During this week's vice presidential debate, Paul Ryan reprised a line Republicans have used repeatedly in making the case for a Romney presidency.
"Mitt Romney -- his experience, his ideas, his solutions -- is uniquely qualified to get this job done," Ryan said in his closing statement. "At a time when we have a jobs crisis in America, wouldn't it be nice to have a job-creator in the White House?"
The central argument at the heart of Romney's candidacy is that he knows how to create jobs and President Obama doesn't. To buttress that claim, Romney points to his career in the private sector, as a Wall Street buyout specialist and venture capitalist at the firm Bain Capital. Bain Capital, of course, specialized mostly in leveraged buyouts -- debt-financed investments in companies that often resulted in bankruptcy, off-shoring and layoffs.
Since those aspects of Romney's business career are less politically palatable, he focuses instead on the few start-ups he helped provide seed funding for -- brands we all recognize, like Sports Authority and Staples.
The problem, however, with spotlighting those businesses is that their success hinges fundamentally on a premise that is perhaps just as unpalatable as the worst excesses of private equity. Those large retail chains exploit the efficiencies of scale to offer the same goods and services that much smaller businesses do, but at much lower costs.
Large chains like Staples also keep their labor costs low by offering low-wage sales associate jobs that pay, in the case of Staples, an average of $8.54 an hour, according to Glassdoor.com. Retail sales jobs -- among the occupations with the largest projected growth over the next ten years -- pay a median annual salary of just $20,670, which isn't even enough to sustain a family of four above the federal poverty line, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. By contrast, the median annual salary of the jobs with the largest growth over the next 10 years is $33,840.
Forty-one percent of the Staples workforce are part-time employees, according to the company's annual report, which describes its workforce this way: "Many of our associates, particularly in retail stores, are in entry-level or part-time positions with historically high rates of turnover." In July, the National Employment Law Project listed Staples as one of the 50 largest low-wage employers in the country.
So the question is this: When Romney champions his success at Staples as one of his main qualifications for the presidency, is he claiming that those kinds of jobs -- part-time, low-wage sales associate jobs that can't even keep a family of four above the poverty line -- are the kinds of jobs he'll create as president?
There is also an inherent tension in the economic prescriptions of Republican candidates like Romney when it comes to small businesses. On the one hand, Republicans contend that small businesses are the engines of our economy. On the other, they believe that whoever can more cheaply and efficiently deliver goods and services to consumers should win in the open market.
In the case of Staples, the number of office-supply stores in the U.S. decreased by about 50 percent in the first ten years after Staples was founded, suggesting that the large retail chain put a lot of smaller mom-and-pop stores out of business. The market share of those smaller and medium-sized stores plunged from 20 percent when Staples was founded in 1986 to just 4 percent in 1998.
:: Sal Gentile (@salgentile) is a segment & digital producer for Up w/ Chris Hayes ::
Leave a Comment:
What is really devious is the hypocrisy of this "news" outlet. Why don't you report how Unions take money each paycheck from employees? But all of a sudden it's wrong when private business holds rallys for the other side. Report both sides please.
At least the union makes sure that we are paid fair wages and benefits. I have worked both non-union and union and can tell you that employers doesn't abuse workers when they know the union is there protecting the workers.
it is ALWAYS wrong to try to sway anyone's vote ...where is the American exceptionalism ideal when we let other people think for us?
I worked in a union shop all the way through college. There is no doubt that the union protected me and my coworkers from the company. There is amble evidence from many sources that unions empower workers and that the end result is a more vibrant economy.
You can go ahead and compare financial support coming from a group that represents American workers, the middle class, protections for the working people in this country with that which arrives with a big bow of 'YOU OWE ME' from 2 brothers who represent ... what? themselves. That's a well-rounded, diverse, all-encompassing establishment isn't it? Who would your candidate best be representing if the issue was pay-back? Koch Brothers in their perpetual wealth job-creating at .0001% or the group that protects working people. People as in here, in the United States where jobs should stay. But THAT'S hypocrisy, too. It's also NO COMPARISON.
The claim was made that fewer jobs or lower wages was not necessarily the goal of the business model used by companies such as Staples. Unfortunately, it is demonstrably and predominantly the actual outcome. Staples may provide some direct and short-term benefits to small businesses that buy office supplies, but it comes at the bigger and longer-term cost of a robust economy that benefits a wider swath of society. Romney has bragged about the jobs created by his Bain investments, such as Staples, but the reality is that Staples created not a single job -- no, not one. Instead, it replaced many existing jobs with fewer jobs, killing mom-and-pop stationary and business equipment stores across the country. In turn, many of the businesses that depended on those mom-and-pop stores were killed off as well, and so on, and so on. Extreme advances in technology have eliminated most of the natural controls on such rampant feeding of nationalized and internationalized businesses.
As it turns out, the older, inherently less efficient models formed the bedrock of the middle class. The much-praised efficiencies of the new models tease us all with low prices, but focus most of the tangible benefits into fewer and fewer hands. (And increasingly those hands belong to people who do not live anywhere near the communities from which they are sucking out the dollars. This fact has the effect not only of destroying anything resembling a local economy, or allowing workers to directly enjoy the benefits of their own labor, but it also separates the decision makers from the personal and environmental consequences of their decisions. Why would a person living in California care about the fact that the "fracking" their company uses to extract natural gas in West Virginia also means that ground water in much of West Virginia will be flammable rather than drinkable?)
People who shop at Walmart, including my own mother, often do so because they save money and stopping at one store is also a convenience. In chasing this mirage of saving money, however, most of us will ultimately end up with less money to spend in the first place, not only because it reduces decently paying jobs at these stores but because our own bosses will eventually turn to the same model whenever possible. And if the current owners of your company might be reluctant to do that, the owners they eventually sell out to probably will see no such reluctance. The result is an ever-tightening cycle in which the middle class simply self-destructs. And as such companies become the only place where those of us who are workers (rather than owners) will be able to find jobs and to buy the things we need, the old model will wither on the vine. There will simply be no other options, and most of us will suddenly find ourselves to be economic slaves if not more traditional ones.
As a small example of resistance, I will not use self-checkout. Never. Under no circumstances (assuming that there is an alternative). I don't care if I have to wait in line. I don't care if I have to pay more for what I buy. We must stop this destructive cycle of replacing all workers with machines. But I fear the battle is already lost.
A key point made at isolated portions of the discussion today needs to be underscored. The trend of outsourcing and automation both for highly skilled and low skilled work is working to defund the consumer economy of purchasing capital.
The point was made that Costco as a policy pays its workers generously unlike its retail competitors. There are consumers such as Outis who consciously make choices which have a positive impact on increasing the buying power of consumers.
What was not discussed is any government policy that establishes a level playing field between businesses minimizing their labor costs and businesses and workers who do what is right for the economy out of the goodness of their hearts.
For example, say for example that Government declared that the purchasing resources of the US consumer was a national resource like other managed resources like water levels of rivers. Metaphorically, no company would be allowed to pump more than their fair share of water-consumer dollars out of the river than what they pumped back in in the form of wages. The form of disincentive would be confiscatory corporate taxes, which the company would avoid by either keeping payrolls of employees with wages 100K or less, or by purchasing unused payroll credits (similar to the carbon credit idea) from labor intensive businesses like the Post office who have would generate surplus employment credits.
I happen to like this sort of approach because it does not presume to tell a business what types of work it should offer, or whether the payroll should be deployed to a small number of 100K employees or many more middle income employees. If there are others, I would love to hear them.
Hayes mentioned he is skeptical of the education mantra chanted by Obama and Romney, but he did not make clear why. The point that devastates the Obama Romney panacea for the declining wealth of the middle class over the past 40 years is this: 21st technology is, unlike 19th and early 20th century technology, no longer labor intensive. It is precisely the opposite and getting more so every year. The trends are for accelerating the trend of eliminating US jobs with automation and outsourcing. A few trade sanctions here and there are not going to offer anything more than a campaign talking point long on symbolism and short on practical effect.
If there are other concrete proposals that would have a dramatic impact on bringing middle class wealth growth more in line with the dramatic rise in US GDP over the past 40 years, then we did not hear them today.
Your last statement is the basis of my personal skepticism around the "lack of education is the cause of the unemployment" mantra. There are more college grads and people with some college struggling without employment than I can believe at this point in time. If the employers don't need these workers, then labor qualifications are clearly not the issue.
I fully support tax-paid public education K-college. Part of our national mission should automatically include ongoing improvements in education, in my opinion. I do not think that problems resulting from minimizing labor costs through automation and off-shoring employment are related to Americans' education. I think extraction of employment is the problem. It is a vacuum with devastating results. We have been obstructed from addressing the problem with our group funds (gov't spending) by political ideologues. Public investment in public services and public assets always stimulate an economy.
When the benefits of a country's industries are highly financialized and not related to domestic manufacturing, then much of the public benefit of those industries is removed. If no provision is made for the disenfranchised labor pool, then education without ensuing subsidy for actively creating new types of industry or services is dysfunctional.
"... say for example that Government declared that the purchasing resources of the US consumer was a national resource like other managed resources like water levels of rivers." How very sane and practical of you!
Stemberg has no idea nor does he care about the workers. He lied, all he cared about is his money and keeping money away from workers so he can have more. working in retail is not a decent job. After I lost my software developer job ($70,000) I turned to retail to tied me over. Working 12 hours a week at 7.50 an hour is not a job, it is an insult to American. No healthcare, no vacation, no holidays, no raise, and more abuse from a company than I ever seen before. You are a slave never knowing where or when you will be required to work. You don't do this as a second job since they will schedule you when you tell them you are unavailable. They also get rid of you after one year if you make it. This is what Texas has to offer, great job creation for Stemberg and nobody else.
Now this article from Hays is Absolutely a riot. So Chris, what about the 582,000 part time jobs that Obama spiking the football about? Do we say CHEERS ON THAT! And your proud of a 7.8% on those terms. Chris your a PHONY!!!!!!!!
Romney, a capitalist himself, should focus on ownership creation to solve the problems in our society (debt, jobs, social safety), but he does not. In a country where private property is so highly regarded it seems obvious that the president's (no matter who that person is) and Congress first priority would be to enact legislation to help all citizens achieve a level of meaningful ownership of productive assets. It is in CAPITAL OWNERSHIP that one becomes self-sufficient and prosperous, not in jobs, especially low-paying jobs that will continue to result as productive capital replaces labor and forces the value of labor further downward.
The economists advising politicians cling to Keynesian economic thinking as if it were immutable, as if it were hard science, as if it were the truth! All economists know they are on shaky ground so they cling more desperately to their failed messiah. The only hope for any system of government, for any monetary or commercial process is "inclusion." Any system that has effectively muscled out the majority cannot stand ... it will not stand.
And while the propaganda machine churns to mis-educate and spread fear and hatred, and effectively deflect a focus on the big issue of WHO OWNS AMERICA, the powerful elite ownership class continues to amass more productive capital business wealth and deny the opportunity for ordinary Americans to strengthen themselves as individuals and as self-sufficient new capitalists building a long term viable income-producing capital estate. Ordinary Americans are losing their inalienable right to property as the system is rigged to the benefit of the richest Americans and enables them to concentrate ownership of future productive capital economic growth in the name of JOB CREATION, which is a fallacy due to tectonic shifts in the technologies of production of products and services. There will never be enough REAL jobs now or in the future. Private sector job creation in numbers that match the pool of people willing and able to work is constantly being eroded by physical productive capital’s ever increasing role. As a result, the nation is adrift and rudderless because we have no strong visionary leaders to steer us on a journey to an ownership culture and a path to prosperity, opportunity and economic justice. And the people are torn with no confidence in a positive outcome.
There are solutioins. Support the Capital Homestead Act at and
The erroneous assumption that Walmart has increased purchasing power for lower income people is misleading. The poor are now forced to purchase inferior products that often break or do not last long, requiring repurchase, or damage to one's home. For instance, after purchasing a rug that had a cheap backing, leaving a sandy grit on my RENTED floor, I am now responsible for resurfacing the wood floor!!!!!!!! This could result in homelessness, since my deposit will be held, and I cannot get another apartment without my deposit....butterfly effects of cheap products have PROFOUND effects on folks living on the edge....
Walmart refused to let me return the rug, but offered a $20 coupon for next purchase...Bring back reliable Sears Good, Better, Best categories with return policies that back up their products!!!
The .01% vision for the American worker, "I owe my soul to the company store"!!!
uugghh. I usually enjoy your show for the Progressive ideas it puts forth. If I had wanted to spend Sunday watching some money-grubbing billionaire/low-wage advocate spewing the praises of Myth Robme, I could have watched Fox Noise. Time to catch up on my reading instead of watching this disappointing sludge. Sooo VERY disappointing.
Stemberg's assertions that his companies do society a service is just flat out propaganda.
The reason there is a WalMart is so people that work at Staples can have somewhere they can afford to shop.
There is an area that is never stated when it comes to salaries. The media always talks about high paying professional jobs and compare that to low paying jobs. It is usually true that harder degrees, like engineering, pay more but not nearly what you think. If a low skill employee worked 55 hours a week at $12/ hr they would gross $660/ week or $34320/yr. Take a highly skilled engineer that makes $90,000 per year, which would be for a senior person with a lot of technical responsibility. They are on salary and expected (and loaded) to work 55 to 60 hours per week. At 55 hours a week this is only $31.47/hr. This can apply to managers and other experienced people and when taxes are accounted for it is closer to $22/ hr. An engineer just out of college might make $40,000 a year which is just above the low skilled worker working the same hours. Salaried employment is basically a scam and this is never brought up because most of the people who can bring it up are on salary.
Indeed. Salaries are a bonus to the employer at the expense of the employee. It removes eligibility for union membership, deprives theworkers of fair pay for time worked, and includes no job protection. The pay category needs to go, but I think we need to improve workplace fairness without risking what salaried employees have to their benefit first. I never understand why nonunion workers seem to want union people to earn less instead of wondering why they themselves aren't getting more? Productivity goes through the roof nation-wide, and workers' income stagnates. That's just ethically wrong.
As an hourly wage worker, I do not begrudge salaried workers their benefits. I don't want anyone to lose the little they've gained or kept in our struggling economy. But frankly, I am unimpressed with the paltry quality of those benefits as compared to the benefits deemed standard for all citizens in Europe, the Nordic nations, and GB. Our country - our people- can do much better than this. Our minimum standards of living are far too low for a modern civilized nation.
I think all you need to know about Romney he is the epitome of Machiavellian. Whatever he needs to do to reach his goal, he does it. If he needs to loan up a company with debt and ship the jobs to China to make money and satisfy his investors, that’s what he does. If he needs to lie to 50 million people during a debate, he does it. How Romney can say he cares about the America after Bain Capital’s record is beyond arrogant. Bill Clinton needs to give Obama the same talk Micky Wart’s brother gave Micky Ward in the Movie the fighter when he was fighting Shea Neary.
Jetro de Bodine, one of the Beverly Hillbillies, at one point decided it was time to find himself a career. He narrowed his options to brain surgeon or fry cook. We, as a country, are narrowing the options in a similar manner.
Those who control the GOP find the working class to be a contemptible foe. We are heading toward a time when the working class will remain distinct from the middle class. With huge increases in productivity things should be going in the other direction, but the wealth hoarders have focused like a laser on preventing ordinary working people from sharing in prosperity, because for them, enough is never enough.
CONTRAST CONTRAST!!
What is it going to take to get Obama to make a real CONTRAST between him and Romney and the Republican machine behind him. Doesn't Over 700,000 lost jobs a month to over 100,000 jobs gained a month enough or using more troops in hot war areas compared to using drones and having great success with them. Spending Billions more than the military wants and none of it being used for support and care for our troops who have come home and suffering the effects of war compared to the slimming down our military to a more efficient modern force with support and compassionate treatment of our courageous warriors coming home. Come on. Make the contrast so Americans can have a clear choice. PLEASE SHOW THE TRUE RESULTS!!!!
This is what the Republican machine produced in the 8 years prior to Obama.
These comments were taken from only one site in 2008. (CNN Money)
• Crude hit an all-time high of $147.27 a barrel
• Credit markets frozen
• General Motors (GM, Fortune 500) lost 31% Thursday and Ford Motor (F, Fortune 500) fell 21%. (That’s stock holder equity losses.)
• People who thought they had access to money didn't have money and they had to sell something," he said. "So it started with forced selling and it's turned into a panic
• S&P 500 down 41.9%.
• We are in a free fall right now" said Phil Orlando, chief equity market strategist at Federated Investors.
• Over the last seven sessions, the Dow has lost 2,271 points, or 20.1%. Since hitting an all-time high of 14,164.53 one year ago today, the Dow has lost 39.4%.
• Markets tanked Thursday - with the Dow falling nearly 700 points during the session - as panicked investors dumped stocks across the board.
• Ford cut its North American workforce by about 33,000 people and it’s share holders lost 48.4% of their equity. GM was worse.
What is it like today? What a CONTRAST right. Really!!!
The Dow Jones Industrial Average
October 9, 2007 - 14164 - New all time high on the Dow
July 2, 2008 - 11215 - Dow closes more than 20% below its Oct. 2007 high
March 9, 2009 - 6547 - Dow closes at post 1997 low - 53.8% below its Oct. 2007 high.
Oct. 11, 2012 - 13326 - TODAY
HELLO WAKE UP! I definitely do not want to go back.!!!
Mr. Staples cited Texas as an example that low taxes creates big jobs and great growth. The Texas job market is hugely deceiving. A big chunk of the jobs created here were government and or the exact low wage jobs being discussed on the program. The government jobs actually came later because we got a big chunk of stimulus money, partially because Texas was as deep in dept as California was. Yep, all those jobs here were low wage jobs and we didn't get enough tax money to cover the obligations. Remember that Texas has much fewer social and educational services than California does, and yet we were just as broke. So, the notion of Mr. Bloomberg, and Mr. Staples that Texas is some comment on low taxes and lots of low paying jobs working, is wrong.
Now, take it a step further, Houston and other major Texas cities have a giant problem. The infrastructure in these cities, due to underinvestment, is crumbling. For example, during the drought last year there were hundreds of broken water mains throughout the city. Water mains that if properly maintained and updated would have stayed intact.
There is a reason why Texas is near the bottom of the states in health care and education, it's because we don't invest in ourselves via paying taxes. The whole Texas job growth thing is based in the oil industry, and if anything happens to disrupt that, Texas quickly becomes Mississippi or any other Southern state. The fact that a professional journalist, and a leader of one of the bigger companies in America don't get this is curious indeed.
I am truly having a hard time understanding how Romney would make a difference for the better in terms of the economy. Everything that has contributed to our demise seems to be something that he supported or acted upon in some way. I don't get it. If it is just the perennial "Republican tax break offering" that attracts people, why even have an election.