A study by the National Association of Manufacturers of new regulations issued in the last year of President Obama's presidency shows the massive cost that businesses will be forced to bear.  The regulations from the Department of Labor, OSHA, NLRB, and EEOC will cost American businesses $80 billion over the next 10 years, with the subsequent loss of 150,000 jobs.  Complying with these regulations will add 411 million hours in paperwork burden.

Washington Free Beacon:

The report analyzed seven regulations from the Department of Labor, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the Equal Opportunity Commission, and the National Labor Relations Board. The measures included the Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces rule, updated overtime rules, new silica standards, the Ambush Elections rule, reporting requirements for employment and wages, and reporting requirements for workplace injuries and illnesses.

The National Association of Manufacturers found that these rules could cost the economy $81.6 billion, eliminate 155,700 jobs, and impose 411 million paperwork burden hours on companies.

The reporting requirements for employment and wages would add more than 3,400 data fields to the current reporting requirements already in place. The rule would increase paperwork hours by 18 million and impose an annual implementation burden of $53 million.

Another regulation requiring companies to publish reports on workplace injuries and illnesses would add $1.1 billion in long-term costs, $10 billion in annual compliance burdens, and 90 million hours of paperwork.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s rule regulating exposure to silica in the workplace would impose $5 billion in annual compliance costs and eliminate 50,000 jobs, according to the Construction Industry Safety Coalition.

The report stated that these regulations would force some employers to trade full-time jobs for part-time jobs.

“The litany of these new labor laws has made it more costly for firms to employ workers,” the association said. “Forcing companies to spend more money in compliance costs has little to do with a company’s main purpose—producing goods and services. These rules result in lower productivity growth, and companies end up paying lower wages and reducing employment.”

“Imposing greater employment costs on companies usually forces them to economize in other ways,” the association said. “In some situations they will try to substitute capital for labor, charge higher prices for goods (and sell less), or reduce wages and fringe benefits for their employees.”

For eight years, President Obama has promised millions of new, good-paying jobs.  Instead, we have what Tyler Durden at the Zero Hedge blog has termed a "waiter and bartender recovery."  It's impossible to square Obama's rhetoric with the reality of his anti-business regulations.

How much worse will Hillary Clinton be for the economy?  It's hard to imagine, but there is no doubt her appointees will be even more liberal than Obama's.  Clinton has become a creature of the hard left and is expected to pay off the radicals with numerous government appointments.  That doesn't bode well for business as people who despise capitalism move into positions of authority to oversee the economy.