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.
article discusses how the money paid to unemployment is way higher that the unemployment percentage reported by the government by 32 percent higher. So either the unemployment checks are higher or there are more people unemployed than the government tells us.
"A dismal job market, a crippled real estate sector and hobbled banks will keep a lid on U.S. economic growth over the coming decade, some of the nation's leading economists said on Sunday."
"Treasuries were the worst performing sovereign debt market in 2009 as the U.S. sold $2.1 trillion of notes and bonds to fund extraordinary efforts to bolster the economy and financial markets."
"A dismal job market, a crippled real estate sector and hobbled banks will keep a lid on U.S. economic growth over the coming decade, some of the nation's leading economists said on Sunday."
"Treasuries were the worst performing sovereign debt market in 2009 as the U.S. sold $2.1 trillion of notes and bonds to fund extraordinary efforts to bolster the economy and financial markets."
Well, I guess you'll just have to bet against the US. Good Luck.
I am glad I didn't listen to you a year ago, or I would have missed the largest stock market gains in US history.
yep stocks are up....but why.... because companies PROFIT for FIRING people
remember 1994...IBM laysoff more than 10,000 people...stocks skyrocket...why...because firing 10,000+ people is more than a billion dollars in profit a year
THIS particular comment ALWAYS cracks me up.
You folks claim the New Deal didn't work because it was just the government spending money and the government becoming a temporary employer - then in the very next breath claim it was WWII that ended the Depression.
So tell me - WHAT was it about WWII that ended the Depression? Was it the government SPENDING money (VASTLY more than the New Deal did)?
Or was it the government directly EMPLOYING 10 million people (by inducting them into the military) - and employing millions more indirectly by providing companies with government contracts to produce war goods?
LOL
From an economic standpoint the New Deal was "Government Involvement Lite" and WWII was "Government Involvement HEAVY". There really wasn't a whole lot of difference other than SCALE. In the New Deal the government spent a lot of money and hired a lot of people. In WWII the government spent a LOT of money and hired a LOT of people. Both had similar impacts on the economy (stimulating production and lowering unemployment) - but in the former the impact was whole lot less because the government was a whole lot less involved (it spent less money and employed a whole lot less people).
Ever look at how much of the GDP was DIRECTLY attributable to the government in WWII? Try 50%. That's right - 50% of the entire nation's GDP was direct government spending (mostly on borrowed money I might add). Factoring the INDIRECT contribution of government spending that number was far higher. Compare that with todays figure (something like 20%).
Talk about a complete lack of logic or consistancy - geeze!
On the one hand you folks claim the New Deal didn't work because it was just government spending (and of course the government has NEVER created a single job ) - then you turn around and out of the other side of your face say it was WWII that ended the Depression - ignorning the fact that the government spent VASTLY more in WWII than it did on the New Deal. Ever look at what the deficit was in 1944? As a comparison of the GDP it was nearly TWICE the defict we have today (you know - the one you folks keep claiming will destroy the dollar and bring about the collapse of America).
The fact is WWII worked better than the New Deal because the scale of government spending was VASTLY MORE than that spent on the New Deal. THAT is what made the difference. As I said - the government spent a lot of money and hired a lot of people during the New Deal - and got pretty good results. During WWII the government spent FAR MORE money and hired FAR MORE people and got FAR MORE spectacular results.
The limited success of the New Deal was because FDR was too timid in his spending. Had he spent the kind of money on the New Deal that he later spent on WWII the economy would have been booming in 1936/37 the way it was booming in 1944/45 - the only difference is - instead the money being spent on weapony that was simply "consumed" by the war effort, the money would have been spent of infrastructure improves that benefitted the country long term.
Don't get me wrong - WWII was a necessary and just war - and it's GOOD that we spent what we did to win it - but the fact is, in regards to ending the Depression - the only REAL reason it was more successful than the New Deal was because of the SCALE of which the government spent.
Ken
Spending didn't create the jobs. The War itself created jobs.
Spending didn't create the jobs. The War itself created jobs.
A war doesn't create jobs. A war isn't an ENTITY - it's an ACTIVITY - an activity undertaken by GOVERNMENTS.
If the government had decided NOT to respond to Pearl Harbor - or if the government had decided to respond in a limited manner because Congress and the Administration decided we didn't have the money to respond in any significiant way and didn't want to borrow more money - and thus increase the deficit to do so - then the war's impact on the economy would have been that much less.
It's the government ACTIONS in war that creates jobs - the government's decision to increase the size of the military twentyfold, to place orders for equipments, for munitions, and for foodstuffs for the troops. It's the GOVERMENT who pays the wages for the troops and (indirectly) for the factory workers and farmers supplying those troops.
In WWII the GOVERNMENT became (by far) the largest employer in the nation and (by far) the largest customer for private business and (by far) the largest consumer of goods and services - and ALL of that required spending. In WWII virtually the ENTIRE ECONOMY revolved around the government.
Spending didn't create the jobs. The War itself created jobs.
War is government spending on steroids. The governments employ everyone they got, and spend all they got to produce bombs and things which are designed to be blown up the battlefield.
stock market is STILL down 30% since its high of 14700 on oct 7 2007.
In fact it was DOWN when Bush left office (from when he came in).
Not many Presidents have that "distinction" (especially not after 8 full years).
What a disaster his Presidency was eh?
If you held gold for 10 years, you made nearly 4x your money. If you held the Dow for 3 years, you essentially broke even. The Dow is also nearly unchanged vs gold since the crash of 2008. If fiat currency morons don't believe gold is money, they should check out the story on how Vietnam is closing public trading of gold in March and FDR ordering Americans to surrender their gold in 1933.
Case closed.
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.
) - then you turn around and out of the other side of your face say it was WWII that ended the Depression - ignorning the fact that the government spent VASTLY more in WWII than it did on the New Deal. Ever look at what the deficit was in 1944? As a comparison of the GDP it was nearly TWICE the defict we have today (you know - the one you folks keep claiming will destroy the dollar and bring about the collapse of America).
