What happened to all of the doom and gloom economic threads?

[Luk]

You really have nothing...

I have no idea why you talk that racist loser with no job that doesn't contribute to the economy.

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

I see you and the "conservatives" are lined up at the station in hopeful anticipation.

Funny that your cutoff is Sept. 2010 and not the depths of the recession when we were bleeding 600K jobs per month. But that might show some actual progress.

Hopeful anticipation?

Wouldn't that be the guy here telling us for two years that the economy is on the verge of taking off?

Thank Gawd your guy kept us at 8% unemployment...

Our cutoff day is when the Democrats seized control of the people's purse. Back when you kept saying, "Okay, maybe it's technically not a recession, but to the middle-class it sure feels like one!"

I guess, then, to the middle class, this must feel like a Depression.

 

[mercury14]

The government says the unemployment rate increased to 9.1% in May as employers added fewer jobs than expected.

http://money.msn.com/market-news/post.aspx?post=4b59cbe9-ed64-46e7-9901-adfef1410948&GT1=33009

From the Bureau of labor statistics:

Nonfarm payroll employment changed little (+54,000) in May, and the unemployment
rate was essentially unchanged at 9.1 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
reported today. Job gains continued in professional and business services, health
care, and mining. Employment levels in other major private-sector industries were
little changed, and local government employment continued to decline.



The unemployment rate ticked up about .05%. Even though +54k jobs were put on, there was an increase in people looking for work that month.

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Under Obama we went from -600,000 jobs per month to about +132,000 jobs per month so far this year. a +732,000 per month swing is "microscopic" though, huh?

Can I quote you on this?

Too bad it takes over 300,000 jobs a month...

The academics have studied the shovel-ready stimulus and most of that money went to making sure the public sector worker made no sacrifice and the majority of added jobs were also government. That's what you get when Democrats run the economy; they hate business, they hate corporations and they think that goodness and light comes from an ever-expanding government. The bigger the government gets, the smaller the private sector gets.

As far as Luke's assertion that the small business sector is poised for a rebound was addressed pages ago by the article from the Left-wing academic Carter and his conversation at 35,000 feet.

Joe Biden, as busybody quoted, was telling us they were going to be at the 500,000 job a month mark last year.

I sure hope Obama runs for President promising us FORE! more years of watching him and his buddies prosper, promise, and pontificate...

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

From the Bureau of labor statistics:

Nonfarm payroll employment changed little (+54,000) in May, and the unemployment
rate was essentially unchanged at 9.1 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
reported today. Job gains continued in professional and business services, health
care, and mining. Employment levels in other major private-sector industries were
little changed, and local government employment continued to decline.



The unemployment rate ticked up about .05%. Even though +54k jobs were put on, there was an increase in people looking for work that month.

Then, of course, a few months ago, the administration announced that so many jobs were never going to return that they pushed the unemployment number down to 8.9% and announced that they were well on the way to Mission Accomplished.

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

I love the bad news is good news explanations...

__________________
A_J's corollary #9a, “When a Republican does it, an explanation is making an excuse, when a Democrat does it, then an excuse is the rightful explanation.”

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

I have no idea why you talk that racist loser with no job that doesn't contribute to the economy.

How many of those 54,000 jobs were your new hires?

 

[mercury14]

Too bad it takes over 300,000 jobs a month...

The academics have studied the shovel-ready stimulus and most of that money went to making sure the public sector worker made no sacrifice and the majority of added jobs were also government. That's what you get when Democrats run the economy; they hate business, they hate corporations and they think that goodness and light comes from an ever-expanding government. The bigger the government gets, the smaller the private sector gets.

And if I show you a link that shows that hundreds of thousands of government workers have been laid off and that overall government payroll is declining, what will you say?

Will you change your story?

Will you stop lying?

 

[koalabear]

And if I show you a link that shows that hundreds of thousands of government workers have been laid off and that overall government payroll is declining, what will you say?

Will you change your story?

Will you stop lying?

Will you ever stop making a fool out of yourself. No.

 

[unregistered]

 

[onemadvagabond]

Unemployment up.
Millions not counted in those numbers because they simply quit actively looking for employment.
Millions underemployed and working at walmart just so they can get some kind of paycheck, because their industries cut back so much.
Housing prices at there lowest since 2002.
Five continuous weeks of losses on Wall Street.
Fuel prices out of control. Driving up the price of everything else.
The biggest indicator of a bad economy? The liberals in Washington (Reid, Pelosi, etc.) refuse to talk about it, and are trying to push the discussion to nothing but that moron Ryan's medicare plan. Which isn't even an actual issue, because no one has even voted on it while millions are now actually struggling to survive. None of them really care. They are a part of the elite, and will never be in that situation.

 

[mercury14]

Millions have lost their jobs under Obama.

Wrong. Obama walked into the Oval Office and immediately America lost 600,000 jobs. Is he responsible for that?

Then every month we lost less and less until we started adding them. Now you're reduced to bitching about being +54k after months near or over +200k.

 

[mercury14]

Millions have lost their jobs under Obama.

Wrong. Obama walked into the Oval Office and immediately America lost 600,000 jobs. Is he responsible for that?

Then every month we lost less and less until we started adding them. Now you're reduced to bitching about being +54k after months near or over +200k.

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

And if I show you a link that shows that hundreds of thousands of government workers have been laid off and that overall government payroll is declining, what will you say?

Will you change your story?

Will you stop lying?

The problem with the rosy numbers you are touting, a few hundred thousand jobs create ignore the average 400,000 new jobless claims a month, which, more than the hope of a better tomorrow has as much to do with 9.1% unemployment as anything else.

If government payroll is declining, then it is about time they felt our pain. If this would have happened because Obama was creating shovel-ready jobs instead of delaying the inevitable, then maybe we would be having a recovery by now, but at every turn, he has allowed his ideology to sway the direction of his attentions. The longer he delayed that which had to happen, the worse the problem got.

Now, show me your stats that prove local governments are cutting back and then show me the stats that prove the Federal government is shrinking. That's the government that is the one printing money to inflate the stock market. It's still due for a much larger correction as the inflation works down to the consumer level.

The fact is, though, and a rough one, that government is now employing more people than the private sector and paying them too much in wages and benefits. Then you turn around and actually demand the private sector hire even as you are still writing the regulations to control these new hires from 4,000 lines of new law that no one red before passing. There are also more people not paying income tax, even earning credits, than people paying taxes. No good comes from this lack of skin in the game.
__________________
You loot the private sector, strip every dollar of 40¢ for overhead, and then give the other 60¢ to your political base in order to revitalize the looted.

What's not to like about that plan?
A_J, the Stupid

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Wrong. Obama walked into the Oval Office and immediately America lost 600,000 jobs. Is he responsible for that?

Then every month we lost less and less until we started adding them. Now you're reduced to bitching about being +54k after months near or over +200k.

Yes. He was part of the Congress that caused the problem. I know you want to scream GEORGE BUSH! GEORGE BUSH! until we finally accept it as truth, but the fact of the matter is, the Democrats were in charge of the Congress for two years prior to the problem and even before that fought tooth, nail and claw to keep George Bush from using the politics of fear to head off the collapse of Freddie and Fannie, for that was one of their cherished sacred cows and even as we converse now, there are Democrats in Congress who want to loosen the reins on home loans, again...

What we are seeing is a scenario played out in Paris, Berlin, Vienna, Washington (FDR), and Tokyo when government decides that it can control the private sector more adroitly than the invisible hand of the market...
__________________
"The more communal enterprise extends, the more attention is drawn to the bad business results of nationalized and municipalized undertakings. It is impossible to miss the cause of the difficulty: a child could see where something was lacking. So that it cannot be said that this problem has not been tackled. But the way in which it has been tackled has been deplorably inadequate. Its organic connection with the essential nature of socialist enterprise has been regarded as merely a question of better selection of persons. It has not been realized that even exceptionally gifted men of high character cannot solve the problems created by socialist control of industry."
Ludwig Heinrich Elder von Mises

 

[Luk]

How many of those 54,000 jobs were your new hires?

Look at A_J The Stoopid try to step to me.

1 more than you last month and it looks like 2 more than you this month.

How ya like 'dem apples?

You contributed nothing but partisan C&P bullshit (MeeMie), colorful fonts (Trysail) and the same tired picture of your President 4,000 times. You don't even have your own shtick, loser.

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Look at A_J The Stoopid try to step to me.

1 more than you last month and it looks like 2 more than you this month.

How ya like 'dem apples?

You contributed nothing but partisan C&P bullshit (MeeMie), colorful fonts (Trysail) and the same tired picture of your President 4,000 times. You don't even have your own shtick, loser.

Yes, I do contribute. I'm just old enough and was smart enough to have reached a comfortable station in life, but my money is still out there participating in the economy...





You're so angry. It must be frustration with your life...

 

[busybody..]

When BUSHCO was creating 200K jobs per month

and

we were told its the WORST ECONOMY since H Hoover

AND

all the jobs were burger flippers

DESPITE ALL THE EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY

today we have

From Bad To Worse: Half Of Last Month’s 54K New Jobs Came From A Single Employer — McDonald’s…


(Weekly Standard) – According to the unemployment data released this morning, the economy added only 54,000 jobs, pushing the unemployment rate up to 9.1 percent. However, this report from MarketWatch suggests data is much worse than that:

McDonald’s ran a big hiring day on April 19 — after the Labor Department’s April survey for the payrolls report was conducted — in which 62,000 jobs were added. That’s not a net number, of course, and seasonal adjustment will reduce the Hamburglar impact on payrolls. (In simpler terms — restaurants always staff up for the summer; the Labor Department makes allowance for this effect.) Morgan Stanley estimates McDonald’s hiring will boost the overall number by 25,000 to 30,000. The Labor Department won’t detail an exact McDonald’s figure — they won’t identify any company they survey — but there will be data in the report to give a rough estimate

 

[busybody..]

Let's stroll down memory lane. Joe Biden, April 2010:

"Some time in the next couple of months we're going to be creating between 250,000 jobs a month and 500,000 jobs a month," Biden said at a fundraiser today in Pittsburgh. ...

The administration's own forecast projects that the labor market will add about 100,000 jobs a month for the rest of the year [2010], then around 200,000 jobs a month next year [2011], and 250,000 jobs a month in 2012. ...

"We caught a lot of bad breaks on the way down," Biden said. "We're going to catch a few good breaks because of good planning on the way up."

Apparently the "bad breaks" continue. Unexpectedly!


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Hey, busybody, what do you think of the postulated "Government is shrinking and shedding jobs?"

 

[Luk]

Yes, I do contribute. I'm just old enough and was smart enough to have reached a comfortable station in life, but my money is still out there participating in the economy...





You're so angry. It must be frustration with your life...

I'm not angry about anything. My life is good, my small business is doing well and there are wonderful people in my life that love me.

Plus, I'm young enough to enjoy life to the fullest.

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Government serves many useful functions, including some economic ones. The findings here support the view that the growth of government in newly emerging nations and economies tends to increase output. Presumably this reflects the reduction in transactions' costs and the improved environment for investment associated with a rule of law and enforceable property rights. At the same time, in modern times relative American federal government spending has expanded rapidly, reflecting sharp increases in transfer payments. The evidence suggests that large transfer payments in particular have negative consequences for growth. The results for the federal government are confirmed for state and local governments and several other countries. The findings suggest that a federal budget strategy of constraining spending growth below output growth, with particular attention paid to constraining transfer payments, would have positive effects on economic growth.

http://www.house.gov/jec/growth/govtsize/govtsize.htm

 

[busybody..]

Hey, busybody, what do you think of the postulated "Government is shrinking and shedding jobs?"

words to big

dont know what they mean

 

[onemadvagabond]

Yes. He was part of the Congress that caused the problem. I know you want to scream GEORGE BUSH! GEORGE BUSH! until we finally accept it as truth, but the fact of the matter is, the Democrats were in charge of the Congress for two years prior to the problem and even before that fought tooth, nail and claw to keep George Bush from using the politics of fear to head off the collapse of Freddie and Fannie, for that was one of their cherished sacred cows and even as we converse now, there are Democrats in Congress who want to loosen the reins on home loans, again...

What we are seeing is a scenario played out in Paris, Berlin, Vienna, Washington (FDR), and Tokyo when government decides that it can control the private sector more adroitly than the invisible hand of the market...

How dare you actally point out the root of the problem.

 

[mercury14]

Unemployment up.
Millions not counted in those numbers because they simply quit actively looking for employment.
Millions underemployed and working at walmart just so they can get some kind of paycheck, because their industries cut back so much.
Housing prices at there lowest since 2002.
Five continuous weeks of losses on Wall Street.
Fuel prices out of control. Driving up the price of everything else.

Stupid.

Unemployment is down since the beginning of the year. It's up a minute amount in the past month even though there were +54,000 jobs added. And of course the three months prior we were adding around 200,000 jobs PER MONTH.

Yes, there are uncounted people who stopped trying. But they're coming back and canceling out some of the job gains.

Five continuous weeks of losses on Wall Street? Okay, but that still only cancelled out about 25% of the gains for the year.

Millions working Wal-Mart jobs? Okay, and Republicans are doing their best to de-unionize entire industries to turn them into low-paying, low benefit Wal-jobs where only the tiny few at the top are making good money.

Housing prices are just kind of sitting there. It will be like this for a while as there's a glut in the housing market. Not much that can be done about this.

Fuel prices? That's a global commodity that Obama (or a hypothetical president McCain) can't contol.

Quit yer bitchin'.