jobs & economy issue - 2011

Attleboro Democracy

Jobs and the Economy:

“On the Ropes”

_______________________________________

Fall, 2011

Politics ~ View from Attleboro

Attleboro Democracy, Fall 2011 2 | P a g e


Contents

Articles………………………………….

Unemployment Demystified……..page 4

Jeremy Denlea

A Jobs Tax Cut Without Jobs……page 5 Andrew Meehan

Massachusetts :

Leaving the Recession…………...page 6 Jim Humphrey

Financial Crisis at Home……......page 6

Timothy O’Neill

Guest Column…………………..............

Scott Brown Embarks on a

Jobs Tour………………………..page 7 John Walsh

Humor & Satire………………………..

My Meeting With the President...page 8 “John Finley”

From Our Readers………………………

America’s History Can Show Us

the Way Forward ……………..page 10 Richard Saunders

Fact Check……………………………...

America’s Debt Is Not New ….page 11

Stimulus Did Create Jobs……….page 11

Democrats of Attleboro Bulletin...page 12

From the Editor –

Although this magazine was written by Democrats, we

aspire that anyone of any political affiliation can read,

enjoy, and think deeply about our words. Andrew Meehan

– Editor, Attleboro Democracy

Welcome –

Welcome to the first edition of the “Attleboro Democracy.”

Inside you will find regular features and selected guest

columns about politics and government that impact the

citizens of Attleboro.

We hope you enjoy the first edition of the “Democracy”

and that you find the content thought-provoking and

informative.

__________

Every season we will focus on a political topic that

impacts the citizens of Attleboro. Our inaugural edition

focuses on “Jobs and the Economy.” Specifically, this issue

will focus on the mass job losses stemming from the recent

recession, as well as the recovery, which has been fueled by

government intervention (in the form of the “Stimulus

Package”) and private industry job creation programs.

The steady downward spiral on the economic front and the

increase in our country’s national debt that occurred at the

end of the last decade was founded upon a combination of

large tax cuts focused on the wealthy that could not muster

an expected trickle-down impact to Main Street, expensive

trillion-dollar wars, and a housing bust caused by massive

deregulation of the financial industry that created a near

collapse of our banking and financial system. These

elements created a “perfect storm” for our economy,

resulting in massive unemployment that our country has not

seen since the Great Depression. Everyone knows somebody

out of work as a result of this recession and it has spared few

industries or sectors of our economy.

In January 2009, President-elect Barack Obama was

handed an economy in peril. In this inaugural issue of

“Democracy,” we will discuss the pros and cons of the

strategies utilized by our government to “right the ship” and

put Americans back to work.


Articles

Unemployment Numbers Demystified

Jeremy Micah Denlea

If I were to tell you that unemployment is at 32%

would you believe me? What if I said unemployment

was only at 3%? Which figure is correct? Well, it

depends on what method you use to determine the

unemployment rate.

With a seemingly endless amount of ways to

manipulate unemployment rates, almost any number is

mathematically correct in one way or another. This

article will discuss some of the most common methods

utilized to define unemployment numbers.

Which methods are correct? Which methods are

flawed? I will leave that for you to decide.

-How the Government Determines Unemployment:

Unemployment = Unemployed individuals actively

seeking work / Total labor force

Obviously, individuals with jobs are considered

employed. Those who are jobless, actively looking for

jobs and available for work are considered to be

unemployed. Individuals who are neither employed nor

unemployed are not considered to be in the labor force.

This means that those who were previously

employed but lost their job and have become so

discouraged that they are no longer actively seeking a

new job are not considered to be in the labor force. To

calculate unemployment numbers the government

would take the number of those considered unemployed

and divide that number by the total number of

individuals considered to be in the labor force. For all

intents and purposes, only individuals receiving

unemployment insurance are considered unemployed by

the government.

- The “Real” Unemployment Rate:

Unemployment = Total number of unemployed

individuals / Total working age population

The “real” unemployment rate includes every

person who is unemployed, not just those recently

unemployed and actively seeking employment. One

example of this would include individuals who are

stay-at home parents. Those who have been out of

the labor force for an extended period of time, who

are discouraged and not actively seeking

employment are another example.

Ergo, this rate is always higher than the

government’s unemployment numbers. When

compared, official government unemployment rates

are significantly lower than “real” unemployment

rates.

- The “Optimistic” Unemployment Rate:

Unemployment = Unemployed individuals

actively seeking work / Total working age population

One alternative method utilized to calculate

unemployment numbers is the “optimistic”

unemployment rate. In this case, only individuals

who are actively seeking employment and are able to

work are considered unemployed. However, this

number is divided by the total working age

population rather than the labor force population.

What this means is that stay at home parents and

those discouraged and no longer seeking

employment are considered to be employed.

Therefore, when using the “optimistic” method,

the unemployment rate appears to be significantly

lower than either the government’s determination or

the “real” unemployment rate.

- Conclusion

You have just been presented with three different

but valid methods of determining the unemployment

rate. In addition to these, there are many more meth-

Click To Return to Table of Contents

http://issuu.com/action/page?page=3


ods utilized by different organizations and economists.

Often, individuals will choose to utilize the method

that will best result in a number closest to their desired

unemployment rate. The methods and mathematics of

unemployment are often nothing more than propaganda

used to promote one’s specific objectives.

So, which method is correct? You tell me.

Jeremy Micah Denlea is a candidate for

Ward 5 City Council in Attleboro.

__________________

A Jobs Tax Cut Without Jobs

Andrew Meehan

Do you remember how back in December of 2010,

President Obama signed a bill that would extend the

Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans? In

theory, by not taxing the super-rich, they would spend

and invest that money, so that the rest of us could get

some jobs.

How’d that turn out so far?

For the last two years, Americans have been

desperate for some sort of solution to the most

important issue plaguing out nation – a very poor

economy and the unemployment problems that have

resulted from such a poor economy. Due to the Toxic

Assets Relief Program and the stimulus, a complete

economic collapse of the United States financial system

and economy were averted. However, problems remain

and our economy is still in dire need of some fix.

If we were to put a finger on a reason for our

economic woe, I think we could point to this: the

wealthy companies and individuals who kept their tax

break last year are not hiring.

It is hard to imagine the reason why they are not

hiring. Let’s face it. Even though the economy has

been bad, it’s been kept relatively stable. Companies

that once should have been afraid of collapsing are

now making huge profits. For instance, Exxon

Mobil, the richest company in the world, garnered a

profit last quarter alone of $10.7 billion, 69% better

than what they did last year (“Exxon Mobil profit

soars along with gas prices”, Washington Post,

Steven Musfon, 4-28-11).

The point of extending the Bush tax cuts for the

super wealthy were to allow them to invest in

America and hire more people. But as

unemployment rates clearly indicate, they’re not

doing so.

If the sole reason for having tax cuts for the

wealthiest Americans is to allow them to spend their

money and create jobs, and they’re not doing it,

there’s no point for those tax cuts to exist.

If corporations are going to squander their

opportunity to help America fix its economy, then

repealing the tax cut will help America square with

its gigantic national debt.

Many accredit the majority of the debt to the wars

in Iraq and Afghanistan. Those certainly have had

their affects, having cost more than $1.2 trillion

dollars. (The national debt is $14.5 trillion) The

stimulus package meanwhile cost $719 billion, but

also saved many jobs. But tax cuts for the rich,

combined with extremely low tax revenues from the

bad economy, have attributed for a loss of an

expected $6.3 trillion dollars (“Running in the red:

How the U.S., on the road to a surplus, detoured to

massive debt”, Washington Post, Lori Montgomery,

4-30-11). If we had that money back, the debt issue,

isn’t really an issue.

Unless America’s economy is in top shape, no

one should get a tax break for private pleasure. The




reason the rich have one is to invest in the U.S.

economy so that it improves (which would be in rich

companies’ own self-interest). But they’re not.

If they’re not going to use it, they should lose

it.

Andrew Meehan is the Editor of the Attleboro

Democracy.

_____________________

Massachusetts: Leaving the Recession

Jim Humphrey

Massachusetts has been steadily adding jobs first in

the nation at one point in 2010) and moved us out of a

global recession that most of us have not seen in our

lifetimes faster than any other state. “The data has been

strong enough to move Massachusetts out of a

moderating recession into a recovery,’’ said Gus

Faucher, director of macroeconomics at Moody’s

Economy.com. “Massachusetts will be seeing job gains

pretty consistently from here on out.’’ (see March 24,

2010, Boston Globe – “Recession has ended in Mass.,

say analysts)

Massachusetts is a leader in the growth industries of

green tech and biotechnology and a top 6 state for

business (per May, 2011 CNBC rankings).

Massachusetts ranks 3rd

nationally in education

and 4th

in technology and innovation.

In terms of taxes Massachusetts is tied for 11th

nationally with Maryland and Illinois, which better

than all New England states except New Hampshire,

though per capita income in New Hampshire is over

20% lower than Massachusetts (see CNN Money

article, February, 2011).

While there is still room for improvement on the

tax front, recently improved revenues just moved

Massachusetts into a budget surplus (good for

business and good for needed government services

such as firemen, teachers, highway workers, and

government contracts creating private sector jobs). I

think we can shed the “Taxachusetts” moniker now.

Let’s try “The Tax Empire State” (note: New York is

just behind New Jersey for the highest tax burden

nationally).

Jim Humphrey is the Chairman of the Attleboro

Democratic City Committee.

_______________

A Financial Crisis at Home

Timothy O’Neill

We live in extraordinarily loud times. All around

us various and often contradictory messages assault

our awareness. We struggle to make sense of this

information and find ourselves lost almost to the

point of futility or worse; latching on to the ideology

that seems to speak with the most authority or

confidence. How do we find a way to determine

what is the truth? How do we pick through the

flotsam of disparate points of view to gather the few

nuggets of illumination?

One way may be to reduce the greater world

around us, the issues and all of the noise that comes

with them, to a reality that we can understand best of




all: our own personal lives and experiences.

Let’s take for example the financial crisis our society

currently finds itself in.

It is possible for us to equate the “crisis” with a

financial setback in our own lives, a job loss for

instance. In a strategy very much like some voices

loudly opine we might conclude “I have no job and as a

result no money therefore will spend no money” but,

unfortunately life is never as black and white as the

loudest among us would like for us to believe.

The fact is that the last thing we would do is stop

spending money. We might cut back on spending or

reallocate spending to address particular issues but we

would not stop spending. We have families to provide

for. We have food to buy, we have household

obligations to service. Further, we might wisely

consider making investments in our ability to compete

with others suffering similar setbacks.

Being responsible individuals we also have assets

that we can draw upon to help us through this difficult,

decidedly temporary, situation; Unemployment benefits,

savings and lines of credit and, of course ourselves, our

experiences and abilities. Unless we are very fortunate

with our assets we would be confronted with the specter

of “Deficit Spending”, or spending more money than we

are taking in. Deficit spending in a financial crisis,

personal or institutional, is neither good nor bad it is a

reality and a necessity.

We would, of course, deficit spend! We would pay

our bills and feed our children even if it meant using

credit to do so, and in light of very recent discussions

how ridiculous is an artificially imposed “debt ceiling”

in a situation like this?

We would attempt to “Stimulate” our personal

economies by monetary investment. Taking a class,

buying a suit for a job interview or even repairs to the

family car would put us in a better position to take

advantage of opportunities that might come along or

may even be present as a result of our initial setback. A

responsible person might consider these strategies

integral to recovery!

Life would be a difficult proposition indeed if we

were unable to look at problems as temporary, just as

our national financial set back is temporary. It is

confusing and frightening, but it is temporary.

Despite the nonsensical paths our elected leader

have taken us down, personal experience tells us that

our and their task would be to manage our assets

responsibly and to navigate our way out of our

setback, hopefully to a stronger position then when

we started. We plan accordingly in our personal

lives; shouldn’t we expect the same from our

government?

Timothy O’Neill lives in Attleboro.

_______________

Guest Column

Scott Brown Embarks on a Jobs Tour

John Walsh

Earlier this month, Senator Scott Brown’s office

announced that he would spend the month of August

going around Massachusetts to discuss job creation.

The junior senator said the effort was a response

to “the high unemployment rate and the need to

create more jobs for the people of Massachusetts.”

Sen. Brown said he wanted to crisscross the

Commonwealth listening to voters.

I call shenanigans of Scott Brown’s “jobs tour.”

Massachusetts’ unemployment rate is well below

the national average and our economy is among the

strongest in the nation, but no one can argue that we

shouldn’t focus on creating more jobs. Folks who are

out of work would certainly appreciate an audience

with Senator Brown.

But, those aren’t the folks Scott Brown met on his

campaign-style tour.




One-third of the events on Brown’s schedule were

speeches to local chambers of commerce. You’ll find

plenty of outstanding citizens at your local chamber of

commerce, from civic leaders to small business owners

looking to expand, but you won’t find too many

unemployed folks.

The times and locations for most of the events were

not publicized. And, as it turned out, most of the events

were nothing more than carefully chosen photo-ops

designed to generate press coverage for a politician

facing a tough reelection battle.

Most remarkably, none of the events at which Scott

Brown said he was planning to listen to Massachusetts

voters were fully open to the public. Brown chose to

hold these events at private venues where access could

be limited or places that understandably can’t be open to

everyday folks.

On the first day of the tour, Brown spoke to a

meeting of a beer brewers association which was only

open to members and their guests. From there he headed

to a Veteran’s Administration hospital, where concerns

over patient privacy and common decency call for

restricted access. Of course, Brown found time to talk to

the media at both events.

A few days later, a group of concerned voters was

turned away from a Brown campaign stop focused on

senior citizens because they were deemed too young by

the senator’s staff. Brown told the seniors who slipped

through the security net that Social Security and

Medicare benefits could be slashed and that he opposed

asking millionaires and billionaires to pay their fair

share to help get our nation’s fiscal house in order.

Later that week, Brown ignored a group of voters

gathered to speak with him in Amherst, leaving them in

a cloud of dust after he took off on the New England

Scenic Trail at a brisk pace with reporters in tow.

The rest of the tour followed in the same vein: The

final event of the tour, which was scheduled to take

place at a public library, was moved at the last minute to

a private venue.

What was billed as a series of open meetings where

Scott Brown could hear from Massachusetts voters and

present his plan to create jobs, turned out to be a

bunch of closed-door meetings choreographed to

create glowing press coverage and prevent anyone

who might disagree with the senator from coming

anywhere close to him.

Shenanigans.

John Walsh is the Chairman of the Massachusetts

Democratic Party.

_______________

Humor & Satire

My Meeting With the President

“John Finley”

Hi, my name is John Finley. My friend, Mr.

Meehan, suggested that I write to you all about an

important meeting I had a few months ago. Recently,

I had the opportunity to sit down with the President

of the United States in the Oval Office. I was advised

to bring up my meeting with President Obama.

During the meeting, as the President described to me

how he is fixing our economy. It was convincing.

The good news I learned of is something I’d like to

share.

Like many Americans, I too have been hit hard by

these economic times. For instance, I lost my small

business the other day. I ran a lemonade stand in the

center of town, until someone from the police

department came and shut down my growing

business because it was “unlicensed” (his words, not

mine). Currently, I now live in my mother’s

basement, although she doesn’t know it. She threw

me out of the house years ago, so I try not to alert

her of my presence.

This made my meeting with the President

additionally pressing. You see, I went to Washington

D.C. back in June to visit the place where I was

born: the American Irish Embassy. Back in 1976, my




father, Joseph Finley, was trying to lobby Congress to

reinstate the position of Postmaster General, and then

appoint himself to it, as he detested mailmen intensely

and wanted to deliver his own mail.

My mother Barbara went into labor, and fortunately

my father, who had been a physician until he was sued

and lost his license for medical malpractice, was able to

deliver the baby- me! – within the gates of the Irish

embassy.

As I trekked across our nation’s capital, I realized

that our country, torn apart by debt, lack of jobs, and a

dislike of math, needed some answers. I decided that I

needed to see President Obama. I stomped over to the

White House, near the gate for “foreign dignities” and

said to a guard in an assertive voice, “My name is John

Finley. I’m from the Irish Embassy.” Technically, true.

Now, as I would find out later, the guard I spoke to

was on the cusp of losing his job. A week earlier, he had

forbidden Bo, the Obama family dog, from frolicking in

the Rose Garden, fearing he might be an imposter dog.

The guard was devoted to proper security.

So the guard, who had been told earlier that the Irish

Ambassador would be lunching with the President, did

not want to make another mistake. He grabbed me by

the collar and ushered me to the President’s Oval

Office. “Here you are, Mr. Ambassador.”

I walked in, and there I saw him: the President of the

United States, Barack Obama, sitting at the resolute

desk. The President looked up and saw me approaching.

He smiled. “Good morning. You must be the new Irish

Ambassador.” The President shook my hand and

offered me a seat. Before he could utter a word, I got

straight to business.

“Mr. President, I have to be honest. There is one

thing bugging more than anything else in the world right

now. Sir, why isn’t the economy improving as much?

What have you done the last two years?

The President smiled kindly at me. “First of all,

Mr. Ambassador” said President Obama, “Let me

assure you the American economy is improving. It’s

been improving since the day I took office.”

Then the President began to convince me.

He’s a very calm, but personable man, the

President. He talked about “TARP”, or the “Toxic

Assets Relief Program” passed by the Bush

Administration, but overseen by the Obama

administration. It was called a bank bailout, but

really, it was a loan to the banks that were in danger

of collapsing back a few years ago due to bad

investments on their part. And so far, those banks are

close to paying bank the federal government with the

people’s money.

Then he talked about the federal auto bailout, a

loan to Ford, General Motors, and Chrysler.

Similarly, that also is close to being paid back.

Additionally, he said that in the coming era of

renewable energy, cars and companies are going to

change to accommodate declining oil resources. He

said that by keeping the American car companies

afloat they can lead the charge for that, and create

American jobs.

Then the President got to the stimulus. “What

town in America do live in when you’re not in

D.C.?” the President asked.

“Attleboro, Massachusetts,” I replied.

“Attleboro?” the President said quizzically.

“That’s far away for someone who lives in the

capitol don’t you think?”

I was about to interrupt and correct the President

that I didn’t live in the Capitol, but he continued:

“As far as I remember from Attleboro, they used

stimulus funds to prevent education layoffs, and

repave some roads. Not the biggest projects, but as I




understand it, Attleboro’s a great place to live. Seems

like it helped though.”

I agreed. The President stopped speaking and as he

did, a rather curious incident occurred: the real Irish

ambassador walked into the room.

The President did a double-take, and then said, “I

think there might be a problem here.”

I was removed from the Oval Office rather quickly,

and then spent about a day in a compound answering

questions and had secret service agents making sure I

wasn’t infected with some sort of deadly disease.

But, my friends, it turned out well. The President

made it clear: things are improving under his tenure.

Jobs are on their way. Well, except for my security

guard friend.

This is a work of satirical fiction by Andrew Meehan.

While John Finley is fictitious, the descriptions of the

TARP funds and the auto bailout funds are factual. The

belief expressed that American cars companies will be

more beneficial when they adapt new technology is the

opinion of the actual author.

______________

Letters from Our Readers

America’s History Can Show Us the Way Forward

Richard Saunders, Attleboro, MA

There are some people who think the best way to fix

the economy is to sit back and let rich companies try to

fix it themselves. That’s clearly not the best way to

handle it.

For all the talk of how to fix things down in

Washington, no one pays attention to something that

could help us fix everything, and that’s our history.

Republicans don’t have a lot of history to look

back at. They sunk the country in the Depression,

and the Bush presidency sunk us in this recession.

Democrats on the other hand, have a lot of people to

look up to.

Look at FDR. When American was on its knees,

and Hitler was invading all of Europe, he asked for

government programs from Congress to help solve

the crisis. And it worked. President Obama today did

the same thing with the stimulus plan, but he hasn’t

gotten credit for saving America from a Depression.

Republicans say we don’t need government

programs or help. What would JFK say to that?

Government programs helped many poor African

Americans as a part of his proposed civil rights

legislation. What about Bill Clinton, who tried to fix

health care reform? All the money spent on health

care could have gone into jobs.

Americans view government action as a stigma. But

we shouldn’t. Democrats, including the President,

should stand up for what we believe, something

Abraham Lincoln, the first Republican president

said, “The legitimate object of government, is to do

for the people whatever they need to have done, but

which they can not do, at all, or can not do, so well,

for themselves.”

If we could have created jobs on our own, we

would have, and businesses would have too! Our

history says that we can use government programs,

sponsored by Democrats, to fix could have created

jobs on our own, we would have, and businesses

would have too! Our history says that we can use

government programs, sponsored by Democrats, to

fix the economy. We should be proud of that

record.

To submit a letter the Attleboro Democracy, write to the editor

at [email protected]


mailto:[email protected]



Fact Check

The Stimulus Created Jobs!

Did the stimulus create jobs? Yes. As Factcheck.org states: “the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office released a report in

August that said the stimulus bill has "[l]owered the unemployment rate by between 0.7 percentage points and 1.8 percentage points"

an "[i]ncreased the number of people employed by between 1.4 million and 3.3 million." Simply put, more people would be

unemployed if not for the stimulus bill. The exact number of jobs created and saved is difficult to estimate, but nonpartisan economists

say there’s no doubt that the number is positive.” (http://www.factcheck.org/2010/09/did-the-stimulus-create-jobs/)

America’s Debt is Not New !

(Washington Post, July 18, 2011)

The national debt is not something that has started in the Obama administration. It is something that has built up over many

presidencies. Similarly, raising the debt ceiling is not new. It has been done by presidents of both parties- in fact, it was raised 17 times

during the Reagan administration.


http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/117xx/doc11706/08-24-ARRA.pdf

http://www.factcheck.org/2010/09/did-the-stimulus-create-jobs/



Democrats of Attleboro Bulletin

Summer Picnic - Saturday, September 10th (rain date 17th) at Capron Park

This year is a municipal election year. The democratic platform promotes open elections for all eligible

participants. We encourage all Attleboro voters to register and to make their voices heard in the city.

The general city elections are Tuesday, November 8th

, 2011. The preliminary election for Ward 5 City

Council is Tuesday, September 20th

, 2011.

For more information on city elections, we encourage you to visit:

http://www.cityofattleboro.us/elections/ - the City of Attleboro Elections Department Webpage

www.attleborodemocrats.org – the Attleboro Democratic City Committee Website

If you have any questions or comments about the Attleboro Democracy Monthly, please contact us

at [email protected].

Look out for our Winter Edition regarding Environment Issues.

Photo Credits:

Muhammad Ali vs Joe Frasier photo courtesy of BestSportsPhotos.com.

Massachusetts unemployment graph courtesy of Boston Globe.

Debt clock photo courtesy of Washington Post.

Debt ceiling chart courtesy of BBC News.

Attleboro photo courtesy of Amazon.com.


http://www.cityofattleboro.us/elections/

http://www.attleborodemocrats.org/

mailto:[email protected]


jobs & economy issue - 2011

Documents