kallend 2,148 #26 November 5, 2009 Quote Quote http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091105/ap_on_bi_go_ec_fi/us_economy Good news, the 3rd and final rung has already started to bottom. After HC I think Obama and staff will be working on jobs creation even more than they have, but you have to stop the bleeding first. In years forward as we retrospect on this recovery and realize how horrible these times were, Obama and this congress will be thought of as a brilliant strategist(s). Some still say FDR was horrible, even tho he recovered much worse, of course those same people won't accept that it was their party, Hoover who finally, in his last year trippled the top tax bracket leading to recovery. It took Clinton longer to flip the economy that was already in recovery, but Clinton ditched the HC agenda so that freed him up. Obama is great! I knew when I read that article this morning that someone on here would try and claim over half a million jobs being lost as a victory. I bet those half a million people would disagree with your leg humping. No-one ever claimed that recovering from 20 years of Voodoo Economics in the previous 28 would be easy or painless.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #27 November 5, 2009 QuoteBillvon: "I suspect most republicans will suddenly find it much easier to cry that word in 9 months." ============== Even easier now, given the runaway spending since your prediction.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #28 November 5, 2009 QuoteQuoteBillvon: "I suspect most republicans will suddenly find it much easier to cry that word in 9 months." ============== Even easier now, given the runaway spending since your prediction. What's interesting is how many of us denied that there was a recession until there actually was a recession. Then we'll get hosed for claiming that the recession was still going on in Feb. 09. And when we find out that it ended, we'll say "it ended.". And then we'll be told, "but you said we were not in a recession, then we were, and now we aren't. Make up you mind." And I'll say, "because we weren't then were and now are not." And I'll be told, "we'd still be in a recession if not for Obama." And I'd say, "Maybe. I don't buy it but I won't be able to prove or disprove it." My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #29 November 5, 2009 QuoteQuoteNice try Sorry I can't respond to that substance, it's gonna take me a solid day to construct a response, pls be patient. First paragraph of the story you rather carefully cited from: WASHINGTON – Companies across the economy are finding ways to do more with fewer workers, dimming hopes that hiring will take off anytime soon. ... Last paragraph: Economists expect the nation lost a net total of 175,000 jobs last month, adding to the 7.2 million lost since the recession began in December 2007. And many expect the jobless rate could rise as high as 10.5 percent before the recovery gains enough steam to start pushing it down next summer. --------- While a slow down in the second order derivative would be a start, we've had those before this year. I'd rather see a month where the net job change is zero as the first point to get excited. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
headoverheels 334 #30 November 6, 2009 Yeah, well, call and wake me up when total unemployment, not just the rate on new claims, has dropped. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #31 November 6, 2009 Unemployment Rate Hits 10.2 Percent, Worst Since 1983; Employers Cut 190,000 Jobs"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Royd 0 #32 November 6, 2009 Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Nice try -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- QuoteSorry I can't respond to that substance, it's gonna take me a solid day to construct a response, pls be patient. You will probably do just fine, in the new Obama government, as a bureaucratic employee, then. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,148 #33 November 6, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteBillvon: "I suspect most republicans will suddenly find it much easier to cry that word in 9 months." ============== Even easier now, given the runaway spending since your prediction. What's interesting is how many of us denied that there was a recession until there actually was a recession. There's been a recession since Dec 2007. YOU and other righties were in denial well into 2008. Which is one of the reasons that it got (and stayed) so bad.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,148 #34 November 6, 2009 QuoteUnemployment Rate Hits 10.2 Percent, Worst Since 1983; Employers Cut 190,000 Jobs That Bush Recession is a doozy, isn't it. It takes a long time to turn around a big ship heading the wrong way. 20 years of Voodoo Economics and you're surprised?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #35 November 6, 2009 QuoteQuoteUnemployment Rate Hits 10.2 Percent, Worst Since 1983; Employers Cut 190,000 Jobs That Bush Recession is a doozy, isn't it. It takes a long time to turn around a big ship heading the wrong way. 20 years of Voodoo Economics and you're surprised? Yep it does take a while. I do wonder when Obama will at least try and turn the wheel cause it will never turn until that is done. I guess we will just keep spending money we dont have and extend this mess as long as it takes to get as many people as possible on the gov tit as fast as possible. By the way, if you doubt what I say, look at the 30's recession and how fast that turned as well as how fast it turned un EU when our pres started the new (fucked up deal) that kept ours going much much longer. Obama is just following the lead. And of course you see no gov implications is what happened other than Bush did it. People like you are going to ensure another one soon"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #36 November 6, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteBillvon: "I suspect most republicans will suddenly find it much easier to cry that word in 9 months." ============== Even easier now, given the runaway spending since your prediction. What's interesting is how many of us denied that there was a recession until there actually was a recession. There's been a recession since Dec 2007. YOU and other righties were in denial well into 2008. Which is one of the reasons that it got (and stayed) so bad. Gee. How neat. Redefine a recession (and call the definition everyone else uses as "erroneous") and then come out in December, 2008 when there is no denial that a recession is in place and say that under our new definition, the recession began a year ago. Seems to me the article you cited was "well into 2008" when released. How heroic to make that stand when even the righties were convinced. You know, John, it's interesting to see that articles like this are out there that prove my point. Another question - since it is so important to you, were tge article's claims peer reviewed? Also, since the recession "peaked" between November 07 and June 08, was the recession over by election time? P.s. Kick ass at my beloved Elsinore. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheBachelor 5 #37 November 6, 2009 Quote Obama is great! Yeah, a brilliant man. He and his advisers predicted that unemployment would hit 8.8 percent by the last fiscal quarter of 2010. With the package, his advisers argued, the unemployment rate would only reach 7 percent. So now that we're at 10.2 percent, you still think he's great. Oh wait, it's Bush's fault... Try this: Stop genuflecting, and open your eyes. Yes, things will improve, but not because of Obama's policies, in spite of them. The sad part is that when things are better in 2012, he'll take credit for it, and probably get reelected. But don't think that I am enamored with EITHER Bush...There are battered women? I've been eating 'em plain all of these years... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #38 November 6, 2009 QuoteYOU and other righties were in denial well into 2008. Which is one of the reasons that it got (and stayed) so bad. YOU and other lefties were trying to say that is started BEFORE then.... But then again, you have claimed that it is not a recession till the NEBR calls it one.... So how can you and other claim it BEFORE the NEBR when it suits you, yet bitch at others when they don't join you in calling it before the NEBR?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #39 November 6, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteNice try Sorry I can't respond to that substance, it's gonna take me a solid day to construct a response, pls be patient. First paragraph of the story you rather carefully cited from: WASHINGTON – Companies across the economy are finding ways to do more with fewer workers, dimming hopes that hiring will take off anytime soon. ... Last paragraph: Economists expect the nation lost a net total of 175,000 jobs last month, adding to the 7.2 million lost since the recession began in December 2007. And many expect the jobless rate could rise as high as 10.5 percent before the recovery gains enough steam to start pushing it down next summer. --------- While a slow down in the second order derivative would be a start, we've had those before this year. I'd rather see a month where the net job change is zero as the first point to get excited. Yes, exactly why we need the gov to step in and create more jobs, if even by opening manufacturing facilities. Also, corps who base here for the tax benefit but send job ovewrseas need to be taxed HARD. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #40 November 6, 2009 Quote Yeah, well, call and wake me up when total unemployment, not just the rate on new claims, has dropped. Until then Obama has done nothing + and we would be far better off with tax cuts, my friends. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #41 November 6, 2009 QuoteUnemployment Rate Hits 10.2 Percent, Worst Since 1983; Employers Cut 190,000 Jobs And if it had been on the same rate of increase, it would be measurably higher. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #42 November 6, 2009 Quote Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Nice try -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- QuoteSorry I can't respond to that substance, it's gonna take me a solid day to construct a response, pls be patient. You will probably do just fine, in the new Obama government, as a bureaucratic employee, then. That was sarcasm to a typical non-response,, just as yours. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,148 #43 November 6, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteBillvon: "I suspect most republicans will suddenly find it much easier to cry that word in 9 months." ============== Even easier now, given the runaway spending since your prediction. What's interesting is how many of us denied that there was a recession until there actually was a recession. There's been a recession since Dec 2007. YOU and other righties were in denial well into 2008. Which is one of the reasons that it got (and stayed) so bad. Gee. How neat. Redefine a recession (and call the definition everyone else uses as "erroneous") and then come out in December, 2008 when there is no denial that a recession is in place and say that under our new definition, the recession began a year ago. Seems to me the article you cited was "well into 2008" when released. How heroic to make that stand when even the righties were convinced. You know, John, it's interesting to see that articles like this are out there that prove my point. Another question - since it is so important to you, were tge article's claims peer reviewed? Also, since the recession "peaked" between November 07 and June 08, was the recession over by election time? P.s. Kick ass at my beloved Elsinore. NO REDEFINITION. Maybe you'll take the time to find the official definition of a recession in the USA, since clearly you don't know how they are defined. Even the conservative WSJ acknowledges what you refuse to accept. It DID start in Dec 2007, the GOP WAS in denial, it got far worse than it had to because of denial, and it hasn't officially been declared over.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,148 #44 November 6, 2009 Quote But then again, you have claimed that it is not a recession till the NEBR calls it one The NBER, not you, not me, not lawrocket, not the Federal Reserve, and not George W. Bush, is charged with determining when recessions start and end in the USA. Since the NBER said it started in Dec 2007, then that's when it started. The writing was on the wall for all to see who chose to look. Those who chose to be in denial just made things worse.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #45 November 6, 2009 Quote Yep it does take a while. I do wonder when Obama will at least try and turn the wheel cause it will never turn until that is done. I guess we will just keep spending money we dont have and extend this mess as long as it takes to get as many people as possible on the gov tit as fast as possible. Riiight, if we just cut taxes it would fix everything. Quote By the way, if you doubt what I say, look at the 30's recession and how fast that turned as well as how fast it turned un EU when our pres started the new (fucked up deal) that kept ours going much much longer. Obama is just following the lead. Don't understand history well? Hoover cut taxes slightly cut taxes but let the market fix itself. When it fixed itself to the tune of 12 mill dead, he did something + by his Revenue Act of 1932, which raised the top tax brkt to 67%, virtually trippling them and the GDP IMMEDIATLEY started repairing, the Unemp even soon started to drop from 25%. Then FDR raised them a little more and enacted the New Deal(s). People stopped starving, unemp started to drop at a good clip, the GDP soared; so what exactly is your complaint about the handling of the GDP recovery? Obama is not following the lead, instead he is deficit spending rather than jacking taxes to 60-70% as presidents in the past have done; now we coddle our millionaires/billionaires. Quote And of course you see no gov implications is what happened other than Bush did it. People like you are going to ensure another one soon Actually Kallend cited Reagan, perhaps you lost that in the translation. I could see how that would be easy tho, they are basically the same president. Tax cuts, kill labor rights, Massive historical debt accumulation, ridiculous overspending..... yea, I guess you have a good defense. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,148 #46 November 6, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteUnemployment Rate Hits 10.2 Percent, Worst Since 1983; Employers Cut 190,000 Jobs That Bush Recession is a doozy, isn't it. It takes a long time to turn around a big ship heading the wrong way. 20 years of Voodoo Economics and you're surprised? Yep it does take a while. I do wonder when Obama will at least try and turn the wheel cause it will never turn until that is done. I guess we will just keep spending money we dont have and extend this mess as long as it takes to get as many people as possible on the gov tit as fast as possible. By the way, if you doubt what I say, look at the 30's recession and how fast that turned as well as how fast it turned un EU when our pres started the new (fucked up deal) that kept ours going much much longer. Obama is just following the lead. And of course you see no gov implications is what happened other than Bush did it. People like you are going to ensure another one soon The Reagan Recession lasted 16 months, from July 1981 to November 1982. Since it took your beloved Ronnie 16 months to turn a relatively mild recession around, don't you think you are showing a real DOUBLE STANDARD griping about Obama dealing with a far worse recession inherited from his predecessor.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #47 November 6, 2009 Quote Yeah, a brilliant man. He and his advisers predicted that unemployment would hit 8.8 percent by the last fiscal quarter of 2010. With the package, his advisers argued, the unemployment rate would only reach 7 percent. Bro, ya gotta cite a source, not a RW nutty source, but an objective source. Also, since unemp was 8.2 as he took office, I would like to know when that was said, it sounds bogus to me as he wasn't even pres when it was > 8%. Quote So now that we're at 10.2 percent, you still think he's great. Oh wait, it's Bush's fault... Try this: Stop genuflecting, and open your eyes. Who's fault is it? He inherited a total mess, is he held to fixing all 3 indicators in 2 weeks? Hell, last Repuiblican mess inherited bya Dem, Clinton, it took him until his 2nd term before the deficit and debt started to turn +, and Clinton's inheritance was a picknick as compared to this mess. Unfortunately Obama won't be able to get donw what he wanted due to having to fix BUSH's mess. If not Buhs's mess, then who's? Quote Yes, things will improve, but not because of Obama's policies, in spite of them. The sad part is that when things are better in 2012, he'll take credit for it, and probably get reelected. SUBSTANTIVELY, what has Obama done that's a bad idea? What has he done that's +? Also, ironically Bush inherited a balanced budget, but he drove teh debt up 5T, that wasn;t his faultClinton inherited 12 years of 250B/yr debt increase, 8 years later left a 236B surplus and the debt had all but leveled off, but that wasn't his doing, it was luck. Reagan inherited a rough economy but a stable debt/deficit, he trippled it, but that wasn't his doing Quote But don't think that I am enamored with EITHER Bush... Really? I am with the 1st Bush. Let's see, he reduced spending, esp with the military, increased taxes to try to stop the bleeding from idiot's 8 years of hell, and he was actually the only war hero we've had for decades, so I guess I can't understand how GHWB was a bad pres. Furthermore, he likes to skydive But I like how you pair the 2 Bush's.....hardly rational. I would love to talk candidly with elder Bush, I bet he would say some nasty shit about idiot Bush. I wonder if he'll do a Ford and posthumously leave a doc stating such. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #48 November 6, 2009 QuoteQuoteYOU and other righties were in denial well into 2008. Which is one of the reasons that it got (and stayed) so bad. YOU and other lefties were trying to say that is started BEFORE then.... But then again, you have claimed that it is not a recession till the NEBR calls it one.... So how can you and other claim it BEFORE the NEBR when it suits you, yet bitch at others when they don't join you in calling it before the NEBR? Since the mortgage mess was what drove the mess, you could say the stage was set in 04 when all the stolen mortgage money was out there. But technically the recession starter in the 3Q of 08. The 1st Q of 08 was also negative, so there was trouble brewing, but technically since the 2nd Q of 08 was +, that brings the 1st Q out, but realistically we must note it as trouble brewing. See the graph: http://www.bea.gov/briefrm/gdp.htm Actually you can see 2 flat Q's, 3rd Q 06 and 1st Q 07, so that is a sign of a sick economy even tho you can't declare a recession. And really, the GDP peaked in the 3rd Q of 07 and slid down every Q until Obama took office in the 1st Q of 09, so that's how we can say the market trended down from mid 2007. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #49 November 6, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteBillvon: "I suspect most republicans will suddenly find it much easier to cry that word in 9 months." ============== Even easier now, given the runaway spending since your prediction. What's interesting is how many of us denied that there was a recession until there actually was a recession. There's been a recession since Dec 2007. YOU and other righties were in denial well into 2008. Which is one of the reasons that it got (and stayed) so bad. Gee. How neat. Redefine a recession (and call the definition everyone else uses as "erroneous") and then come out in December, 2008 when there is no denial that a recession is in place and say that under our new definition, the recession began a year ago. Seems to me the article you cited was "well into 2008" when released. How heroic to make that stand when even the righties were convinced. You know, John, it's interesting to see that articles like this are out there that prove my point. Another question - since it is so important to you, were tge article's claims peer reviewed? Also, since the recession "peaked" between November 07 and June 08, was the recession over by election time? P.s. Kick ass at my beloved Elsinore. NO REDEFINITION. Maybe you'll take the time to find the official definition of a recession in the USA, since clearly you don't know how they are defined. Even the conservative WSJ acknowledges what you refuse to accept. It DID start in Dec 2007, the GOP WAS in denial, it got far worse than it had to because of denial, and it hasn't officially been declared over. Since overall trends are based on the statistical mode, meaning the macrostructural view, the graph: http://www.bea.gov/briefrm/gdp.htm clearly illustrates a downard trend from mid 2007 until Obama took office, with only 1 quarter defying the trend spanning 1 1/2 years. I think to say Dec 07 is really generous, as it could be argued teh downturn started mid 07. Unlemp started to significantly rise on mid 08, so as unemp lags a year on the front and the back, I say it really started in mid 07 using realistic terms. http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet?series_id=LNS14000000 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #50 November 6, 2009 QuoteThe Reagan Recession lasted 16 months, from July 1981 to November 1982. http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet Maybe officially, but not realistically. Unemp ddin't go under 7% until 1985 and never was nearly as low as it was during the Clinton era. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
