his girls probably understand how hated he is right now.
seeing things?
Submitted by catnamedjake on Sat, 09/10/2011 - 8:35pm.
Does anyone else see the striking resemblance in this photo of Obama to Simon Bar Sinister? Where's UnderDog when we need him!
"..his vision of government's
Submitted by ant on Sat, 09/10/2011 - 10:33pm.
"..his vision of government's role in hard times, and Republican vision of a government starved of a means to do so."
This is a big problem for conservatives today, we are at odds with a Party that just refuses to accept the idea that government is part of the problem. Why is the left so intolerant of the idea of "Get out of the way!!!"? Rhetorical question. I know it's about a good gig, buying votes, and Money,money,money.
File that under "Ya don't say....."
Submitted by drsamherman on Sat, 09/10/2011 - 10:40pm.
Did the bumbling incompetent economic disaster masquerading as POTUS think he could make some rote teleprompter vocal extravaganza and suddenly reinvigorate hiring after three years of sitting on his posterior? If he did, I may have to advance my malignant narcissistic personality disorder observations of him to a delusional phase. Even if congress passed everything he wants (which the petulant, whiny nincompoop will NOT get) tomorrow, the economy does not respond like a cardiac pacing patient in an electrophysiology lab. Business leaders are telling Emperor Napoleon Obonaparte that his plan will mean little, if any, gains in the short run and more debt and lower credit ratings in the long run.
It's Not The Spending Stupid
Submitted by HardRightTurn on Sat, 09/10/2011 - 10:47pm.
It's about the repressive regulation and lack of a stable business environment. Banks require a five year business plan as part of an application for a commercial loan. No one knows what assumptions to use on tax rates, energy costs, health care costs, and interest rates.
Obama would know this if he had any experience in the real world, but he is an ignorant liberal.
To more fully comprehend the Left, one must read “Leftism As Psychopathy” by John Ray, M.A., Ph.D. Caution, it might scare you a little bit.
http://jonjayray.tripod.com/psycho.html
The only thing 'robust',
Submitted by killa37 on Sat, 09/10/2011 - 11:29pm.
The only thing 'robust', 'ambitious', and 'far-reaching' about Boy BlahBlah is his opinion of himself................nobody else is buying into his BS anymore - even though it's the same BS that he was laying out when he started - the guy is as predictable as the sun coming up in the east..............and I still can't figure out how so many people bought into the scam. Unfortunatly for me and millions like me, we're suffering mightily because of it.
This seems to eliminate
Submitted by Bill The Bold on Sun, 09/11/2011 - 3:58am.
one leg of the republican's table of ideas for creating jobs. The notion that corporate taxes are an impediment to hiring now seems to be wrong. It also clearly supports the notion that the primary obstacle is demand. It also supports the notion that business tax breaks are not the way to stimulate the economy, and at the same time supports the stimulus direct spending as valid. Just need more of it.
Bill The Bold
Submitted by hydrodynDM on Sun, 09/11/2011 - 4:13am.
What exactly is the "this" you are referring to?
Does it hurt, Bill ?
Submitted by ckc1227 on Sun, 09/11/2011 - 3:35pm.
No, seriously, does being a brain dead liberal hurt?
Not too much praise please
Submitted by Tomorama on Sun, 09/11/2011 - 10:28am.
This line from the times says all you need to know about gutless fraudulent liberal lies and their way of "thinking":
"As President Obama faced an uphill battle in Congress to win support even for portions of the plan".
Blaming others IN SPITE of Republicans being on record as saying they are willing to work with the President on this bill RIGHT AFTER the speech and the FACT that some of the parts of the bill are currently sitting in the Senate right NOW doing nothing because the Democrats are putting party before country and won't bring up 13 BILLS the Republican House proposed.
So I take it someone at
Submitted by Rusty Shackleford on Sun, 09/11/2011 - 12:32pm.
So I take it someone at Newsbusters read the whole thing and confirmed that the point was not to label business leaders "racist"?
I wonder if someone slipped up at the Times or if they feel the need to show actual journalism a couple times a year for the sake of pulling it out to say "See? See? If we're so biased then why did we post this?"
They did put it in the Saturday edition in order to ensure that it would be read by the fewest people possible, but I still think it's odd that the Times put this on the front page because generally when they post actual journalism in their newspaper they hide it deep within the paper and leave the front page for their editorials. Whether this was a long term plan or if someone just slipped up I bet someone's gonna get the cold shoulder at the office on Monday.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chris Matthews: The Joy Behar of MSNBC.
Bill Maher: The Joy Behar of HBO.
Paul Krugman: The Joy Behar of The New York Times.
"Well Duh!" Missing from NYT headline.
Submitted by Avitar on Sun, 09/11/2011 - 5:56pm.
'Well Duh! Employers Say Jobs Plan Won’t Lead to Hiring Spur'
It shoould either be that or
'Unexpectedly Employers Say Jobs Plan Won’t Lead to Hiring Spur'
That has gotten a little too thin to sell even to New York City readers.