<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.3" -->
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>If Business Confidence Explained Lack of Hiring, Then Hours Per Worker Would Be Increasing</title>
		<description>Comments for If Business Confidence Explained Lack of Hiring, Then Hours Per Worker Would Be Increasing at http://www.cepr.net , comment 1 to 5 out of 5 comments</description>
		<link>http://www.cepr.net</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Sun, 19 May 2013 11:32:49 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>FeedCreator 1.7.3</generator>
		<item>
			<title>Huh?</title>
			<link>http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/if-business-confidence-explained-lack-of-hiring-then-hours-per-worker-would-be-increasing#comment-1696</link>
			<description>This post seems to have no connection to the WaPo article referenced. I saw nothing of the bogus argument about fear of regulation or taxation, only about business optimism or pessimism about the future of demand. Are you saying optimism or pessimism about the future has nothing to do with demand or business decisions to meet that demand?  - urban legend</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 23 Jul 2010 08:48:16 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>What about...</title>
			<link>http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/if-business-confidence-explained-lack-of-hiring-then-hours-per-worker-would-be-increasing#comment-1625</link>
			<description>Companies could be bringing in temps to work 20 hrs per week, claiming that they would add more &quot;permanent&quot; workers if they felt more confident.  This would reduce the average hours per worker (note: per worker, not per person in the US), yes? - Doug B</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 21 Jul 2010 10:15:59 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/if-business-confidence-explained-lack-of-hiring-then-hours-per-worker-would-be-increasing#comment-1622</link>
			<description>That's exactly right Mr Who's Your Nanny, it has nothing to do with lack of demand and everything to do with slavery reparations as announced by Rush Limbaugh.  Corporations won't hire because of a realistic belief that future profits will be siphoned off by stupid liberals to reimburse those harmed by slavery.

That's also why hours per worker are low.  Anticipating coming socialism, corporations took a cue from Germany and decided to hire more workers for fewer hours to spread the wealth in zero sum fashion to demonstrate that capitalism and free markets are working fine, and if no reparations were expected, they'd hire even more part time workers with no benefits. - izzatzo</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 21 Jul 2010 08:52:43 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Plausible Deniability</title>
			<link>http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/if-business-confidence-explained-lack-of-hiring-then-hours-per-worker-would-be-increasing#comment-1616</link>
			<description>Put that pistol back in the holster. Shooting from the hip is dangerous. Business people are liars because they like to keep earnings, profits; but data that is probably compromised by a severe structural change in the economy is adequate for your conclusion? Reboot. - sam</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 21 Jul 2010 05:12:17 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/if-business-confidence-explained-lack-of-hiring-then-hours-per-worker-would-be-increasing#comment-1614</link>
			<description>Do the media run &quot;dog bites man&quot; stories every day? They do run &quot;businessmen complain about taxes, regulation&quot; stories. - skeptonomist</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 21 Jul 2010 03:37:16 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
