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

[koalabear]

http://www.frugal-cafe.com/public_html/frugal-blog/frugal-cafe-blogzone/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/obama-jobs-unemployment-political-cartoon1.jpg

hehehehehe

 

[RobDownSouth]

U3 but the curve in the U6 would probably look very similar.

Who in either party knew the recession was going to be as bad as expected?

Probably Dubya, but he kept the truth from the American public in order to preserve his legacy.

 

[jeninflorida]

but people giving up the search is good, because Obama will give them welfare

http://www.frugal-cafe.com/public_html/frugal-blog/frugal-cafe-blogzone/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/obama-jobs-unemployment-political-cartoon1.jpg

 

[mercury14]

The last BLS report had something like 400-something thousand new workers looking for work. Your cartoons are stale.

 

[bra_man69]

The last BLS report had something like 400-something thousand new workers looking for work. Your cartoons are stale.

Not as much as your bullshit ass clown.

 

[mercury14]

Not as much as your bullshit ass clown.

Nice to see Vette's obsession with men's asses and assholes is rubbing off on mini-Vette here.

 

[bra_man69]

Nice to see Vette's obsession with men's asses and assholes is rubbing off on mini-Vette here.

There you go again talking about man ass when everything fails talk about ass and dick right.

Definition of ass clown
ass clown

A general term describing intellectually challenged
people or a fool of great magnitude.
mercury14=ass clown.

 

[unregistered]

 

[eyer]

- 16,807,795 American households living below the poverty line in 2011

- total American taxpayer assistance going to those households in 2011: approximately $1 trillion

- $61,194 average taxpayer assistance per American household living below the poverty line in 2011

...the United States now spends more on means-tested welfare than any other item in the federal budget—including Social Security, Medicare, or national defense. Including state contributions to the roughly 80 federal poverty programs, the total amount spent in 2011 was approximately $1 trillion. Federal spending alone on these programs was up 32 percent since 2008.



http://www.weeklystandard.com/sites/all/files/images/America%20Spent%20Enough%20On%20Federal%20Welfare%20Last%20Year%20To%20Send%20$60,000%20To%20Each%20Household%20In%20Poverty.preview.jpg

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/over-60000-welfare-spentper-household-poverty_657889.html

 

[mercury14]

They don't have a clue how many new "workers" are looking for work, and who cares when there are 20 plus million already looking for work?

If they don't have a clue about new workers looking for work you can't say they have a clue when they stop looking. But that's one of your main rationalizations for criticizing the dropping unemployment rate - are you sure you want to let it go?

There you go again talking about man ass when everything fails talk about ass and dick right.

Definition of ass clown
ass clown

A general term describing intellectually challenged
people or a fool of great magnitude.
mercury14=ass clown.

Yeah you keep spamming things about asses and penises, filling the void left by Vette's week of verbal self-control. Your comments have been noted.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

'The Policies That Caused the Mess in the First Place'
Jon N. Hall, The American Thinker
October 27, 2012

For the last four years, Democrats and their amen corner in the old media have been trying to lay all the blame for the financial crisis of 2008 on poor old George W. Bush. They want folks to believe that that since the crisis happened on "his watch," that Bush's policies therefore caused the crisis.

Since we're all about thinking here at American Thinker, that seems to be an example of the error known as post hoc ergo propter hoc -- "after this, therefore because of this." However, in the "thinking" of your garden-variety progressive Democrat, the translation from the Latin is: "after Bush, therefore because of Bush."

Back in the Olden Days, this kind of thinking was considered fallacious -- a failure in logic. Even the old media understood. But here's the deal: the crisis didn't happen only on Bush's watch; it also happened on the Democrats' watch. That's because Democrats controlled both houses of Congress for the final two years of Bush's tenure. Nevertheless, during the 2008 campaign, all Democrats talked about were the "last eight years," as though they hadn't also been in power. Actually, Republicans controlled both houses for only four and a half years of Bush's time in office. If one were to adopt the post hoc thinking of Democrats, one might say that the financial system was doing just fine until Democrats took over Congress in January 2007. Indeed, the Great Recession began about a year after Democrats won the 2006 midterm elections.

Although the financial crisis didn't happen merely because George W. Bush occupied the White House, Democrats would have you believe it. Notice that when Democrats bring up some variation of "going back to the policies that caused the mess in the first place," it stops right there; they don't go on to say what those policies were. The reason why Democrats don't elaborate is because many of the factors that "caused the mess" were created by Democrats -- and some of them had been in effect for decades.

Housing, especially sub-prime mortgages, was at the center of the financial crisis. The Community Reinvestment Act, which coerced commercial banks to make loans to folks who weren't creditworthy, was a big factor. Enacted in 1977, the CRA is a Democrat policy. Fannie Mae was also a prime suspect in the crisis, and Fannie was created by Democrats in 1938, during the New Deal era. The "implicit guarantee" of certain "government-sponsored enterprises" (private companies like Fannie Mae) and the securitization of mortgages are also Democrat policies.

Another factor that may have contributed to the crisis is the repeal of Glass-Steagall (the Banking Act of 1933), which created "firewalls" between commercial and investment banks. That repeal was signed by President Bill Clinton, a Democrat.

Yet another factor implicated in the crisis is the "easy money" policy of the Federal Reserve. That misguided policy is attributable to the Fed's "dual mandate," which Democrats created in 1977.

...

To repeat: Congress is "off-loading legislative responsibilities" for "economic policy" onto the Federal Reserve. The offloading of its responsibilities onto other bodies, like the Fed, is one of the reasons Congress is the branch of the federal government held in the most contempt. What are we paying these people for? Why not just dissolve Congress and let the Fed do everything?

Democrats, whether it's President Obama or members of Congress, find it difficult to accept responsibility. Maybe that explains why Democrats have a hard time demanding responsibility from the citizenry. Given this unfortunate tendency, conservatives need to erect a "firewall" against the possible re-election of Pres. Obama by returning complete control of Congress back to Republicans. Winning back the majority is paramount.

Democrats fail to mention that during the halcyon days of Bill Clinton, when the budget was balanced and the economy was humming, America had an all-Republican Congress. We need to return to those prosperous days of yesteryear when America had an adult Congress, one that accepted responsibility. The Pelosi-Reid Congress was the worst in generations. America needs to "go back" to a Congress like that of Gingrich-Lott, one that balanced budgets and managed a vibrant economy.

Insofar as "the policies that caused the mess in the first place," Democrats already have a corner on that. As long as they refuse to acknowledge the consequences of their own policies, Democrats cannot be taken seriously.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/10/the_policies_that_caused_the_mess_in_the_first_place.html

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Free-Market Lessons from the Gadget Boom
Ira Brodsky, The American Thinker
October 27, 2012

For years, the press was filled with stories about how the U.S. had fallen behind Europe in wireless. A 1999 TIME article entitled "Why Your Cell Phone Stinks" boasted that Europeans routinely used their mobile phones to pay bills, make reservations, and share digital photos. Americans, meanwhile, were still catching up with Europeans in text messaging.

Europe's wireless industry was booming. Unlike in the U.S., nearly everyone in Europe had mobile phones, and they worked on all mobile networks, because every phone manufacturer and every mobile network operator used the exact same technology. The lesson, according to the pundits, was that markets for new technologies do best when solutions are developed by industry-wide panels of experts and technical standards are enforced by governments.

Wireless was growing in the U.S., but at a slower rate. The pundits grumbled that new technologies do not fare as well in the U.S. because of what they called "market fragmentation." Consumers had to choose among competing standards. There were different mobile phone models for each network.

The evidence seemed to say that industrial planning and government mandates are superior to competition.

Fast-forward to 2012. Europe's wireless industry is on the ropes. Finland's Nokia, for years the world's leading maker of mobile phones, is sinking almost as fast as it rose to the top. The U.S. leads Europe in fourth-generation (4G) network deployments and user adoption of smartphones. AT&T, T-Mobile, and Verizon Wireless have built nationwide 4G networks, and Sprint's is under construction. Two thirds of the mobile phones sold in the U.S. today are smartphones.

There is, in fact, a global wireless gadget boom underway, and it is being driven by three U.S. companies: Apple, Google, and Amazon. Sales of smartphones, tablets, and e-readers have skyrocketed over the past few years. More than one million wireless gadgets based on U.S. technology are being activated around the globe each day.

There's no denying that Europe profited -- though only temporarily -- from the highly controlled manner in which it developed the second-generation (2G) mobile phone standard known as GSM. GSM quickly became the world's dominant 2G technology. However, GSM triumphed not due to planning committees and government mandates. It was the first 2G system to be widely deployed, and it introduced desperately needed competition to Europe's telecom market.

There's also no denying that the gadget boom was created by private companies working independently of each other. The iPhone was developed by Apple alone and in secret using a mix of voluntary standards and proprietary technologies. The same is basically true for Google's Android and Amazon's Kindle.

The case for mandatory technology standards sounds compelling, but it isn't. Twenty years ago, pundits warned that U.S. travelers would need to carry multiple devices because the country lacked a single, nationwide wireless standard. It didn't occur to the pundits that operators would build nationwide networks and manufacturers would squeeze multiple standards into devices. For example, the Apple iPhone 5 supports up to fifteen different wireless modes encompassing cellular, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, and radio-locating.

In theory, industry planning committees bring together the best minds to develop the best possible solutions. In practice, committees tend to be dominated by people representing the status quo. Agreements are reached through a process of negotiation and compromise. That process tends to produce predictable, lowest-common-denominator solutions. Committees are where innovation comes to die.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/10/free-market_lessons_from_the_gadget_boom.html

 

[mercury14]

Since we're all about thinking here at American Thinker, that seems to be an example of the error known as post hoc ergo propter hoc

So after churning out reams of hyperbole, straw men, and cherry picked pseudo-facts, and outright lies, the American Thinker suddenly had a 'come to Jesus' moment and is now concerned with thinking errors.

It's too much. It really is.

 

[RobDownSouth]

So after churning out reams of hyperbole, straw men, and cherry picked pseudo-facts, and outright lies, the American Thinker suddenly had a 'come to Jesus' moment and is now concerned with thinking errors.

It's too much. It really is.

The very definition of irony.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

On Tuesday, the Federal Reserve re-affirmed its commitment to using unconventional efforts to stimulate the economy.

In the latest Fed statement, the central bank said it would keep buying $40 billion in mortgage-backed debt per month to push interest rates lower.

The Fed also repeated its vow to keep interest rates near zero until mid-2015.

Although that may seem like the Fed is sending a signal to markets that they’re intent to drive the economy, no matter what the cost – that may not be what the Fed is really saying.

According to former Fed Governor Kevin Warsh the move isn’t a show of strength – it’s something far more ominous.

“I think the Fed revealed in their actions just how grave they think the economy is,” he said on The Kudlow Report.

http://finance.townhall.com/columni...the_fed_have_grave_concerns_about_the_economy

 

[RobDownSouth]

According to former Fed Governor Kevin Warsh the move isn’t a show of strength – it’s something far more ominous.

“I think the Fed revealed in their actions just how grave they think the economy is,” he said on The Kudlow Report.

http://finance.townhall.com/columni...the_fed_have_grave_concerns_about_the_economy

Kevin Warsh is actively being pushed by Fox News to become Mitt Romney's Treasury Secretary

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Marcellus Can Swing Swing States
Bruce Walker, The American Thinker
October 27, 2012

The election may well boil down to a handful of swing states. Ohio and Pennsylvania are two of the most critical for Obama. It is inconceivable that Obama could lose those two states, with their 38 electoral votes, and win the election. Is there anything at this late date which Romney might do to make an extra pitch to voters in those northern industrial states?

Yes. A news story that broke on October 20 ought to raise lots of eyebrows in those states. Two separate studies, one by Standard and Poor's and the other by ITG Investment Research, determined that Obama's U.S. Energy Information Administration had dramatically underestimated the size of the Marcellus Shale Gas Field.

How badly off were Obama's bureaucrats? The field is three times richer than the Obama administration thought, and the field may hold half of the proven gas reserves in America. This is from a federal agency which is intended to provide independent information and statistics. Was this simply typical Obama incompetence, or was it typically Obama calculated mendacity? Who knows, but Obama's men wildly miscalculated how much cheap energy lies in the field.

Moreover, the gas seems likely to be very cheap to extract. Natural gas is a very clean energy resource, but as a fossil fuel -- an energy resource which actually works -- it leaves leftists cold. Where is the Marcellus Field? It stretches from West Virginia through Pennsylvania and Ohio and into New York.

A federal government aggressively committed to removing regulatory obstacles to the exploration and production in this field could very quickly create tens of thousands of good-paying jobs in Pennsylvania and Ohio (the average pay at one of those sites is $83,000 a year.) Although the Marcellus Field will not account for all the estimated 3.5 million new jobs in the natural gas shale area over the next couple of decades, it will account for a lot of them. In states like North Dakota, where the Bakken Field is producing a lot of fossil fuel, the unemployment is so slight that there is really a labor shortage in much of the state.

The economic bonanza to the Rust-Belt economies of those two swing states would be almost immediate, because investors will be lined up to start producing natural gas from this huge field. The impact upon the region is even more positive when one considers that the northeast uses a lot of energy for both residential heating and industry, and the proximity of a huge amount of cheap natural gas could suddenly make a lot of factories in the region competitive as well as reduce the heating costs of homes and offices.

Not only could that make ordinary Pennsylvanians and Ohioans interested in getting the Marcellus Field into production fast, but it could offer members of industrial unions in those states real hope of getting good-paying jobs in reopened factories. The cumulative impact would spread to the housing market, to retail businesses, and to almost everyone in the private sector in those two states.

But the benefit of an aggressive development of the field could help not only the private sector. Although state and local laws vary, lease payments and royalties of natural gas produced on state- or local government-owned lands could produce a big paycheck for state and local governments without any tax increases or, indeed, tax revenue increases at all. The revenue stream for state and local governments nationally is estimated to be a whopping $2.5 trillion over the next couple of decades.

Robust energy production in the United States strengthens the dollars, weakens the power of rogues like Chávez and Ahmadinejad, creates genuinely productive jobs, dramatically increases American private investment in the research and development work which holds the key to our economic future, and may actually give America some of the influence that it long had as an energy-exporting nation.

Is there a downside? The production of huge amounts of clean, cheap natural gas means that the cozy arrangement that Obama has had with Solyndra and other "green energy" campaign contributors and the resulting boondoggles that produce nothing but taxpayer liability will be even more indefensible than these sweetheart deals have already been.

The good people of Pennsylvania and Ohio have some important and, depending upon who wins the election, very happy news to hear. If Mitt Romney wins -- and Mitt should hammer this news each day until the election -- he has a guaranteed turnaround of their states' economies, with good jobs, cheap energy for consumers and businesses, and plenty of money for state and local governments. It is real news, and it is really good news -- but only if Mitt Romney wins the presidential election.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/10/marcellus_can_swing_swing_states.html

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

But wait, there's more! WoodTV's "Target 8" now reports that "workers at LG Chem, a $300 million lithium-ion battery plant heavily funded by taxpayers, tell 'Target 8' that they have so little work to do that they spend hours playing cards and board games, reading magazines, or watching movies. They say it's been going on for months." In spite of a $151-million stimulus grant from President Obama's Department of Energy, the LG plant, located in Holland, Michigan, has yet to ship out a single battery. A hundred of the plant's 200 employees are funded by the stimulus funding, and the Korean-based company "has spent $133 million [of the grant] so far, most for construction and equipment. ... About 40% has gone to foreign companies -- mostly to Korea." The plant is unlikely to produce more batteries any time soon, because "the last of the materials needed to make battery cells, including chemicals, was shipped back to Korea." It is worth noting that $533,000 of the grant was spent on a groundbreaking ceremony featuring President Obama.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/10/more_green_energy_follies.html#ixzz2AVEmtFnn

 

[mercury14]

The very definition of irony.

He doesn't get it.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

BUT WAIT! VOTE NOW AND YOU GET AN ADDITIONAL BONUS!

In a recent and timely article, Asche Schow of the Heritage Foundation published a list of 36 companies that received funding from Obama's Department of Energy "that have either gone bankrupt or are laying off workers and are heading for bankruptcy," including A123 Systems. Based on Schow's figures, this represents $10.2 billion of federal funding that has gone or will likely go down the drain, with few if any sustainable jobs to show for it.

Yet none of these developments have deterred the Obama administration from continuing to invest in green-energy projects that incidentally provide financial windfalls to certain favored states. The Hill's Energy & Environment blog recently reported that "the Interior Department set aside about 285,000 acres for commercial-scale solar in Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, and Utah. The federal government will offer incentives for development, help facilitate access to existing or planned electric infrastructure, and ease the permitting process in the 17 zones." It should be noted that Senator Harry Reid helped Interior Secretary Ken Salazar develop the final plan.

All of this green stimulus spending is in spite of the fact that the environmental rationale for it is becoming increasingly suspect. The U.K. Daily Mail recently publicized the quiet release of data showing that there has been no increase in aggregate global temperatures for the last sixteen years. If that is the case, then (according to the Mail's figures) global temperatures have remained the same or decreased in 56 of the last 72 years, or 78% of that time period. This hardly demonstrates a correlation between increased emissions and global warming.

From an economic standpoint, though, the verdict is clear: at great cost, President Obama's green energy policies have resulted in the destruction rather than the creation of jobs for Americans. If this money had been left in the hands of the private sector, many more jobs would have been created at companies providing goods and services that Americans actually want. Instead, the future earnings of Americans will now have to go toward paying off government debt rather than accumulating the capital that alone makes it possible for companies to create new jobs.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/10/more_green_energy_follies.html#ixzz2AVFY5MAt

 

[RobDownSouth]

Fun chart of the day
Military contributions to Presidential Candidates:
http://i1239.photobucket.com/albums/ff502/Soonyigump/militarycontribution.gif

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

The economy grew at just 2% from July through September after a dismal downward revision of the previous quarter to 1.3%. But the important thing to remember is that just one quarter GDP number does not tell the whole story of the true direction of our economy, and if the trend continues, this 2% rate will also be revised down as the real data is added to the calculation. (About 30% of the data used to come up with the original GDP rate comes from surveys)

The most telling information regarding our economic "recovery" is that the average rate of growth for 2012 of 1.74% is LOWER than last year's 1.8% rate. What this means for our economy is that it's actually slowing, not growing. And that's far from what you will hear from the MSM and team Obama regarding today's GDP number.

As for the average American family, the data used for today's number isn't very good at all, as reported by CNBC online:

"Personal income growth slowed considerably during the third quarter, increasing just 2.7 percent after growing 4 percent in the second quarter. The savings rate also slowed to 3.7 percent from 4 percent."

And today's rate increase was also helped quite a bit by "public sector" spending, not the average American family.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/10/important_facts_about_todays_gdp_rate.html#ixzz2AVHkmsAS


Four more years, gawd I cannot wait...

 

[mercury14]

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/10/important_facts_about_todays_gdp_rate.html#ixzz2AVHkmsAS


Four more years, gawd I cannot wait...

Your article says two things:

1) GDP grew? Pfft, let's minimize that and say that GDP doesn't tell us that much (yes it does).

2) But GDP definitely tells us that the economy isn't growing because it's 0.06% lower than this quarter last year. Doesn't matter that it just grew .7%, we need ignore that kind of significant growth.

 

[phrodeau]

But wait, there's more! WoodTV's "Target 8" now reports that "workers at LG Chem, a $300 million lithium-ion battery plant heavily funded by taxpayers, tell 'Target 8' that they have so little work to do that they spend hours playing cards and board games, reading magazines, or watching movies. They say it's been going on for months." In spite of a $151-million stimulus grant from President Obama's Department of Energy, the LG plant, located in Holland, Michigan, has yet to ship out a single battery. A hundred of the plant's 200 employees are funded by the stimulus funding, and the Korean-based company "has spent $133 million [of the grant] so far, most for construction and equipment. ... About 40% has gone to foreign companies -- mostly to Korea." The plant is unlikely to produce more batteries any time soon, because "the last of the materials needed to make battery cells, including chemicals, was shipped back to Korea." It is worth noting that $533,000 of the grant was spent on a groundbreaking ceremony featuring President Obama.
Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/10/more_green_energy_follies.html#ixzz2AVEmtFnn

LG Chem is a South Korean company doing business in the US. They supply batteries for electric vehicles, and they have produced enough overseas to meet the demand.

The plant was built by American workers. Would you rather that it wasn't built at all?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

LG Chem is a South Korean company doing business in the US. They supply batteries for electric vehicles, and they have produced enough overseas to meet the demand.

The plant was built by American workers. Would you rather that it wasn't built at all?

Yes.

But you will not understand why.

When government takes capital, either future or present, and spends it then it is more likely destroyed and unavailable for private sector expansion.

You see a failed factory built while I see a long-term and successful factory not built do to the positive interference of government (referencing Say, Bastiat and von Humboldt, you know, books...).