Axed

Back in December, I wrote about the layoffs -- what a polite word for a terrible act -- then coursing through book publishing, my own business of more than 30 years. "When you get the word," I commented, "the call, the notice that you're a goner, or when your little world shudders, that's something else again. Even if the call's not for you, but for a friend, an acquaintance, someone close enough so you can feel the ripples, that can do the trick."

I had, by then, felt those ripples when Colin Robinson, an editor I admire, a Brit working for a large New York house, was axed. At the time, I wrote about his firing without using his name, but he's since written his own account of how he was tossed out (and what's happening to publishing) in the London Review of Books. "I'd hardly settled behind my desk," he begins, "when one of my bosses asked if I would join her in the corner office. 'Please close the door,' she said as I entered the room. Seldom a good sign. 'Why don't you take the comfortable chair?' Oh dear.")

Oh dear, indeed. He was gone the next day -- and what was his boss's last comment to him about book publishing? "She said that two words sprung to mind: General Motors." Indeed again. In fact, too much of American life has a GM look to it these days. Take journalism. Newspapers? Get your money out while you can. Last week, the Rocky Mountain News, almost a century and a half old, died ignominiously, as in the near future may the Seattle Post Intelligencer, the San Francisco Chronicle and other endangered species of papers. Last week as well, the Philadelphia Inquirer went into bankruptcy, just one of 33 U.S. daily newspapers whose parent companies have recently filed for it; and that's without even mentioning the rest of our papers radically cutting costs and staffs, hocking assets, or sinking into debt. If you needed one more hint about the way the wind was blowing, Howard Kurtz of the Washington Post reported that, "on Friday, the American Society of Newspaper Editors canceled its convention, saying too many members planned to stay home."

I still read two papers a day in print, but no matter. I'm 64 years old, almost as superannuated as the papers I read. This year it seems all but certain that at least one, if not more, major cities in this country will lack a newspaper.

Recently, a close friend of mine in publishing was whacked. Ten years at his job, 24 hours out the door. It does take your breath away. Or mine at least. And Jill Fraser's as well. It's as if you're watching the tightening gyres of some bird of prey circling in for the kill. But, as Fraser, who runs the website EconoWhiner.com, indicates in her new post at TomDispatch.com, "A Farewell to Jobs," not every American is quite so out of breath, not if we're to believe the latest opinion polls. They indicate that about one-third of Americans say they are worried about losing their jobs "not much" or "not at all."

She wonders: Are they crazy in a world in which job security is so yesterday? Or are they just in denial? Or, she suggests, "Maybe the real story is, why aren't more of us?"

Comments (65)

1. Well, 28% of them thought Dubya was a great President....so that might be a big chunk of it.

   Just can't believe that the Lord would let THEM lose their job...that's for the godless liberals!

   heheh

   Posted by Mask at 03/05/2009 @ 4:13pm

2. Why mass-circulation medias (read: your generic city newspaper) choose to adopt the mantras of the Left, to make a huge part of its reader base feel guilty about consumptions, about driving SUVs, to embrace embroyonic AGW science and pawn if off as "consensus", to always focus on the imperfections of our society,....to in general, make an awful lot of people SICK of papers?

   They don't get it.....but they try so hard to piss off their two main sources of revenues: advertisers, that's businesses, and subscribers, that's people paying $200 annual subscriptions.....

   It's NOT rocket science!

   Posted by Happy at 03/05/2009 @ 4:19pm

3. TOM, There is no such thing as job security, and everyone is expendeble. Most Americans in the working world know this, which may explain why people don't worry so much.

   What's the point?

   Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 03/05/2009 @ 4:24pm

4. Posted by Happy at 03/05/2009 @ 4:19pm

   Uh, HAPP, apart from blaming the local newspapers, didn't the GUY YOU VOTED FOR LAST NOVEMBER (in your words) "embrace embroyonic AGW science and pawn if off as "consensus""?????

   Posted by Mask at 03/05/2009 @ 4:31pm

5. Chip is correct, there is no such thing as job security unless you live in a totalitarian state.

   Now it seems Obama is trying to give people job security by having the govt hire anyone who needs a job.

   Oops, I get it. Obama wants a totalitarian state.

   Posted by antisocialist at 03/05/2009 @ 4:49pm

6. MASK, have I ever said, and go to the archives, that I agree with every campaign platform of McCains?

   You obviously agree with everything of Magic and he can do no wrong, even when he does something totally opposite of what he campaigned on and endeared himself to you and the `tingle up the legs' MSM.

   IF you can show that I align with McCain 100%, I will donate another $200 to The Nation....and if you can't, then cease and deceast (?sp?) from throwing this in my face....it's really, really tiring....frankly, pretty childish.

   Posted by Happy at 03/05/2009 @ 4:49pm

7. Uh, HAPP, apart from blaming the local newspapers, didn't the GUY YOU VOTED FOR LAST NOVEMBER (in your words) "embrace embroyonic AGW science and pawn if off as "consensus""?????

   Posted by Mask at 03/05/2009 @ 4:31pm

   It's one of the reasons that McCain didn't get more of the conservative vote.

   Posted by antisocialist at 03/05/2009 @ 4:50pm

8. IF you can show that I align with McCain 100%, I will donate another $200 to The Nation....and if you can't, then cease and deceast (?sp?) from throwing this in my face....it's really, really tiring....frankly, pretty childish.

   Posted by Happy at 03/05/2009 @ 4:49pm

   This is what everyone, right or left has come to expect from a Mask posting.

   Posted by antisocialist at 03/05/2009 @ 4:54pm

9. Posted by Happy at 03/05/2009 @ 4:49pm

   But if the REPUBLICAN NOMINEE "embraces" it...

   why are the local papers your target of scorn?!??!??

   Posted by Mask at 03/05/2009 @ 5:45pm

10. " there is no such thing as job security unless you live in a totalitarian state"

    (quote of the week)

    Posted by darladoon at 03/05/2009 @ 5:45pm

11. It's one of the reasons that McCain didn't get more of the conservative vote.----Posted by antisocialist at 03/05/2009 @ 4:50pm

    Really? Who did you vote for, Larry?

    or are you not a "conservative"???

    LOL

    Posted by Mask at 03/05/2009 @ 5:45pm

12. for those who don't know yet, the "quote of the week" is an ongoing series highlighting the most moronic, most inane, and most terrible thoughts from our users.

    this week's winner is antisocialist.

    Posted by darladoon at 03/05/2009 @ 5:46pm

13. Posted by Mask at 03/05/2009 @ 5:45pm

    Only some newspapers are scorned, but a good deal of them are just god awful to read. The papers of today lacks character. And there a number of reasons why:

    1. They don't vet their sources for their stories

    2. They came to the internet too late and missed their opportunity to capture a younger audience.

    3. Dishonest journalists

    4. Using a lot of misleading headlines

    5. Oversensationalizing

    And the list goes on. It wouldn't suprise me if half of those papers disapeared by next year.

    Posted by ACook at 03/05/2009 @ 6:09pm

14. There is a lot to panic about in today's economy, but incomprehension (or ridicule) over the fact that more people aren't worried about job loss is pompous and silly.

    At the height of the Great Depression the unemployment rate was about 25%. That means that in the worst economic crisis ever about three-quarters of Americans had jobs. A lot of those who were working were doubtless very worried about their jobs, but I have no trouble imagining that a fair number of those employed (for who knows what combination of reasons falling short of denial or insanity) were not immediately (or only slightly) worried about losing their jobs.

    Right now the unemployment rate is below 10%. It will almost certainly go higher - possibly much higher. But I see no reason why a third of those who are working now might not be immediately worried about job loss. Not every job is equally vulnerable all the time, and what is incomprehensible to me is to suppose otherwise.

    Posted by iamcfar at 03/05/2009 @ 6:15pm

15. this week's winner is antisocialist.

    Posted by darladoon at 03/05/2009 @ 5:46pm

    Really Darla? Why don't you educate us on how anyone can have complete job security in an open society? Only in a totalitarian state can anyone be guaranteed a job.

    Posted by antisocialist at 03/05/2009 @ 6:30pm

16. why are the local papers your target of scorn?!??!??

    Posted by Mask at 03/05/2009 @ 5:45pm

    Let's see if you can get this.....

    Did McCain's GW position endear you to vote for him? If not, why not?

    Speaking of scorn, I scorn you more and more, as you insist on being childish, don't bother to respond....you're gone until something interesting you say is reflected in other's comments!

    Posted by Happy at 03/05/2009 @ 7:18pm

17. Cool!

    I "Axed" MASK on the Axed thread.....karma, yep!

    Posted by Happy at 03/05/2009 @ 7:19pm

18. All the liberal regressive biased media are going the way of Air America reflecting the mode of the American public. No one is believing the leftist biased polls, editorials, and the bias and predjudice passed off as "journalistic" investigative reporting.

    So far 16 states are rejecting the pork barrel spending bill passed by congress and I won't be surprised if more come on board! So much for imagined mandates!

    Posted by comancheamerican at 03/05/2009 @ 7:24pm

19. Since Barack Obama was sworn in as president on Jan. 20, stocks have tumbled to record lows -- with investors losing an estimated $2.5 trillion in market value.

    The trend continued Thursday, with the Dow closing down 281 points, a 4.1 percent drop for the day. Since Inauguration Day, the Dow has fallen 20.4 percent

    Posted by comancheamerican at 03/05/2009 @ 7:31pm

20. It wouldn't suprise me if half of those papers disapeared by next year.---Posted by ACook at 03/05/2009 @ 6:09pm

    Then, you'd only be able to listen to Rush and watch Fox News....oh,wait...you do that now, don't ya?

    heheh

    Posted by Mask at 03/05/2009 @ 7:40pm

21. Pretty UNBELIEVABLE.....with 17 jobs deputy secretary positions to fill, and NOT ONE has been named AND confirmed! Also today, Surgeon General nominee Gupta, withdrew as well.......is it at all possible not many want to be associated with this Ship of Manchurians that is sinking our country????

    Geithner's choice for deputy secretary, a former SEC staffer, withdraws after interviews

    Thursday March 5, 7:08 pm ET

    By Daniel Wagner, AP Business Writer

    WASHINGTON (AP) -- Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner's top pick to be his deputy withdrew from consideration Thursday, a setback for the agency as it confronts the worst financial crisis in decades.

    Annette Nazareth, a former senior staffer and commissioner with the Securities and Exchange Commission, withdrew after several interviews and vetting of her financial history,...

    Nazareth, a partner at the law firm Davis Polk & Wardwell, could not be reached for comment. Treasury and White House officials would not comment on the matter.

    Nazareth's withdrawal from consideration comes as critics say Geithner's lacks the senior staff he needs to make critical decisions about the financial crisis. Not one of his top 17 deputies has been named, let alone confirmed.....

    Posted by Happy at 03/05/2009 @ 7:40pm

22. you're gone until something interesting you say is reflected in other's comments!----Posted by Happy at 03/05/2009 @ 7:18pm

    Two weeks...tops!

    Posted by Mask at 03/05/2009 @ 7:41pm

23. One of the solutions to our financial crisis is to implement One Payer healthcare.

    According to a recent study by the California Nurses Association, Medicare for all will create 2.6 million new jobs, and inject $100 billion more in wages into the U.S. economy.

    Posted by nursevic at 03/05/2009 @ 7:53pm

24. Comancheamerican, I'm sure when the stock market was tumbling under W you were prancing about telling every naysayer something like "One person doesn't effect the market." At least the politicians whose views you share did.

    Face facts, your policies have put us in the toilet, and you're answer is to keep doing the same thing. You neocons are like flies who keep smashing into the window...the only difference is that even flies eventually realize its not working.

    Posted by slezell at 03/05/2009 @ 8:14pm

25. Then, you'd only be able to listen to Rush and watch Fox News....oh,wait...you do that now, don't ya?

    heheh

    Posted by Mask at 03/05/2009 @ 7:40pm

    Mask, I've never listen to Rush Limbaugh in my life and I've told you that repeatedly.

    I don't know how you get so stuck on the notion that all conservatives listen to the man. When you work as much as I do, and see as many people in a day as I do, you don't want to be bothered by more conversation.

    (Speaking of which, I'm on call this weekend, damn!)

    Posted by ACook at 03/05/2009 @ 8:28pm

26. It could be self confidence?

    Enterprise level, and wide, adaptability, adroitness ... ?

    I've been involved with such an entity, watched (and helped) them transition (successfully) to a different area of technology (and multitasking, doing hardcore R&D in various and sundry green technologies as well) in about four months. Such entities will be the last to go.

    Belief in self?

    So ... I have compassion, concern, I have empathy for those trekked into less fortunate circumstance(s, when it rains it pours ...). But no I am not worried. About hyper-inflation, that the worthless paper will be nationalized and not foreclosed I am concerned, but about mere job loss?

    No I am not.

    Posted by V at 03/05/2009 @ 8:30pm

27. According to a recent study by the California Nurses Association, Medicare for all will create 2.6 million new jobs, and inject $100 billion more in wages into the U.S. economy.

    Posted by nursevic at 03/05/2009 @ 7:53pm

    i realize you have a vested interest in propping up the Nurses association, but their so-called facts are bogus.

    Secondly, Medicare is bankrupt and you want to expand it? As the Comptroller General told both Congress and the White House before quitting, Medicare is going 2 Trillion per year in the red and will soon be 40 Trillion in the red.

    And you want to do more of that? We can't take that kind of change

    Posted by antisocialist at 03/05/2009 @ 8:43pm

28. Our own Obama, PM Rudd, has been overtly throwing money at taxpayers and covertly at businesses, the latter contrary to its official non-protection stance. The former no doubt to show us how muscular government intervention works.

    The results are starting to flow in and don't auger well for the old stimulus package syndrome/government bail out packages.

    Just this week one of our major textile manufactures made 1850 textile works redundant as it plans to move parts of it's manufacturing plant to greener pastures aka Asia as follows:

    CLOTHING manufacturer Pacific Brands will axe 1850 jobs from its manufacturing and administration operations in Australia.

    The move comes after the company, which manufactures a number of clothing brands including Bonds, Holeproof, Hosiery and King Gee, posted a first half year loss of $149.956 million.

    Pacific Brands chief executive Sue Morphet said the current economic climate remains challenging and uncertain, with consumer confidence at low levels.

    The initial response of the government (and the unions) was to castigate Ms Morphet for her "obscene" $1.9 million salary. However it is now coming out that PM Rudd handed over $10 million to her company just before Christmas to shore up the jobs of the company's staff.

    So $10.4 billion in government cash handouts last December to those on all sorts of government benefits and pensions and $34 billion cash handouts this month to all those earning under $100,000 doesn't seem to be having the desired effect.

    Like Obama, Rudd has been scaring the country witless, perhaps to claim the credit when it turns around, so most have been impressed with his shock/fear tactics and have been banking it rather than spending it.

    One projection is for the unemployment rate to go from 4.6 % to 7-10%.

    Posted by lrjones4 at 03/05/2009 @ 9:00pm

29. Antisocialist, One of the reasons Medicare is bankrupt is that Physicians and hospitals overtreat the elderly (Medicare patients) performing unnecessary and costly procedures in order to compensate losses incurred by those who have no insurance. Hospitals cannot deny them care.

    Meanwhile, hospital CEO's are reaping the profits. Insurance companies are also reaping outrageous profits by denying care to those they supposedly insure. By eliminating the healthcare insurance industry, there is plenty left for all of us.

    Posted by nursevic at 03/05/2009 @ 9:45pm

30. Obama wants a totalitarian state.

    Posted by antisocialist at 03/05/2009 @ 4:49pm

    are you on shrooms?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 03/05/2009 @ 10:16pm

31. It's one of the reasons that McCain didn't get more of the conservative vote.

    Posted by antisocialist at 03/05/2009 @ 4:50pm

    think geithner's bad?

    imagine secretary GRAMM!?!?!????!?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 03/05/2009 @ 10:17pm

32. And you want to do more of that? We can't take that kind of change

    Posted by antisocialist at 03/05/2009 @ 8:43pm

    yep.

    let 'em rot!

    Posted by frosty zoom at 03/05/2009 @ 10:23pm

33. Posted by ACook at 03/05/2009 @ 8:28pm

    Where DO you get your news from, ACOOK?

    Posted by Mask at 03/05/2009 @ 10:24pm

34. are you on shrooms?----Posted by frosty zoom at 03/05/2009 @ 10:16pm

    Didn't you know, FROSTY?

    According to lvlib, we've been "Sweden" since 1932...."Chavez' Venezuela" since The Great Society....and just one Obama investment in alternative energy away from "Kim Jong-il's North Korea"!

    Naturally, Larry is relatively UN-phased by that in his non-blog life and only THREATENS to move to that last bastion of freedom....El Salvador....isn't ever going to actually do it.

    heheh

    Posted by Mask at 03/05/2009 @ 10:27pm

35. There are no republican or democratic parties any longer. There is only one large criminal organization beyond the reach of our laws.

    Posted by b4real at 03/05/2009 @ 10:38pm

36. Where DO you get your news from, ACOOK?

    Posted by Mask at 03/05/2009 @ 10:24pm

    "I have a vast variety of sources where we get our news, too. Georgia isn't a foreign country, where it's kind of suggested, "Wow, how could you keep in touch with what the rest of Washington, D.C., may be thinking when you live down there in Georgia?Believe me, Georgia is like a microcosm of America."

    Posted by frosty zoom at 03/05/2009 @ 11:35pm

37. Senator Sanders: "Will you tell the American people to whom you lent $2.2 trillion of their dollars?"

    Chairman Bernanke: "No"

    Posted by frosty zoom at 03/06/2009 @ 01:33am

38. Speaking of getting AXED, I'll watch and see what happens to Cramer!!!!

    CNBC "Mad Money" host Jim Cramer says if he's on the administration's enemies list he's in good company because President Obama's agenda "is crushing nest eggs around the country."

    Cramer, who says he used to make "six figure" donations to Democrats before his media contract prohibited it, described talk host Rush Limbaugh as "a genius of the medium."

    On Wednesday, Limbaugh said he and Cramer were on the White House enemies list, and predicted the administration "was going to shut Cramer up pretty soon, too, but he'll go down with a fight."

    Limbaugh, Cramer says, was "dead right."

    "I was on my hackles when I heard White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs' answer to a question about my pointed criticism of the president," Cramer wrote in a column posted Thursday on Mainstreet.com.

    Cramer has been a strong critic of Obama's, suggesting his budgetary problems have been destroying wealth by hurting the stock market.

    On Wednesday, Gibbs said: "I'm not entirely sure what he's pointing to, to make some of the statements. And you can go back and look at any number of statements he's made in the past about the economy and wonder where some of the backup for those are, too."

    Cramer's response to the blatant slam on Thursday: "Obama has undeniably made things worse by creating an atmosphere of fear and panic rather than an atmosphere of calm and hope."

    Cramer said he personally agrees with Obama's agenda, but says that in the current economic circumstances it is "radical," and should be put on hold until the business climate improves.

    Posted by comancheamerican at 03/06/2009 @ 02:28am

39. "If that makes me an enemy of the White House," Cramer wrote, "then call me a general of an army that Obama may not even know exists -- tens of millions of people who live in fear of having no money saved when they need it and who get poorer by the day."

    The natives are getting restless and Obamanation and the Undemocratic congress who are spending 9.5 million of the Omnibus on themselves and raises for their staff should start sweating!

    Posted by comancheamerican at 03/06/2009 @ 02:30am

40. Posted by frosty zoom at 03/05/2009 @ 11:35pm

    You forgot to say "You betcha!"

    heheh

    Posted by Mask at 03/06/2009 @ 08:53am

41. Posted by comancheamerican at 03/06/2009 @ 02:30am...

    You're talking to yourself again...

    Posted by ttr at 03/06/2009 @ 08:59am

42. You're talking to yourself again...

    Posted by ttr at 03/06/2009 @ 08:59am

    Only person who'll listen.....heheh

    Posted by Mask at 03/06/2009 @ 09:59am

43. There is no such thing as job security unless you live in a totalitarian state.

    Now it seems Obama is trying to give people job security by having the govt hire anyone who needs a job.

    Oops, I get it. Obama wants a totalitarian state.

    Posted by antisocialist at 03/05/2009 @ 4:49pm

    Ergo, those years in the 50s, 60s and even into the 70s and 80s, when millions of people worked for one employer (at&t, ibm, gm etc.) their entire adult lives with benefits and pensions (i.e. job security), we lived in a totalitarian state. what a ridiculous argument.

    Posted by kennyboy at 03/06/2009 @ 09:59am

44. Posted by comancheamerican at 03/06/2009 @ 02:30am...

    You're talking to yourself again...

    Posted by ttr at 03/06/2009 @ 08:59am |

    You're talking to yourself again...

    Posted by ttr at 03/06/2009 @ 08:59am

    Only person who'll listen.....heheh

    Posted by Mask at 03/06/2009 @ 09:59am

    and even he doesn't understand.....

    Posted by frosty zoom at 03/06/2009 @ 10:21am

45. and even he doesn't understand.....--------Posted by frosty zoom at 03/06/2009 @ 10:21am

    True. Try to get a straight answer from RIO when he goes into full-blown paranoia and starts talking about how "Obama is going to establish a socialist dictatorship and become a Hitler for conservatives and Christians"....

    to the question (quite logical)...

    "Well, then RIO...when are you escaping??? Bags packed for Aruba or lvlib's hideaway down in El Salvador? Or are you suicidal?"

    (Or...doesn't even HE believe his own crap????...heheh)

    Posted by Mask at 03/06/2009 @ 10:47am

46. The reason this country is fundamentally strong and sound is precisely because companies go out of business, people are fired, dead wood is axed.

    That is how bad companies and lousy workers are replaced by companies and people who are worth their salt. That is how an economy is kept vibrant and dynamic. Enterprises and people who don't work need to be replaced by what does.

    The alternative to such a continual process of destruction and creation, is the Soviet Union, the People's Republics and city workers who read the papers half the day, can't be fired and in fact live on a glorified dole. That is what Engelhardt wants, serfdom, a society bound to do moronic govt jobs, because firing someone is too heartbreaking.

    It isn't. A competent guy, with a real skill, will always make a living in this society. It might take moving to a different part of the country, or require a new tack, some initiative but there are always opportunities in a rich country of 300 million people.

    Posted by Hugo_Pirovano at 03/06/2009 @ 11:28am

47. The reason this country is fundamentally strong and sound is precisely because companies go out of business,....bad companies and lousy workers are replaced by companies and people who are worth their salt. That is how an economy is kept vibrant and dynamic.....

    Posted by Hugo_Pirovano at 03/06/2009 @ 11:28am

    Always gets under my skin that the Left refuses to acknowledge the concept of Evolution, other than as attacks on religions!

    Posted by Happy at 03/06/2009 @ 11:35am

48. Posted by Happy at 03/06/2009 @ 11:35am

    So, HAPP, do you believe in evolution...as far as it applies to life on Earth and humans?

    Posted by Mask at 03/06/2009 @ 11:49am

49. Ergo, those years in the 50s, 60s and even into the 70s and 80s, when millions of people worked for one employer (at&t, ibm, gm etc.) their entire adult lives with benefits and pensions (i.e. job security), we lived in a totalitarian state. what a ridiculous argument.

    Posted by kennyboy at 03/06/2009 @ 09:59am

    I've worked since 1962 and there is no such thing as job security.

    Posted by antisocialist at 03/06/2009 @ 12:05pm

50. Posted by antisocialist at 03/06/2009 @ 12:05pm

    There was MORE job security, Larry.

    And given Ike's 80% top marginal tax rate....seems by YOUR standard, THAT was a 'totalitarian state', yes?

    Posted by Mask at 03/06/2009 @ 12:22pm

51. There was MORE job security, Larry.

    And given Ike's 80% top marginal tax rate....seems by YOUR standard, THAT was a 'totalitarian state', yes?

    Posted by Mask at 03/06/2009 @ 12:22pm

    There was not more job security. On what basis do you make that claim?

    Was everyone guaranteed a job for life?

    As to the tax rates, it was criminal that the US had such rates just as the 16th amendment is almost criminal in it's effect on our nation.

    Another vital point which you always overlook is that even as bad as that rate was, todays rates are comparable.

    Back in the 50's, state income tax rates were very low. Sales taxes were much lower, the Medicare tax didn't exist, Social Security was 1% and then progressed through the 50's ending at 3%.

    Gasoline taxes were about a penny a gallon and I paid 19 cents per gallon in the mid 60's. Now California gas tax alone is 26 cents per gallon + 18cpg Federal meaning I pay 22% taxes on each gallon of gas. California now starts it's top tax bracket at 39k AGI which is 9.3% plus a new 2.5% temporary income tax. In the 50's and 60's our sales tax rate including local taxes was 3%. Now it's 9%. Now we get our utility bills taxed

    There has been no substantial improvement in our tax rates. What the Fed and State govt's have done is tax us more in more areas.

    Posted by antisocialist at 03/06/2009 @ 1:33pm

52. Where DO you get your news from, ACOOK?

    Posted by Mask at 03/05/2009 @ 10:24pm

    When I get the opportunity to read them, the Financial Times, Atlanta Business Chronicle (or any BizJournal for that matter), WSJ, Barrons, Investors Business Daily and on occassion, the NY Times, Chicago Sun Times,and my old hometown paper - The Detroit Free Press.

    Posted by ACook at 03/06/2009 @ 2:05pm

53. Posted by antisocialist at 03/06/2009 @ 1:33pm

    Wait a tick....I though "40% of the country doesn't pay ANY income taxes now" and "the rich pay most of the taxes" and "a tax cut exluding the top 5% is simply welfare!!!"?

    Posted by Mask at 03/06/2009 @ 2:17pm

54. Posted by ACook at 03/06/2009 @ 2:05pm

    Congratulations, kiddo.

    You DID beat Sarah Palin's time for answering that question!

    heheh

    Posted by Mask at 03/06/2009 @ 2:18pm

55. Wait a tick....I though "40% of the country doesn't pay ANY income taxes now" and "the rich pay most of the taxes" and "a tax cut exluding the top 5% is simply welfare!!!"?

    Posted by Mask at 03/06/2009 @ 2:17pm

    There's no contradiction. I was adding what people like yourself fail to consider whenever you bring up old tax rates.

    And the 40$ figure applies to Federal Income tax and you know it.

    What my obvious point showed is that overall taxation is much greater than when the Fed income tax marginal rates were higher.

    If you can't acknowledge such a simple fact, what real debate is there?

    Posted by antisocialist at 03/06/2009 @ 2:45pm

56. For at least the last 15 years it has been the express common wisdom that the good old days of permanent employment at one jobsite following by retirement with a generous pension is going away. Young people have been advised that they can expect to change jobs several times during their working years. Pension plans have given way to 401k's. It is true that some entrenched special interests like the UAW are still hanging on to extensive benefit packages and retirement as early as 48. Whether the manufacturers can stay around long enough to pay those benefits remains to be seen. But, given the totality of the circumstances, someone getting fired is just not that significant.

    Posted by jsens at 03/06/2009 @ 3:48pm

57. ....California now starts it's top tax bracket at 39k AGI...

    Posted by antisocialist at 03/06/2009 @ 1:33pm

    I find this low $39k figure rather puzzling, not shocking....& would like to know how this evolved.

    It is actually quite fair since it forces most everybody on W-2 salaries, to pay at the same top marginal rate.....I can almost wish for that low of a AGI for Fed Income Tax, to bring far more people into the tax-paying side.

    On the other hand, I can see why Cali ended up a basket case.....since most everybody pays, they want & demand more services. It's one thing for the non-tax payers to demand welfare/services, but it's entirely of a different magnitude when those making demands are paying the taxes, no matter how little in absolute dollars but paying the same top marginal rate as the corp. big wigs pulling down 8 figures.

    There maybe huge Behaviour Economic lessons to be learned in this deficit-leading state!

    Posted by Happy at 03/06/2009 @ 5:10pm

58. 1. They don't vet their sources for their stories

    2. They came to the internet too late and missed their opportunity to capture a younger audience.

    3. Dishonest journalists

    4. Using a lot of misleading headlines

    5. Oversensationalizing

    And the list goes on. It wouldn't suprise me if half of those papers disapeared by next year.

    Posted by ACook at 03/05/2009 @ 6:09pm

    Sounds a lot like the GOP poster boy, Rush Limburger.

    Posted by Wolfgang1 at 03/06/2009 @ 5:13pm

59. There are no republican or democratic parties any longer. There is only one large criminal organization beyond the reach of our laws.

    Posted by b4real at 03/05/2009 @ 10:38pm

    I fear you may be correct.

    Posted by Wolfgang1 at 03/06/2009 @ 5:20pm

60. Why newspapers are going out of business - it's not that they're so bad. It's that "the Internet ate their business plan" (Dan Savage). I do all my advertising on Craig's List now. Others use the Internet too. Where will newspaper funding come from?

    Tax rates - the Rightists are right that more tax is being collected now than in the 50s. But now it's mostly from the working class and the middle class (F.I.C.A., gas taxes, sales taxes etc.) The rich with their 36% top income tax rate, are getting off way cheaper.

    The main cause of the recession/depression isn't Obama's policies, which just started six weeks ago for crying out loud! It's that the rich have too much and the rest of us don't have enough to sustain demand. (Oh, and that little financial Ponzi scheme collapsing.)

    If we want to get moving again, we have to Tax The Rich! Go ahead and scream, but there's no other way to get the money back in circulation.

    Posted by DavidSpero at 03/06/2009 @ 6:42pm

61. The rich with their 36% top income tax rate, are getting off way cheaper.

    It's that the rich have too much and the rest of us don't have enough to sustain demand.

    Posted by DavidSpero at 03/06/2009 @ 6:42pm

    Where do you get these bizarre notions? the rich pay more than double the share of personal incomes taxes than they were paying 30 years ago.

    In 1980 the top 1% paid 19% of the taxes. in 2007 they paid 39.9%.

    between 2000 and 2006, pre-tax income for the top 1% of tax returns grew by 34%, while pre-tax income for the bottom 50% increased by 22%. All figures are nominal (not adjusted for inflation).

    From other IRS data, we can see that in 2006, 92.7 million of the tax returns came from people who paid taxes into the Treasury. That leaves 43 million tax returns filed by people with positive AGI who used exemptions, deductions and tax credits to completely wipe out their federal income tax liability. Not only did they get back every dollar that the federal government withheld from their paychecks during 2005, but some even received more back from the IRS. This is a result of refundable tax credits like the Earned Income Tax Credit, which are not included in the aggregate percentile data here.

    The top-earning 25% of taxpayers (AGI over $64,702) earned 68.2% of the nation's income, but they paid more than four out of every five dollars collected by the federal income tax (86.3 percent). The top 1 percent of taxpayers (AGI over $388,806) earned approximately 22.1 percent of the nation's income (as defined by AGI), yet paid 39.9 percent of all federal income taxes. That means the top 1% of tax returns paid about the same amount of federal individual income taxes as the bottom 95% of tax returns.

    http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/250.html

    Posted by antisocialist at 03/06/2009 @ 6:57pm

62. There's more to the story. Sadly, many companies have also used the current economic downturn as a means to rid themselves of workers who are more costly but otherwise excellent employees. A large number of "laid off" and "terminated" (those denied severance through trumped up charges against them) employees are older, unhealthy, disabled, people of color or high-wage long-term employees. Under cover of economic downturn companies have managed to shed employees who were formerly under protected status (age, race, disability, etc.). This is a big boon to companies across the Nation -- cut your workforce and simultaneously shield yourself from the expenses of the protected groups. What a difficult thing it will be for these workers to try and secure new jobs. The problem is indeed much bigger than any of us realize. God help us all.

    Posted by MaryanneAZ at 03/08/2009 @ 2:48pm

63. Under cover of economic downturn companies have managed to shed employees who were formerly under protected status (age, race, disability, etc.). This is a big boon to companies across the Nation -- cut your workforce and simultaneously shield yourself from the expenses of the protected groups. What a difficult thing it will be for these workers to try and secure new jobs. The problem is indeed much bigger than any of us realize. God help us all. Posted by MaryanneAZ at 03/08/2009 @ 2:48pm

    Gee, I didn't know the EEOC closed up shop during economic downturns. Do you have any facts to back these assertions?

    Posted by twillie at 03/08/2009 @ 9:00pm

64. Sadly, many companies have also used the current economic downturn as a means to rid themselves of workers who are more costly but otherwise excellent employees......

    Posted by MaryanneAZ at 03/08/2009 @ 2:48pm

    You mean like The Messiah NOT letting the current economic `crisis' go to waste by laying waste to capitalists, pensions, 401Ks, IRAs, Foundations, Endowments, stock options, etc.?

    Do you follow sports at all, Maryanne? Do you ever hear of sports team offloading their highest-scoring player who also happen to have the fattest contract? Sometimes, the teams aren't even in trouble financially.....crazy world, ain't it?

    Posted by Happy at 03/08/2009 @ 9:36pm

65. Sadly, many companies have also used the current economic downturn as a means to rid themselves of workers who are more costly but otherwise excellent employees. A large number of "laid off" and "terminated" (those denied severance through trumped up charges against them) employees are older, unhealthy, disabled, people of color or high-wage long-term employees. Posted by MaryanneAZ at 03/08/2009

    I waited over the weekend to see if the poster had any data to back up these assertions. Haven't seen any yet. This seems like speculation.

    Posted by jsens at 03/10/2009 @ 3:40pm