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.
Thank Clinton for NAFTA and the 2000 China trade act!
Yep. NAFTA dates back to 94, can't blame Republicans too much for that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaymondChandlerLives
The U3 was 7.8% (and skyrocketing) when Bush left office in January 2009. Know how many jobs the economy shed that year? FIVE MILLION. By the time the bleeding finally stopped in February 2010 the Great Recession had extinguished 8.7 million jobs. All that disposable income, vanished. It took two years to lose 8.7 million jobs, and a little over four to get them all back. We're obviously better off now, and it's ridiculous to even ask the question. History will be very kind to Obama.
We also have much more people entering the labor force by age (anyone who includes kids and retirees in unemployment rates is flawed.) Let's remember there are a lot of millenials looking for work once they exit college. Let's remember that those underemployed are not included in the U-3, it's about double the unemployment rate.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 26 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,568 posts, read 16,556,695 times
Reputation: 6044
Quote:
Originally Posted by CravingMountains
You look at it your way and I'll look at it my way. You are wanting to look at the meager improvements in our economy as a positive to Obama's presidency. I look at the meager improvements in our economy with shame, as this is the most anemic economic recovery our nation has ever endured. And I blame Obama's far reaching government and Tea Party obstructionism for it.
I'm also very disapproving of how much the government is intervening in the affairs that should be left up to private markets to decide. Bailing out banks, our motor companies, injecting trillions of dollars into our economy to keep it merely on life support. The government is the sole thing holding our economy up right now. If not for bailouts, and QE, and continued spending, the broken parts of our economy could have corrected themselves. Many sectors that should have died still live and it will continue to drag our recovery down.
Again, you havent put forth an argument to justify you blaming President Obama, heck you havent put forth one to blame the Tea Party ( i realize I never asked for one, but thats the point, you have provided exact same amount of evidence either way)
I tell you what. lets let AIG, GM, Chrysler,Citigroup and BoA go under. combined, that is another 1.1 million people jobless, and thats not counting all the other people who depend on those companies for their jobs(tire and parts manufactures). Those are just the companies that took the most bail out money, What about WellsFargo,Ally,JP Morgan, Cap One, American express.....?
In a perfect world, we could do what you want. Go purely by ideology, cut all the dead,dying, and revived wood out of the economies, and other companies would immediately spring up or expand filling their places
replacing jobs, equity, and stability.
But we dont live in that perfect world. In reality, your idea likely shuts down 4 of the 10 largest banks in the nation and people's lose their entire life savings, the companies that close down account for 10+ million jobs. And the small or more well rounded companies dont just step in and start hiring people either because they dont have the room for more employers and because people arent spending remember,we are in a recession so people think its going to get worse and they put their money away.
This is exactly why we need politicians who put ideology aside rather than be all or nothing, because we dont live in a perfect world, and a business is going to do what is best for them, not what is best for everyone else.
You're delusional. There were 12, yes 12, other recessions equal to or greater than the mild recession from Dec. 2007 to June 2009.
October 1873(III) - March 1879 (I) - 65 Months
August 1929(III) - March 1933 (I) - 43 Months
March 1882(I) - May 1885 (II) - 38 Months
April 1865(I) - December 1867 (I) - 32 Months
January 1910(I) - January 1912 (IV) - 24 Months
September 1902(IV) - August 1904 (III) - 23 Months
January 1913(I) - December 1914 (IV) - 23 Months
June 1857(II) - December 1858 (IV) - 18 Months
June 1869(II) - December 1870 (IV) - 18 Months
December 1895(IV) - June 1897 (II) - 18 Months
June 1899(III) - December 1900 (IV) - 18 Months
January 1920(I) - July 1921 (III) - 18 Months December 2007 (IV) - June 2009 (II) - 18 Months
Just because you bought the B.S. hook, line and sinker that that was the worst recession in U.S. history doesn't make it so. Even if you add the 8 months recessions in 90 - 91 and March 2001 - November 2001 you still would only be only slight longer than half of the longest recorded U.S. recession. And that completely ignores the 120 month expansion, the longest in U.S. history in the early to late 1990's.
There are a hundred different ways of looking at the economy, and a million different statistics. But if you wanted to focus on just one number that explains why the economy can’t really recover, this is the one: $7.38 trillion. That’s the amount of wealth that’s been lost from the bursting of housing bubble, according to the Federal Reserve’s comprehensive Flow of Funds report. It’s how much homeowners lost when housing prices plunged 30% nationwide. The loss for these homeowners was much greater than 30%, however, because they were heavily leveraged.
You look at it your way and I'll look at it my way. You are wanting to look at the meager improvements in our economy as a positive to Obama's presidency. I look at the meager improvements in our economy with shame, as this is the most anemic economic recovery our nation has ever endured. And I blame Obama's far reaching government and Tea Party obstructionism for it.
I'm also very disapproving of how much the government is intervening in the affairs that should be left up to private markets to decide. Bailing out banks, our motor companies, injecting trillions of dollars into our economy to keep it merely on life support. The government is the sole thing holding our economy up right now. If not for bailouts, and QE, and continued spending, the broken parts of our economy could have corrected themselves. Many sectors that should have died still live and it will continue to drag our recovery down.
You know it is possible to actual destroy the economy so that it would take decades to recover. Without the government intervention we were well on our way. I may no like everything the occurred or approve of the way it did a occur, but the idea that there should be no intervention is just denying the reality of the situation. Many of those arguing for government intervention went against long held beliefs about such interventions.
You know it is possible to actual destroy the economy so that it would take decades to recover. Without the government intervention we were well on our way. I may no like everything the occurred or approve of the way it did a occur, but the idea that there should be no intervention is just denying the reality of the situation. Many of those arguing for government intervention went against long held beliefs about such interventions.
As I said earlier in the thread, many still think it will take another 5 years to get back on track. 5 years meaning 2009 or to put in another way, an entire decade of recovery. None of the previous recessions (perhaps baring a 1970's "recession") took that long to truly recover from. (I'm going off the list of recessions in the other post.)
I agree that the intervention was needed but perhaps things were done the wrong way. QE has only stabilized interest rates and (perhaps) propped up the stock market. To quote a meme, no one thought twice of QE but creating a jobs bill with tax cuts and people lost their minds on both sides of aisle.
Older Americans still make up the largest segment of those not participating in the labor force. The LFPR will not be returning to previous highs anytime soon because of the demographic changes occurring in the U.S. population. What we are seeing in the LFPR rate was predicted decades ago, before anyone could possibly know the condition of the economy.
BULL ****!
Over the past twenty years, the participation rate of those 55 and older has increased by 10.8% while that of those 65 and older increased by 7%.
The participation rate of those 24 to 54 decreased by 2.2% and that of those 16 to 24 decreased by 11.2%.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 26 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,568 posts, read 16,556,695 times
Reputation: 6044
Quote:
Originally Posted by mkpunk
As I said earlier in the thread, many still think it will take another 5 years to get back on track. 5 years meaning 2009 or to put in another way, an entire decade of recovery. None of the previous recessions (perhaps baring a 1970's "recession") took that long to truly recover from. (I'm going off the list of recessions in the other post.)
I agree that the intervention was needed but perhaps things were done the wrong way. QE has only stabilized interest rates and (perhaps) propped up the stock market. To quote a meme, no one thought twice of QE but creating a jobs bill with tax cuts and people lost their minds on both sides of aisle.
You are going off of an opinion poll of normal people though, most of those people still think we are in a recession, because they dont know there are actual definitions to the words recession and recovery. They are not "feeling" like depression, you are either in one, or you arent.
You are going off of an opinion poll of normal people though, most of those people still think we are in a recession, because they dont know there are actual definitions to the words recession and recovery. They are not "feeling" like depression, you are either in one, or you arent.
Wall Street has recovered while Main Street sure as hell has not. We can point to stocks and company profits but wages are stagnant and pay is keeping up with inflation but not costs.
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.
