The econonmy is not improving according to Lowe's (Charlotte, Shelby: sales, how much)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I received a part-time job offer after forwarding my information to a company that places temps at least at Lowe's, HD & Wally World, however Lowe's gave the order not to hire any more temps and laid off those that were employed so obviuosly consumers are not rushing out to buy items for their homes as we are led to believe according to the media so are we in for a double dip recession that some have predicted? What does that mean for the RE market? The WH is looking for another stimulus package but if the first one didn't work will the second? Supposedly the second package is to fund teaches, police, etc., but considering the first package of job creation almost a million dollars was spent to hire one person so wouldn't the WH be better off sending to each tax payer a check say for $500 to stimulate the economy rather then inflating employment data? How would voters respond to another stimulus and would they express their opinion to the elected leaders in D.C.?
Location: The place where the road & the sky collide
23,816 posts, read 34,799,150 times
Reputation: 10256
Quote:
Originally Posted by golden phoenix
I received a part-time job offer after forwarding my information to a company that places temps at least at Lowe's, HD & Wally World, however Lowe's gave the order not to hire any more temps and laid off those that were employed so obviuosly consumers are not rushing out to buy items for their homes as we are led to believe according to the media so are we in for a double dip recession that some have predicted? What does that mean for the RE market? The WH is looking for another stimulus package but if the first one didn't work will the second? Supposedly the second package is to fund teaches, police, etc., but considering the first package of job creation almost a million dollars was spent to hire one person so wouldn't the WH be better off sending to each tax payer a check say for $500 to stimulate the economy rather then inflating employment data? How would voters respond to another stimulus and would they express their opinion to the elected leaders in D.C.?
Stimulus money is working in Cleveland County, slowly. A variety of businesses are coming in. Right now I know of 3 businesses hiring multiple people in Kings Mountain & a number of stores have help wanted signs up. Between Kings Mountain & Shelby, I'm aware of somewhere in the neighborhood of 1000 construction jobs, possibly more, since most that I know of are in Kings Mountain (including in the city) & there could be more in Shelby that I don't know about.
The unemployment rate is very high here, but these jobs will have more impact here because of lower population density.
WASHINGTON - President Obama urged reluctant lawmakers Saturday to quickly approve nearly $50 billion in emergency aid to state and local governments, saying the money is needed to avoid "massive layoffs of teachers, police and firefighters" and to support the still-fragile economic recovery. In a letter to congressional leaders, Obama defended last year's huge economic stimulus package, saying it helped break the economy's freefall, but argued that more spending is urgent and unavoidable. "We must take these emergency measures," he wrote in an appeal aimed primarily at members of his own party.
The letter comes as rising concern about the national debt is undermining congressional support for additional spending to bolster the economy. Many economists say more spending could help bring down persistently high unemployment, but with Republicans making an issue of the record deficits run up during the recession, many Democratic lawmakers are eager to turn off the stimulus tap.
Now that people seem to no longer care how much money the federal government prints up to spend, why doesn't the government just borrow another $30T and give every man woman and child in the USA $100,000? That will certainly "stimulate" the economy. Why not make it $300T. Then everyone could have a million bucks. They could pay off all their debts and have plenty left over for all kinds of economic investment and activity.
Why bother to even borrow it, they can just print it and pass it out on demand. (this is what they did in Iraq, they threw stacks of 100s off the backs of trucks) What do you think?
Now that people seem to no longer care how much money the federal government prints up to spend, why doesn't the government just borrow another $30T and give every man woman and child in the USA $100,000? That will certainly "stimulate" the economy. Why not make it $300T. Then everyone could have a million bucks. They could pay off all their debts and have plenty left over for all kinds of economic investment and activity.
Why bother to even borrow it, they can just print it and pass it out on demand. (this is what they did in Iraq, they threw stacks of 100s off the backs of trucks) What do you think?
They should have just done this in the first place. If they would have just gave every man woman and child in the US say $30,000 that would have stimulated the economy a great deal. I would have atleast went out and bought a new car with that kind of money!!!!
I don't know about this... my kid was hired by one of the chains you mentioned about a month ago as a part-timer. It's an entry level job in one of the departments with a schedule of about 32-25 hours per week. I also understand there is a group of new employees each week going through orientation.
While many of these jobs maybe filling current openings and not growth, if these stores were on the ropes, wouldn't the flow of new employees be minimized?
Stripes,
It seems that Lowe's wouldn't want to hire in-house versus temp but maybe the market is picking up and that's why they decided to hire in-house. Different ways to interpret corporate.
True, true. I see it as a positive that they are hiring in house and not using temps as so many companies like to do. Even my company does that and I really dislike it! I'd rather have a permanent employee that I can develop and hold accountable for performance, rather than one that has no "buy-in" to the success of my organization. But that's not my call, so I live with it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
