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

[4est_4est_Gump]

Busy sometimes picks out a molehill and tries to make it a mountain. Here, a mom and pop contractor wanted to retire. At the auction he said he was tired of all the regulations. BB conflates that into an indictment of the entire US economy. There's no indication that he was retiring because of the regulations, or if he were 40 instead of 65 that he would be quitting.

Other contractors are doing just fine in that city.

Nobody else talks to him so I figured I'd stretch his point a bit.

Yeah, but we've posted the comments from all over the chi-omega curve of business folks and it is a common complaint, the cost of compliance.

They have a regulation for everything. All designed by committee, lobby and industry expert to protect the common man, the planet, the economy, the ...,

But, somehow, we just never get the regulation right, or have enough of them, so we keep tinkering while the libs yell, "Where the fuck is the middle class going?"

"We need us some new laws! some new taxes! some rope! pitchforks..."

How can you measure the value of knowing that company books are sounder than they were before? Of no more overnight bankruptcies with the employees and retirees left holding the bag? No more disruption to entire sectors of the economy?
Michael Oxley 2002
Co-Author of Sarbanes-Oxley Law

It will take the next economic crisis, as certainly it will come, to determine whether or not the provisions of this bill will actually provide this generation or the next generation of regulators with the tools necessary to minimize the effects of that crisis.
Chris Dodd
Co-Author Dodd-Frank Financial Reform Act
Friend of Angelo

 

[busybody..]

Busy sometimes picks out a molehill and tries to make it a mountain. Here, a mom and pop contractor wanted to retire. At the auction he said he was tired of all the regulations. BB conflates that into an indictment of the entire US economy. There's no indication that he was retiring because of the regulations, or if he were 40 instead of 65 that he would be quitting.............But we both know that we hear these stories DAILY and from all over the cuntry

Other contractors are doing just fine in that city...........Of course YOu dont know that

Nobody else talks to him so I figured I'd stretch his point a bit.

You still LIED about the incident, made up numbers from nothing, just to bash someone, and bullshitted.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

... and I'll bet Barney Frank's not the least bit worried about his retirement after all those years of legal insider trading...

 

[busybody..]

Yeah, but we've posted the comments from all over the chi-omega curve of business folks and it is a common complaint, the cost of compliance.

They have a regulation for everything. All designed by committee, lobby and industry expert to protect the common man, the planet, the economy, the ...,

]

He knows

He doesnt care!

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

You still LIED about the incident, made up numbers from nothing, just to bash someone, and bullshitted.

Thanks for the shower Coach Cowher!

 

[JohnnySavage]

You still LIED about the incident, made up numbers from nothing, just to bash someone, and bullshitted.

I was making a point, dummy. Of course I made up numbers. I'm fairly certain that company made more than $100 Dummy.

You big dummy.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Somewhere along the way we need to GET the idea that every government cause is an excuse for empire building and patronage.

 

[JohnnySavage]

Yeah, but we've posted the comments from all over the chi-omega curve of business folks and it is a common complaint, the cost of compliance.

They have a regulation for everything. All designed by committee, lobby and industry expert to protect the common man, the planet, the economy, the ...,

But, somehow, we just never get the regulation right, or have enough of them, so we keep tinkering while the libs yell, "Where the fuck is the middle class going?"

"We need us some new laws! some new taxes! some rope! pitchforks..."

How can you measure the value of knowing that company books are sounder than they were before? Of no more overnight bankruptcies with the employees and retirees left holding the bag? No more disruption to entire sectors of the economy?
Michael Oxley 2002
Co-Author of Sarbanes-Oxley Law

It will take the next economic crisis, as certainly it will come, to determine whether or not the provisions of this bill will actually provide this generation or the next generation of regulators with the tools necessary to minimize the effects of that crisis.
Chris Dodd
Co-Author Dodd-Frank Financial Reform Act
Friend of Angelo

I have been asking BB to show me an Obama regulation that is killing jobs. He was using this company's sale as an example, even though, if BB's argument were true - which it isn't - the regulations in question appear to be city ordinances not Federal regulations promulgated by the Obama Administration.

At the end of the day though, I've lost interest and am looking for something else to talk about this morning.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I have been asking BB to show me an Obama regulation that is killing jobs. He was using this company's sale as an example, even though, if BB's argument were true - which it isn't - the regulations in question appear to be city ordinances not Federal regulations promulgated by the Obama Administration.

At the end of the day though, I've lost interest and am looking for something else to talk about this morning.

... beat you to it.

 

[busybody..]

I have been asking BB to show me an Obama regulation that is killing jobs. .

anyone that AXES this question

is NOT serious

but you know that as well

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

anyone that AXES this question

is NOT serious

but you know that as well

The equine is deceased...


Stop flagellating.

u w1n

 

[busybody..]

u w1n

of course

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

last word?

 

[busybody..]

no

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

word

 

[unregistered]

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

How do we end up in economic doo doo?

Republican voodoo economics?

Something else?

Maybe:

DECEMBER 5, 2011 4:00 A.M.
The Solyndra ‘Business Model’
It always depended on government spending.

How does a fledgling solar-panel company with dim prospects for survival in the free market become profitable? Well, in the case of Solyndra, a good first step was to have the federal government put up a considerable investment — a $535 million loan guarantee. But as the company’s backers would soon discover, coming up with a viable step two is a little more complicated. In many cases, the only feasible way forward is to go to whatever lengths necessary to repeat step one.

Continued support from the federal government was always a fundamental aspect of Solyndra’s “business model.” On Dec. 18, 2009, three months after the Department of Energy (DOE) loan guarantee was formally awarded, Solyndra submitted a filing to the Securities and Exchange Commission for a planned initial public offering of company stock. In that filing, the company said that it planned to become profitable in part by “strategically aligning our products with key government programs that provide financial incentives, export credit and project finance.” Having someone like billionaire Obama fundraiser George Kaiser as a primary investor certainly couldn’t have hurt, either.

Of course, the only thing better than a government program designed to promote an otherwise undesirable product — expensive and inefficient solar panels — would be a law encouraging the purchase of those products. Which is why Solyndra’s backers were so eager to see Congress pass cap-and-trade legislation, which would have made other forms of electricity more expensive. One can quite reasonably suspect that this was a central focus of the company’s multi-million-dollar lobbying effort in Washington. But Solyndra’s bosses weren’t just rooting for cap-and-trade to pass; they had essentially baked it into their business strategy.

In a May 24, 2010, e-mail to a senior White House official, Department of Energy stimulus adviser Mike Rogers explained that the company’s executives “have been counting on an energy bill to pass.” As a result, Rogers warned, “if Europe goes south and we don’t see an energy bill here, [Solyndra] will face issues in the 18–24 month window.”

The cap-and-trade bill fizzled out in the weeks following the e-mail, and Rogers’s premonition proved optimistic: Solyndra filed for bankruptcy only 16 months later.

Solyndra is eerily reminiscent of another failed company — Enron. Though originally founded as a natural-gas company, Enron made aggressive inroads into the green-energy sector in the 1990s, developing strong alliances with members of the Clinton administration — with Mr. Climate Change himself, Vice President Al Gore, in particular. In fact, Enron was a major investor in Solarex, which was then the second largest American manufacturer of photovoltaic solar cells, the very kind that Solyndra specialized in.

Enron was instrumental in helping to establish the EPA’s $20 billion–per–year sulfur-dioxide cap-and-trade program in the early 1990s and soon became a major trader on the “pollution credit” exchanges, raking in hefty profits. Eying an even more lucrative opportunity, the company set its eyes on setting up a regulated credit-trading scheme for carbon dioxide, furiously lobbying the Clinton administration (and later, the George W. Bush administration) to ratify the Kyoto accords — which would have done just that, and also would have unleashed a slew of new subsidies and federal mandates for “green” energy.

Enron’s chief climate lobbyist, John Palmisano, infamously wrote in a December 1997 memo:

If implemented [the Kyoto Protocol] will do more to promote Enron’s business than will almost any other regulatory initiative outside of restructuring of the [electricity] and natural gas industries in Europe and the United States. . . . The endorsement of emissions trading was another victory for us. . . . This agreement will be good for Enron stock!!

Enron now has excellent credentials with many “green” interests. . . . This position should be increasingly cultivated and capitalized on (monetized).

But in the end, the Kyoto Protocol was never ratified by either the Clinton or Bush administration.

Andrew Stiles is the Franklin Center’s 2011 Thomas L. Rhodes Journalism Fellow.
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/print/284845

 

[busybody..]

He doesn't know how to Google.

I say again

He that AXES the question

Doesnt want the answer, nor will accept it

Witness said 'person" making up the numbers and presenting it as FACT

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

It's not voodoo economics!

It's vampire government.

The growth of government matched against GDP and median income since 1947...

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011...king_the_life_out_of_the_private_economy.html

... that sucking sound is your benefits and programs actually working as designed by the best minds the Left can produce...

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

It's not voodoo economics!

It's vampire government.

The growth of government matched against GDP and median income since 1947...

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011...king_the_life_out_of_the_private_economy.html

... that sucking sound is your benefits and programs actually working as designed by the best minds the Left can produce...

In America socialism is the love that whispers its name, so we're trying to disguise it as oligarchy with artificial conservative coloring and sweetner.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

A rose by any other name...

A number, by any other value...

Hope and Change apparently means that the Obama administration is counting on so many Americans giving up hope that the administration can now change the entire metric for measuring unemployment. When you analyze the most recent employment statistics, you have to conclude the strategy is working.

We all know that Barack Obama's legacy will be that of a wide swath of destruction across the economy and in fact all of American life. And one item you can add to that Obama ash heap will be the trust anyone has in any government statistics -- most notably the official unemployment rate. And as a result, Obama may be really hanging himself with these accelerating obfuscations.

For months, the administration has been monkeying with the unemployment figures to hide some of the trauma Obama has inflicted on the U.S. economy, but last week's shameful cooking of the jobs report took it to a whole new level. To hear the government tell it, our unemployment rate plummeted nearly half a point in just a month to a level of 8.6%. And it did this on the strength of 120 thousand new jobs.

Now, I hate to quibble, but for the entire length of the Bush administration, we were told every month that it takes 125 to 150 thousand new jobs just to keep the unemployment rate stable. Suddenly that kind of growth under Obama sends our UE rate spiraling downward. What gives?

Well, thanks to great work and aggressive tweeting by economist and commentator Jim Pethokoukis -- formerly of Reuters -- we know what gives. The universe of potential workers is now so small that it is hiding how weak the employment situation is in our nation.

Without getting too bogged down in the weeds of employment statistics, the U3 -- or headline rate -- is what is considered "the" unemployment rate. That is what was reported at 8.6 this week. The U6 rate combines unemployed and "underemployed" and is at 15.6%. That's a great indicator, but the newsmaker is U3.

The U3 rate is the percentage of the "participating labor force" that is unemployed. That is all well and good, except that the Obama labor department has decided that it will simply manipulate the definition of "labor force" to suit its own needs. And what the Obama administration has done is simply shrink the definition of the "labor force" by pretending that hundreds of thousands of non-working adults are no longer in existence for all intents and purposes.

If you are offended that under ObamaCare you may be considered "a unit," you should know that under Obama employment stats you may not even exist! In fact, a lot of non-working adults who existed in October apparently no longer do exist officially.

In other words, in the universe Obama took over from George W. Bush, the unemployment rate would still be over 11%.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2011...yment_rate_now_meaningless.html#ixzz1ffVCrohD

 

[RobDownSouth]

Intellectual Inconsistency At Its Finest!

A rose by any other name...

A number, by any other value...

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2011...yment_rate_now_meaningless.html#ixzz1ffVCrohD

So if I'm readin' your puerile propaganda correctly, when we have a Democrat in the White House we should be reportin' the U6 number becoz it reflects more poorly on the President, but when we have a Conservative in the White House the much lower U3 number is just peachy, coz it's morning again in America.

Am I hearin' ya right?

Duke, Duke, Duke
Duke of Derp
Duke Duke..

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

A rose by any other name...

A number, by any other value...


Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2011...yment_rate_now_meaningless.html#ixzz1ffVCrohD

To my way of thinking what the gummint aims to do is count WIA and ignore MIA and KIA casualties.

 

[koalabear]

Stocks gain as European outlook improves

http://data.moneycentral.msn.com/scripts/chrtsrv.dll?symbol=%24US%3AINDU&width=298&height=160&c1=3&ce=0&cf=0&d2=0&d3=0&d4=1&d5=0&e8=1&legend=0&banner=5&af=2&palette=2


USA outlook show no improvement.

 

[busybody..]

Take a look at these headlines:


The President’s Jobless Recovery
Frustrated Job Seekers Cause Jobless Rate To Drop
Economy Adds Few New Jobs
Low Jobless Rate Reflects Lost Hope
US Jobless Rate Drops But For Wrong Reasons

Recent headlines regarding the drop in the unemployment rate from 9% to 8.6% right?

Wrong.

Those are headlines from January 2004, when the jobless rate dropped to 5.7% and when President Bush was just starting a re-election campaign.

Here are headlines from Friday’s job numbers:


Unemployment Rate Drops To 8.6% Raising Hopes
Jobless Rate Drop Could Boost Obama
Obama Gets Economic Indicator He Can Crow About
Good News On Job Front For Obama
Jobless Rate Lowest In 2.5 Years

See the difference? I am not one to go one about “the liberal media.” That would indicate the media as a whole has a sought after liberal agenda (and some of them do but they’re easy to spot). The problem is, most journalists have an inherent bias that affects their reporting. They just don’t realize it. It just comes out naturally. The majority of those who work in journalism are Democrats/liberals.

The reality is, the headlines that described the jobless rate in 2004, fit perfectly with the jobs report that came out on Friday. Only 120,000 jobs were created in the month of November. Granted, the October jobs report was revised upwards by 70,000 but that is still not anywhere close to the numbers needed for nearly a half point drop in the jobless rate.

The real reason for the percentage drop was due to the number of people who gave up looking for work. Remember, the unemployment rate reflects the percentage of Americans who are actively seeking a job. When over 300,000 people give up looking for employment, that is reflected in the job numbers, hence the drop.

But the mainstream media has largely ignored this fact. Thus the headlines we see above.