U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-07-2010, 08:35 PM
 
Location: Iowa, Heartland of Murica
3,437 posts, read 5,351,120 times
Reputation: 3400

Advertisements

I was trying to draw a comparison between the current unemployment crisis we are experiencing and 1983, and it is just not the same, I found this clip of NBC News Overnight from 1983, and between December/82 and November/83, the unemployment rate fell 2.4%! According to this clip, 750000 Americans found jobs in November 83, sorry, but I dont even see how that would be possible today, I feel nostalgic when I watch this clip, it seems like this country just aint what it used to be


YouTube - 1983 - NBC News Overnight part 1
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-07-2010, 08:54 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,093 posts, read 69,963,954 times
Reputation: 27520
Try comparing to the Great Depression rather than a recession. This is different. We've passed recession. I'm waiting on some brave soul in the government to say depression.

It took them a year to admit recession yet many here said it and were blasted for it until the government confirmed what we already knew.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2010, 09:29 PM
 
8,268 posts, read 10,388,144 times
Reputation: 4748
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
It took them a year to admit recession yet many here said it and were blasted for it until the government confirmed what we already knew.
Who is "them" exactly?

I could be wrong but I thought a recession was defined as two consecutive quarters of a decline in real GDP. Obviously it would take at least six months, and real GDP is a published (granted sometimes revised and republished) economic measure that anyone can discover. If that is true it's not up to someone having an opinion that we're in a recession, it's a simple fact that can be gleaned only as a lagging indicator.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2010, 09:43 PM
 
Location: San Antonio Texas
11,435 posts, read 15,963,834 times
Reputation: 5224
Quote:
Originally Posted by Repubocrat View Post
I was trying to draw a comparison between the current unemployment crisis we are experiencing and 1983, and it is just not the same, I found this clip of NBC News Overnight from 1983, and between December/82 and November/83, the unemployment rate fell 2.4%! According to this clip, 750000 Americans found jobs in November 83, sorry, but I dont even see how that would be possible today, I feel nostalgic when I watch this clip, it seems like this country just aint what it used to be


YouTube - 1983 - NBC News Overnight part 1
That is also when many manufacturing jobs were right here in the US, not shipped off to foreign countries. I read just yesterday that the new MLK statue for the Washington DC Mall was made in China, sign of the times.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2010, 09:47 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,093 posts, read 69,963,954 times
Reputation: 27520
Quote:
Originally Posted by slackjaw View Post
Who is "them" exactly?

I could be wrong but I thought a recession was defined as two consecutive quarters of a decline in real GDP. Obviously it would take at least six months, and real GDP is a published (granted sometimes revised and republished) economic measure that anyone can discover. If that is true it's not up to someone having an opinion that we're in a recession, it's a simple fact that can be gleaned only as a lagging indicator.
"them" is the government and their economists.

Now how do you track a GDP that is positive only because of government spending ? Does that really count ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2010, 09:48 PM
 
5,721 posts, read 5,246,015 times
Reputation: 3603
Quote:
Originally Posted by wehotex View Post
That is also when many manufacturing jobs were right here in the US, not shipped off to foreign countries. I read just yesterday that the new MLK statue for the Washington DC Mall was made in China, sign of the times.
Wow. That is so wrong. I remember a couple of years ago when Minnesota banned "Made in China" US Flags and they got flak for it. But seriously. That's just sad.

I think there is a proposed bill that would impose a tax on companies shipping their call center jobs to foreign countries, and forced them to say, "I'm answering your call from _____." I think that would be a step in the right direction.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2010, 10:02 PM
 
Location: San Antonio Texas
11,435 posts, read 15,963,834 times
Reputation: 5224
Quote:
Originally Posted by juppiter View Post
Wow. That is so wrong. I remember a couple of years ago when Minnesota banned "Made in China" US Flags and they got flak for it. But seriously. That's just sad.

I think there is a proposed bill that would impose a tax on companies shipping their call center jobs to foreign countries, and forced them to say, "I'm answering your call from _____." I think that would be a step in the right direction.
that's another thing that I remember too. When I was attending UT-Austin in the mid 80s, we were lucky to have a lot of telemarketing jobs avbl for extra income. I worked for a survey co where I made $4/hr, marketing credit cards for $6/hr, MCI- don't remember that rate. I doubt that those kind of jobs exist anymore for college kids these days. Those rates don't seem like a lot now, but they were OK in the 80s.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2010, 10:07 PM
 
Location: Orange County, CA
1,765 posts, read 1,865,752 times
Reputation: 827
Today's situation sounds more like 1933, the era of the Great Depression, than 1983. If the government were really honest with their unemployment numbers, the REAL rate is closer to unemployment rate of ~25% which characterized the Great Depression as well....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2010, 10:17 PM
 
20,454 posts, read 26,583,914 times
Reputation: 13163
This is an unofficial observation, unaided by charts or forecasts...my island statistically has one of the highest unemployment rates in the country; about 19%. But---the work here is largely seasonal, which accounts for the numbers. That's always been a way of life here; work every day, all day, during the summer and not so much during the winter months.

Last season, the fishing lodges were down 25% in occupancy. This year, their bookings are back to normal, so somewhere, someone's doing something right.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2010, 10:32 PM
 
Location: Texas
5,774 posts, read 6,663,990 times
Reputation: 2856
You are absolutely right OP. They are in no way shape or form the same. Reagan inherited a functioning economy, no outright wars, no financial meltdown and no closing or cleaning up a faulty and broken government left by the previous administration.

Reagan came to office w/ a 7.6% unemployment rate. Left w/ a 5.5% unemployment rate that in between rose to just under 10%. Reagan's "economy" didn't improve for just under 3 years (1983)...if you compare that to Obama's time-line that would be 2011. And most of all Reagan burdened this country with a MASSIVE debt and deficit. Reagan also never, ever submitted a balanced budget.

So, no. The two comparison's are in no way shape or form similar. Thanks for letting everyone know it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top