The Economic Stagnation Named ‘Recovery’ (federal government, federal, administration, income)
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.
tell me how we're spending more, if there are less people working, and those that do have jobs, are working less hours..
the bs about old people and students is just that, bs, because thats been taking place since the beginning of time.. FAIL..
No it hasn't, the LFPR peaked in the 90's and was predicted to decline. The teen LFPR rate has been declining since the 70's.
The 25-54 age group has the highest attachment to labor (80%+), but that group grew .4% vs the 2.6% for the 55+ group which has a much lower participation rate (~40%). It's true that people are working longer, but the LFPR is still significantly lower for the 55+ crowd and always has been.
No it hasn't, the LFPR peaked in the 90's and was predicted to decline. The teen LFPR rate has been declining since the 70's.
The 25-54 age group has the highest attachment to labor (80%+), but that group grew .4% vs the 2.6% for the 55+ group which has a much lower participation rate (~40%). It's true that people are working longer, but the LFPR is still significantly lower for the 55+ crowd and always has been.
Oh please. The underlying problem was the housing bubble, caused by the repeal of Glass-Steagall in 1999. It took the Democrats and bankers less than a decade to cause another Great Depression.
The investment banks were demanding mortgage generation to feed their derivative creation so they could create products to sell to investors. The investment banks were buying up lenders to guarantee their supply of sub-prime loans. The investment products they were creating were mostly unregulated and opaque to the investors. The net result was to suck in a lot of capital into the very risky derivative marketplace.
Yes, the repeal of Glass-Steagall complicated or magnified the problem, but it was the derivatives that tripped up the investment banks.
The investment banks were demanding mortgage generation to feed their derivative creation so they could create products to sell to investors. The investment banks were buying up lenders to guarantee their supply of sub-prime loans. The investment products they were creating were mostly unregulated and opaque to the investors. The net result was to suck in a lot of capital into the very risky derivative marketplace.
Yes, the repeal of Glass-Steagall complicated or magnified the problem, but it was the derivatives that tripped up the investment banks.
it would not have taken place if illegals, foreigners, unemployed, poor and anyone who breathed to sign the dotted line of a mortgage commitment. They bought too much of a home they could not afford. They walked away from their mortgage commitment. The housing market fell because the values were not there because of the foreclosures that were in the tens of thousands..
There are those who bought a home and still are paying the payments... many walked away because the value of their home dropped and they were underwater with their mortgage. They did not honor their mortgage commitment. Many did and many still do. They have refinanced when the mortgage rate was 3 or 4%.
Bush warned Congress 12 times. Bush wanted regulation. Greenspan stated unequivocally F&F were a ticking time bomb.
To ignore those facts isn't productive.
Posted with TapaTalk
Yep Bush warned 12 times about the ticking time bomb but democrats live in fairy land and encourage people who don't have an ounce of financial understanding to sign the dotted line and knowing full well these people would lose the house. Democrats to this day refuse to take a look in the mirror. That's why "it's his fault and pointing fingers works so well" They blame as if it's going to change anything for them. Nope, they would do it again, lose it all and wail like big babies again. DEMOCRATS.... dumb as rocks
I wouldn't say that anyone wants failure. But I do think that many do not want the current President to succeed. And so there are businesses that aren't hiring, aren't giving out raises, and are hoarding capital, waiting for the next President to take office before they start being part of the recovery. In part, that's due to doubts over Obamacare, and doubts over this President's policies, but in part it's also due to partisanship and simple dislike of this President.
What is wrong with you. Businesses do not make decisions based on wanting a president to fail! Are you really that stupid to believe that?
On the other hand who in the hell would take risks, take on more responsibility, hire more people when they don't know what is going to happen. Who the hell wants to work any harder when Obama will take it away through taxation. Forget that. Get this greedy president out of office, lower taxes on employees and jobs will open up.
Hint: If the cost of doing business increases companies will cut cost and if that meant your job so be it. If that means they won't hire so be it. You voted for it, you got it. Next time don't be an idiot and think about consequences.
it would not have taken place if illegals, foreigners, unemployed, poor and anyone who breathed to sign the dotted line of a mortgage commitment. They bought too much of a home they could not afford. They walked away from their mortgage commitment. The housing market fell because the values were not there because of the foreclosures that were in the tens of thousands..
There are those who bought a home and still are paying the payments... many walked away because the value of their home dropped and they were underwater with their mortgage. They did not honor their mortgage commitment. Many did and many still do. They have refinanced when the mortgage rate was 3 or 4%.
Who provided the money for the mortgages and where did they raise the money? At the height of the bubble the largest market share had shifted to the private (non-governmental) investment banks, even more so in the sub-prime category. The investment banks were under no government mandate to make the mortgages or engage in the market. They were doing it because they thought they could make a lot of money at very low risk. They were wrong and it almost took down not only the United States' economy, but many economies around the world.
It was not only the poor that were taking out large mortgage loans. The jumbo sub-prime mortgages on million dollar homes were also going to a lot of middle-class and wealthy Americans.
You and I know that, but I was being facetious about the poster I quoted.
I agree with you.
Posted with TapaTalk
Then you come off as an idiot, since that poster you quoted actually said that recovery wasn't a feeling.
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.