Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Factor in the 90,000,000 or so Americans who have simply surrendered and given up looking for work and the true unemployment rate is around 10%.
Actually, if they used the same metrics for unemployment as they did during Clinton's presidency it would be closer to 12%.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RecentlyMoved
yawn
and in other news, he's still the POTUS for another 2+ yrs.
these threads are really boring
That is the beauty of the BoR's... people still have the right, at least for now, to complain in a public forum.
I can't say those rights will remain if we continue to elect people from either of the old parties. Though some must spell Libertarian with an R at the moment.
Just imagine how much more quickly it could've improved and how much needless suffering could've been prevented if Republicans hadn't spent his entire presidency actively, openly trying to hurt to economy and retard job growth purely to win political points.
Imagine how much worse things would have been without Republicans blocking as much of Obama's economy killing policies as possible. Things didn't start to turn around until after the democrats lost the Housein 2010 and really went into the tank when democrats gained control in 2006.
Go read Reckless Endangerment by Morganstern and Rosner. The practices at Fannie Mae had everything to do with the housing bubble. They promulgated easy money practices, primarily for purposes of padding the bonuses of senior execs. Both James Johnson and Franklin Raines (fannie CEOs) made over $100 million in roughly decade long tenures.
It worked as long as housing prices spiraled upwards, because the bad loans translated to equity gains. If you gave a liar loan to a minimum wage worker for $400,000, it was ok that he didn't have resources to pay the mortgage, because the home was worth $500,000 next year. The liar loan had generated a $100,000 gain, some of which went into various pockets, including the lender, the dealers in mortgage-backed securities, and the senior execs at Fannie Mae. It was ok until the market realized that this was a tulip-style bubble, and housing prices started to slide backwards. Then the whole thing collapsed.
This was all predicated on accounting practices at FNMA, which the Bush admin, in particular Tres. Sec'y John Snow, had tried to rein in, but was stopped by House Democrats who were allies of FNMA.
Well I prefer "All the Devils Are Here: The Hidden History of the Financial Crisis" by McLean and Norcera.
But that doesn't alter the fact that the accounting practices at FNMA during the early 2000s were not directly connected to the housing bubble. FNMA was not a major player in sub-prime mortgages particularly in the early 2000s. While it is true that FNMA lowered its standards in mid 2000s, that was done to regain market share from the non-governmental companies which were the major players in the sub-prime market. However, that was all done after the congressional hearings that were contained in the video you posted. In hindsight too many people conflate the too events: FNMA accounting practices (which were changed), sub prime mortgages. The only real connection between the two events is the danger too the financial system if the GSEs were to fail for whatever reason.
Very few of either party were attempting to rein in the unregulated mortgage derivatives market. The often accepted position being that this was a complex market run by sophisticated financial professionals which did not lend itself to government oversight or regulation; better to let the players self regulate the market.
it's a huge lie, is what it is, for election time. Republicans go along with it. To drop from 10% to 6% would mean that 8 million new jobs (that are worth a hoot) would have had to be created in 2 years. Didn't happen and won't happen (ever again)
Thanks for some proper critical thinking. To exceed population growth, recover lost jobs and add jobs to the economy to make the new, improved and wildly absurd unemployment number make any sense, we'd need to have added ~600k jobs per month for the last 2 years.
Given that the NY Times does cartwheels of ecstasy every time the new jobs exceeds 100k in a month, I don't seem to recall the 600k average that would make the unemployment numbers gel at all.
The proper unemployment number of "those seeking working and unable to find it" is closer to 16%, and if based on "able to work but not working, whether seeking to or not" which is the labor force participation total, the rate is ~31%.
Besides inflation, no number is more grossly misrepresented and misunderstood than the DC-approved unemployment rate. The reason they lie to you is because if most people knew that over a quarter of work-eligible people were simply not working, they'd freaking panic.
The GOP would not have let you do any of the above. Presidents do not have unlimited power to do whatever they want. Obama has brought up his desire for corporate tax rate cuts four times, and GOP has shown no interest in cutting them. Either they don't want the cuts, or they want it, but don't want Obama to get any credit for it.
Or they want it but not with all the excessive pork and illegal amnesty that Obama another dems tack on to every bill no matter how unrelated. A bill with one good Soundbite and 10 bad hidden barbs should be defeated.
Note to Democrats: Normal Americans don't have six years
I don't have time to read the entire thread because I'm at work but
it is going to take a long time for the economy to come back after the
ARTIFICIAL housing boom which created this mess in the first place.
And I don't even blame any President. The fault lies with our banks
and private investors.
Let us face it:
There are many jobs that are never coming back to America.
We have to figure out what we are still good at, or create something else,
other than investing in WAR. We could start a Nat'l rail system but
Republicans would never go for that, or we could invest in oil, gas, coal
solar and wind but that isn't going to sustain the economy either. We can't
be a service industry forever.
We have to bring back agriculture and that would be HEMP.
I've always said it would be the saving grace of America.
From biofuel to building products and clothes. The list is endless.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
but
